David Von Pein

Oswald's money order was on its way to Chicago shortly after 10:30 AM, Dallas time, on March 12th, 1963. The envelope is postmarked "10:30" (which, of course, is AM; it's certainly not 10:30 PM). And it was sent AIR MAIL. So, I'd like to know what is so extraordinary about an AIR MAIL letter that is postmarked 10:30 AM being able to travel the relatively short (flying) distance between Dallas and Chicago in just a few hours' time? Of COURSE Oswald's money order could arrive in Chicago on the afternoon or evening of March 12. Given the postmark and the fact he used air mail, it's quite possible. And the PROOF it did arrive in time for Klein's to run Oswald's order through their cash register is, of course, Waldman #7, which has a MARCH 13 stamp at the top, and Waldman told everybody what that stamp signifies in his WC testimony, which must also be a lie, per the conspiracy mongers (or Waldman was simply a boob). Right, Jimbo?

Every time I read one of your silly "EVERYTHING'S FAKE & EVERYBODY LIED" posts, I sure feel like reaching for a barf bag, I tell ya that. How close are you to embracing Fetzer's theory about Z-Film fabrication, Jimbo? I'll give you three more months, and you'll be in bed with Fetzer. Six months after that, you'll believe all of Lifton's theories too, probably even his "No Shots Came From The Rear" tripe. You're already part of the way there already--since you think that Kennedy's brain was substituted for another one at the supplemental brain exam. With a running start like that, you'll totally be in Lifton's camp before you know it.

So, the March 12-13 money order thing is example #299 (at least) on the ever-growing list labelled "THINGS THAT THE RETARDED PATSY-FRAMERS SCREWED UP", with the idiot plotters deliberately doing "impossible" things to frame everybody's favorite patsy for all 11/22/63 murders. But apparently DiEugenio feels there is no need to ask: Why would the plotters and cover-uppers do it like this, when they could have just as easily made it look like the money order was deposited on March 16 or 17 or 18, or any date they choose, since every single thing to do with Oswald was FAKE anyway? And, of course, DiEugenio doesn't bat an eyelash when it comes to the fact that the HSCA determined that everything to do with the money order was totally legitimate, even though the HSCA was dying to find a conspiracy in the case. Jimbo, you're a stitch.

Well, if one of Mr. Swanson's main goals is something so incredibly peripheral and unimportant as trying to discover what happened to Jackie's pink hat, I'm just wondering how serious and "definitive" his book will actually be. James Swanson, btw, hosted a lengthy 90-minute program featuring Vincent Bugliosi at the Cooper Union in New York City on May 15, 2007, at the start of Bugliosi's book tour for his JFK book, "Reclaiming History". Nothing was mentioned at all during that program about Swanson himself being engaged in a JFK book project. (Of course, it's also likely that Swanson, as host of the program, wouldn't have wanted to steal any of Mr. Bugliosi's thunder at that particular moment.) SWANSON/BUGLIOSI IN 2007: http://fora.tv/2007/05/15/Vincent_Bugliosi_Reclaiming_History THE MISSING PILLBOX HAT: http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2011/01/jacqueline-kennedys-pink-hat-is-missing.html

Ah, well. It's my job. So, what can I do? Ya can't buck the Langley boys.

You're dead wrong about this. And the date at the top of Waldman #7 ("Mar 13 '63") proves you are wrong. (Oh, yeah, Waldman 7 is a fake too, right?) BTW, Oswald mailed the money order via AIR MAIL (probably fairly early in the morning on 3/12 would be my guess, BEFORE HE WENT TO WORK that day). That's likely how the money order got to Chicago in 24 hours, because it was likely mailed (by AIR mail) very early in the day on March 12th. In fact, it very likely was in Chicago by the evening of March 12th. Otherwise, it wouldn't have been delivered by the Chicago post office to Klein's on the 13th. "AIR MAIL":

No, I sure can't. Unfortunately, Lee wasn't kind enough to supply the DPD with that info prior to 11:21 AM CST on 11/24/63. Sorry.

ADDENDUM REGARDING THE DATE THAT KLEIN'S RECEIVED LEE OSWALD'S MONEY ORDER: Here's a fact I had forgotten about until looking once again at Waldman Exhibit No. 7: There is a date stamped at the very top of Waldman No. 7 (which is the Klein's order form for Oswald's rifle order)....and the date is "Mar. 13, '63", which is the date that Oswald's money order passed through the Klein's cash register (per William Waldman's testimony, below): DAVID BELIN -- "Is there anything which indicates in what form you received the money?" WILLIAMS WALDMAN -- "Yes; below the amount is shown the letters "MO" designating money order." MR. BELIN -- "Now, I see the extreme top of this microfilm, the date, March 13, 1963; to what does that refer?" MR. WALDMAN -- "This is an imprint made by our cash register indicating that the remittance received from the customer was passed through our register on that date."

Huh? Are you saying, Gil, that there are public records available for EVERY Klein's bank deposit for both the months of February and March of 1963? For every day of each of those months? Please tell me where I can find those extensive Klein's records. I'd like to see them. You certainly aren't talking about any of the "Waldman Exhibits". Where did you get such detailed info on the Klein's deposits for two complete months? See my following post below for proof that Gil is wrong about this.

Yeah, I know. See my last edit above. I fixed my error.

But Waldman 10 shows TWO "3-13-63" dates at the bottom of the columns for the itemized listing of the Klein's bulk deposit. And the grand total on BOTH documents (the itemized list and the "Feb 15" deposit ticket) is identical, which would indicate that both documents are referring to the same bulk deposit:

Whew! Thank goodness you straightened me out on that, Gil! It's good to know that your whole thread here wasn't designed to point a finger of guilt at someone who might have been tampering with the evidence in the case of a murdered President. So, if it wasn't a "conspirator" (or "cover-up" operative) who was doctoring the paper trail to C2766....then I assume you, Gil, must make allowances for the "2-15-63" date on the extra copy of the Klein's deposit ticket being an innocent, ordinary mistake by the Klein's employees. Correct?

Oswald did some stupid things on 11/22, yes. But he accomplished his main goal--killing the President. That was the most important thing. And I think it's a pretty good guess to say that Oswald (after accomplishing his goal of murdering the Chief Executive) never expected to live to see the November 23rd dawn. He, of course, could easily have been shot dead in the Texas Theater by any number of armed policemen. So, living for an extra two days must have been looked upon as a nice extra bonus from Lee Harvey's point-of-view.

The "WRONG DATE ON THE EXTRA COPY OF THE DEPOSIT SLIP" is just one more example (among dozens of others) where the conspiracy theorists SHOULD be asking themselves the following logical question: WHAT THE HELL WERE THE CONSPIRATORS THINKING WHEN THEY DID SOMETHING THIS STUPID -- LIKE PUTTING A FEBRUARY 15 DATE ON A DEPOSIT TICKET THAT THE PLOTTERS HAD TO HAVE KNOWN FROM THE GET-GO WAS A DEPOSIT THAT NEEDED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARCH 13 KLEIN'S DEPOSIT --- OR LIKE PLANTING A MAUSER RIFLE IN THE BOOK DEPOSITORY, WHEN THEY CERTAINLY MUST HAVE KNOWN THAT THEIR PATSY NAMED OSWALD DIDN'T OWN A MAUSER--HE OWNED A MANNLICHER-CARCANO? Errors such as that one with the incorrect date on the deposit ticket are errors that are MUCH easier to associate with normal fallible human errors than they are associated with any kind of perceived "plot" that has been PRE-arranged by a group of conspirators for the purpose of faking evidence in the JFK murder case. Why is this so? Because if that February 15 date was really written there by a person who deliberately was trying to create a fake and false paper trail to Rifle C2766 (and, hence, incriminate a "patsy" named Lee Harvey Oswald), then the plotters would have KNOWN from the start that they would need to be very very careful when placing all of this FORGED EVIDENCE into the record, and they would make doubly certain to cross every T and dot every I in the proper places. And they would have also known to have placed the proper bank stamps on the documents in question too (or they SHOULD have factored that detail into their "Let's Frame Oswald" ruse, unless all of these plotters, to a man, were brainless morons). The fact that we have discrepancies like the "Feb. 15" deposit slip existing in the record at all is, in my opinion, more of a sign of NO CONSPIRACY connected with items like that deposit slip than it is with the type of vast "Every Document Is Phony" plot that a lot of conspiracy theorists believe in today. My last paragraph is either pretty accurate...or: your patsy-framers screwed up YET AGAIN with a piece of evidence in this case. How many stupid, reckless, idiotic errors do you allow your patsy-framers before you put on the brakes and realize that such discrepancies would NOT EXIST AT ALL if there really was a concerted effort by a band of plotters to doctor all of the evidence in the JFK case? http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/03/doctored-evidence-or-human-errors.html

Then why do we have any "handwriting analysts" testifying in court at all? If everybody's signature and handwriting COULD conceivably be easily faked and forged, what good are people like McNally and Alwyn Cole?

Did Milam simulate the skulls being on a pivoting "neck" type of device, as JFK's head was on in Dealey Plaza when he was shot? Or were Milam's skulls nailed squarely (and firmly) to the ladder? If it's the latter option, I think Milam's tests are not valid and do not simulate the proper conditions of a human head on a human (pivoting) neck.

Like I said, Lee...human beings are inherently stupid. Your unbelievably stupid and reckless-beyond-belief "patsy framers" are proof of that, it would appear. And Lee H. Oswald WAS human (well, almost anyway).

I just found the Olivier testimony that Pat was probably referring to--it's in the Rockefeller Commission records. Here's what Olivier said about his '64 skull tests and the direction of the skull movement: Q. Have there been any instances in which you have done firings into the head? A. We have done firings into human skulls filled with gelatin and coated with gelatin, and we have even put goat skin on it to simulate the human scalp. Q. Have you been able to observe the nature of the movement of the skulls? A. The skulls that we shot invariably rolled away from the gun. And this was a reason for this, that you didn't get any jet effect, because the gelatin that we used was 20 percent gelatin, this was our simulant for tissue. We also used it as a simulant for the brain. There is one bad thing about that. If you want to see this movement, the gelatin is too elastic, it recovers, in other words, any gelatin that expands out comes back like a rubber band. So it didn't fly loose from the skull to get a jet effect. Q. You mean such as brain tissue might? A. Right. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/olivier_a.htm

You've got to be kidding me! Good heavens, Pat...use YOUR head! If the skull is NAILED to the ladder (and not even on a "neck"-like spring to provide some freedom of movement for the skull), OF COURSE the skull has to go forward. How could it possibly go anywhere else? In effect, then (if I'm interpreting your comments about Wallace Milam's experiment correctly), Milam was PROHIBITING any kind of rearward movement at all by nailing down the skulls. You can't see the logic of what I'm getting at here, Patrick? C'mon.

@Pat Speer (re Lattimer's ladder/skull tests): Well, for Pete sake, what direction would you expect a NAILED-DOWN SKULL ON A LADDER to go if shot from behind? How could it go backward if it was NAILED to the ladder? (Did I misinterpret your "nailed" comment above, Pat? Because, if I didn't, this is laughable.) In fact, I've always contended that Lattimer's skull tests are MORE impressive since the skulls were just lying there (untethered) on the ladder. With a "FREE TO MOVE ANYWHERE" situation of a skull that was not tied down in some way...and STILL having the skulls go backward, it seems more impressive to me. And the "ladder recoil" junk is just that....junk (IMO). When I view those films of Lattimer's, I see the skulls flying backward BEFORE the ladder ever tips backward (which I think is the excuse given by some CTers for why Lattimer's skulls went backward). The ladder seems to be going FORWARD, while the skull moves BACKWARD. What is deceiving about that, Pat? I really do not see what the complaint is on this?

Well, I once postulated that very idea--Oswald left his popcorn trail on purpose. But, who knows? But there's one big difference here---ALL of the actual evidence in the case points toward Oswald, while NONE of the evidence points toward any unknown, "mystery" shooters. If we had a mystery shooter in the mix, wouldn't you think his gunshots would have left behind SOME tangible evidence in the limousine that wasn't immediately swept under the carpet by your band of evidence-manipulators? Just ONE hunk of bullet--or SOMETHING? After all, we know (via my previous examples on this subject) that your collection of "Let's Get Oswald" patsy framers was totally retarded from Day 1. I mean, allowing Lee Harvey to walk around on the lower TSBD floors at around 12:30 (or to possibly even waltz outside the building and get himself PHOTOGRAPHED by James Altgens, as Jim Garrison seemed to actually believe in 1967) just reeks of "patsy plotter incompetence" to me. Doesn't it to you?

But Lee [Farley] and David [Josephs]--- You CT guys have got SO MANY people who would need to be involved (and remain dead silent afterward) in order to have the kind of "Let's Frame Oswald" conspiracy exist that you imagine did exist...well, it ain't even funny (or conceivable...or logical)...now, is it? I mean, re the paper trail for Oswald's rifle alone, how many people must be "involved" in faking the evidence that shows Oswald did order and pay for that rifle? If you think it was merely one or two people, I think you should probably think again. There are several FBI agents (and Hoover, of course). And Waldman of Klein's (surely). And other Klein's employees who helped search the Klein's records until 4 AM on 11/23. Or do you even believe that a search WAS made at Klein's in Chicago? Was that all a ruse too? Don't you believe that an order form and envelope (microfilm) with HIDELL'S name on it and OSWALD'S Dallas PO Box on it was found by KLEIN'S EMPLOYEES on the morning of Nov. 23? Or was there really a search, with the Klein's people finding a PHONY/PLANTED microfilm copy of this in the KLEIN'S DOCUMENTS in Chicago? (Boy, those evidence-fakers must have been fast that night!): http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0331a.htm It all snowballs out of control if you're a conspiracy theorist. And that's just ONE piece of the so-called "fake" evidence. That's not even including the money order....or the rifle itself....or Waldman Exhibit #7....or Oswald's revolver....or the bullet shells in the TSBD....or the bullet shells on 10th Street....or the paper bag in the Sniper's Nest....or Oswald's fingerprints and palmprint on the rifle....or the backyard photos....or the Mexico City trip....or CE399....or the Walker shooting....or all of the various witnesses who swore under oath that Oswald was involved in the Tippit murder....and on and on and on. ALL of that's fake? All of it? If you want to believe that, knock yourself silly (if you haven't already). As another LNer once said -- It was either Oswald alone...or a whole bunch of people running around trying to make it LOOK like Oswald alone. Now, I wonder which of the above two options is the most reasonable (and believable)?

Because Oswald's handwriting is on the money order. Why that extremely powerful fact isn't good enough for you is a mystery. But it IS good enough for me (and probably for most other reasonable people). Plus--there's the FACT that Klein's positively had that money order IN ITS POSSESSION in March 1963. We know that to be the case, because if they didn't, they would have never processed the sales order for Rifle C2766 to "A. Hidell", as seen in Waldman #7. (Oh, yes, Waldman 7 is yet another fake document, isn't it, Lee?) And Klein's STAMPED the money order with their own company stamp, for Pete sake. Why do you think EVERYTHING is a fake--even that Klein's stamp on the back of the Oswald money order? Nothing is EVER what it seems to be, is it Lee (and Jimbo)?

That is very likely because that was merely an "extra copy" of the deposit ticket, and my guess would be that that extra copy never made it to First National Bank at all. Or, if it did go the bank, perhaps the bank only stamped the FIRST copy, and not the "extra copy". But if it never went to the bank in the first place, of course it wouldn't have any "First National Bank" markings on it. First off, how does Armstrong know that Klein's provided no "additional help" at all regarding the money order? But even if Armstrong is correct here, it could have merely been an educated, logical guess on the FBI's behalf. By that time on early Saturday morning, the FBI likely knew a whole lot about Oswald's financial state, and they likely knew he had no personal checking account at all. And they certainly knew that the rifle was ordered via MAIL ORDER. That left only CASH and a MONEY ORDER for the most likely methods by which Oswald would have paid for the rifle. (And we know he paid for it, because Klein's wouldn't have had a record of the SALE [Waldman 7] if the rifle had not been paid in full by the purchaser.) So, to the Post Office the FBI went. Pretty simple tracking method, IMO, given what the FBI likely knew about Oswald and his finances as of early on Nov. 23, 1963. But I'd like to also know where Armstrong got the info about Klein's providing the FBI no help at all re the money order on 11/23/63 AM. Can that be documented somewhere in the record?

Sorry I had to use 2010 stuff to illustrate my point, Jimbo (my simple point being: not all PROCESSED checks that are deposited by bank customers have bank markings on them), but all of my 1963 cancelled checks are currently locked up at CIA HQ in Langley until 2039. (Hoover ordered it; I didn't.)