Ray Mitcham

I am even number on my front side, than I am on my backside. How odd is that?

I've got a bowel on my back side.

I agree with you, Larry. The operational range of the type 80 that we used in the RAF in the fifties, had a reliable range of 250 miles and 90,000 feet. These were used for Air Defence Operations. As South Korea is at least 500 miles from Atsugi, then it would have been strange for them to track it even that far.

I think it's just a case of Semantiks.

Agreed, Greg. Nowhere has it been shown that Oswald possessed an Imperial reflex. For somebody like Oswald, allegedly interested in photography, he wouldn't have chosen such a cheap camera, anyway.

Why would he be holding an Imperial Reflex camera up to his eyes? I agree with Bob. There is no light above the camera to relict light to the viewer.

"Since Prayer Man was pointing his twin lens reflex camera in the general direction of the sun, enough light was entering it through the upper "viewing" or "reflex" lens so that half (?) of it," ​He was standing in shade so he couldn't have been pointing the camera in the direction of the sun.

Nothing wrong with that philosophy, and of course if you don't like what anyone says, you can always ignore them. On the one hand, Greg does sometimes try to discuss the actual evidence whereas all DVP wants to do is 'Claim the WCR is 'real' evidence and anything the CTer's produce is lies. His philosophy is that whether it makes any sense at all, if the WR said it, it is gospel. Hallelujah, it's in the good book!

James B Walcott Mr. Wilcott. Well, it was my understanding that Lee Harvey Oswald was an employee of the agency and was an agent of the agency. Mr. Goldsmith. What do you mean by the term "agent?" Mr. Wilcott. That he was a regular employee, receiving a full-time salary for agent work for doing CIA operational work. Mr. Goldsmith. How did this information concerning Oswald first come to your attention? Mr. Wilcott. The first time I heard about Oswald being connected in any way with CIA was the day after the Kennedy assassination. Mr. Goldsmith. And how did that come to your attention? Mr. Wilcott. Well, I was on day duty for the station. It was a guard-type function at the station, which I worked for overtime. There was a lot of excitement going on at the station after the Kennedy assassination. Towards the end of my tour of duty, I heard certain things about Oswald somehow being connected with the agency, and I didn't really believe this when I heard it, and I thought it was absurd. Then, as time went on, I began to hear more things in that line. Mr. Goldsmith. I think we had better go over that one more time. When, exactly, was the very first time that you heard or came across information that Oswald was an agent? Mr. Wilcott. I heard references to it the day after the assassination. Mr. Goldsmith. And who made these references to Oswald being an agent of the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. I can't remember the exact persons. There was talk about it going on at the station, and several months following at the station. Mr. Goldsmith. How many people made this reference to Oswald being an agent of the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. At least--there was at least six or seven people, specifically, who said that they either knew or believed Oswald to be an agent of the CIA. Mr. Goldsmith. Was Jerry Fox one of the people that made this allegation? Mr. Wilcott. To the best of my recollection, yes. Mr. Goldsmith. And who is Jerry Fox? Mr. Wilcott. Jerry Fox was a Case Officer for his branch, the Soviet Russia Branch, [REDACTED] Station, who purchased information from the Soviets. Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Wilcott, did I ask you to prepare a list of CIA Case Officers working at the [REDACTED] Station in 1963? Mr. Wilcott. Yes, you did. snip Mr. Wilcott. The specific incident was soon after the Kennedy assassination, where an agent, a Case Officer--I am sure it was a Case Officer--came up to my window to draw money, and he specifically said in the conversation that ensued, he specifically said, "Well, Jim, the money that I drew the last couple of weeks ago or so was money" either for the Oswald project or for Oswald. snip Mr. Wilcott. I believe that Oswald was a double agent, was sent over to the Soviet Union to do intelligence work, that the defection was phoney and it was set up and that I believe that Marina Oswald was an agent that had been recruited sometime before and was waiting their in Tokyo for Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. Goldsmith. What is the basis for that opinion? Mr. Wilcott. The basis for that is discussions that I had with people at the XXXXX Station. Those are discussions with people who gave the indication that there was every cer- tainty that Oswald was an agent of CIA, runout of XXXXXXX Station, and that he was freed from Russia there in the final courses in Russia and was trained by CIA people at Atsugi.

The "trousers" thing isn't really very important at all. I just don't think Oswald took the time to change his pants (or shirt) when he went to his roominghouse on Nov. 22. Therefore, it's my opinion that Oswald lied about his pants. It's possible that he changed his pants, but I'm doubting it. It just doesn't make any sense to me that he would have done that. If it wasn't important, why did you bring it up?

Thanks Jim. Perhaps the others should read it.

Also being a vet, don't the powers that be control his pension and other benefits?

Go on, Jim, I like to see it.

You're right. I don't think Oswald changed his trousers. LHO lied about that part of his "Beckley" story. Once again, when someone's statement disagrees with your position, they are lying.

You see, folks, this is the kind of mind-numbing (il)logic I'm confronted with every day here in the "JFK world". Kenny Drew knew exactly what I meant when I said (correctly) that J.D. Tippit's last name was spelled the same backward and forward. But Kenny will nitpick about the Capital T. He does this just to argue and for no other worthwhile purpose. Mind-boggling, isn't it? It was your nit picking over his mis-spelling of Tippit that made him re-nitpick. Mind boggling you are.

Try "he was framed." There's one explanation.

Rather like the Nutters. When C.T's say that Oswald never carried a rifle into the TSBD, they say " yes he did, Frazier saw him carrying a paper bag with it in!" When C.T's say in that case, Frazier said the bag was too short to hold a dismantled rifle, the Nutters say "He was wrong-He lied- He was mistaken" When C.T's say that Frazier demonstrated how Oswald allegedly carried the rifle under his arm pit,the Nutters say "He was wrong and the rifle must have been above his shoulder!" In the Nutter world, the witnesses are right when they back up the W.C. (How well initialled is that!) but are wrong and lying when they don't.

Close upon the rifle strap. It does not appear to have any "flat" areas which would indicate such a flat strap, as shown above. IMO.

Are you sure Ray? I found this - a vintage cloth Carcano sling which Klein's gunsmith claims would have been sent with the rifle if anything was sent at all... Does look like what was on there a bit... Did the rifles come equipped with straps? A- No, because they were very cumbersome to pack. if some_ one would specifically order a sling with the rifle, a military strap would be sent. This would not necessarily mean a strap that was made especially for the 6.5 mannlicher-carcano. Magnifying the photos, David, it still appears to me that the strap is a piece of thick cord rather than the strap you illustrate. (No appearance of any flat area in the strap) However, I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

Nonsense Your snippet pales BIG time in comparison to the truckload of docus him promoting the LNer theory or 'disproving' multiple shooters. Pure disinfo Duncan Disino? Oh, that's right, I forgot people like you don't like it when undeniable facts are shoved straight in your face. Living in your uneducated straight jacket world of myths and factoids isn't for me, hard evidence wins the day every time. My posting of the Video snippet was to prove the point to Jim, and that Jim ( A knew B and B knew C, proves that C knew A ) DiEugenio was wrong with his quoted comment shown below. "But none of these showed up in any of the many documentaries he helped put on TV." The Video tells the truth, get over it! From which documentary was the clip, Duncan?

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? His head is clearly tilted more downward in the right photo, which would make his ears appear higher. If you don't understand how perspective works, I'm afraid there is no helping you. In that case his chin should be lower in the right photo.

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty?

Wrong insert

Certainly look as though the original writing has been blanked out under the hand written numbers. Good spot,David.

Wow, three people all make the same mistake and say a "slender" 5'10" man weighed 165lbs. Another coincidence in a case full of them.