Denny Zartman

Ol' "Four Wallets" Oswald. Why would anyone suspect Oswald was ever being impersonated? He was just your everyday average guy with four wallets. I didn't know the Irving wallet was the only one surviving in evidence. Of course they don't want to have to explain more than one wallet, much less four. It's amazing to me that anyone can take even a casual look at stuff like this and not think something suspicious was going on.

I'm sure that it's just a funny coincidence that Oswald apparently had a total of $183.87 in cash on the morning of November 22. I wonder if they found $5.13 at the Tippit scene? 🤔

Are the personal insults necessary? First it's the constant general characterization of anyone who disagrees as "loons" and other derogatory terms. Now there are direct personal insults to other forum members by name. I just don't understand why the moderators on this forum tolerate this kind of behavior. Is this really how we're expected to approach discussion here? By constantly insulting and demeaning the other side? Now by name? As I see it, this is not an argument in good faith. Calling someone an "agenda-driven huckster" and then expecting a genuine discussion as if the personal animus wasn't obvious is insulting. It's almost as if some people are on this forum not for honest discussion in good faith but rather with the sole purpose of actively trying to provoke responses from specific individuals. That, to me, seems like an agenda.

It's thought-provoking. Didn't Robert say he wouldn't have recognized the kid in the zoo photo as his brother? Or was he speaking about the Oswald in the leafleting footage? Either way, it's an odd thing for anyone to say.

.

What point are you trying to make with this thread?

I could be mistaken, but I believe that version is missing pages 37, 38, and 68 through 80. I should let @James DiEugenio know that the PDF's I sent him are also incomplete. While they do have 37, 38, and 68 through 77, it ends at page 81 also, so Appendix A (interview with Darrell Tomlinson) is incomplete. Also no other appendixes other than the first page of appendix A (if there are any others) are included.

"Mrs. Markham, who is an utter screwball..." - Joseph Ball, Warren Commission lawyer, December 4, 1964

Yes. The single bullet theory ends there.

Hi Jim, I tried to send you a direct message, but for some reason the forum wouldn't let me. Anyway, I have two PDF's that I think have the full "The Bastard Bullet" between them. Let me know i you'd like them and I'll send them your way.

From what I've read, the JFK assassination made the Beatles afraid to come to America. They genuinely thought they would be in danger the minute they stepped out in public. I believe it is also on the record that Paul McCartney offered to compose a score for Mark Lane's film Rush To Judgement.

I've told this story before and I'm going to tell it again. When I've been on other online public discussion groups and the topic of the JFK assassination has come up, there are always gun enthusiasts who know nothing about the assassination but never fail to chime in and show off their vast knowledge of all things firearm. But, whenever I ask them how much ammo they have on hand at that particular moment, and if it wasn't unusual that LHO (a person allegedly owning and regularly practicing with a rifle) had no ammunition at any of his residences, their response is... silence. I've never once had a reply.

On one side, you have Conspiracy Theorists who are trying to study, research, and solve the crime. On the other side, you have the Lone Nutters who think the case was solved in an hour sixty years ago. But the LN's keep posting here every day like it's their job. I think the LN's treat "discussion" on this forum as an intellectual exercise or a parlor game to pass the time. The LN's have made up their minds long ago, and I guess it's fun for them to keep arguing the same points over and over. Whenever they do manage to finally be cornered in a specific detail suggesting conspiracy that they can't counter (as they recently have been with the oil-free alleged rifle wrapping paper) they just say they don't care and merrily go on repeating the CT's have presented zero evidence and are all just crazy or in a cult or something. Why bother? It's not a good-faith debate or discussion on their part. For them, countering conspiracy arguments is like a tennis player standing in front of a ball machine. For them it's fun to try and hit back as many balls as they can, but if a few get by it's no big deal. For them, it's the knocking down that's fun. Meanwhile, most folks realize the implications of a crucial piece of evidence having a seriously suspicious aspect about it. They don't ignore it like a tennis ball. My view would be just "agree to disagree." They've invested too much time developing their online personas as a solid LN's to ever concede any point on anything. And there are so many points that, if conceded, would bring the whole Lone Nut theory crashing down immediately. Then the onus would be on the LN's to explain why they were oblivious to it this whole time.

I just finished watching the interview. It was very good. There were a lot of topics addressed succinctly. Well done. Thanks for sharing it here @James DiEugenio . We're fortunate to be on the forum with experts like yourself. I appreciate it.

This is what is so frustrating about "debate" on this forum. Either Oswald was impersonated in the weeks leading up to the JFK assassination (which is a screaming indicator of conspiracy) or he was impersonated before it was possible that those impersonations would be linked specifically to the JFKA (as evidenced by the J. Edgar Hoover memo, which means there was something rotten going on about the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald" before the JFKA.) Or... it was both. If it was both, then in my view a person can't totally discount the possibility of the Harvey and Lee theory as being possible. In addition to @Bob Ness 's story about Star Gate, one could also point to the book "The Men Who Stare At Goats" as good examples of how far the government would go in the name of espionage. Finally, I must always point to the recent documentary "Three Identical Strangers" as evidence that separating twins for nefarious purposes is not a difficult feat to accomplish.

@David Josephs Wow. You are knocking it out of the park with your research here. Thank you for putting in so much time and effort, and for sharing your knowledge of the case with us all.

Documents about the assassination are still being kept secret for national security reasons. How could Hickey accidentally firing his rifle in 1963 affect national security in 2023?

Very interesting. I had not heard of this before.

Those are really amazing stories. We're privileged to have you share them with us. Thanks much.

Exactly. This whole debate reminds me of the old joke "who are you going to believe; me or your lying eyes?" Bullets shot through cotton looked like CE 399. Bullets shot through cadaver wrists did not. So those desperate to support CE 399 pull out their calculators and their pine boards and use convoluted, tricky math try to convince us all that an elephant can hang from a cliff with its tail tied to a daisy.

I have a newspaper from Michigan that was, I think, their first edition covering the assassination, and they say only that the rifle was a foreign make. I've posted pictures before of both rifles. Apparently it is true that the Mannlicher Carcano has "MADE ITALY" and "CAL 6.5" written on top of it. The Mauser practically has a paragraph written on it giving ID information. The idea that all those cops that discovered it and first examined it could not read is ridiculous, in my view. I've seen it argued that the misidentification was because they just glanced at it. First of all, what cop "glances" at at what is a murder weapon and the most important piece of evidence they will ever touch in their entire lifetimes? Second "glancing at it" -how, EXACTLY, does that work? I want a detailed explanation at how anyone, much less EVERYONE, could "glance" at the rifle. Did they keep their eyes covered with their hands the whole time except for one quick peek? Did they run up to the rifle, and then stole a quick look at it as they turned to immediately run away? I know this sounds like I'm kidding, but I'm not. Anyone who thinks the cops "glanced" at it, I would pose the same question. If you came within an arms length of it and looked at it for more than a few seconds, it was not a glance. If you held it in your hands, you certainly did not glance at it. And one of the cops owned a sporting goods store, didn't he? It really doesn't matter, it just further underlines how unbelievable it all is. I don't care how much the profile of the Mannlicher looked like a Mauser from a distance. Anyone who could read would not mistake both the make AND the caliber. I have never once heard a convincing argument as to why I, or anyone, should honestly believe the cops in Dallas read the words "MADE ITALY" and thought to themselves "This rifle was made in Germany" and read "CAL 6.5" and thought to themselves "Cal 6.5 means 7.65." Especially someone who owned a store that sold rifles, but let's get real - these were all good ol' Texas boys in 1963. Each and every one of them was familiar with firearms.

Go to the movies?

You're doing great @Tommy Tomlinson. LN's are very hard to pin down on anything imho. The distance between Oswald's hand and his armpit does not allow for a fully broken down version of the rifle he was accused of using. There's just no way around that fact.

And, as has been pointed out recently, everything surrounding JFK and the production of "Seven Days In May" is fraught with meaning.

Great stuff @W. Niederhut , you're very good on guitar. Thank you for sharing. Happy New Year, everyone!