John Butler

Doug Horne was convinced that the body was removed because there was a chance Texas authorities would come on aboard the plane and remove the body.

But, does that explanation explain the black hearse, the shipping casket, and the body bag?  Were these planned for ahead of time?

Dones anyone have a plan or diagram of Boeing VC-137C SAM 26000 Air Force 1's cargo space?  Or is that restricted information since I can't find anything on that on Google.

Another thing Doug Horne was convinced about was that if Earl Rose, Dallas County Coroner, was allowed to make the autopsy then it would be honest.  I don't agree.  IMO, the autopsy of Tippit was not honest. 

Gil,

David Lifton and Doug Horne have pretty much explained what happened enroute to the autopsy and during the autopsy.

I have one question.  If the shipping casket arrived before the bronze casket arrived would that indicate two different sources of transportation from Dallas?

There was 20 minutes difference in arrival.  Does that indicate 1 plane or 2 planes.  It has been so long since I have read David Lifton I don't remember.

"On 4/30/2022 at 10:48 AM, John Butler said:

Yes, but.  Were the Paines doing that out of good Quaker principles, or were they working for a government intelligence agency?  I vote CIA.  And, in the case of CIA or ACLU, I vote CIA.  I vote the cameras were Oswald's.

W. Niederhut replied:

Agreed.  And how did the Paine's "good Quaker principles" work out for Bell Helicopter profit margins after 11/22/63? 

Honestly, DiEugenio has the patience of Job to repeatedly take the time to debunk all of the incessant gibberish posted on this forum by the resident Lone Nutter "cognitive infiltration" tag team.  Basta per Dio...

IMO, anyone who claims that Ruth Paine wasn't working for the Company is living on Planet Posner."

One of the missing posts contained this:

"Honestly, DiEugenio has the patience of Job to repeatedly take the time to debunk all of the incessant gibberish posted on this forum by the resident Lone Nutter "cognitive infiltration" tag team.  Basta per Dio..."

I re-posted the bold print in a response to one of Jeremy B's post.  Was this offensive enough to be lost?  Edited?  I don't think so in comparison to some of Jeremy's posts.

And, if things were censored, why Jim Hargroves post?  Was there a technical problem, or human involvement?      

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Hi,

Two or three hours ago, I made a lengthy post to the “Which came first, the bus or the Rambler?” thread started by Steve Thomas.  My post seems to have disappeared, along with posts by John Butler and, I think, Denny Zartman.

I worked for over an hour on this material, and I neither mentioned nor attacked any other forum member.  Anyone know why these posts disappeared?  Sadly, I didn’t make a copy of my work and I don’t think I broke any forum rules.

New posts can take a while to appear, but the time here seems excessive.
 

Jim,

Your post was exceptional and had material I wanted for later reference.  So, I made a copy.  I have sent it to you by email.

I believe this is the right one for today.

I hope someone offers an explanation for this.

2 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

John Butler- what is the basis for your belief that the MC bullet was designed to tumble? The FMJ bullet was designed as part of the international agreements to avoid the kind of wounds that would by soft-nosed bullets.  It is universally understood that the shape of JFK's rear entry wound was due to the trajectory.  

Lawerence,

I had read that several times in several different places.  Whether a FMJ or soft nosed bullet was used had nothing to do with tumbling.  The shape of the long Carcano round lead to the tumbling effect at about 2000 fps.  It was not accurate enough in early use and so the increase in tumbling was added to fix that problem.  The M16 5.56 round at about 3000 fps is a tumbling round due to its high speed.  Tumbling was a way to increase the killing power of a small caliber round and was also a way to get around the FMJ agreements.

From the net:

Steinel’s loading of the 6.5 x 52mm Carcano is unlike other modern loadings of the cartridge. Their offering respects the original concept of the round and provides impeccable accuracy as it was in its original design in 1891. The rifle most associated with the round is probably the Carcano Model 1891/38, infamous for being the rifle that Lee Harvey Oswald used during the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The rifles at the time were being sold for as little as $29.95 (about $155 when adjusted for inflation).

First introduced in 1891, the 6.5x52mm Carcano was used in the nearly 3 million Carcano rifles that were built. The caliber remained in military service until the 1970s at which point it was phased out by many militaries for more modern offerings. Carcano rifles are famous for having a heavy-hitting round for the caliber, however, the first iteration of the 6.5x52mm suffered from poor terminal performance, so later iterations of the round introduced aluminum into the bullet nose to increase tumbling upon impact.

"The rifle most associated with the round is probably the Carcano Model 1891/38, infamous for being the rifle that Lee Harvey Oswald used during the assassination of President John F. Kennedy." 

I don't agree with this statement, or your statement on trajectory.  Hydrostatic shock from a high-powered round creates a tremendous pressure per square inch in liquid and semi-liquid material and that pressure must have an outlet.   

59 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

It should be noted, moreover, that the stable design of the M/C bullet made it ideal for certain kinds of shooting--like big game shooting of animals with thick skin a la elephants and rhinos. The stable design allowed the bullet to pierce the thick skin without tumbling or exploding. This allowed the bullet to reach the internal organs.

It has always been my belief that the long 6.5 mm Carcano round was designed to tumble and strike the target in order to leave a larger than .25 caliber wound.  Look at Kennedy's back and you will see "key hole" shape wounds left by tumbling Carcano rounds.  The Carcano was a medium power rifle with the round traveling at about 2000 feet per second.  Higher powered rounds such as the M! 30.06 or Mauser 8Mm traveled at speeds over 2600 fps and closer to 3000 fps.  The M14 7.62 Nato round traveled at that speed of 2600 fps. 

There is the question of collateral damage.  High powered rounds such as the ones mentioned above are capable of penetrating metal, or glass, or human bodies and traveling on to do damage to others.

With the exception of the head shot, I would think most rounds fired in Dealey Plaza, there could be as many as 10 according to some people, were probably short rounds, rounds with lesser propellant for a lesser velocity so they could be sound suppressed, or would not exit a body once penetrated.  If they weren't then Dealey Plaza would have been like a battlefield with more causalities.  The idea of causalities other than the intended one wound have to have been considered.  

44 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

There was no pointed tip ammunition available for the M/C rifle. The different manufacturers all made rounded tip. 

Pat is generally correct, but a lesser amount of pointed tip bullets were made.  The question is were they made long ago?

7 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

As if all of that isn't improbable enough, the theory required the Russian-speaking boy to forget most of his Russian, the very skill for which he was recruited in the first place, so that he had to teach himself the language again just before his false defection was due. It's nonsense.

This is an example of Jeremy's outrageous claims that lack any basis in fact or reality.  Where's the proof of this?  Where is the language or psychological authority for saying this?  What professional studies point this out?

A birth language is never really forgotten if learned by age 5.  It can be recalled and improved.  I can't recall the source for this, but it was probably learned in Psychology or Education classes many years ago.  

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Mr. B. has specialized in trying to debunk the Harvey and Lee Menace® for years.

Not only that, but anything anti-Warren Commission, anti-Zapruder film, or any other so-called conspiracy theories.   

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Now, since this is a thread about the bus and taxi ride and the Nash Rambler, it is interesting to note the vast amount of evidence there is that supports both versions.  See John Armstrong's write-up on how two LHOs left the Texas School Book Depository that tragic day, one from the west side of the building and the other from the north side.

What Jeremy doesn't understand is talking about the bus and taxi ride leads naturally to Roger Craig's testimony.  And, that introduces two Oswalds at the TSBD.  Hence, Harvey and Lee information is natural to this thread.  

Once you sort out those things involving the cab and bus rides and Roger Craig, you will need to look at the larger picture in which the two stories occurred.  If you take the witnesses and evidence at face value as you should since they has not been contradicted, then the larger picture involves why were two Oswalds at the TSBD.  And, of course this involves the story of Harvey and Lee.

7 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

I'd like to comment on two points. Firstly, the derailing of this thread to promote a nonsensical, far-fetched theory that almost no-one believes, and secondly the actual topic of the thread.

Armstrong's theory is incoherent. His imaginary double-doppelganger project, which supposedly began in the late 1940s or early 1950s, was set up for one specific reason: to produce, several years in the future, a false defector who had a plausible American background and a sufficient knowledge of Russian to allow him to understand what was going on around him in the Soviet Union.

Why?  You derail threads all the time with your outrageous, non-factual claims and bold, meaningless assertions such as those above.  You derail threads all the time with your vicious insults and ad hominem attacks which you call humor.  Can you prove this "incoherent" idea with facts rather than simple statements and assumptions that you think everyone agrees with. 

Well, I would imagine that spy folks do much worse than a false defector program that was first conceived at the beginning of the Cold War.  Refugees were available, why not use them at a later time.  What about things like the Gulf of Tonkin and the Northwoods plan and many other things like that.  Those two were of the same period.  One against Cuba and the other started the Viet Nam war in a larger way.

The decision makers in WWII did horrible and terrible things to win the war.  Check out the fire bombing of Dresden in Germany.  They didn't need an atom bomb.  Those in power after the war did the same kind of decision making.  It resulted in killing a president.  A regime change as it is called.

24 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

That is about as involved as the Paine's could conceivably be. The Paine"s are a sort of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" conspiracy honey pot. But the truth is there are people who do those things, whether it's out of the goodness of their hearts or some ideology, just as there are people who are committed to selfless acts to do relief work to relieve the suffering of others or even everyday people who work in hospitals.

Yes, but.  Were the Paines doing that out of good Quaker principles, or were they working for a government intelligence agency?  I vote CIA.  And, in the case of CIA or ACLU, I vote CIA.  I vote the cameras were Oswald's.

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is from Marina's New Orleans Grand Jury testimony.

Q: Do you still see Ruth Paine?

A: No, I like her and appreciate what she did.  I was advised by Secret Service not to be connected with her, seems like she was...not connected...she was sympathizing with the CIA.  She wrote letters over there and they told me for my own reputation to stay away.

Then to cap off this dialogue here you go:

Q: In other words, you were left with the distinct impression that she was in some way connected with the CIA

A: Yes.

Far too many people don't allow a witness to say what they said and take it for what they said.  They have to put their interpretation into the witness' mouth.

Marina says CIA.  She was a big girl and intelligent.  She, in my opinion was a Russian agent, could speak English well enough to say basically what she needed to say.  She said CIA and not ACLU.

2 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

Oswalds Minox had a 5 digit serial number & all of the commercially available ones had 6 digit serial numbers.

That would preclude Michael Paine from publicly buying the Minox in 1950.

Michael,

If Roger Craig was not a super cop, then he was close to it.  He was all over the assassination scene directly after the assassination.  He ended up in the TSBD with the Mauser inches from his face.  

As I said earlier, he blew up the cover up.  But, very few think that way.  Which of the two Oswalds was on the 6th floor?  Or, were they not on the 6th floor, but doing other things.  I'm with Jesse Curry when he said he could never put Oswald on the 6th floor with a rifle in his hand.  There is good evidence to say that no one fired a shot from the 6th floor. 

What were two Oswalds doing at the TSBD?  One, Harvey I think was assigned to take photos of the parade.  That tied him to the TSBD so that he would later become the patsy.  The John Martin film shows him under the trees taking photos of the p. limo and then later as Prayer Man in Couch. 

Lee Oswald was at the TSBD.  Or, some one who looked like Lee and Harvey was there.  He may have been the one demonstrating to the public that there was an assassin on the 6th floor.  But, in my opinion he is the fellow in Altgens 6 known as Doorway Man disguised as Billy Lovelady. 

This is a bit of a stretch.  Harvey may have seen, from his position under the trees, Lee standing in the doorway of the TSBD talking to Bill Shelley.  This could be why he said he was standing out front talking to Bill Shelley when the p. limo went by.

A lot of this is speculation based upon facts from films, photos, witness statements, and researchers work into the JFKA.            

39 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

When people here tell you "Harvey and Lee" has all been debunked and that nobody believes it, don't believe them.

Well said Jim,

I usually don't answer comments from Jonathan and Jeremy.  I made a copy of your comment in Word.  I may, if you don't mind, use this to answer whenever my anti-fans make those kind of remarks. 

By just about any standard of proof one would have to come to the conclusion there were two Oswalds at the TSBD.  And, furthermore the two men looked very much alike so that witnesses to two different events agreed that the man at the two different events was identified as Lee Harvey Oswald (the Warren Commission version) and was the one shot at the DPD.  We call this Oswald, Harvey.  Then, the one who got into the Nash Rambler must have been Lee Oswald who Roger Craig identified as Lee Harvey Oswald (Harvey) the man he saw at the DPD. 

It gets confusing, but and this is a big but, Lee Harvey Oswald (as identified by the Warren Commission) can not have been in two places at once.  He could not be on Elm Street getting in a Rambler and riding in a bus and cab on other streets at the same time.    

21 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

John,

According to CD 705...

The first inclination on the Sheriff's Department Dispatch Tapes that something was wrong comes in at 12:30:40. All Units are ordered to report to the railroad yards.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=394

page 368

 

An unknown mike on Channel 1 of the City's Police Department Dispatches is stuck open between around 12:27 and 12:34.

On Channel 2 of the DPD's Dispatch Tapes, (the cars involved in the motorcade itself), Unit 1 (Chief Curry) orders the units to go to Parkland Hospital and get men on top of that triple underpass to see what's going on up there at 12:30

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=487

page 461

 

I guess I was wrong about the shooting taking place at 12:35.

Steve Thomas

Steve,

There is so much detail to recall in the JFKA that it is a wonder we get anything right.  Richard Price just replied with photo id of the time, the Mcintyre photo.  I don't remember ever seeing that.  And, I spent considerable time trying to find that very info and couldn't.  Thanks again to Richard.

There's another problem I believe.  That is different accounts of the same thing.  Often, one can le lead astray if the other account isn't taken into consideration. 

Thanks for bring this topic up because it helps clarify my thinking on Roger Craig.  Roger Craig blew the cover-up up.  It is a wonder he wasn't killed directly after the assassination.      

8 minutes ago, Richard Price said:

John, I believe the photo with the time shown is the McIntire photo of the motorcycles ahead of the limo as it comes out from under the triple underpass (the "Old Charter" sign in the foreground.

Thanks a bunch Richard,

As much as I have studied that photo, I never saw that.  Even, If I did I don't remember it.  Thanks again.  I'll see if I can keep that in my memory banks.

11 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Oswald supposedly got on the bus in front of the Rio Grande Building at 251 N. Field St. That is approximately 5 blocks from Dealey Plaza. JFK was shot at approximately 12L35 PM. It’s hard to see how Oswald could have walked those 5 blocks in 4 minutes.

Didn't witnesses say the shooting occurred at 12:30 PM basing this on the sign/clock above the TSBD.  But, you will have a hard time proving that since I can't find any photos or films showing that clock at that time during the assassination.  There are some after the assassination.

3 hours ago, George Govus said:

Bugliosi has Oswald entering the bus at 12:39. Craig said it was 12:40 when he saw a white male in his twenties run down the knoll from the direction of the book depository.

Craig later identified the person he saw run down the hill as Lee Harvey Oswald.  The man shot at the DPD who I call Harvey.  Other witnesses identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the bus and taxi rider.  He had things linking him to the bus on him when captured. This was the man shot at the DPD and who I believe is an unknown double of Lee Oswald.

If those times are correct, then you can't have the same person in two different places at roughly the same time.  It could be the same time with watch differences in time.  The key here for me is that Roger Craig and other witnesses for bus and taxi identified Lee Harvey Oswald, the man at the DPD.  In no way is that possible unless the double looked enough like the man at the DPD in features and appearance.  Granted, many people have problems with facial recognition, but I don't think that number is really that big.

One can only conclude there were two Oswalds at the TSBD.

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Well, it only took 12 pages for this thread to devolve into "Harvey and Lee" nonsense. John, out of curiosity, if Marina was aware that she "shared" two nearly identical husbands and was in on the plot, why on God's green earth did she consent to the 1981 exhumation?

We haven't devolved into "Harvey and Lee" nonsense.  There is no such nonsense, but a well grounded in facts theory on the mysterious Lee Harvey Oswald.    This was a comment for David Josephs on his nice pictures showing Lee Oswald, and then I said let's return to the cameras.  You are derailing the discussion by sidetracking here.   

I said nothing about Marina being in the plot.  I said Marina had two husbands.  She said that in an interview with Nerin Gun working for a French magazine in 1964.  1981 is a lot different than 1963-64 for Marina.  If you don't understand that then read up on her life.

As best as I can remember at this point Marina said something like I had two husbands.  Lee, a kind man and father of my children, and Harvey, a mean and crazy man who killed the president.  She said this in the 1964 interview.  Marina was a Russian spy.  Gun spoke of meeting her in 1963 at the DPD shortly after the assassination.  And, then again later in 1964.  He remarked on her language ability in 1963 has non-existent and then fairly fluent in 1964.

This is all I am going to say on this since I don't wish to side-track this discussion.  I find it quite interesting.  The things that have developed here are very fascinating.

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

My point Greg....

Go find out.  Have you even tried searching this forum?

A MINOX image is similar to a 35mm size except that it is longer than a 35mm photo.

Armstrong H&L p.158

The Minox produces a finished photograph that is the same width, but longer,' than a photograph produced by a 35 mm camera. The length of a Minox photo distinguishes it from similar sized photographs. The National Archives has several Minox photographs of scenes in Japan, Philippines, Atsugi, Hawaii, and of Lee Oswald and his Marine buddy, George Hans Wilkins.61 The only Minox photographs in the JFK Collection in the National Archives are those taken in the Far East-there are no Minox photos either prior to or after Lee Oswald's military served in Japan.

NOTE: Neither Zack Stout, George Wilkins nor Bobby Warren the Marine who spent nearly every day for 10 months with Lee Oswald in Japan, both on and off duty were interviewed by the FBI or Warren Commission.

There has been much controversy related to this photo

.

There are those who feel this was taken with a Minox..  Bottom right with the background added...

 

David,

Thanks for these clearer photos of Lee Oswald in the military.  These add quite a bit to my ID character traits of Harvey and Lee.

1.  Lee Oswald's nose was wider than Harvey's.  This is clearly seen in these photos.

2.  The double bend of the upper rim of Harvey's ear is not matched by Lee's ear which doesn't have that double bend.  The right hand photo gives a clear indication that this is so.

3.  Lee's chin is wider than Harvey's and does not have the dip or bend present in Harvey's.

4.  Harvey has a receding hairline which he covers up with a comb over.  Lee doesn't have this problem.

Thanks again David.  These two photos are enough to clearly separate Harvey and Lee.

And, none of the above look like this guy.  Except for the parts of Harvey.

Now, back to the cameras.

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

But I have to press you on a different point. We see in the DPD evidence photo a number of Minox accessories and other items and some "Michael Paine" name-tags. Michael Paine identified those items as belonging to him, and such items were later returned to the Paines, a return of their property. The light meter--Michael Paine's. The Minox camera case--Michael Paine's. The binoculars--Michael Paine's. The name-tags reading "Michael Paine"--Michael Paine's. 

When did he identify this equipment as his possessions.  Because someone placed name tags near things doesn't mean it was his.

Could you add more detail to this in order to clarify what you are saying.

6 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

That it would be plausible that Oswald would like to work with a Minox if he had one is not contested. But It is implausible that Oswald could afford one, or afford all of the Minox accoutrements (whereas cost of such a high-end camera was no obstacle to Michael). Oswald shows no ownership of expensive equipment in any other case.

Greg,

Lee and Harvey Oswald were spies.  Lee was more into radar.  Harvey was the camera man.  Harvey needed that MInox in Russia (of course secretly).  The Russians would have known what that was and what it was for.  

Some of the photos developed for Alan Weberman was from Minox film showing Lee Oswald in the Philippines.  So, what does that say?  Simply, that Lee had the Minox for a long time.  He had the camera before Harvey went to Russia.  The two shared various things over time.  Clothes, equipment, and Marina. 

It wasn't a matter if he could afford one.  These were given to people who worked in intelligence.  His type of Minox was not sold to the public. 

Are you saying that the other cameras there at Ruth's house were Michael's possessions?  I have never heard that before. 

As far as Oswald owning an expensive Minox, it seems to me you are setting up a strawman to knock down.  Let me know if I have misread what you are saying.

More than likely Harvey had the Minox when he worked at Jaggers, Chile, Stovall.  Supposedly, he was enroute to Cuba on another agent provocateur adventure.  He memorized Cuban towns, villages, rivers, mountains, etc.  These maps that he was making or assisting Jaggers, etc. were U2 photos of Cuba.

The Minox would be handy to copy those photos for later study and memorization.    

53 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

As to "how a mistake" could happen...  consider it wasn't a mistake... more like covering tracks after the fact.

my $.02

Always worth reading.

This brings back memories on what one would see in a Minox with the camera fully opened.  

56 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

The photo equipment all belonged to Oswald... a reoccurring theme is Oswald and his camera equipment wherever they may be...  To be able to name the brand on the "self-timer" suggests to me it says so on the outside of the case.

A big question that a lot of folks have not considered is why Ruth Paine allowed her husband's possessions to be taken by the DPD officers.  With all of Oswald's cameras, camera equipment, and other items there why was Michael's alleged possessions included?  Michael Paine was not a criminal or criminal suspect.  He was not charged with a crime or was a suspect.