Bernie Laverick

"This explanation is far more likely true than your unsupported speculation that Ryder himself made the calls." No it isn't... Unsupported speculation is just that: it isn't grade-able, and it doesn't come by degree. Your unsupported speculations and suspicions are still that, however superior you feel they may be to other people's unsupported speculations. But, like me...you have zilch proof! Difference is, I admit it. Bit by bit 'Lee' is slowly being inserted into this story: having exhausted all the other "suspicious" 'sightings' of our enigmatic 'Lee', we are now dredging the bottom with doppelgangers who had absolutely NO resemblance to LHO. "The same people involved in sending an Oswald lookalike to the Sports Drome Rifle Range on numerous occasions..." Here we go...They were identical except that they looked nothing like each other. He was 'undercover' in a safe house but sometimes went out fishing and buying trucks. And again... "The same folks who sent someone resembling “Oswald” and using his name..." "The same conspirators who sent an “Oswald” lookalike to the Southland Hotel parking garage" and "The same people who sent a fellow who looked like “Oswald” hitch-hiking on the R.L. Thornton Expressway while carrying a 4 foot long package wrapped in brown paper" Ok we get it. You've driven your point home with a sledgehammer. Someone posing as Oswald, who looked like him, was going around implicating LHO. Let's be straight talking. 'Lee' was being used to implicate 'Harvey. in the up coming assassination. To do this, as you have amply demonstrated, it is imperative that said doppelganger should bear a very close resemblance to LHO at least, or the entire plot falls on its arse! Agreed? It's Achilles heel time again Jim. We all know what question is coming next. It is one you have all tried to brush under the carpet for years. How did the plotters know that these two individuals, picked from adolescence, would grow into lookalikes ? I don't expect an answer soon. Or at all...

“That is, after the anonymous calls made by Ryder to the media.” PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE THAT RYDER MADE THE ANONYMOUS CALLS!!! He certainly swore otherwise during his testimony: I just thought I too would join in the speculation and "suspicion" and then sell it off as a fact. Irritating isn't it? However I think there is more to my speculation, that is, that the originator of this tag would be the first to know of its existence. Either that or he was coerced into doing (and/or admitting to) something he knew not to be true. What became of Ryder? Did he just carry on being a gunsmith? Did he ever talk of his bizarre experience of being embroiled in this story. Or was he one of 'them'?

Bump for Jim... I thought you may have at least addressed this point Jim. At first I thought it was a genuine error, it's easy to do. But you guys do it ALL the time. Then when it's raised you completely ignore it and dump another chapter no doubt also full of these 'mistakes'. I can't be bothered to check it all out anymore when underhand tactics and blatant lies like this are the chief weapon I would be fighting against. I don't want to spend a couple of days reading through all the evidence, highlight the inevitable whacking great holes, distortions and lies (like the above), then spend a further week getting you to apologise for, retract, or at least simply acknowledge your deliberate mistakes. Did you know when you asked how the FBI could have turned up at Ryder's the day after the assassination that in actual fact they did no such thing? It was two days after that. (As you well knew, because you used that date yourself in a further post!)). That is, after the anonymous calls made by Ryder to the media. But your 'mistake' just happens to strengthen your "suspicions", and hopefully others too. Shameful tactics...

The unanswered anomaly not answered in above exchange with Jim... "From John's write-up: “That morning (11/23/63), only a couple of hours after Ryder arrived at the Sports Shop, FBI Agent Emory Horton arrived at Dial Ryder's house in Irving (circa 10:30 AM). Warren Commission attorney Liebeler asked Ryder, 'How did Horton know to come out to the sports shop?' Ryder replied, 'Actually, I don't know....'” I still haven't had time to read up on that section as promised. It jarred with me though to be honest. I couldn't myself understand how he, or anyone else, could have been onto it so quick. Then I read your follow up post and you provide the answer..."On November 25 (Monday) FBI Agent Emory Horton arrived at Dial Ryder's house in Irving at 10:30 am." So Ryder being quoted as not understanding how Horton came by his name is disingenuous isn't it? By implication we are led to believe it is suspicious that the FBI could be on the ball so quick. Horton's visit came after an anonymous caller made at least two calls to the media and the FBI. I'm sure the timeline being stated as 23/11 was an honest mistake. You guys are quite lucky with these mistakes though...When I make a mistake I pay a price, but for some, mistakes just seem to strengthen their argument.

Bernie, It's not so much a devotion to H&L as it is a reading of the evidence, which amounts to hundreds (maybe even thousands) of little details. As just one little example from HarveyandLee.net.... LEE OSWALD: two scars from a gunshot wound On October 27, 1957 Richard Cyr was standing about 15 yards from his barracks in Atsugi, Japan and heard a gunshot. Cyr and other marines ran into the building and found (LEE) Oswald sitting on his locker with a nickel-plated .22 derringer laying nearby on the floor. (LEE) Oswald said, "It seems as though I've shot myself." Oswald was taken to the sick bay for treatment and then taken to the U.S. Navy Hospital in nearby Yokosuku. A Navy surgeon closed the wound with stitches and allowed the .22 slug, which lay just below the surface on the back side of Oswald's upper left arm, to remain in his arm. A week later, on November 4, Dr. Greenlees made an incision on the back side of Oswald's arm, removed the .22 caliber slug, and closed the wound with stitches which were removed 10 days later. LEE Oswald had two incisions and now had two scars. After (HARVEY) Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963, an autopsy was performed by Dr. Earl Rose of Dallas. Dr. Rose listed and described numerous small scars on Oswald's body, including "a pale, white, oblique 1/4 inch scar." But nowhere, in the lengthly and precise autopsy report, did Dr. Rose observe or report any scars on Oswald's left arm. Photographs were taken of Oswalds arms, but show no scars from a bullet wound. After the autopsy, (HARVEY) Oswald was taken to the funeral home where he was embalmed and prepared for burial by mortician Paul Groody. Groody was subsequently interviewed by the Secret Service and asked if there were any scars on Oswald's arms and he (Groody) repeatedly said there were no scars on Oswald's upper left arm. Can you explain why two scars from a six-year-old gunshot wound would be missed by both Rose and Groody? Also, I read the page from the Mary Ferrell site about Ryder, but didn't see where the FBI claimed the ticket was from a different Oswald. Does that claim exist? If it does, I'll try to remember to bring it to JA's attention. Jim I have no intention of going into teeth, gunshot wounds or tonsils... We've done that. I am responding to this particular issue you posted linking John's new article. Let's, for once, just stick to one thing at a time eh? I never said that the "FBI claimed the ticket was from a different Oswald"...I'm simply claiming that it is no "mystery" as to how the FBI got to know of this tag written by Ryder in the first place. Your introduction to the article says it is. It is YOU who is implying that it was possibly a different Oswald and that the FBI had prior knowledge of this event. They didn't. They were informed by an employee of WFAA-TV who passed on the anonymous tip to the DPD. No mystery at all. Why spoil a really good article by falsely implying a mystery when basic research shows there to be none. Because 'mystery' is the oil that keeps the whole H&L on the road. Without it there is no H&L. Ah... Bernie... you introduced the two Oswalds by saying above that John and I are "devoted to the "H&L theory." I was just pointing out why. Why bring it up if you don't care to discuss it? Back on topic, I have never implied that the ticket was placed in Ryder's shop by an Oswald or anyone else. I have no idea how it got there. Here's what John Armstrong wrote about it: There is little doubt that Dial Ryder had an undated repair tag on November 23. There is no doubt the repair tag was intended to show the Irving Sports Shop mounted a scope on Oswald's $12.78 rifle. There is no question that one or more anonymous callers led the Dallas Police, FBI, and the press to the Irving Sports Shop. The unanswered ques­tion is who, if someone other than Dial Ryder, created the tag on Ryder's workbench and who, if someone other than Dial Ryder, notified the Dallas Police, the FBI, and the press. SUMMATION: The same day the FBI announced that Oswald purchased a mail-order rifle for $12.78 (without a scope), Ryder "found" an undated repair tag and three or more anonymous callers notified police that the scope on Oswald's rifle had been mounted at the Irving Sports Shop. Ryder told FBI Agent Horton and news reporters that he may have mounted the scope on Oswald's rifle. Six days later (11/29/63), after the FBI announced that Oswald purchased a rifle with a scope already mounted for $19.95, Ryder told the FBI and the Secret Service that he was sure that he had NOT mounted the scope. Whatever the truth surrounding the repair ticket, Ryder's admis­sion places him at the center of the controversy surrounding a $12.78 rifle, without a scope, allegedly purchased from Klein's. Your post seem to suggest that everything has been explained about this incident, but I don't think that is the case. John also wrote this: The owner of the Irving Sports Shop, Mr. Charles W. Greene, telephoned all of the Oswalds listed in the Dallas and Irving telephone directories in an attempt to locate the "Oswald" listed on repair ticket 18374, but was unsuccessful. Warren Commission Attorney Liebeler told Dial Ryder, "The FBI has at­tempted to find every Oswald in the whole Dallas and Fort Worth area and the surround­ing area and it has found many of them and it has questioned all of them, some of whom have moved out of Dallas and Fort Worth, as to whether or not they ever had any work done in that gunshop, and you should know that none of them ever did." Remember that for nearly a week after the assassination, news media widely reported that the the FBI had analysed the handwriting on the order form for a $12.78 rifle, with scope, and determined it to be "Lee Harvey Oswald's." "The unanswered ques­tion is who, if someone other than Dial Ryder, created the tag on Ryder's workbench and who, if someone other than Dial Ryder, notified the Dallas Police, the FBI, and the press." But Ryder admitted that he was the one who wrote the tag. He confirmed that it was his writing. There is no "someone other" involved. We know he wrote the tag so he must have been the first person to have this information, obviously. He then admitted telling his wife before informing anyone else. "three or more anonymous callers notified police that the scope on Oswald's rifle had been mounted at the Irving Sports Shop." I could be wrong but I believed there was just the one call, a woman, so if you could show citations for that I'd appreciate it. Also I don't think that the shop was first mentioned, it was a vague location that contained several gun shops. "Your post seem to suggest that everything has been explained about this incident, but I don't think that is the case." See, this is where we all go round the mulberry bush again isn't it? We don't know the FULL story so any tiny doubts or miniscule anomalies can then be construed in any manner we wish to fit whatever pre-ordained conclusion we have drawn. I don't believe that the FBI (or any other sinister parties) had any prior knowledge of that tag: a tag for a gun that Oswald didn't use 'brought in' by someone who looked nothing like Oswald! Let's assume it WAS the assassination weapon. Well then we'd have a story; and one that would have been part of the 'known' narrative. Conversely, let's suppose it wasn't Oswald's gun but it was brought in by someone identical to him. Likewise we have a mysterious story of someone possibly impersonating him. But you have neither! Ryder has neither! The fact that you portrayed the tag as being "found" using inverted commas, strongly implies that you think there is another more sinister explanation. But you don't say what. I've also noticed that neither you or John have mentioned Harvey or Lee in this story, but refer to him as LHO. Whilst I find this as a progressive move I can't help feeling it is merely a tactical innovation. This portion of the article, at least, alludes to (by a nod and a wink and without mentioning names) the narrative the originators have spent huge parts of their lives promoting. And finally... "Remember that for nearly a week after the assassination, news media widely reported that the the FBI had analysed the handwriting on the order form for a $12.78 rifle, with scope, and determined it to be "Lee Harvey Oswald's."" But this has nothing to do with the tag we are talking about! This refers to the order made to Kleins. Why would you mention handwriting recognition on a document we are not discussing to make your point? Ryder wrote the tag. It's his writing and he admitted to it! The fact that the FBI assumed it was LHO's handwriting on another document is another story... but it does serve as a nice distraction from the main point.

Bernie, It's not so much a devotion to H&L as it is a reading of the evidence, which amounts to hundreds (maybe even thousands) of little details. As just one little example from HarveyandLee.net.... LEE OSWALD: two scars from a gunshot wound On October 27, 1957 Richard Cyr was standing about 15 yards from his barracks in Atsugi, Japan and heard a gunshot. Cyr and other marines ran into the building and found (LEE) Oswald sitting on his locker with a nickel-plated .22 derringer laying nearby on the floor. (LEE) Oswald said, "It seems as though I've shot myself." Oswald was taken to the sick bay for treatment and then taken to the U.S. Navy Hospital in nearby Yokosuku. A Navy surgeon closed the wound with stitches and allowed the .22 slug, which lay just below the surface on the back side of Oswald's upper left arm, to remain in his arm. A week later, on November 4, Dr. Greenlees made an incision on the back side of Oswald's arm, removed the .22 caliber slug, and closed the wound with stitches which were removed 10 days later. LEE Oswald had two incisions and now had two scars. After (HARVEY) Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963, an autopsy was performed by Dr. Earl Rose of Dallas. Dr. Rose listed and described numerous small scars on Oswald's body, including "a pale, white, oblique 1/4 inch scar." But nowhere, in the lengthly and precise autopsy report, did Dr. Rose observe or report any scars on Oswald's left arm. Photographs were taken of Oswalds arms, but show no scars from a bullet wound. After the autopsy, (HARVEY) Oswald was taken to the funeral home where he was embalmed and prepared for burial by mortician Paul Groody. Groody was subsequently interviewed by the Secret Service and asked if there were any scars on Oswald's arms and he (Groody) repeatedly said there were no scars on Oswald's upper left arm. Can you explain why two scars from a six-year-old gunshot wound would be missed by both Rose and Groody? Also, I read the page from the Mary Ferrell site about Ryder, but didn't see where the FBI claimed the ticket was from a different Oswald. Does that claim exist? If it does, I'll try to remember to bring it to JA's attention. Jim I have no intention of going into teeth, gunshot wounds or tonsils... We've done that. I am responding to this particular issue you posted linking John's new article. Let's, for once, just stick to one thing at a time eh? I never said that the "FBI claimed the ticket was from a different Oswald"...I'm simply claiming that it is no "mystery" as to how the FBI got to know of this tag written by Ryder in the first place. Your introduction to the article says it is. It is YOU who is implying that it was possibly a different Oswald and that the FBI had prior knowledge of this event. They didn't. They were informed by an employee of WFAA-TV who passed on the anonymous tip to the DPD. No mystery at all. Why spoil a really good article by falsely implying a mystery when basic research shows there to be none. Because 'mystery' is the oil that keeps the whole H&L on the road. Without it there is no H&L.

BTW, regarding the accusation that Ryder lied about conversing with newspaper man Schmidt, I have three comments: Ryder claimed he wouldn't talk to Schmidt. He even took the phone off the hook. Schimdt claimed that he did talk to Ryder, and that an associate listened in on the whole conversation. I only skimmed the article. But from what I saw, I couldn't tell who was lying. Why would somebody listen in on the conversation? I couldn't tell from the testimony, but if this associate heard BOTH sides of the conversation, to me this stinks. Maybe to provide later corroboration for a conversation that didn't really happen? I wish I had time to delve into this. EDIT: Oops... Bernie not Ernie. So sorry. Hi Andy, (...sorry I couldn't resist it) I didn't copy the full thread because it's annoying for members. I've uploaded a portion of CE 1334 on MFF (I hope it turns up in the right place...). If not, please follow the link. http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317&search=ryder#relPageId=571&tab=page This conclusively proves that the media were first informed via an anonymous tip off to a Ray Johns of WFAA-TV on the 24th Nov who then passed on the info to the DPD. Schmidt, the reporter who rang Ryder, was told of the tip off on turning up for work on the 28th, but you are correct in saying that on the 25th an FBI agent had already interviewed Ryder. He swore he had had told no one of this tag except his wife and he categorically denied talking to the media. So you have to ask who is telling the truth. Because one is black and the other is white. Schmidt says he definitely had a conversation with Ryder. Ryder completely denies it and says he put the phone down. Schmidt says Ryder provided him with all the salient points about the price and the type of repairs required, which turned out to be spot on, Ryder completely denies it. So where did Schmidt get this information from? The only people who had that info was Ryder, his wife, and whoever gave the tip off. Yet a county reporter also independently knew about this tag too, and didn't need to talk to Ryder to get his story? Let's assume for one moment that someone else, someone who knew about an Oswald getting a gun repaired; not Ryder, not Schmidt, but some other dark player, and he/she was the source of this info... surely they would have contacted the DPD directly, (albeit anonymously) and not a media outlet! I have no proof but common sense tells me it was either Ryder or his wife who first furnished the information to the media. Only they had that information at that time. Why he/she/they would do this is anyone's guess. But you cannot really draw any other conclusions. As for doppelgangers and H&L I made reference to wasn't in response to anything you had written Sandy, but a more general response to the originator of the topic who linked an article by John Armstrong, the creator of Harvey & Lee. The whole implication, knowing how devoted to the H&L theory John and Jim are, is that somehow somebody in the FBI had prior knowledge of the gun shop saga, and of someone purporting to be LHO. It is sold as a "mystery" as to how the FBI could have come by this information yet the chain of evidence showing this hasn't been explained in the original article. That surprises me because other parts of the article are extremely well researched. Funny that the bit that shows exactly how the FBI came to know of this gun shop tag is left dangling in mid air and sold off as a mystery. Best regards...

Ernie, First let me say that I read some of the testimony and skimmed some of it. So I may be mistaken somehow in my response here. But I think not. It seems like you (and Mr. Greener) are mistaken in some way. You both say the Dallas Herald got involved with the Irving Gun Shop before the FBI did. But I think it happened the other way around. You said: Only when the story broke did the FBI get involved, naturally. Had the FBI known about this first why would the Dallas Herald even be involved in the story? Mr. Greener (the shop owner) agrees with you: Mr. LIEBELER. I am trying to find out at what time this story first broke, whether the FBI had been here at the shop to ask any questions before the story came out in the newspapers? Mr. GREENER. As I recall, no. None of the law enforcing agencies had been by previous to that. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression is that he [FBI agent] came here because they saw the story in the paper? Mr. GREENER. That is my idea. Either that, or they were informed by the news reporters. But I read in other testimony that the FBI got involved on Monday the 25th, whereas the Dallas Herald didn't get involved until Wednesday the 28th. The following Ryder (the workman) testimony establishes the date for the FBI visit: Mr. LIEBELER. When did the FBI first come out? Mr. RYDER. On Monday. Mr. LIEBELER. On Monday? Mr. RYDER. Yes; that was on Monday, of the funeral of the late President. Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25, 1963, when the FBI came out on Monday and you gave them the tag or showed them this tag; is that right? Now, as you read the following Greener testimony, keep in mind that the Oswald tag had been found by Monday the 25th: Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression now is that the FBI man was here when the tag was found [on Monday 25th or earlier]? Mr. GREENER. That is my impression; yes. So Mr.Greener changes his mind and no longer agrees with you. Now he agrees with his employee, Ryder. The FBI was there early. Now let's turn to the testimony of Schmidt, the newspaper reporter. His testimony establishes the date for the Dallas Times Herald visit: Mr. LIEBELER. As I have indicated to Mr. Ryder, Mr. Schmidt testified yesterday that on the morning of November 28, 1963, you came to work in your office at the Dallas Times Herald and received information of some sort that possibly Lee Oswald had had some work done on a rifle, on his rifle or a rifle, in some sports shops or gunshop in the outlying areas of Dallas. Would you tell us briefly what happened after that, Mr. Schmidt? Mr. SCHMIDT. After I got the tip, I traced it down and thought it was Garland first and I looked it up in the phonebook--the city directory--and the usual sources that we go through--I looked-through and this Ryder was the only one that I could find, or apparently he was the one that said what I was looking for. Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you get Ryder's name in the first place; do you know? Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, it was from a tip around the police station. Now, I don't remember. I have been trying to remember where who specifically it came from, but it was one of the many we were getting at that tim. Incidentally, the highlighted text near the end tells us who found out about the gun shop's Oswald tag. Someone around the police station knew about it. Perhaps a DPD employee?? So you see, the FBI really did go to the gun shop first. BTW, regarding the accusation that Ryder lied about conversing with newspaper man Schmidt, I have three comments: Ryder claimed he wouldn't talk to Schmidt. He even took the phone off the hook. Schimdt claimed that he did talk to Ryder, and that an associate listened in on the whole conversation. I only skimmed the article. But from what I saw, I couldn't tell who was lying. Why would somebody listen in on the conversation? I couldn't tell from the testimony, but if this associate heard BOTH sides of the conversation, to me this stinks. Maybe to provide later corroboration for a conversation that didn't really happen? I wish I had time to delve into this. Sandy, it's not a real big deal but my name is Bernie not Ernie, the clue is in the name at the top of the post you replied to. You say you haven't really read the whole transcript (as well as the name of the person you are replying to) but already everyone excluding Ryder seems suspicious to you. I know why of course. This story isn't a story unless there is a possible doppelganger attached to it. On this particular example though it is water-thin gruel. Look I aren't criticising the article for the sake of it, I've said, I thought it threw up some real good information. My irritation is this constant attempt to create the illusion that there was a second Oswald who can account for EVERY anomaly in the records or from witness testimony. Only Ryder knew about this tag, but the implication is that the FBI also knew about it too. Given that the Oswald in question didn't look like LHO and the gun in question wasn't LHO's why would the FBI need to know this information beforehand anyway. What are you implying? I thought we had established that it couldn't have been a doppelganger because Ryder didn't identify him. And surely if it had been 'Lee' setting up 'Harvey' (because that is what all this is about!) Ryder would have seen the likeness like dozens of others. We have also proved that Ryder did lie to Greener about talking to the press. He said he hadn't spoken to anyone "AT ALL" whereas Schmidt, who asked to take a lie detector test to prove his credibility, went into great detail on how the conversation went. If this isn't true then the info he is using must have come straight from the FBI. Don't you think it a bit odd that they would give the info to a journalist, wait until he rings Ryder and gets the story published and only then do the FBI decide to go and see Ryder? That didn't happen! As to the guy listening in on the conversation, it doesn't say, but I took it that he was just in the room listening to Schmidt's part of the dialogue. That would be perfectly normal (we even used to do that in our sales office if there was a particularly 'difficult' conversation to be had with a client.) According to the testimony Sandy, the FBI were informed by the media, it was an anonymous tip made to a couple of media outlets who then contacted the FBI. It started with a phone call from someone who knew for definite that tag was there. If the FBI did know this why didn't they act on it instead of calling the Dallas Herald? At that stage the FBI knew nothing. The only person who knew of this tag was Ryder. It seems logical then to assume that he is the source of the information. Can anyone add to the three possible scenarios as to how this tag business could have come about. 1 - It was the historic LHO who wanted work doing on different riffle to the one subsequently found in TSBD . 2 - It was someone else called Oswald about a different riffle to the one subsequently found in TSBD 3 - Ryder wrote the tag after the event and either he or his partner anonymously tipped off the media.

I don’t want to seem argumentative, I actually thought John’s article was really illuminating and adds something of value to the process. What spoils it for me is the constant need to anchor such research into an existing belief. For instance, it is painted as a “mystery” how the FBI came by the Irving Gun Shop in the first place but common sense tells us otherwise. Take the tag ‘found’ at Irving Gun Shop with the name Oswald on it. It is seemingly a “mystery” as to how the FBI came by this information yet the sequence of events shows exactly how it came about. Mr GREENER was the owner and his assistant, RYDER, is the one who wrote the tag and carried out the repairs. He subsequently denied seeing Oswald and confirmed that the gun in question wasn’t the assassination weapon. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any reason to believe that any reporter talked to Ryder prior to the time the FBI came to your shop? Mr. GREENER. One told me he did. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that reporter's name? Mr. GREENER. No; he was with the Times Herald. Mr. LIEBELER. Dallas Times Herald? Mr. GREENER. I couldn't swear. Mr. LIEBELER. He told you he talked to Ryder? Mr. GREENER. Ryder told me he hadn't. Mr. LIEBELER. Ryder told you the reporter had not talked to him? Mr. GREENER. Had not talked to him. Mr. LIEBELER. Did the reporter tell you when he had talked to Ryder? Mr. GREENER. He told me that he talked to him earlier in the morning… So we have proof that the employee is lying to his boss. And it wasn’t the FBI, but the Dallas Herald who first made the contact…apparently. Mr. LIEBELER. I am trying to find out at what time this story first broke, whether the FBI had been here at the shop to ask any questions before the story came out in the newspapers? Mr. GREENER. As I recall, no. None of the law enforcing agencies had been by previous to that. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression is that he came here because they saw the story in the paper? Mr. GREENER. That is my idea. Either that, or they were informed by the news reporters. Mr. LIEBELER. Now did this reporter from the Dallas paper, whose name you don't remember, tell you that Ryder had called him? Mr. GREENER. No; he told me that he called him, called Ryder. Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you how he got the idea to call Ryder? Mr. GREENER. No; he didn't. Mr. LIEBELER. And you didn't ask him? Mr. GREENER. No. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss this question with Ryder? Mr. GREENER. Yes; I did. And he said he had not talked to a newspaper reporter about it. Mr. LIEBELER. At all? Mr. GREENER. Right. Why is Ryder lying to his boss about not talking to the media? What is he trying to hide from him? If the Dallas Herald reporter is really telling the truth and not just defending his sources, who else could possibly know about this tag? Certainly not the FBI, they came along later… Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the exact details under which you found the tag in the shop? Mr. RYDER. Well, we talked about this thing on Saturday morning and like I said before, like you saw the workbench up there today, that it is cluttered up, and on Saturday evening I was cleaning it off and found the tag laying back on the workbench. Mr. LIEBELER. The Saturday following the assassination? Mr. RYDER. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. You found the tag there yourself? Mr. RYDER. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Had the FBI been out here prior to that time? Mr. RYDER. No. Mr. LIEBELER. They had not? Mr. RYDER. No, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. When did the FBI first come out? Mr. RYDER. On Monday. Mr. LIEBELER. On Monday? Mr. RYDER. Yes; that was on Monday, of the funeral of the late President. Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25, 1963, when the FBI came out on Monday and you gave them the tag or showed them this tag; is that right? Mr. RYDER. He told us to hold onto it, and then they later came by and got the tag. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to the newspaper reporter about this? Mr. RYDER. There were several out here after the FBI had been out, and we told them the same thing that we told the FBI. Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't talk to any newspaper reporter before the FBI came out here? Mr. RYDER. No. But according to the owner, Mr Greener this was the scenario. Sounds like our boy Ryder is a bit of a romancer. Mr. LIEBELER. Who found the tag; do you remember? Mr. GREENER. No; I don't know. If I remember correctly, and I could be wrong, because like I said, you are going into things that hadn't entered my mind since November 22, along in there, and it seems to me that he had contacted Ryder and they had come down here. Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI? Mr. GREENER Yes, and they found the tag on the workbench somewhere. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression now is that the FBI man was here when the tag was found? Mr. GREENER. That is my impression; yes. Somehow someone from the Dallas Herald received a tip off about a gun repair shop who had a tag with the name Oswald written on it. So others knew about this tag before the FBI; firstly the source of the information and secondly the Dallas Herald. Only when the story broke did the FBI get involved, naturally. Had the FBI known about this first why would the Dallas Herald even be involved in the story? So we have three, and only three, scenarios for that tag to have been there in that shop. The real Oswald went there and asked for repairs to yet another gun he owned. Another Oswald went there for repairs to another gun. Or, Ryder wrote the tag after the event and either he or his partner contacted the media with an anonymous tip off. Here is a fascinating exchange between the Dallas Herald reporter, Hunter Schmidt, and Ryder who Schmidt claimed had provided the information that was eventually published. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/ryderschmidt.htm Make your own mind up who is telling the truth.

"With the original Kleins microfilm in hand the FBI could easily copy and fabricate a Klein's order form to show that Oswald (Hidell) purchased a 40" Italian rifle (C2766) from Kleins. They could easily show that Oswald paid for the rifle with a $21.45 postal money order. And they could create and backdate FBI reports to create the illusion that FBI agents "found" information relating to Oswald's purchase of the rifle on Klein's microfilm. They needed only 3 items to suddenly "appear" on the microfilm--a blank Klein's order coupon (from a sports magazine), a Klein's order form, and a stamped and "dated" mailing envelope." "The FBI needed to create reports that showed Crescent sold C2766 to Klein's, and then re-sold that rifle to Oswald. All documentation had to be dated after Crescent Firearms' sold C2766 to Klein's (after June 18, 1962), but before April 10, 1963, when Oswald allegedly used this rifle to fire shots at General Edwin Walker. The FBI's first step was to ignore the sale of C2766 by Crescent to Kleins on June 18, 1962, and show that C2766 was shipped to Kleins in early 1963." And so on... No doubt there were huge gymnastics performed by the FBI during those first few fraught hours after the assassination. The order had come down from above - nail Oswald. And only Oswald. Documents are then tortuously fabricated to create a narrative consistent with that. There is without doubt more than a glimmer of truth in this article and it shows the kind of gross falsification that was needed to arrive at a politically 'safe solution'. Question though: in retrospect, if they had had the resources wouldn't it have been neater to have simply found a doppelganger and have HIM go and buy the damn rifle? There has been talk of such a doppelganger using Oswald's name buying trucks, going fishing and being interviewed when it was dangerous for the plot to do so. Yet here was a golden opportunity to actually use him in such a way as to totally incriminate Oswald but the plotters preferred and chose the above frantic sequence of events. The person who everyone was fooled into believing was Oswald (presumably because of 'Lee's' very close resemblance) could have been used to buy the gun from any shop in Dallas. Get him to make a scene whilst doing it and immediately there is a link between the gun, the seller and the buyer...that is, Oswald. I wonder why they didn't do that...

All the statements below are culled from the above post. See if you can spot a pattern. 1 During the next 2-1/2 months a young man, identified by witnesses as “Lee Harvey Oswald," appeared in various locations in order to create the impression that he was a communist, 2 Someone was needed to impersonate HARVEY Oswald in Dallas, and who better than LEE Oswald. (WHY??) 3 Following the assassination Jarnagin recognized the younger man as “Lee Harvey Oswald” 4 Oct 17 (Thur), TEC. A man closely resembling HARVEY Oswald showed up at Laura Kittrell's 5 "were much alike in size, shape, and outline, there was a marked difference between them in bearing and manner.” 6 After the assassination Weston recognized the man as LEE Harvey Oswald 7 The clerk and three customers later identified the man as LHO 8 Following the assassination Mrs. Whitworth and her friend, Gertrude Hunter, identified the young man as LHO 9 That evening Harvey Lawill Wade saw a man he later identified as LHO 10 Helen saw a photograph of LHO on television. She immediately recognized him as the man who appeared the night before at the Professor's apartment But you're all sticking firm that they didn't look that similar? Because if they did look similar, so much that he was "instantly recognised", then it's all over for you. Nobody with an IQ of more than 13 could possibly buy that ridiculous coincidence.

Implore? All I said is you'd next be whining to the moderators - lo and behold, like clockwork. That you cannot tell the difference between an original and altered image when it's that obvious speaks volumes of your abilities to do any critical thinking. What again are you doing here? So you messaged me something abusive knowing I would complain to the mods? KNOWING I would do that? That sounds like a deliberate move then. One with a specific hoped-for conclusion. You want to be disciplined so you have an excuse to disappear whilst this rock solid proof of your deceit goes away. Didn't work did it? I haven't complained. I don't want the mods to do anything. I quoted your message to show what low-life tactics some scumbags are prepared to go in order to derail the entire JFK assassination debate and vomit their deliberate disinformation down our throats. LHO is the tiny one at the back. Get over it. What that means for your puerile fantasy is irrelevant. Deal with the facts.

Just received this unsolicited message from Josephs. This is the second time he has pulled this little tactical stunt... "Maybe if you took your nose out of Greg's ass long enough to do your own thinking you wouldn't be such an asshole..." I don't want the moderators to do anything, despite him imploring me to complain to the them. Josephs wants to be temporarily banned so he doesn't have to keep humiliating himself like this. He can write abusive messages to me all day; (he's clearly got nothing else to do with his time). it's just an admission that he can now no longer sustain this deliberate disinformation campaign, run by BIG money, called H&L. As soon as we show rock solid proof of their utter deceit they become abusive and aggressive. Hope I've spoiled your day!

So what was the answer to Greg's pertinent question "How far back from the group do you think LHO was?" One foot? Two? Five? And you think that will make a tall husky lad appear smaller than everyone else there? Even the ones stood right beside him? But of course. You HAVE to believe it. If not you will look like an idiot who has wasted his life on a ridiculous premise when he could have used that time to enjoy it and not be the butt of everyone's jokes. You fundamentalist freaks scare the bejesus out of me.

Illustrating you don't understand photography is appreciated... Once again... distance to the camera and focal length - any clue? Yawn...! Then explain why he is still dwarfed by those stood to his right and who are the same distance away from the camera. If LHO were stood 20 or 30 feet behind the entire group you would definitely have a point. But he isn't. And if he were as big and husky as you keep having to prove (otherwise, once again H&L bites the dust) that would shine through regardless of camera angle. No camera angle will show Sly Stallone looking like Woody Allen, however much you warble on about perspective. What an irony that you of all people should be banging on about perspective. You could do with a bucket-load yourself!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGor7ZyCawI This is what they were all singing at the CAP...

Pay attention David please. It was Greg who wrote a few posts earlier in #1801..."You're the one claiming he went there..." Which is perfectly correct English grammar. GAAL decided to use his expert language skills and correct him in post #1802... "CAP photo small LEE people. Your the one claiming he went there he (LEE) saw smallish , The burden of proof is on you to show when it was he was smallish." Gaal (#1802) Oops! You just don't seem to care how many times you come on here and thoroughly humiliate yourself do you? So, who is the smallest little man in the photo David? Is it 'Harvey' or is it 'Lee'? A straightforward answer would be just dandy. I think the little diddy one looks like LHO. Do you?

"...CAP photo small LEE people. Your the one claiming he went there he (LEE) saw smallish ..." Gaal Talking of linguistic skills, where did Gaal learn such fluent gibberish? Anything to say about little Tom Thumb Oswald at the CAP? But you keep saying 'Lee' was tall and stocky, so it must have been either 'Harvey' or yet another doppelganger posing in that photo (...'Harvey Lee and a spare makes three') But 'Harvey' didn't knock about with David Ferrie you keep telling us... So who is the tiny little fella that looks just like LHO in that CAP photo? PS...Were there three Marguerites as well?

Jim's font size is bigger than Oswald! Quote of the Week already... "The photo was obviously altered!" --Tommy Shhh, they don't want to talk about that photo. Tom Thumb at the back is giving it all away!

Jim's font size is bigger than Oswald!

And as if to prove my above point. I find it depressing that so many on here who seemingly want to expose the dark shady forces behind the assassination of JFK are themselves completely hooked on the very people who benefit from those dark shady forces. JFK's killers worked for people like Trump. When, in my mind's eye, I try and conjure up a composite image of the type of ultra rich person who would go to extreme and murderous lengths to "keep the money", Donald Trump's face shines brightly back at me. He's just what America needs right now, a racist sexist bigot with too much money and too much power. It's odd that folk go on a public forum dedicated to teasing out the many intricate details of the political corruption at the heart of America in 1963... yet act as cheerleaders for the corrupt political elite of today.

Trump is not part of the Republican Establishment. Probably the most naïve statement I have ever seen on this forum, trumped only by the idea that he was in any way "like JFK". This is where a lot of us go wrong. Start with 2 + 2 = 5 and you will never get to the bottom of anything. It was precisely people like Trump who wanted JFK, and all he stood for, assassinated! If you can't see that now, you have zero chance of understanding who would have wanted him dead then! So you reckon Trump would be working for world peace and taking on powerful vested interests? Really? I note that there are a lot of posters on this forum (and I have to say, it's mainly American members) who full on support the neo con de-regulated capitalist free market and all that implies. It makes you wonder why they want to spend any time on who killed some "Commie pig" in 1963. I'm sure they have their reasons....

PLEASE NOTE YOU POSTED ON THIS FORUM ABOUT GOING OUT TO PUBs / TAVERNS or some such and YOU connected it to the phrase , "I have a life". You seem to be a musician , link below to help you in your ,"gigs". Jesus would never approve of dinking to excess !!! .,gaal == http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=571684 (read full page // estimate 22 beers a band member and thus Tavern owner 'owed' money) Gaal has read an article that shows that the fictitious Blues Band once drank more than they earned. So, logic dictates that if you are in a band then you obviously drink to excess. All bands. All musicians. I know Steven, this new fangled pop music is all the devil's work. So is writing plays. In fact anything that requires personal expression or heartfelt creativity should be abolished forthwith. Guns and God. That's all we need! This is the kind of brain-dead logic that leads to accepting without question the H&L nonsense. Hale Bopp, can you hear me? You missed one!

Is going fishing and buying trucks under his own name a pattern of behaviour consistent with CE activities? His own name??? Going fishing?? Desperate stuff!