Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Posts

    7,851
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by David Von Pein

  1. The Chicago bank could not have transferred (technically, negotiated) the M.O. and gotten paid for the $21.45 (or whatever) it remitted to Klein's without endorsing the money order.

    I've speculated in the past about this sort of thing (and, yes, I *am* only speculating and it should identified as such, because I have no proof of this)....

    I'm wondering if a document (or deposit ticket) representing the bulk transfer of money orders from, in this case, First National Bank in Chicago to the FRB in Chicago, would be the only document that would need to be stamped or marked or endorsed by First National? ~shrug~ (Bernice Moore thinks otherwise, however.)

    From THIS EDU. FORUM DISCUSSION IN MARCH 2011....

    DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

    It's my feeling, too, that in many cases where a large, bulk deposit is made which includes many checks and money orders (which would certainly have been the case with the $13,000+ deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods on March 13, 1963) that it's quite possible that only the DEPOSIT TICKET for the entire bulk amount gets stamped by the bank after it is received. That last part about "bulk deposits" with a lot of checks and money orders shouldn't be too hard to verify at some point in the future. (Are there any bank employees posting at this forum?)

    BERNICE MOORE SAID:

    I did work in a bank back then, but here in Canada. .... I do not know if the process was the same, in the states, but here every cheque, money order, [or] whatever, in a deposit was stamped, as it was also with the stamp of the bank where it was first presented, on the back. fwtw.

  2. But if it is made with card stock, why is it that the "Mar 12 1963" postal stamp so readily bled through to the back? The fact that it bled though indicates that the MO we see is actually paper stock, not card stock. And this conclusion contradicts the conclusion of the prior paragraph.

    Nice point Sandy.

    More stupidity on the part of your bumbling idiotic patsy framers, right Jimmy? They couldn't even get the right "card stock" to mimic a real U.S. Postal Money Order. What a band of goofs those plotters were.

    But thank goodness we've got super sleuths like Armstrong, Josephs, Larsen, and DiEugenio on the scene now to figure all this out. Otherwise, Dulles, Ferrie, Shaw, and the stumblebum who used the wrong paper for CE788 would never have been found out and exposed!

  3. Davey:

    I am not ta[l]king to you anymore on this issue. OK?

    I only did so to show the others how your constellation works: the McAdams, DVP, Davison connection. So they will not be fooled again.

    Over and out.

    Bye.

    Okay, Jimmy.

    Ten-Four and Wilco.

    One-Adam-12 out.

    jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-complete-series.html

  4. Just like Bardwell Odum showed Wright and Tomlinson CE 399 and they positively identified it, right ?

    Give us all a break OK?

    And let's not forget about the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald's handwriting is on the money order in question -- the original of which was examined by questioned documents expert Alwyn Cole of the Treasury Department.....

    MELVIN EISENBERG -- "Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a U.S. postal money order in the amount of $21.45, payable to Klein's Sporting Goods, from "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." For the record I will state that this money order was included with the purchase order in Exhibit 773 which has just been identified, and was intended and used as payment for the weapon shipped in response to the purchase order, 773. I ask you, Mr. Cole, whether you have examined this money order for the purpose of determining whether it was prepared by the author of the standards?"

    ALWYN COLE -- "Yes, sir."

    MR. EISENBERG -- "What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole?"

    MR. COLE -- "It is my conclusion that the handwriting on this money order is in the hand of the person who executed the standard writing [i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald]."

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Looks like we can add the name of Alwyn Cole to James DiEugenio's list of falsehood tellers. Right, Jim? (Or does Cole already show up as #1,846 on your existing list?)

  5. Just like Bardwell Odum showed Wright and Tomlinson CE 399 and they positively identified it, right ?

    Give us all a break OK?

    Yeah, Jim, CD75 is just another lie, right? This one being told by the THREE different Chicago FBI agents who attached their names to that report in CD75 -- Gale T. Johnson, James E. Hanlon, and Philip R. Wanerus.

    So there are three more scheming falsehood tellers for Jimmy to add to his ever-growing list of falsehood tellers (can't say the L-word at this forum, for some silly reason).

  6. Warren Commission Document No. 75, Page 668, is an FBI report that says a money order for $21.45 was sent to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago on March 16, 1963 (next-to-last paragraph)....

    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10477#relPageId=672

    Sure looks like the Hidell money order entered the federal banking system to me.

  7. Sorry, it did. And as I said, this is about the third or fourth time.

    And just what were the other two or three, Jim? Please provide the links.

    When does a continuous pattern of "errors" become a deliberate attempt to mislead?

    Holy St. Mary! What a beautiful place for a "Pot/Kettle" icon here! (Somebody get me one--quick!)

    CTers have the patent on sending people down garden paths. And they own another patent on sending perfectly innocent people to the figurative gallows based on NOTHING but suspicion, rumor, and gut feeling --- like, say, Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, Linnie Randle, Wesley Frazier, Bob Frazier, Allen Dulles, and M.N. McDonald, among dozens of others connected in some way to the events of November 22, 1963.

    Jim D. surely must have changed his middle name to "Irony". How could it possibly be anything else?

    IMO, he [James R. Gordon] was right when he wanted to kick you off for saying the Single Bullet Theory was inescapable.

    Well, James, fortunately for all of us, you aren't steering the ship here at The Education Forum.

    Yeah, inescapable BS.

    You, Jim, should be very familiar with those two initials -- BS -- what with the fact you believe in every one of these incredibly ridiculous things....

    jfk-archives/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-81/The-Stupid-Things-James-DiEugenio-Believes

  8. So what does she [Jean Davison] do with this half baked observation instead? She passes it on to DVP...

    Totally untrue. I merely saw Jean's post at the McAdams forum and decided to re-post it here. Jean wasn't "passing" anything on to ME specifically at all.

    Jean, in fact, is a current member of this forum and she can post here anytime she wants. She's been a member since August 22, 2004, as we can see here in her profile....

    http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=1129

    So she certainly doesn't need me (or anyone else) to serve as a go-between when it comes to posting at this forum.

    Time for DiEugenio to wipe a little egg off of his face now. I had to do that yesterday when I fully admitted I was wrong about the "punch holes" topic. Will Jim do likewise now and retract his wholly inaccurate quote cited above?

  9. I mean the bleed through. I don't see how it can be ignored.

    It really does seem to me to be a big faux pas, one which the WC apparently swallowed.

    I mean can someone explain it innocently?

    Sure. There must have been a "heavier hand" being applied by both Lee Oswald (whose written words are bleeding through just a little bit on the CE788 money order) and the postal employee who stamped the M.O. in the lower right-hand corner. More pressure on the pen or the inked stamp means more ink being absorbed by the paper. Hence, it bleeds through to the other side.

    If the 1961 money order mentioned earlier by John Armstrong has no bleed-thru, and *IF* it was the exact same thickness of paper stock as CE788 (which I don't suppose can ever be confirmed with 100% certainty), then I suppose that would indicate the people who wrote on and/or stamped that 1961 money order just didn't apply as much pressure as Oswald and the post office clerk applied to the CE788 money order on March 12, 1963.

    Is that "innocent" explanation not nearly good enough for you, James? (Silly question, I know.)

    Plus, it's also possible (I suppose) that between 1961 and 1963, a lighter weight and thinner paper stock was being used for U.S. Postal Money Orders, which would, of course, lend themselves more to "bleed-thru".

  10. My question would be: Who is Greg Castle and does he really know this issue back and forth?

    His name is Brian Castle. Not Greg. ....

    http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13267538-about-that-money-order-

    And if we want to get into a debate about which side produces more lame-ass theories and pure speculative nonsense relating to the JFK assassination -- LNers or CTers -- I could go on for days about how the CTers of the world have added more sheer crap to the table than all of the LNers of the planet combined. And I've documented thousands of examples of this at my own website.

  11. This almost never happens, but its continuing. More from John Armstrong:

    Prior to 1963 postal money orders were "punched" with rectangular holes prior to deliver to the US post office for sale to customers, as were the stubs/receipts attached to the end of postal money orders. As you can see on many examples, with an uncashed postal money order from 1961 (front and back sides), with rectangular punched holes. And postal money order stubs, with rectangular holes.

    Why don't you ask DVP, or any of these idiots, how the postal money order stubs can have rectangular punched holes prior to being deposited to a bank as they claim. And, by the way, do you notice that the ink from the postal stamps, payee, and payor did not bleed thru to the reverse side of the

    money order?

    I've already admitted that I was wrong about the punch holes being placed in Oswald's money order as a part of processing the M.O. Here's exactly what I said yesterday....

    "More information (from 1962 newspaper accounts) on the punch holes, dug up by Tom Scully, is available HERE and HERE.

    Looks like a nice big defeat for the "LN" side regarding the "punch holes".

    Celebrate, CTers! Looks like you won this one.

    But, I can't help but repeat....

    How in the heck do CTers think the Hidell money order managed to get to the Federal Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia, if it wasn't cashed and then processed by someone?

    ~big shrug~" -- DVP; 11/10/15

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

    What do you want now---a pint of my blood? Geez.

    And maybe you'd like to ask John Armstrong about that "OUT OF SEQUENCE MONEY ORDER" theory of his. Ask him if he really thinks the Dallas Post Office was the ONLY post office selling U.S. Postal Money Orders in early 1963.

  12. Jim, this is unimaginable stupidity. Don't waste your time with these people.

    Speaking of unimaginable stupidity relating to Oswald's money order.....

    RAY MITCHAM SAID:

    From "Harvey and Lee" by John Armstrong:

    "All US Postal Money orders have unique serial numbers. In the fall of 1962, Oswald purchased numerous money orders from the same downtown post office and mailed them to Washington, DC in order to repay a loan from the government for his travel expenses incurred when he returned to the USA from Russia. These money orders were purchased in numerical sequence beginning in November, 1962. These serial numbers show that some 1200 money orders per week were purchased at the downtown post office in Dallas. At this rate we see that Oswald's alleged purchase of a money order on March 12, 1963 should have been numbered 2,202,011,935. But the serial number of the money order published in the Warren Volumes was more than 118,000 numbers higher. At the rate of 1200 money order per week, this money order should have been purchased in late 1964 or early 1965. In other words, this money order could easily have been pulled from a stack of fresh, unsold money orders by a postal official in Dallas, sometime after the assassination, and then given to the FBI. A close look at the details surrounding the "finding" of the money order the day after the assassination strongly suggests that this is what happened."

    [-- John Armstrong]

    Any comments, Dave?

    DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

    Why couldn't the Dallas post office have simply run out of their supply of blank U.S. Postal money orders shortly before Oswald purchased his M.O. on March 12th? It's fairly obvious to me that that is what happened.

    Does John Armstrong really think that the Dallas post office had an unlimited supply of money orders on hand at all times? How silly.

    At some point, the supply of money orders would run low and the Dallas post office would replenish its stock. And when they do get fresh stock, the serial numbers are, of course, going to be much higher than the ones they just ran out of, since they are "U.S. POSTAL MONEY ORDERS" with unique serial numbers attached to each one and are being continuously supplied to post offices and other institutions all around the entire country, not just the Main Post Office branch in Dallas, Texas.

    Why on Earth is my above "Ran out of stock and simply replenished their supply with money orders that obviously would have much higher serial numbers" explanation not even to be considered by conspiracy theorists like John Armstrong?

    ~big shrug~

    BTW, HERE'S another official document (an FBI FD-302 report this time) which verifies that U.S. Postal Money Order #2,202,130,462, signed by "A. Hidell", was in the possession of the FBI in Washington on November 24, 1963 (the date in the lower left corner of the report).

    A quote from that FBI report:

    "This money order was hand carried to the FBI Laboratory where it was turned over to Special Agent James T. Freeman."

  13. Well, David, of course we only see a PHOTO of the money order (CE788) in the WC volumes. (What do you expect? You want the WC to deliver the original M.O. to your house so you can examine it?)

    But the fact remains that the ORIGINAL money order was recovered in Virginia on Nov. 23 and was certainly available to the FBI and Treasury Department handwriting analysts. (Why WOULDN'T it be?)

  14. As far as I am aware, the FBI saw and examined the ORIGINAL money order---not a Xerox copy of a microfilm. Klein's never even had a microfilmed record of the money order at all.

    We know via CD87 that the original M.O. was recovered from the Federal Records Center at Alexandria, Virginia.

    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490#relPageId=118

    So why would the FBI and the Treasury Dept. (Alwyn Cole) experts use a copy when the original was readily available? The same thing with the HSCA handwriting experts. It makes no sense at all to do that.

  15. More stuff to ponder re: the money order.....

    HENRY SIENZANT SAID:

    Why are you assuming a PO Money Order requires a bank stamp?

    That hasn't been demonstrated anywhere, as far as I know.

    Typically, there's a claim the MO should have one, then that's "demonstrated" by switching to a different financial instrument, a personal check, and a check is shown with the bank markings. But as I've pointed out in the past, those are two entirely different financial instruments, and there's no reason to assume they'd be handled the precise same way.

    A personal check is backed only by the amount of money in the person's checking account. It can be overdrawn, and checks can bounce.

    A Post Office Money Order is backed by the full taxation power of the U.S. Government. It can't be overdrawn, and the government has the power to raise taxes to pay its bills. In addition, because a Money Order is paid for by the purchaser at the time of purchase, it is more valuable than a personal check for the same amount. A personal check can bounce, a money order can't.

    Given those differences, I've asked conspiracy theorists on a number of occasions why we should assume the two financial instruments should be processed in the same way by banks, and never gotten a satisfactory answer.

    I think the problem here is that conspiracy theorists are putting forth an assumption as a fact (that the MO should have a bank stamp), and nobody is questioning that assumption.


    DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

    Well, maybe you're right, Hank. I have no idea really.

    But as far as my previous assumption (brought forth by other people online in 2014 and 2015) that the punch holes that are present in Oswald's money order were placed there as a substitute for an inked stamped endorsement of some kind, I stand corrected on that wrong assumption. And I say that based on the 1962 newspaper article that Tom Scully posted online today [November 10, 2015].

    But your thoughts, Hank, are interesting ones to consider as well. It's certainly not very likely that a United States Postal Money Order, which as you say is backed by the U.S. Government, is going to bounce. And it was paid for by Lee Oswald when he purchased it at the Main Post Office in Dallas on 3/12/63. So we KNOW that the U.S. Government (the post office) got paid its $21.45 for the amount of the money order. Otherwise, the M.O. would never have been handed over to Oswald in the stamped amount of $21.45. [And I'm saying this based on my belief that the M.O. is NOT a fraudulent document and WAS purchased by the REAL Lee Harvey Oswald.]

    Thanks for your post, Henry. It gives me even more things to consider with respect to the lack of any bank markings on the back of Oswald's money order.

    I have never even considered the loopy idea of that M.O. being faked by a group of patsy framers, however. That idea is ludicrous, in my view. It's only because these things (like "the lack of bank stamps" topic) are brought up over and over again by the conspiracy theorists that makes me even want to look into them superficially (let alone in great depth).

    But, of course, a JFK CTer sees sinister, underhanded activity almost everywhere he looks --- even, evidently, at Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago and the U.S. Post Office in downtown Dallas.

    David Von Pein
    November 10, 2015

  16. You've almost given in to the possibility of a conspiracy, Dave, and it is obvious you are now grappling with your inner demons.

    Not even close, Bob.

    The lack of a bank stamp (or even two) doesn't prove that money order is fake. It's got OSWALD'S writing on it and it's got KLEIN'S stamp on it. And it's a document that perfectly aligns with everything found in Waldman Exhibit #7 --

    >> The "Hidell" name to whom Klein's mailed the rifle.

    >> The PO Box number to which Klein's sent the rifle.

    >> The exact dollar amount ($21.45), which is precisely the amount found in Waldman 7 as well. (And the "M.O." notation written by Klein's right underneath the "Amount Enclosed" line on Waldman 7.)

    >> And the dates line up nicely too (March 12 for the M.O. purchase; and March 13 on Waldman #7) --- although CTers think it was impossible for the letter/money order to get to Chicago in just one day; but a 29-year veteran of the U.S. Post Office [Jimmy Orr] thinks otherwise....

    DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

    Jimmy, in your experience, in general, how long does it take an air mail letter to go from Dallas, Texas, to Chicago, Illinois (provided the letter was mailed no later than 10:30 AM local Dallas time)?

    JIMMY ORR SAID:

    David,

    Cancelled in Dallas by 10:30 AM and flown to Chicago that afternoon. Arrival for mail processing at a Chicago General Mail Facility during the early morning hours of the 13th and on the street for delivery to Klein's that same day. Makes perfect sense considering the volumes handled in 1963.

    [End Quote.]

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    So everything about the money order aligns with the Klein's internal paperwork. So that means KLEIN'S was a major part of the plot to frame Oswald too, if the CTers are right about this thing. And that's not a reasonable thing to think, IMO.

  17. Also worth a replay....

    "As for the lack of any bank stamps appearing on the back of Oswald's postal money order, I don't have a definitive answer to explain it. But I'd be willing to bet the farm that there IS a reasonable and non-conspiratorial answer to explain the lack of markings on the back of that document without resorting to the conclusion that the money order was manufactured and faked by a group of conspirators in a complicated and intricate effort to frame Lee Harvey Oswald for John F. Kennedy's murder. And I know that conspiracy theorists who think Oswald never ordered a rifle from Klein's Sporting Goods in early 1963 have a heck of a lot MORE evidence to explain away than I do -- such as all this stuff." -- DVP; October 27, 2015

  18. More information (from 1962 newspaper accounts) on the punch holes, dug up by Tom Scully,

    is available HERE and HERE.

    Looks like a nice big defeat for the "LN" side regarding the "punch holes".

    Celebrate, CTers! Looks like you won this one.

    But, I can't help but repeat....

    How in the heck do CTers think the Hidell money order managed to get to the Federal Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia, if it wasn't cashed and then processed by someone?

    ~big shrug~

  19. Sandy,

    Unless the procedures and methods of punching holes in U.S. Postal money orders have changed dramatically since 1963, then your explanation of WHEN the holes were put in the Oswald/Hidell money order is flawed. Because I found pictures of two other U.S. Postal money orders that both have specific amounts shown on them, and nowhere on these money orders do I see any punch holes whatsoever:

    Money-Order-1.jpg

    Money-Order-2.jpg

    Now, granted, the two examples I cited above are money orders that were issued decades after Oswald purchased his M.O. for the rifle in '63. The two examples above come from the years 2000 and 2011 (I couldn't find any pictures of other non-Oswald money orders from 1963; maybe somebody else will have better luck). But do you think the method of identifying both the serial number of the money order and the dollar amount via punch holes has changed (and, in effect, been completely eliminated) since 1963?

    I'll admit, I have no answer to my last question. Maybe you're correct and the holes were punched in the Oswald money order prior to a time when it would have been processed at any banking institution. But as my two money order examples above indicate, I think there's room for doubt when it comes to your explanation about WHEN those holes were punched in the Oswald/Hidell money order.

    Even if the holes do represent what you say they represent (the serial number and the amount of the money order; and you make a good case for that being true), why couldn't those holes have been placed there by a banking institution as part of the processing of the document after it was deposited by Klein's into their First National Bank account (which is a deposit that certainly DID take place, as we can see via the Klein's inked stamped on the back of the money order)?

    In other words, can it be PROVEN that all of those holes punched in that $21.45 money order were put there BEFORE (and not AFTER) Lee Harvey Oswald dropped that document in a mailbox on March 12, 1963?

    I'll also link to this information once again, supplied by Mike Giampaolo, which indicates that during the 1960s, a system by which keypunch operators would handle thousands of checks per hour was in place in many major U.S. cities. Now, yes, this excerpt below (from Giampaolo's post) talks about only "check-processing", and not specifically the processing of United States Postal Money Orders. But it's quite possible (even likely) that a similar keypunch process for handling money orders in this manner was in place in the 1960s as well....

    "IBM 1401 Data Processing System 1960's era.....A visit to the check-processing department of a high-volume office like Atlanta or Jacksonville would mean walking into a room in which 70 to 85 women sat busily clicking away at Gray, 36-pocket IBM 803 proof machines, punching in payment amounts and bank identification numbers with one hand and, with the other hand, picking up checks one at a time from a stack and pushing them into a slot. The machine sorted the checks into pockets for eventual return to the bank on which they were drawn, while a record of the activity was printed on paper tapes. A skillful operator could handle 1,200–1,500 checks per hour."

    [End Quote.]

    Based on what I just said and presented above, I still think that the holes in the Hidell/Oswald money order could certainly be part of the result of bank processing and handling. But if (somehow) I am definitely proven wrong, and Sandy Larsen is proven correct, I'll certainly be willing to admit it on this forum in the future.

    But if the day ever comes when I am positively proven wrong on this "Holes" matter, then the conspiracy theorists who think that the Hidell money order is a fake document that was manufactured by plotters who were trying to frame Lee Oswald should be scratching their heads and asking themselves this important question:

    If these conspirators were so good and so thorough that they could perfectly fake Lee Harvey Oswald's handwriting on CE788 (the money order) so that it would fool some of the nation's top handwriting analysts (who had the ORIGINAL money order for comparison, not just a photocopy of same)....then how come those very same conspirators were so stupid and careless as to not place on the phony money order a single bank stamp that would indicate the document had been properly processed? After all, according to CTers, those plotters were able to fake the Klein's endorsement stamp on the back of the money order. And yet they failed to fake any bank stamps whatsoever. I wonder why?

    Sandy,

    Don't you agree with me that the question I just asked above is a reasonable one? And don't YOU too wonder how those super-skilled evidence manipulators could be so perfect one minute and yet so amazingly inept and bumbling the next?

  20. Even if banks did use punch holes for endorsements at the time, so what? The Hidell money order has no such holes punched.

    And after receiving your Masters Degree in "Keypunch Hole Evaluation" just a few hours ago after your one-day crash course at Keypunch School, you actually feel confident enough to make the statement you just made about the Hidell money order having "no such holes punched" in it?

    Amazing.

  21. ... do you really think Klein's would have shipped a $21-dollar rifle to somebody (Oswald/Hidell or anybody else on the planet) without having first been PAID for the item?

    No, I don't. If the TSBD Carcano was bought from Klein's, somebody paid for it. But not with the Hidell money order.

    They definitely shipped to PO Box 2915 in Dallas on 3/20/63?

    Well if they did, it wasn't paid for with the Hidell money order. The evidence proves it.

    The "evidence" actually proves just the opposite (of course).

    Waldman 7 indicates the Hidell rifle order was paid via "M.O." [Money Order].

    The CE788 money order was stamped with a Klein's stamp on the back. (Is that fake too?)

    And Waldman 7 proves that Klein's did ship Rifle C2766 to Hidell/Oswald on March 20.

    So even if I were to accept the crazy notion that the money order was never cashed (which I do not accept, of course, with that M.O. being retrieved by the Secret Service in Alexandria, Virginia, on 11/23/63), we still KNOW that Rifle C2766 was sent by Klein's to Hidell/Oswald, regardless of what was done with that M.O. AFTER Klein's deposited it.

    And how did the money order get to the Federal Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia, if it wasn't cashed and then processed by SOMEBODY? Did a "Hidell" money order suddenly just fall from the sky and into the Records Center building in Alexandria? ------> MaryFerrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490#relPageId=118

  22. David,

    [...]

    So the problem still stands that a Carcano rifle wasn't paid for with this money order. Nor was anything else.

    But, Sandy, you'll readily admit (I assume) that the method of punching holes in a deposited money order IS, in fact, a legitimate and valid method utilized by banking institutions to process a document like a U.S. Postal Money Order (in lieu of physically stamping each item with an inked rubber stamp), correct?

    However, you now want to move the goal posts again and play "keypunch expert" to try and still cast some doubt over the legitimacy of Oswald's postal money order. Right?

    In summary....

    It's fairly clear from some recent Internet posts I've linked to above that the holes that are visible in Lee Oswald's money order (CE788) provide a strong indication that that money order WAS cashed and WAS processed somewhere after Klein's Sporting Goods deposited it into their First National Bank of Chicago account on March 13, 1963.

    Conspiracy hobbyists can now only look at the holes and complain that they don't line up right, or aren't in the correct sequence, or whatever, in order to still cling to their treasured belief that the money order was faked from the ground up in an effort to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.

    Again I'll ask --- How much of this "Fakery" crap is a reasonable and sensible person supposed to swallow whole?

×
×
  • Create New...