David Von Pein

Yes, the building I suppose could have been sealed off a little sooner than it was. I think the official "sealing" time was 12:37 PM, seven minutes after the shooting and about four minutes after Oswald escaped the building. So, in hindsight and in a perfect world where everybody does everything perfectly and in a timely manner, it would have been better if the police had sealed the building at 12:31 PM instead of 12:37. But that's the way it was. You don't think the seven-minute delay was deliberate, to allow the "real assassins" to escape, do you Bill?

I'm not familiar with this subject at all. And CE345 is a photo of the back of the limousine. Did you get the right CE number? http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0484a.htm

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-secret-service-and-ce399.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-37.html

You don't think the NAS/NRC study in the early 1980s produced a "proper" evaluation of the acoustics evidence, Bill? Why not? What's wrong with the NAS study? BTW, here's a rare interview with one of the scientists who studied the Dictabelt evidence for the NAS in the '80s (Charles Rader). Good stuff here: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/06/jfk-acoustics-charles-rader-interview.html

I've heard recently that Ms. McKinnon is not really Ms. McKinnon at all. The "cowering" woman believed for years to be named McKinnon is actually another person altogether. (Or so I heard recently.) The woman's daughter (I think it was) came forward in just the last few months to make the claim that it was her mother, and not the McKinnon woman, who is seen crouching on the Knoll in films after the shooting. Whether the new story is accurate, I have no idea. But, again, as I stated in my last post, MANY witnesses in the Plaza were never identified and never gave statements. Why single out THIS person or THAT person, when we know that DOZENS & DOZENS of different people all belong in that same "Never Identified" category?

Lots of witnesses have never been identified. In fact, how many of the women lining the north side of Elm Street have ever been officially identified (other than Mary Woodward)? How many of those women gave statements to the police and/or gave testimony to the Warren Commission? Any idea? My guess is: Very few. And these women (who are believed to be nothing but "cardboard cutouts" by the Jim Fetzers of the world) were actually some of the CLOSEST witnesses to the President when the shooting occurred. Were all these women kept under wraps because of what they knew?

CE573 IS the "Walker bullet", despite anyone's "steel jacketed" references to that bullet. You can't provide any proof at all that CE573 is a "planted" bullet of some kind. Just like no CTer on Earth has ever proven that CE399 is a plant either (try as they might to do so). You can scream "The rotten evil cops & Feds planted evidence" till the cows come home. But one thing you'll never be able to do is to PROVE that ANY evidence connected with the assassination of John Kennedy was faked, manipulated, manufactured, switched, or planted. But I'm sure that the mere possibility of such evidence tampering is more than enough to meet the flimsy requirements of Mr. Robert Prudhomme.

Are you referring to the Coke bottle which is sitting atop the retaining wall in some of the photos taken in Dealey Plaza? Or do you mean Oswald's Coke bottle? In either case, I have no idea. But is it really important? As for the broken soda bottles (and I think Marilyn Sitzman said there were two bottles that were broken by the young couple on the park bench), again, I haven't any idea. But what difference does it make? And the Dr. Pepper bottle has no relation to Oswald. We know this bottle on the sixth floor belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams:

Why can't both descriptions apply to Oswald? I think they can..... He WAS a very successful Presidential assassin (the evidence proves that fact beyond doubt). And: He was "no good" (most Presidential assassins can--and should--be classified as such, don't you agree?). He was "crazy" (again, to be a Presidential assassin, you've got to be at least a tad bit bonkers, right?). He was a "loser" (most everybody agrees on this point to describe Oswald, whether they belong in the CT or the LN camp). Therefore, both of the descriptions laid out by Bill Kelly above are most appropriate to describe Lee Harvey Oswald.

Sure, I guess so. But it has nothing whatsoever to do with the JFK assassination. The same way the whole affair in New Orleans involving Shaw, Ferrie, and Banister has nothing whatever to do with JFK's death either. It's a CTer parlor game (with the help of Jim Garrison for the New Orleans sideshow, of course). That business only helps to muddy the waters and blur the facts. And that Hale/Exner business is the same kind of distraction. Interesting? Yes. Helpful in the long run? No.

But you don't really think Oswald shot at Walker either, do you Bill? Anyway, here again we are faced with an unanswerable type of question. Who can know these things for sure? Nobody can. But this type of question does not magically ERASE all of that evidence with Oswald's name on it that's on the sixth floor. That evidence is still going to exist no matter what Oswald's demeanor was like when he encountered Marrion Baker. And his cool demeanor is just as indicative of guilt, IMO. Because any truly INNOCENT person would probably NOT be cool and calm and TOTALLY SILENT when confronted at gunpoint by a police officer. An innocent person would probably have been rattled, startled, scared, and would have said SOMETHING to Baker, like: "What did I do? Why are you pointing a gun at ME?" But Oswald says nothing. You know why? Because he didn't NEED to say those things--because he, and he alone, was the only person on the planet at 12:31 PM who knew exactly what had just happened out on Elm Street in front of the Book Depository. Ergo, he expected the cops to be crawling all over the building in very short order. Which is one of the main reasons he scurried down four flights in a very short amount of time right after the shooting. Surely, even conspiracy theorists wouldn't expect ANY assassin to just loiter on the sixth floor playing dominoes for a half-hour after having just killed the President....would they, William?

Oswald was, of course, the sixth-floor sniper, so the person with the "bald spot" that Amos Euins talked about in his testimony IS Lee Harvey Oswald--without doubt. Euins was mistaken about the bald spot, of course. But he also had a hard time figuring out whether the sniper was black or white too. So we should take his descriptions of the assassin with a good-sized grain of salt.

There was no man in the window "a few minutes after the last shot". It's a ridiculous theory to begin with. Why on Earth would anyone have felt any need to move boxes around right after the shooting? It's dumb. Somebody on Duncan's forum created a really nice gif clip which merges the Powell and Dillard pictures together, and the merged montage indicates that no boxes were moved at all. It's all a matter of perspective.

Not when we factor in all of that "Oswald Did It" evidence that he left up on the sixth floor. Plus, I've theorized in the past that the slender Mr. Oswald might very well have opened that vestibule door only a fraction of the way. You don't need to open a door all the way in order to get to the other side. I think Oswald realized that fact and only opened it as far as he needed to, in order to slide his slender frame inside the door. Therefore, the door didn't take nearly as long to close.

We're talking about a matter of a few seconds in real time. And those few seconds could have made the difference here. Oswald must have just barely slipped through the lunchroom door a matter of seconds before BOTH Truly and Baker got to the second floor. Now, tell me how my above scenario is totally out of the realm of possibility.

Oswald was the person holding a gun on the west side of the Depository at approx. 12:15 (per Arnold Rowland's account). Oswald wasn't on the second floor at 12:15. Carolyn Arnold's story is full of inconsistencies and time discrepancies. AN OSWALD TIMELINE

But you'll have to agree that Oswald DID achieve a whole lot of "notoriety" by doing things his way (i.e., by not admitting he killed anyone). Right, Bill? So, either way, he gained the fame he sought. And by denying guilt, and if Jack Ruby hadn't intervened, Oswald would have been the front-page news for months at his high-profile trial. That's something he would certainly relish. That's better than confessing.

I haven't the foggiest. Nor do I care.

Obviously not, because CE573 is copper-colored and it is the bullet taken out of Walker's house: Let me guess---573 is a fake? And he lied when he said this too, right Bob?..... Mr. EISENBERG - Can you think of any reason why someone might have called this a steel-jacketed bullet? Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact just have a copper-alloy jacket.

Steel is metal. Why pretend it isn't? In fact, the dictionary tells us that steel can, indeed, contain "copper" elements: STEEL (noun) --- 1. A generally hard, strong, durable, malleable alloy of iron and carbon, usually containing between 0.2 and 1.5 percent carbon, often with other constituents such as manganese, chromium, nickel, molybdenum, copper, tungsten, cobalt, or silicon, depending on the desired alloy properties, and widely used as a structural material. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/steel So, as I said, you're talking semantics here. And as I recall, Robert Frazier of the FBI talks about this "Steel" vs. "Metal Jacketed" stuff in his WC testimony. IIRC, Frazier said that many times the two terms are used interchangeably within FBI reports.

HSCA: I have no idea. ARRB: There was no reason for anybody to testify in front of the ARRB. Their job was to release documents, not to re-investigate the case. If it weren't for Doug Horne's bagful of idiocy regarding the medical evidence, there wouldn't have been ANY testimony taken by the ARRB at all. Nor did there need to be any taken, given the ARRB's mandate and responsibilities. Horne's conclusions, as we all know, were a joke and an utter embarrassment to Mr. Tunheim's Review Board. TODAY: Huh? You think that Obama should re-open the case to satisfy the whims of you conspiracy theorists? And then Ruth Paine should be called to the witness stand again? What for? Another investigation will only give you yet another "official" committee to snub your nose at. So what's the point? Or maybe you think the next investigation should be headed up by the "Alteration Brothers" perhaps -- David Lifton and Doug Horne. (That'd be some farce, wouldn't it?)

Ruth Paine transported the rifle back to Dallas/Irving in her station wagon in Sept. '63. Ruth drove Lee Oswald and some of his possessions to the bus station in April of '63 when Lee moved from Dallas to New Orleans. I think it's fairly clear that Oswald's rifle was among those possessions he took by bus to New Orleans. We know that Lee had the rifle in New Orleans in the summer of '63. Marina testified as follows: Mr. RANKIN. When did you first notice the rifle at New Orleans? Mrs. OSWALD. As soon as I arrived in New Orleans. Mr. RANKIN. Where was it kept there? Mrs. OSWALD. He again had a closet-like room with his things in it. He had his clothes hanging there, all his other belongings. Mr. RANKIN. Was the rifle in a cover there? Mrs OSWALD. No. Mr. RANKIN. Did you notice him take it away from your home there in New Orleans at any time? Mrs. OSWALD. No. I know for sure that he didn't. But I know that we had a kind of a porch with a---screened-in porch, and I know that sometimes evenings after dark he would sit there with his rifle. I don't know what he did with it. I came there by chance once and saw him just sitting there with his rifle. I thought he is merely sitting there and resting. Of course I didn't like these kind of little jokes.

Beats me. Moe, Larry, and McCurley perhaps?

Merely semantics. "Steel" vs. "Full Metal Jacketed". Naturally, you think CE573 is yet another phony piece of evidence. And yet the stupid idiots who put that bullet into evidence couldn't manage to plant a bullet that could be positively linked to the patsy's rifle. Dumbbell plotters all.

I haven't the foggiest. But I'd be willing to bet that this is another one of the hundreds of mangled "myths" associated with the JFK case. But I've never heard about this one myself. But there were some American reporters who were right on the ball regarding a possible connection between Oswald and the Walker shooting. As early as Saturday afternoon, November 23rd, during one of Chief Jesse Curry's many hallway interviews, a reporter asked Curry this question (which certainly was a good question indeed): "Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?" Curry's reply was "I do not know."