What Is a "Break Through" Thread or Post, Is "This", One?

[David Josephs]

From my reading of Unspeakable and what little I know of the 22nd... the (or any) Oswald double had been seen in a number of places for no good reason...

So why buy the only thing in the store that MAY require ID?

to create and cause more confusion in the aftermath of the assasination and/or

to establish a conspiracy was in the works

MANY have argued that the conspiracy was transparent on purpose... so we could quickly blame someone - hopefully Communist Cuba/USSR

Why else was EVERY SINGLE EXAMPLE of a conspiracy squashed, forgotten, ignored?

Cause there were so many of them... or as we've come to know:

LBJ: Cause we are not going to start WWIII and kill 40 million Americans in an instant.

That and all the evidence led back to the US itself... bummer huh?

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

you wrote:

One further thing Moore said - the individual had been nervous while in the shop. Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone? What it DOES sound like is an under age kid whose just bought beer and is nervous about getting caught.

I can't believe anyone assumed this was actually Oswald... that's the whole point. The description is similiar to the man seen taken out the BACK of the Texas Theater in handcuffs and driven off in a police car...

Now I'm thoroughly confused, David. Here is part of what was posted as being Armstrong's words: "The FBI interviewed Fred Moore who said Lee Oswald entered the Jiffy store on Industrial Blvd at 8:30 a.m. and bought two beers-while Harvey Oswald was working at the Book Depository.

So the answer to your disbelief that anyone could believe it was Oswald is – Armstrong said it was Oswald (Lee Harvey).

That is NOT MY belief. I thought I made it clear that I believe it was an under age kid.

The question is "why is ANYONE showing an OSWALD ID other than Oswald?" and one that may have had "H. Lee Oswald" on it.

I don't know that anyone did show ID. The FBI report is dated Dec 2 so Moore had plenty of time to obtain Oswald's date of birth from the papers. He lied because typically, those types of shops do not ask for ID – particularly if the person looks like they "might" be old enough – and even when they do ask – they will typically accept any old thing as valid. Moore was dealing with the FBI. He said he asked for ID because they had previously been caught selling to minors. That, to me, sounds like he is giving a reason for asking for ID when it would be common knowledge with law enforcement that they don't, as a rule, do that. CYA. (I can just imagine it... "You asked for ID? Getouta here!" with Moore replying, well yes, sir. You see, we had been caught before selling to minors....") How many times had they been caught (he seems to suggest more than once)? How many times did it take getting caught before they decided it wasn't worth it any more and they started asking for ID? What were the penalties they paid on those other occasions?

http://www.acorn.net...R/.ja-ex34.html

John Armstrong theorizes this was Lee Oswald's wallet, not Harvey's,

perhaps containing the same license shown to store clerk Fred Moore hours

earlier when Lee bought two beers then some "peco" brittle. A Texas

driver's license belonging to "Lee Oswald" turned up at the Texas

There you go. According to Armstrong, it was Lee Oswald – not according to me.

Department of Public Safety the following week. Aletha Frair, an employee

saw and handled Oswald's Texas driver's license Lee, who drove; not

Harvey, who didn't. Six other employees Ray Sundy, Joyce Bostic, Inez

Laake, Gayle Scott, Peggy Smith and Mrs. Ernie Isaacs also saw Lee

Oswald's driver's license. They noted it was dirty and worn as though it

had been carried in a billfold. The license was the main topic of

discussion in their office for quite a while. Mrs. Lee Bozarth, an

employee of the Texas Department of Public Safety, stated categorically

that she knew from direct personal experience that there was a DPS

driver's license file for Lee Harvey Oswald. The file had been pulled

shortly after the assassination. Lee Oswald drove, and had a valid Texas

driver's license. Harvey Oswald, the man under arrest at 2 pm, November

22, did not drive, and did not have a license.

But did he not put in some paperwork at some stage? Going form memory.

Where do you get the impression the LHO walked off the job with any regularity and stayed away for well longer than any normal break time would be allowed.

I never said he DID. I said it was possible. He did the same in New Orleans, in case you're not aware of it. But to reiterate, I DO NOT believe this was Lee Oswald, or anyone deliberately impersonating Lee Oswald, so what is theoretically possible really does not matter to me here.

that he drank beer in the early morning.... that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

Lee Oswald was known to drink beer in the Marines and in NO. But if it wasn't Oswald at the Jiffy Store, what does it matter?

that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

How could you take the rhetorical "Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone?" as indicating I thought him being nervous buying a beer sounded like an accurate description? Did I not then indicate it sounded more like a minor buying a beer?

No Greg, the person in the store was not LHO the TSBD employee...

Agreed.

Mr. GIVENS. Well, I first saw him on the first floor.

Mr BELIN. About what time was that?

Mr. GIVENS. Well, about 8:30.

Jarman, James Earl TSBD employee

The first time I saw Lee Oswald on Friday, November 22, 1963 was about 8:15 a.m. He was filling orders on the first floor.

A little after 9:00 a.m. Lee Oswald asked me what all the people were doing standing on the street.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

Truly, Roy TSBD Superintendent

Arrives at work around 8am and remembers seeing Oswald already working on the first floor. They exchange Hello's

Very friendly boss, but I don't see the significance here.

My guess regarding Moore's Boss withholding the Jewish name comment may be on the same order as Moore makeing sure he says he was asking for ID... CYA.

How does that work? Is mentioning a Jewish name incriminating? Enlighten me! Isn't it much more likely it wasn't said at that particular time because - apart from anything else - "Lee Oswald" is not a Jewish name?

Whether something "makes more sense" is simple conjecture, right? You haven't anything that would suggest that other than Rubenstein being so much more Jewish sounding than Oswald the comment was or wasn't ever delivered... an interesting conjecture none the less.

Conjecture based on one actually being a Jewish name and the other, not – and the fact that the Ruby slaying of Oswald gets mentioned as a reference point for when the beer drinking took place (i.e. the day before). And then of course, there is also the fact that Worthington did not remember it. Your conjecture as to why Worthington denied remembering it needs further fleshing out as it makes no sense to me at all.

We as a reaserch community are getting ever closer to the reality that multiple Oswalds were obviously at play in the months, weeks, days and the day of the assassination.

Are you also saying it was Oswald who was at the shooting range, gun shop, gets into that refrigeration guy's truck* to tell that same "shoot the president with a rifle" story..., makes the calls from Mexico City, etc...

I don't think so...

All of those episodes need to assessed on their own merit – just as I have done with this. Whether none, one or all of those other episodes turned out true, they have no bearing on THIS one being true.

I've read your post a couple times now and still do not see how you determine Moore's story is a waste of time and Armstrong's use pathetic... given all this other evidence

What evidence? What you have is the say so of one man of whom you know nothing. All we do know is that his manager did not support the only part of his story he actually may have been able to support, had it been true. Apart from that, we have Moore placing the incident on the Saturday – not the Friday, along with his inability to ID Oswald as the man.

If the idea had been to "create and cause more confusion in the aftermath of the assasination and/or to establish a conspiracy was in the works", then the plan failed miserably here. Moore said there were others in the shop, but does your version of "Lee Oswald" stay in the shop to drink his beers (as Moore indicated folk usually did) to create a scene that they all would recall? No. He nervously leaves to drink them – just like a minor would who didn't want anyone taking too much notice of him while he drank.

Moore had an under-age drinker on Saturday morning. The drinker left so as not to be noticed. Just as he was leaving, Worthington entered from the back. Moors says something to Worthington along the lines of "there goes another kid buying beer". Over the next week, he dramatizes this episode, telling people it was Oswald. Someone contacts the FBI to report it. Moore then spins his story to them when they call around, but realizing the potential trouble he could get in for making up the story, he refuses to ID Oswald. He also gratuitously adds a comment he made on the Sunday about Rubinstein and instead claims he made it about Oswald on a previous day. Conjecture to be sure – but far more grounded in what we actually know about the incident than anything else presented.

I look forward to your response.

DJ

*edit: not sure if it was a refrig repairman's truck... but the man goes back and tells the story to a friend and ultimately is severely beaten... if I remember correctly

Doesn't matter. It is not part of this episode. That story may or may not be true. This one is not.

edit #2 - one more thing Greg... if you are right and the Oswald sighting was Saturday morning, while Oswald was in jail, wouldn't that seem a bit strange to you?

I never said it was Oswald there on a Saturday morning. I said the episode happened on the Saturday morning. And I said Saturday because it is what Moore said.

Your problem appears to be that you have started with a conclusion and now you are trying to hammer all the bits into that. I simply assessed the situation based on what is in the FBI report and let it lead wherever it may.

Verdict: Moore was likely trying to puff up his importance among family and friends and spun a story around a kid buying beer on a Saturday, claiming it was Oswald buying beer on Friday. He has no support for this claim from any other source – indeed odd if this was a deliberate an attempt to create a scene – and one part is in fact denied by the person (Worthington) he claimed could verify it (the comment about the name). He had plenty of time to get Oswald's date of birth from newspapers, so I don't see how that can be used as supporting his story. He was then left in a situation when confronted by the FBI, of having to confirm the incident or look like the fabricator he actually was, but at the same time, get himself off the hook by refusing to ID a person he had never actually eyeballed to begin with.

Try looking at the evidence without the H & L lens. Your vision may improve. At the very least, it would stop all the confusion about who we are both talking about. That is to say, when I refer to Lee Oswald, I am referring to the historical person – the one who was in the Marines, lived in NO and handed out leaflets and later got a job in Dallas at the TSBD. I Know H & L supporters cannot do that, but if you would kindly ( a ) stop assuming I am talking about two different people and ( b ) when you refer to the person you believe was Lee Oswald, call him just that, and when you are referring to the mythical "Harvey" please refer to him as a possible double, or something along those lines. Just trying to make the discussion a little easier and more comprehensible, is all...

Edited February 19, 2011 by Greg Parker

[Robert Howard]

Greg,

you wrote:

One further thing Moore said - the individual had been nervous while in the shop. Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone? What it DOES sound like is an under age kid whose just bought beer and is nervous about getting caught.

I can't believe anyone assumed this was actually Oswald... that's the whole point. The description is similiar to the man seen taken out the BACK of the Texas Theater in handcuffs and driven off in a police car...

Now I'm thoroughly confused, David. Here is part of what was posted as being Armstrong's words: "The FBI interviewed Fred Moore who said Lee Oswald entered the Jiffy store on Industrial Blvd at 8:30 a.m. and bought two beers-while Harvey Oswald was working at the Book Depository.

So the answer to your disbelief that anyone could believe it was Oswald is – Armstrong said it was Oswald (Lee Harvey).

That is NOT MY belief. I thought I made it clear that I believe it was an under age kid.

The question is "why is ANYONE showing an OSWALD ID other than Oswald?" and one that may have had "H. Lee Oswald" on it.

I don't know that anyone did show ID. The FBI report is dated Dec 2 so Moore had plenty of time to obtain Oswald's date of birth from the papers. He lied because typically, those types of shops do not ask for ID – particularly if the person looks like they "might" be old enough – and even when they do ask – they will typically accept any old thing as valid. Moore was dealing with the FBI. He said he asked for ID because they had previously been caught selling to minors. That, to me, sounds like he is giving a reason for asking for ID when it would be common knowledge with law enforcement that they don't, as a rule, do that. CYA. (I can just imagine it... "You asked for ID? Getouta here!" with Moore replying, well yes, sir. You see, we had been caught before selling to minors....") How many times had they been caught (he seems to suggest more than once)? How many times did it take getting caught before they decided it wasn't worth it any more and they started asking for ID? What were the penalties they paid on those other occasions?

http://www.acorn.net...R/.ja-ex34.html

John Armstrong theorizes this was Lee Oswald's wallet, not Harvey's,

perhaps containing the same license shown to store clerk Fred Moore hours

earlier when Lee bought two beers then some "peco" brittle. A Texas

driver's license belonging to "Lee Oswald" turned up at the Texas

There you go. According to Armstrong, it was Lee Oswald – not according to me.

Department of Public Safety the following week. Aletha Frair, an employee

saw and handled Oswald's Texas driver's license Lee, who drove; not

Harvey, who didn't. Six other employees Ray Sundy, Joyce Bostic, Inez

Laake, Gayle Scott, Peggy Smith and Mrs. Ernie Isaacs also saw Lee

Oswald's driver's license. They noted it was dirty and worn as though it

had been carried in a billfold. The license was the main topic of

discussion in their office for quite a while. Mrs. Lee Bozarth, an

employee of the Texas Department of Public Safety, stated categorically

that she knew from direct personal experience that there was a DPS

driver's license file for Lee Harvey Oswald. The file had been pulled

shortly after the assassination. Lee Oswald drove, and had a valid Texas

driver's license. Harvey Oswald, the man under arrest at 2 pm, November

22, did not drive, and did not have a license.

But did he not put in some paperwork at some stage? Going form memory.

Where do you get the impression the LHO walked off the job with any regularity and stayed away for well longer than any normal break time would be allowed.

I never said he DID. I said it was possible. He did the same in New Orleans, in case you're not aware of it. But to reiterate, I DO NOT believe this was Lee Oswald, or anyone deliberately impersonating Lee Oswald, so what is theoretically possible really does not matter to me here.

that he drank beer in the early morning.... that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

Lee Oswald was known to drink beer in the Marines and in NO. But if it wasn't Oswald at the Jiffy Store, what does it matter?

that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

How could you take the rhetorical "Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone?" as indicating I thought him being nervous buying a beer sounded like an accurate description? Did I not then indicate it sounded more like a minor buying a beer?

No Greg, the person in the store was not LHO the TSBD employee...

Agreed.

Mr. GIVENS. Well, I first saw him on the first floor.

Mr BELIN. About what time was that?

Mr. GIVENS. Well, about 8:30.

Jarman, James Earl TSBD employee

The first time I saw Lee Oswald on Friday, November 22, 1963 was about 8:15 a.m. He was filling orders on the first floor.

A little after 9:00 a.m. Lee Oswald asked me what all the people were doing standing on the street.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

Truly, Roy TSBD Superintendent

Arrives at work around 8am and remembers seeing Oswald already working on the first floor. They exchange Hello's

Very friendly boss, but I don't see the significance here.

My guess regarding Moore's Boss withholding the Jewish name comment may be on the same order as Moore makeing sure he says he was asking for ID... CYA.

How does that work? Is mentioning a Jewish name incriminating? Enlighten me! Isn't it much more likely it wasn't said at that particular time because - apart from anything else - "Lee Oswald" is not a Jewish name?

Whether something "makes more sense" is simple conjecture, right? You haven't anything that would suggest that other than Rubenstein being so much more Jewish sounding than Oswald the comment was or wasn't ever delivered... an interesting conjecture none the less.

Conjecture based on one actually being a Jewish name and the other, not – and the fact that the Ruby slaying of Oswald gets mentioned as a reference point for when the beer drinking took place (i.e. the day before). And then of course, there is also the fact that Worthington did not remember it. Your conjecture as to why Worthington denied remembering it needs further fleshing out as it makes no sense to me at all.

We as a reaserch community are getting ever closer to the reality that multiple Oswalds were obviously at play in the months, weeks, days and the day of the assassination.

Are you also saying it was Oswald who was at the shooting range, gun shop, gets into that refrigeration guy's truck* to tell that same "shoot the president with a rifle" story..., makes the calls from Mexico City, etc...

I don't think so...

All of those episodes need to assessed on their own merit – just as I have done with this. Whether none, one or all of those other episodes turned out true, they have no bearing on THIS one being true.

I've read your post a couple times now and still do not see how you determine Moore's story is a waste of time and Armstrong's use pathetic... given all this other evidence

What evidence? What you have is the say so of one man of whom you know nothing. All we do know is that his manager did not support the only part of his story he actually may have been able to support, had it been true. Apart from that, we have Moore placing the incident on the Saturday – not the Friday, along with his inability to ID Oswald as the man.

If the idea had been to "create and cause more confusion in the aftermath of the assasination and/or to establish a conspiracy was in the works", then the plan failed miserably here. Moore said there were others in the shop, but does your version of "Lee Oswald" stay in the shop to drink his beers (as Moore indicated folk usually did) to create a scene that they all would recall? No. He nervously leaves to drink them – just like a minor would who didn't want anyone taking too much notice of him while he drank.

Moore had an under-age drinker on Saturday morning. The drinker left so as not to be noticed. Just as he was leaving, Worthington entered from the back. Moors says something to Worthington along the lines of "there goes another kid buying beer". Over the next week, he dramatizes this episode, telling people it was Oswald. Someone contacts the FBI to report it. Moore then spins his story to them when they call around, but realizing the potential trouble he could get in for making up the story, he refuses to ID Oswald. He also gratuitously adds a comment he made on the Sunday about Rubinstein and instead claims he made it about Oswald on a previous day. Conjecture to be sure – but far more grounded in what we actually know about the incident than anything else presented.

I look forward to your response.

DJ

*edit: not sure if it was a refrig repairman's truck... but the man goes back and tells the story to a friend and ultimately is severely beaten... if I remember correctly

Doesn't matter. It is not part of this episode. That story may or may not be true. This one is not.

edit #2 - one more thing Greg... if you are right and the Oswald sighting was Saturday morning, while Oswald was in jail, wouldn't that seem a bit strange to you?

I never said it was Oswald there on a Saturday morning. I said the episode happened on the Saturday morning. And I said Saturday because it is what Moore said.

Your problem appears to be that you have started with a conclusion and now you are trying to hammer all the bits into that. I simply assessed the situation based on what is in the FBI report and let it lead wherever it may.

Verdict: Moore was likely trying to puff up his importance among family and friends and spun a story around a kid buying beer on a Saturday, claiming it was Oswald buying beer on Friday. He has no support for this claim from any other source – indeed odd if this was a deliberate an attempt to create a scene – and one part is in fact denied by the person (Worthington) he claimed could verify it (the comment about the name). He had plenty of time to get Oswald's date of birth from newspapers, so I don't see how that can be used as supporting his story. He was then left in a situation when confronted by the FBI, of having to confirm the incident or look like the fabricator he actually was, but at the same time, get himself off the hook by refusing to ID a person he had never actually eyeballed to begin with.

Try looking at the evidence without the H & L lens. Your vision may improve. At the very least, it would stop all the confusion about who we are both talking about. That is to say, when I refer to Lee Oswald, I am referring to the historical person – the one who was in the Marines, lived in NO and handed out leaflets and later got a job in Dallas at the TSBD. I Know H & L supporters cannot do that, but if you would kindly ( a ) stop assuming I am talking about two different people and ( b ) when you refer to the person you believe was Lee Oswald, call him just that, and when you are referring to the mythical "Harvey" please refer to him as a possible double, or something along those lines. Just trying to make the discussion a little easier and more comprehensible, is all...

I believe Greg makes a very good point. The Forum is, and has always been a place where researchers and famous writers and not so famous writers are villified and subject

to ridicule because any individual attestation of fact, whether it is regarding a document, premise and "theory" becomes cannon fodder for resident big names, little names

or whathaveyou, to take potshots because the aforementioned do not "agree" with "their" concept of the big picture.....many times, said persons

wouldn't know that the declassifcation process under the JFK Records Act makes their "theories" about as viable as a proverbial Introductory JFK 101 course ..........

Examples...where do I begin...attacks on Joan Mellen, courtesy of [fill in the blank]

attacks by RIP Gerry Patrick Hemming on Tosh Plumlee,

really nasty attacks within the Zapruder film analysis community on Jack White,

or Jack White towards anyone who does not accept

every jot and tittle of Harvey and Lee.....[And I am sympathetic to Jack,

he had the added humiliation of being hammered at the HSCA

hearings because he pointed out some things that they did not want to hear,

so they treated him badly, anyone who knows their stuff

should know that.....]

attacks on anyone who points out that Lee Harvey Oswald could possibly not been the

assassins of President Kennedy, JD Tippit USMC Private Schrand

by such esteemed persons as in the 1960s-70's era, J Edgar Hoover, Frank Sturgis,

E. Howard Hunt, Lawrence Schiller and government spokespersons associated with or

synonymous to "The Mighty Wurlitzer."

When Jim Garrison, according to whomever you ask "investigated," "butchered," or "covered-up"

his foray into the Kennedy Assassination, the Warren Commission had such an all-time low in credibility,

comments were made by scribes and lawyers regarding not wanting to even include

documents from the Warren Commission in the trial of Clay Shaw; but in 2011 the Warren Commission

has been transformed into a phoenix that has risen from the ashes, as documentation worthy of being

canonized alongside the Constitution of the United States, as boxing promoter

Don King once said "Only in America."

.

Where did the problem develop? A lack of civility which has taken on a new dimension with the resultant dynamic of "pot calls kettle black?"

Some of this is completely understandable when you consider the bonafide JFK researcher has had to cope with:

In no particular order.

1. Proven Bogus documents

2. CIA assets who have deliberately included "government conspiracy theories," ie Castro, KGB Chicoms did it,

who in turn, were linked to groups with names practically out of a John Le Carre novel,

See The Schickshinny Knights Of Malta.

3. Visitors to the Forum, who have been so strident other Forum Members felt so "at a loss," understandably so....

they modified their settings so they wouldn't have to read the limpid regurgitations emanating from aforementioned person

Anyone remember "Lynette?"

Which reminds me of a particularly humorous anecdote.....

The story taken from the Middle Ages, [another epic period for

governments and institutions killing ants with sledgehammers];

regards an itinerant traveler who chances upon a village on one his lengthy

travels, as he approaches he sees the Devil himself sitting on a ledge on the outskirts of the town.

Utterly incredulous, the traveler says "what are you doing here?

I would have thought you would have been in the village

creating havoc within the populace, and inciting them to acts

of evil against one another." The Devil, shrugged his shoulders

and said, "they are doing quite well without me."

Translation: We have met the enemy and he is Us?

There is also the bitter, acrimonious [understatement]

feelings between supporters of the Lee Harvey Oswald

did it school,and believers of a conspiracy.

In all due respects, the defenders of the Warren Commission

are afforded the same rights to their opinion's, interpretations

of fact here as well, the only stipulation is that they

show some idea of understanding basic rules of civility

and honesty.

I have been trying to contribute for ages here,

pointing out areas of interest, suspicious relationships

and factual obscurities which, I believe deserve more attention

One of these areas is cryptology; I have devoted

an entire thread on the subject, which is about as active a

thread as a dormant volcano, and yet even though, as

recent a post as yesterday where Luis Castillo, the MKULTRA-like

assassin sent in 1967 to possibly kill Ferdinand Marcos,

as government hypnosis experts determined, was associated with codes.

As were William Dalzell, graduates of Bletchley Park's

Government Code and Cipher School, who later

were associated with President Kennedy's cabinet...

including William Bundy, brother of McGeorge Bundy

JMWAVE certainly had an interest in the subject.

Reel 21, Folder C - AMMUG-1 PRODUCTION FILE pg 10

Found in: HSCA Segregated CIA Collection (microfilm - reel 21: AMMUG)

CASTILLIAN ENGLISH CUBAN

To use cipher codes Cryptoanalysis Cryptorym pseudonym Code system Cipher Key

code To code a message Decipher decode Cover story Agent 'spotting Guard watch

http://www.maryferre...21&relPageId=10

Or

Home/Archive/Documents/JFK Assassination Documents/JFK Documents - Central Intelligence Agency

HSCA Segregated CIA Collection/HSCA Segregated CIA Collection, Box 17/

NARA Record Number: 104-10075-10220

JMWAVE CABLE RE CIPHER MATERIAL [11/28/63]

http://www.maryferre....do?docId=40681

FOLLOWING CIPHER MATERIAL ISSUED JMWAVE CO FOR RESUPPLY AMCOG-3,

ODLONG PBRUMEN AMCOG

SICPLAN VALON: DECIPHER PADS AP1212, 6819, AP1213 3365 AND AP1214, 3819

But apparently new research is not much of a priority to some people here, unless it dovetails

nicely with their own preconceived ideas re same.

Cheers

Edited February 19, 2011 by Robert Howard

[David Josephs]

Greg,

I want to give your reply the thought it deserves..

but it was your post:

Here's what the FBI report says in summary:

Moore thought that the customer had first come in at about 8:30, purchased two beers and returned later to buy two pieces of Peco Brittle.

and then

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

was it 8:30 as the FBI reports or 9:30 as you assume?

and if it was Saturday and the ID was an "Oswald" - which is Moore's statement AS RECORDED BY THE FBI (who if anything could be counted upon to skew any reference AWAY from if being another Oswald), not Armstrong's - that's an even better case for multiple Oswald's... ignoring all the evidence that supports other "Oswalds"... leading up to Robert Vinson's account... just does not make your interpretation of Moore's testimony as likely as there being a second Oswald.

But I'll be back with a response line by line as you so graciously offered me - and I appreciate your time and manner Greg - as well as respect your position... as long as you support it with more than you interpretation or assessmento f the info but with the info itself - taken with other info in the same area - and offer your conclusions.

Surely you can't argue that the OSWALD recorded on tape and film at the Mexican Embassy was actually Oswald... Someone used his name... why? and how is that any different from someone using his ID the morning of the assassination other than to confuse and stick out like a sore thumb...?

DJ

Edited February 19, 2011 by David Josephs

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

I want to give your reply the thought it deserves..

but it was your post:

Here's what the FBI report says in summary:

Moore thought that the customer had first come in at about 8:30, purchased two beers and returned later to buy two pieces of Peco Brittle.

and then

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

was it 8:30 as the FBI reports or 9:30 as you assume?

David,

if the incident happened on Friday, it happened at 9:30 as that is when Worthington entered on Friday. But Moore let slip it actually happened the day before Oswald was shot by Ruby. If Saturday is correct, then his recall of it happening at 8:30 may be right.

and if it was Saturday and the ID was an "Oswald" - which is Moore's statement AS RECORDED BY THE FBI (who if anything could be counted upon to skew any reference AWAY from if being another Oswald), not Armstrong's - that's an even better case for multiple Oswald's... ignoring all the evidence that supports other "Oswalds"... leading up to Robert Vinson's account... just does not make your interpretation of Moore's testimony as likely as there being a second Oswald.

Who is ignoring the evidence? not me. The report states "further identification of this individual as Oswald, Moore said, arose when he had seen Oswald on television in the course of his travel from the Dallas Police Department prior to his being shot by Ruby. At this time, he recalled the name and the identification of Oswald as the customer in his store the previous day." Am I right in assuming this has been missed or ignored in all other assessments of this document?

With regard to the ID: I have already dealt with that: he had a long time prior to the interview to get the month and year of birth of Oswald from the newspapers. Take that recall of the birth date away and there is zip evidence any ID was shown. In regard to his memory... you can't have it both ways and say he misremembered the day it happened but had perfect recall of Oswald's date of birth from the driver's licence.

Here is the quote from the report on the ID issue: "Identification of ID as Oswald, Moore said, arose when he asked for identification as to proof of age for purchase of two bottles of beer. Moore said he figured the man was over 21 but the store frequently requires proof by reason of past difficulties with local authorities for serving beer to minors."

Be honest. How many little stores like that back in '63 do you think asked someone who looked over 21 for ID? He fabricated the request to look at the ID and then came up with an excuse why he asked for it when it would have been common knowledge that such requests were rarer than assassins buying guns through the mails.

But I'll be back with a response line by line as you so graciously offered me - and I appreciate your time and manner Greg - as well as respect your position... as long as you support it with more than you interpretation or assessmento f the info but with the info itself - taken with other info in the same area - and offer your conclusions.

[edit done here]

I have supported it with a thorough analysis of the evidence -- and the ONLY evidence is the FBI reports. This is far more support than offered any where else. Others have put the cart before the horse by virtue of the information being left unfiltered through any thought processes and simply slotted straight into a pre-determined theory . I'm not offering a theory. I'm offering an analysis based solution.

If you think others have better support their positions on the "Jiffy Store Incident" with the evidence, I'd like to see that additional evidence. And if you believe I am wrong that those others have indeed given due thought and consideration to the contents of the two documents, then please explain how they missed such a simple thing as Moore placing the event on Saturday?

[end edit]

Surely you can't argue that the OSWALD recorded on tape and film at the Mexican Embassy was actually Oswald... Someone used his name... why? and how is that any different from someone using his ID the morning of the assassination other than to confuse and stick out like a sore thumb...?

David, one provable example of someone impersonating Oswald does not validate all other sightings. That just defies logic.

DJ

Edited February 20, 2011 by Greg Parker

[Guest Tom Scully]

....Anyone remember "Lynette?"

Which reminds me of a particularly humorous anecdote.....

The story taken from the Middle Ages, [another epic period for

governments and institutions killing ants with sledgehammers];

regards an itinerant traveler who chances upon a village on one his lengthy

travels, as he approaches he sees the Devil himself sitting on a ledge on the outskirts of the town.

Utterly incredulous, the traveler says "what are you doing here?

I would have thought you would have been in the village

creating havoc within the populace, and inciting them to acts

of evil against one another." The Devil, shrugged his shoulders

and said, "they are doing quite well without me."

Translation: We have met the enemy and he is Us?

There is also the bitter, acrimonious [understatement]

feelings between supporters of the Lee Harvey Oswald

did it school,and believers of a conspiracy.

In all due respects, the defenders of the Warren Commission

are afforded the same rights to their opinion's, interpretations

of fact here as well, the only stipulation is that they

show some idea of understanding basic rules of civility

and honesty.

I have been trying to contribute for ages here,

pointing out areas of interest, suspicious relationships

and factual obscurities which, I believe deserve more attention

One of these areas is cryptology; I have devoted

an entire thread on the subject, which is about as active a

thread as a dormant volcano, and yet even though, as

recent a post as yesterday where Luis Castillo, the MKULTRA-like

assassin sent in 1967 to possibly kill Ferdinand Marcos,

as government hypnosis experts determined, was associated with codes.

As were William Dalzell, graduates of Bletchley Park's

Government Code and Cipher School, who later

were associated with President Kennedy's cabinet...

including William Bundy, brother of McGeorge Bundy

JMWAVE certainly had an interest in the subject.

Reel 21, Folder C - AMMUG-1 PRODUCTION FILE pg 10

Found in: HSCA Segregated CIA Collection (microfilm - reel 21: AMMUG)

CASTILLIAN ENGLISH CUBAN

To use cipher codes Cryptoanalysis Cryptorym pseudonym Code system Cipher Key

code To code a message Decipher decode Cover story Agent 'spotting Guard watch

http://www.maryferre...21&relPageId=10

Or

Home/Archive/Documents/JFK Assassination Documents/JFK Documents - Central Intelligence Agency

HSCA Segregated CIA Collection/HSCA Segregated CIA Collection, Box 17/

NARA Record Number: 104-10075-10220

JMWAVE CABLE RE CIPHER MATERIAL [11/28/63]

http://www.maryferre....do?docId=40681

FOLLOWING CIPHER MATERIAL ISSUED JMWAVE CO FOR RESUPPLY AMCOG-3,

ODLONG PBRUMEN AMCOG

SICPLAN VALON: DECIPHER PADS AP1212, 6819, AP1213 3365 AND AP1214, 3819

But apparently new research is not much of a priority to some people here, unless it dovetails

nicely with their own preconceived ideas re same.

Cheers

Robert, if I constitute a considerable portion of your regular audience here on The Forum, I have to warn you that you are preaching to the choir.

I am not convinced, as a result of my experience participating

here, that the common goal is to solve the two related murder mysteries and the conspiracies related to them and then to the obstructions of the official investigations of these murders.

I hope John Simkin is still privately interested, even though he has changed his public position.

I read about the efforts of other members concentrating on lines of inquiry which seem at best, to hold the potential of low impact results. On this page there is a discussion about a convenience store clerk who may have witnessed Oswald purchasing beer at a key time of day. Then, there is the McWatters bus controversy. My reaction is that Dallas County Deputy Roger Craig should have been a "case closed" witness, by any potential of testimonial impact.

Mindful of the Roger Craig impeccability standard, what can a person rehashing the beer purchase or the bus ride, hope to achieve for their time and effort, related to impeaching or strengthening the testimony record of the witnesses of those events? Who will be persuaded to think differently about the entirety of the Warren Report, when the impact of Roger Craig's testimony is compared to the predicted effect of impeaching what Mary Bledsoe said, or by finding something to strengthen the testimony of the beer seller?

A similar inquiry aimed at impeaching the testimony of Wesley Frazier and his sister, at least is aimed at a big stakes, big potential component of the WC's conclusions...disconnect LHO from concealed transport of a rifle into the TSBD on 22 November, and maybe you've achieved a "break through" potential.

I appreciate that many potential contributors and evaluators of the research that actually does get posted on this Forum are not here to contribute or to post feedback. In some cases they are hoping to market what they learn, so they are not inclined to share it for free. Even Forum contributors who intend to share all they discover are probably constrained to one degree or another by obligations of confidentiality to sources, or because they decide some details are just too sensitive to share openly.

If all of the ambitions and concerns conflicting with this Forum just being a workshop devoted to collectively solving these murders and cover up are still insufficient to end all progress, as Robert points out, there is also the constraint of mindsets being so set in their ways that they are resistant to acceptance or consideration of new information.

I believe if you can raise suspiscions about the reliability of key, WC people like Earl Warren and Albert E. Jenner to an obvious enough degree, you may just generate enough additional doubt to make untenable the establishment view still enjoying a stranglehold on information sources such as.:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_harvey_oswald

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lee Harvey Oswald (October 18, 1939 – November 24, 1963) was an American man who, according to four government investigations,[n 1] assassinated John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States....

Above is what is aggressively maintained as a "neutral POV".

It begs to be laughed out of town, because such deliberately rigid misinformation cannot logically coexist in the same, online encyclopedia, as this.:

Let's see how long this edit is permitted to stay visible and reasonably intact, on its merits....will it be hours...or just minutes until the "minders" swoop in for the "kill"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby#Allegations_of_organized_crime_links

Jack Ruby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...Allegations of organized crime links...

...Within four hours of Ruby's arrest on November 24, 1963, a telegram sent from La Jolla, CA, was received at the Dallas city jail in support of Jack Ruby, under the names of Hal and Pauline Collins.[11] That telegram supports the Warren Commission exhibit (CE 1510), which names Hal Collins, Jr.[12][13] as a character reference listed by Jack Ruby on a Texas liquor license application.[14] In 1957, Hal Collin's sister, Mary Ann Collins,[15][16] had married Robert L. Clark,[17][18] the brother of former U.S. Attorney General and the then sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Tom C. Clark. Robert L. Clark was the former Dallas law partner of Maury Hughes.[19][20][21] Tom C. Clark advised newspaper columnist Drew Pearson in 1946 that the FBI had verified the claims[22][23] of James M. Ragen that Henry Crown and the Hilton Hotel chain controlled organized crime in Chicago.[24][25][26][27][28][29][30] Tom C. Clark selected Henry Crown's son, John as one of his two Supreme Court law clerks for the 1956 term,[31] and Tom Clark provided one of two recommendations to the Warren Commission to appoint Henry Crown's attorney, Albert E. Jenner, Jr.[32] as a senior assistant investigative counsel responsible for determining whether either Oswald or Ruby acted alone or conspired with others.[33]...

Here is additional support for the points detailed above.:

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=humphreys+%22master+fixer+of*%22&btnG=Search+Books#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks:1&q=%22luxurious+custom+tailor+shop+on+the+Magnificent+Mile*%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22luxurious+custom+tailor+shop+on+the+Magnificent+Mile*%22&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=e458fcba916dafce

Organized crime in Chicago: hearing before the Permanent ...

United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs. Permanent Subcommittee on

Investigations - 1983 - 224 pages - Snippet view

In 1959 the headquarters of the Chicago mob was located in a luxurious custom tailor shop on the Magnificent Mile on Michigan Avenue on the North Side of Chicago, the near North Side of Chicago. There, daily meetings took place of those people who were the leaders of the mob in Chicago at that time. They were Tony Accardo, Sam Giancana, Murray "The Camel" Humphreys, Gussie Alex, Les Kruse, Ralph Pierce, and

particularly Frank Ferraro, who was Giancana's underboss, the No. 2 man in the outfit at that time. We became aware, as we learned what was going on in that tailor shop, of the fact that there was a very close association between Murray Humphreys, who was the master fixer of the mob at that time, the successor to Jake Guzik, Greasy Thumb Guzik, and John D'Arco. John D'Arco at that time was the...

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=%22phone+surveillance%2C+which+remained+in+place*%22&btnG=Search+Books#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks:1&q=%22words+that+J.+Edgar+Hoover+found+the+solution+to*%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=e458fcba916dafce

J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets - Page 457

Curt Gentry - 2001 - 846 pages - Preview

phone surveillance, which remained in place undetected for five years, would teach the FBI more about organized crime than all the generations of bugs it sired. Names, dates, amounts. Judges, senators, congressmen, mayors, policemen. Murders, robberies, scams, voting frauds. According to William Brashler, the Chicago agents "heard from the hoods' own lips who had the power and how it was distributed, who put the fix in and where it was put, what decisions were made and who was affected, who had the solutions. They heard stories, anecdotes, family problems, even a history of mob decisions as told with relish by Murray Humphreys."47 Humphreys, who was known as "the Camel" or "the Hump," was the legal tactician of the Chicago syndicate and one of the mob's greatest political fixers. And it was from Humphreys's own words that J. Edgar Hoover found the solution to an old mystery: how the former attorney general, and current Supreme Court justice, Tom Clark had been bribed to grant parole to the four Chicago Mafia...

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=Accardo%3A+the+genuine+godfather+humphreys+clark&btnG=Search+Books#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=1&tbs=bks:1&q=I+heard+Humphreys+discuss+this+situation+more+than+once.+He+bragged+how+he+had+gotten+to+Tom+Clark%2C+then+the+Attorney+General&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=e458fcba916dafce

Accardo: the genuine godfather

William F. Roemer - 1995 - 484 pages

For a short time, Ricca, true name DeLucia, took over as the Outfit boss. But soon he was convicted in the Hollywood Extortion Case. He and his fellow convicts in that case would be sentenced to ten years.

But in one of the major scandals of the Truman Administration, they were released immediately

as they became eligible for parole — after just three years, even though there had been a superseding indictment hanging over them which mandated they would not be paroled.

I heard Humphreys discuss this situation more than once. He bragged how he had gotten to Tom Clark, then the Attorney General, who would later be rewarded by being appointed by Truman to the Supreme Court and whose son, Ramsey Clark, would be successor down the line as Attorney General

http://www.amazon.com/Accardo-Godfather-William-Roemer-Jr/dp/product-description/0804114641

Accardo: The Genuine Godfather [Mass Market Paperback]

William F. Roemer Jr.

...Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Nicknamed "Joe Batters" by Al Capone because he beat two thugs to death with a baseball bat, Tony Accardo

(1906-1992) would go on to impress his mob superiors by using "Chicago Choppers"? Thompson submachine guns?

at the infamous St. Valentine's Day Massacre in 1929. After the demise of Capone, Accardo quickly moved to

the forefront of the mob hierarchy, becoming a capo under Capone's successor, Frank Nitti, and concentrating on gambling operations. Roemer, who exhibits a grudging respect for Accardo, alleges without documentation that the mob under Accardo bought off U.S. Attorney General Tom Clark with an appointment to the Supreme Court. Also covered are Accardo's appearance before the Kefauver Committee in 1951, where he was cited for contempt of Congress; his Chicago mob's late move into Las Vegas; his "retirement" to

consiglieri in 1957; how J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were finally forced to join the battle against organized crime after the infamous Apalachin, N.Y., mob meeting in 1957; Accardo's prohibition on selling narcotics; and his ordered "hit" on Sam Giancana. Roemer (The Enforcer), former senior agent on the organized crime squads of the Chicago FBI, has written a colorful biography rich in fact, anecdote and speculation. Photos. Major ad/promo.

Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information,

Inc.

http://www.google.com/#q=%22Celano%27s+Tailor+Shop%22&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=lnt&sa=X&psj=1&ei=vrlgTcrcAYmjtgeMmqn5Cw&ved=0CA8QpwUoBQ&bav=on.1,or.&fp=bc3757e578a738f7

USREPORTS WIRETAPS ON CRIME CHIEF

‎

Pay-Per-View - Chicago Tribune - Mar 21, 1970

The prosecutors said Cerone's conversations in the Cbicago area were at Celano's tailor shop 620 N Michigan av in a room at the Lake Tower inn 600 N Lake ...

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=bks:1&q=fbi+%22little+al%22+tailor++&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=fbi+%22little+al%22+tailor++&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=e458fcba916dafce

Louis Armstrong: an extravagant life

Laurence Bergreen - 1998 - 564 pages - Snippet view

Humphreys's every move was shadowed by the FBI, and many of his supposedly secret business meetings were surreptitiously ... nicknamed "Little Al," after Al Capone, planted in Celano's Custom Tailor Shop at 620 North Michigan Avenue.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=bks:1&q=%22*the+Armory+Lounge:+the+other%2C+called+%22Little+Al%22%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=e458fcba916dafce

Newsweek: Volume 122, Issues 18-26

1993 - Snippet view

... in the mobster's favorite drinking place, the Armory Lounge: the other, called "Little Al" after Al Capone, in mob heaquarters in a custom tailoring shop at 620 N. Michigan. The mobsters were "gleeful," Roemer recalls. ...

If David Lifton is consistent, his strong support for the reliability of Curt Gentry's, unrelated FBI files research also published in the book I quoted from above, should persuade Mr. Lifton to support what I have put together.:

...Everything I am saying above is laid out, chapter and verse, in chapter 28 of Kurt Gentry's 1991 book, "J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and His Secrets". Every freshman legislature rated a file, and those files were "kept in the office of [FBI official] Lou Nichols, who handled Congressional liason." ...

...Tom,

You've searched out and posted a number of interesting clips (and thankyou for that), but none of it changes the main point I was making.

First of all, the documents Gentry used were apparently obtained from the FBI, under the FOIA. So there is no reason to assume a tainted provenance. What Gentry obtained--and then wrote about (in some detail)--was the 600 plus page FBI file, just as it would have existed in 1960. Without such a file, it is all journalistic rumor and gossip. The existence of such a file makes all the difference, politically.

Second: Anything written years (and even decades) after that, is largely irrelevant to the point I was making--which is that the FBI files permit us to get a fuller understanding of what was probably in what perhaps should be called the "blackmailer's toolbox," circa, July, 1960. And the answer is: a real bombshell....

My main point is a suggestion that you compare what you are pursuing to my "break through" example, above. My contributions to the example are finding Drew Pearson's October 1963 assertion that prominent Chicago businessmen who are "household names", still control the mob, and comparing the disclosures in the posthumously published Drew Pearson Diaries, (1949-1959), that Pearson claimed Tom Clark told him in 1946 that the "household names" were Crown, Hilton, and Annenberg. I discovered that Tom Clark nonetheless appointed Crown's son as his law clerk, that Albert Jenner had hired this law clerk a short time later and later made him a law partner, that Tom Clark was one of two names Earl Warren said approved of placing Albert Jenner on the WC investigative staff, and that Jenner had represented Frank Darling in the 1953 investigative hearings of the Dorfmans, and Jenner's firm

filled in for the Dorfman and Teamster Pension Fund Attorney, Stanford Clinton, a Pritzker law partner, with Jenner and Block representing the Teamster Fund in originating Hotel construction loans to the Pritzkers.

I think I've proved my discoveries, to the extent it is possible to do so. I've made a new dent of undetermined size in the credibility of the WC and the findings in its report.

I do not claim a "break through" and no one else is telling me I have achieved one. I've discovered the association of Henry Crown's executive, Patrick H. Hoy with the Byfields and Irv Kupcinet, the Byfield association with JFK himself, through Glen Ora, the Byfield sister-in-law in the Braga family, Byfield, Jr. in the wedding of William HG Fitzgerald and Annilese Petschek, and Byfield's widowed, second wife's marriage to Robert S. McNamara.

None of this new information seems to even raise an eyebrow in the community, except an interest from Bill Kelly. All of the above is well supported, and the leads need more attention.

What are you working on, what is its potential in helping to discredit the WC and its "work"? Is proving your discoveries a possibility? When will any of your "stuff" be ready to edit into wikipedia articles? I'd be happy to help anyone who has an idea for a wikipedia article edit, make it happen.

Edited February 20, 2011 by Tom Scully

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I've made a new dent of undetermined size in the credibility of the WC and the findings in its report.

THe Warren Commission has not enjoyed much credibility with the intelligent public, especially after Epstein's INQUEST, which showed that "most of the commissioners were absent most of the time."

No rational person would believe a verdict rendered by jurors who were absent for most of the trial.

[David Josephs]

First off… While I have read parts of Armstrong’s work I am not intimate with the details and I certainly do not imply that the other OSWALD was the Harvey to the arrested Lee or vice versa…

What I am saying is that there is abundant testimony from a variety of witnesses that a man matching Oswald’s description was seen in and around Dallas not only on the 22nd but in the weeks prior as well.

From Unspeakable p.286-303…. Wise, White, Burroughs, Haire and Vinson all saw this other person on the 22nd…

Greg,

you wrote:

One further thing Moore said - the individual had been nervous while in the shop. Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone? What it DOES sound like is an under age kid whose just bought beer and is nervous about getting caught.

I can't believe anyone assumed this was actually Oswald... that's the whole point. The description is similar to the man seen taken out the BACK of the Texas Theater in handcuffs and driven off in a police car...

Now I'm thoroughly confused, David. Here is part of what was posted as being Armstrong's words: "The FBI interviewed Fred Moore who said Lee Oswald entered the Jiffy store on Industrial Blvd at 8:30 a.m. and bought two beers-while Harvey Oswald was working at the Book Depository.

So the answer to your disbelief that anyone could believe it was Oswald is – Armstrong said it was Oswald (Lee Harvey).

That is NOT MY belief. I thought I made it clear that I believe it was an under age kid.

With all due respect… you “made it clear that (you) BELIEVE” from your interpretation of the testimony… it was a kid… you are entitled to an opinion yet a person, obviously not the LHO working at the TSBD on the 22nd, was nervous – and given who he may have been, nervous sounds about right – it was going to be a busy day for this person… in my interpretation of the statement.

Moore states the name on the ID as Oswald… the description is very much like Oswald, and he came back again later… to make another impression. And please stop bouncing back and forth on the time...

It seems to me that you are trying very hard to make what Moore says, not what he says.

The question is "why is ANYONE showing an OSWALD ID other than Oswald?" and one that may have had "H. Lee Oswald" on it.

I don't know that anyone did show ID. The FBI report is dated Dec 2 so Moore had plenty of time to obtain Oswald's date of birth from the papers. He lied because typically, those types of shops do not ask for ID – particularly if the person looks like they "might" be old enough – and even when they do ask – they will typically accept any old thing as valid. Moore was dealing with the FBI. He said he asked for ID because they had previously been caught selling to minors. That, to me, sounds like he is giving a reason for asking for ID when it would be common knowledge with law enforcement that they don't, as a rule, do that. CYA. (I can just imagine it... "You asked for ID? Get outa here!" with Moore replying, well yes, sir. You see, we had been caught before selling to minors....") How many times had they been caught (he seems to suggest more than once)? How many times did it take getting caught before they decided it wasn't worth it any more and they started asking for ID? What were the penalties they paid on those other occasions?

This whole paragraph is nothing but conjecture on your part Greg… You ask good questions yet if what Moore said was recorded correctly by the FBI… the event occurs at 8:30 and again before 9:30 when Moore’s boss arrives. He even mentions H. Lee Oswald – are you claiming they referred to him as such that weekend so that Moore could have picked up on that name? Please cite the source.

ASSUMPTION of CYA is also interesting Greg… but this is really not just some isolated incidence and while your assumption of “follow up questioning by the FBI” is also interesting… but sadly, NOT what happened or what was recorded. If all we are going to discuss is your assumptions of what he said as they exist in a vacuum – unrelated to anything else – why bother?

Like discussing the backyard pic as real or not even though we know Oswald never had the rifle, the rifle doesn’t match. etc... what’s the point?

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/JA/DR/.ja-ex34.htmlhttp://www.acorn.net...R/.ja-ex34.html

John Armstrong theorizes this was Lee Oswald's wallet, not Harvey's,

perhaps containing the same license shown to store clerk Fred Moore hours

earlier when Lee bought two beers then some "peco" brittle. A Texas

driver's license belonging to "Lee Oswald" turned up at the Texas

There you go. According to Armstrong, it was Lee Oswald – not according to me.

Department of Public Safety the following week. Aletha Frair, an employee

saw and handled Oswald's Texas driver's license Lee, who drove; not

Harvey, who didn't. Six other employees Ray Sundy, Joyce Bostic, Inez

Laake, Gayle Scott, Peggy Smith and Mrs. Ernie Isaacs also saw Lee

Oswald's driver's license. They noted it was dirty and worn as though it

had been carried in a billfold. The license was the main topic of

discussion in their office for quite a while. Mrs. Lee Bozarth, an

employee of the Texas Department of Public Safety, stated categorically

that she knew from direct personal experience that there was a DPS

driver's license file for Lee Harvey Oswald. The file had been pulled

shortly after the assassination. Lee Oswald drove, and had a valid Texas

driver's license. Harvey Oswald, the man under arrest at 2 pm, November

22, did not drive, and did not have a license.

But did he not put in some paperwork at some stage? Going form memory.

Where do you get the impression the LHO walked off the job with any regularity and stayed away for well longer than any normal break time would be allowed.

I never said he DID. I said it was possible. He did the same in New Orleans, in case you're not aware of it. But to reiterate, I DO NOT believe this was Lee Oswald, or anyone deliberately impersonating Lee Oswald, so what is theoretically possible really does not matter to me here.

Fair enough Greg… but you not believing its possible does not make it so. First you discuss his walking off the job and drinking beer at 8:30 then you say it was not Oswald... and as I’ve said already – I agree, it was not Oswald... but based on the testimony it was just as likely the ID said H. Lee Oswald as your belief that it didn’t.

Funny how much you sound like the FBI/SS though Greg.... 3 bullets, no more... don’t care what you saw, heard or say. So Moore’s wrong because you want him to be? You going to say the same about Odio as well?

that he drank beer in the early morning.... that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

Lee Oswald was known to drink beer in the Marines and in NO. But if it wasn't Oswald at the Jiffy Store, what does it matter?

that he would have acted nervous buying beer and calm when a cop points a gun at him...

How could you take the rhetorical "Does that sound like Lee Oswald to anyone?" as indicating I thought him being nervous buying a beer sounded like an accurate description? Did I not then indicate it sounded more like a minor buying a beer?

Again and again Greg.... rhetorical questions about LHO at the Jiffy Store when you already acknowledge he was not there... and we all agree that we was not there.

No Greg, the person in the store was not LHO the TSBD employee...

Agreed.

Mr. GIVENS. Well, I first saw him on the first floor.

Mr BELIN. About what time was that?

Mr. GIVENS. Well, about 8:30.

Jarman, James Earl TSBD employee

The first time I saw Lee Oswald on Friday, November 22, 1963 was about 8:15 a.m. He was filling orders on the first floor.

A little after 9:00 a.m. Lee Oswald asked me what all the people were doing standing on the street.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

Truly, Roy TSBD Superintendent

Arrives at work around 8am and remembers seeing Oswald already working on the first floor. They exchange Hello's

Very friendly boss, but I don't see the significance here.

Simply supporting our agreed upon – He was not there – statement. And whoever was, was there at 8:30 not 9:30... and back again by 9:00. Givens and Jarman’s testimony support this. Roy seeing him at 8am and Givens at around 8:30 suggest he did not leave – as we agree.

My guess regarding Moore's Boss withholding the Jewish name comment may be on the same order as Moore makeing sure he says he was asking for ID... CYA.

How does that work? Is mentioning a Jewish name incriminating? Enlighten me! Isn't it much more likely it wasn't said at that particular time because - apart from anything else - "Lee Oswald" is not a Jewish name?

Whether something "makes more sense" is simple conjecture, right? You haven't anything that would suggest that other than Rubenstein being so much more Jewish sounding than Oswald the comment was or wasn't ever delivered... an interesting conjecture none the less.

Conjecture based on one actually being a Jewish name and the other, not – and the fact that the Ruby slaying of Oswald gets mentioned as a reference point for when the beer drinking took place (i.e. the day before). And then of course, there is also the fact that Worthington did not remember it. Your conjecture as to why Worthington denied remembering it needs further fleshing out as it makes no sense to me at all.

Your employee makes what could be, in 1963, a somewhat racist comment and you’re confused as to why Worthington might not want to mention it? Just as believable as the man with the Oswald ID being an underage boy. You want to hang your hat on Worthington not remembering what Moore said about LEE OSWALD being a good Jewish name as a complete negation of his testimony? Seems a bit of an overplay on that point in my opinion.

“on the previous day” was not necessarily something that MOORE said as opposed to what Barry writes as a description.... adds more confusion – doesn’t it? Couldn’t have been Oswald so make sure the report is as ambiguous as possible...

The man sees a DL with H. Lee Oswald, 3/10/39... and then recognizes the man from TV over the weekend.

Odio saw him months before and also remembered him from the TV... so do a number of other witnesses... if you want to simply shrug Moore off, nothing I can do. But if you want to read about the entire day and who was seen and who looked like Oswald and where he went and what he did... then look back a few weeks and see the multiple Oswald sightings – incriminating sightings – I think you may see this in a different perspective.

I also want to say that of course it is possible the entire thing was made up... there were many leads claiming to have seen Oswald – at some point though Greg, connected evidence starts to trump assumption.

We as a research community are getting ever closer to the reality that multiple Oswalds were obviously at play in the months, weeks, days and the day of the assassination.

Are you also saying it was Oswald who was at the shooting range, gun shop, gets into that refrigeration guy's truck* to tell that same "shoot the president with a rifle" story..., makes the calls from Mexico City, etc...

I don't think so...

All of those episodes need to assessed on their own merit – just as I have done with this. Whether none, one or all of those other episodes turned out true, they have no bearing on THIS one being true.

I have to disagree there Greg. If a pattern emerges that Oswald is being impersonated – and a VERY STRONG PATTERN EMERGES when we look at all these separate incidences... and yet another incidence occurs that ultimately emerges as a pattern for the day (buying beer/candy, men seen on the 6th floor with rifles at 12:15, Craig seeing him getting into a car, (pretty much proved he wasn’t on the bus) seen entering the theater first at 1:05 buying the popcorn at 1:15 all the while Tippit is murdered, seen being ushered out the BACK of the theater, being seen in a red falcon at 2pm, being seen getting on an undocumented US transport plane) and then add the different people and places an Oswald knew and stayed with, etc in the weeks prior, all intertwined with Cubans and CIA....

Now, when someone says a man with an Oswald ID is seen the morning of the assassination mere blocks from the assassination spot – and the rest of the day ultimately plays out as continue to learn... I think there is a significant bearing on this incident being truthful.... much more so than your underage/CYA assumptions

I've read your post a couple times now and still do not see how you determine Moore's story is a waste of time and Armstrong's use pathetic... given all this other evidence

What evidence? What you have is the say so of one man of whom you know nothing. All we do know is that his manager did not support the only part of his story he actually may have been able to support, had it been true. Apart from that, we have Moore placing the incident on the Saturday – not the Friday, along with his inability to ID Oswald as the man.

Your assumptions of the testimony. Not how I read it. AND NOT REALLY THE POINT OF MY ORIGINAL POST which had to do with the emerging proof that two or more Oswalds had been in play for many months. The HSCA could not get away from Odio’s testimony – Oswald was in the company of Cubans months before the assassination. Very inconvenient.

So if you are looking for me to agree that the Jiffy Store sightings may NOT have been of an Oswald... I agree.

But MAY NOT is most definitely not WAS NOT... Your assumptions are just as fragile as Moore’s sighting... I am more than willing to leave it at that. I think you are saying that you feel that proof of multiple Oswalds should be stronger than Moore’s statement, or are you saying that Moore’s statement should not even be considered because of what you describe as the inconsistencies? Just sounds awfully suspect to dismiss what may be indicative of a conspiracy for the reasons you name.

If the idea had been to "create and cause more confusion in the aftermath of the assassination and/or to establish a conspiracy was in the works", then the plan failed miserably here. Moore said there were others in the shop, but does your version of "Lee Oswald" stay in the shop to drink his beers (as Moore indicated folk usually did) to create a scene that they all would recall? No. He nervously leaves to drink them – just like a minor would who didn't want anyone taking too much notice of him while he drank.

Assumptions Greg... pure assumption on your part. I can just as easily assume his buying beer at 8:30 – which required ID – and then to return for Candy... left more than enough of a memory for Mr. Moore – whether you accept it as such or not. And what you describe as “nervous” does not even appear as a statement attributed to Moore – sorry if I don’t accept FBI reports on face value.... Seems that ANYTHING could have been and was written on these reports that had NOTHING to do with what was said.

My assumption now.

Moore had an under-age drinker on Saturday morning. The drinker left so as not to be noticed. Just as he was leaving, Worthington entered from the back. Moors says something to Worthington along the lines of "there goes another kid buying beer". Over the next week, he dramatizes this episode, telling people it was Oswald. Someone contacts the FBI to report it. Moore then spins his story to them when they call around, but realizing the potential trouble he could get in for making up the story, he refuses to ID Oswald. He also gratuitously adds a comment he made on the Sunday about Rubinstein and instead claims he made it about Oswald on a previous day. Conjecture to be sure – but far more grounded in what we actually know about the incident than anything else presented.

Nice Story – and he did not refuse, just said he was thinner in the face.... Looks to me that the NO photo does show him a bit fuller in the face... no?

I look forward to your response.

DJ

*edit: not sure if it was a refrig repairman's truck... but the man goes back and tells the story to a friend and ultimately is severely beaten... if I remember correctly

Doesn't matter. It is not part of this episode. That story may or may not be true. This one is not.

edit #2 - one more thing Greg... if you are right and the Oswald sighting was Saturday morning, while Oswald was in jail, wouldn't that seem a bit strange to you?

I never said it was Oswald there on a Saturday morning. I said the episode happened on the Saturday morning. And I said Saturday because it is what Moore said.

“on the previous day” is what the report says... not “yesterday”... was Friday previous to Sunday? Yes. Sorry but I cannot conclude that this means Saturday when the entire rest of the statement points to Friday... simply a generalization in my book

Your problem appears to be that you have started with a conclusion and now you are trying to hammer all the bits into that. I simply assessed the situation based on what is in the FBI report and let it lead wherever it may.

thank you for defining “my problem” Greg.... your assessment is highly speculative and filled with assumptions... my interpretation fits with the events of the day and has other substantiating evidence for a second Oswald being in Dallas that morning. That day. Dismiss what you will...

Verdict: Moore was likely trying to puff up his importance among family and friends and spun a story around a kid buying beer on a Saturday, claiming it was Oswald buying beer on Friday. He has no support for this claim from any other source – indeed odd if this was a deliberate an attempt to create a scene – and one part is in fact denied by the person (Worthington) he claimed could verify it (the comment about the name). He had plenty of time to get Oswald's date of birth from newspapers, so I don't see how that can be used as supporting his story. He was then left in a situation when confronted by the FBI, of having to confirm the incident or look like the fabricator he actually was, but at the same time, get himself off the hook by refusing to ID a person he had never actually eyeballed to begin with.

Try looking at the evidence without the H & L lens. Your vision may improve. At the very least, it would stop all the confusion about who we are both talking about. That is to say, when I refer to Lee Oswald, I am referring to the historical person – the one who was in the Marines, lived in NO and handed out leaflets and later got a job in Dallas at the TSBD. I Know H & L supporters cannot do that, but if you would kindly ( a ) stop assuming I am talking about two different people and ( b ) when you refer to the person you believe was Lee Oswald, call him just that, and when you are referring to the mythical "Harvey" please refer to him as a possible double, or something along those lines. Just trying to make the discussion a little easier and more comprehensible, is all...

As I stated – I do not have an opinion one way or an other regarding Harvey and Lee per Armstrong. I do not come to this discussion with that mindset... I believe we have put to bed the idea that whoever was in that Jiffy Store was NOT LHO, the man killed by Ruby 2 days later. But to completely dismiss the possibility based on your interpretation of the words in the FBI report is too much of a stretch...

You tell an interesting tale none the less... but the person having an Oswald ID is just as likely if not more so than your scenario... I don’t have to assume anything either, just take his words at face value – the evidence you claim to produce does nothing to support the idea the person was underage, did not show an Oswald ID and did not return and leave before Worthington arrived... your explanation requires we ASSUME quite a lot... possible for sure... plausible... ??

I just look at the rest of the day’s events and what we come to know as evidence and testimony from those who we would say are reliable – There was more than one person representing themselves as Oswald... plain and simple...

Greg,

I want to give your reply the thought it deserves..

but it was your post:

Here's what the FBI report says in summary:

Moore thought that the customer had first come in at about 8:30, purchased two beers and returned later to buy two pieces of Peco Brittle.

and then

Not sure what you're trying to prove here. The incident at the store was at 9:30 am and according to google, it's a 13 minute walk. My experience with google however, is that the estimates are always conservative. But 13 minutes still gets him there by 9:30. Not that it matters. We're talking theoretical possibilities only. It wasn't him. And it didn't happen on the Friday.

was it 8:30 as the FBI reports or 9:30 as you assume?

David,

if the incident happened on Friday, it happened at 9:30 as that is when Worthington entered on Friday. But Moore let slip it actually happened the day before Oswald was shot by Ruby. If Saturday is correct, then his recall of it happening at 8:30 may be right.

and if it was Saturday and the ID was an "Oswald" - which is Moore's statement AS RECORDED BY THE FBI (who if anything could be counted upon to skew any reference AWAY from if being another Oswald), not Armstrong's - that's an even better case for multiple Oswald's... ignoring all the evidence that supports other "Oswalds"... leading up to Robert Vinson's account... just does not make your interpretation of Moore's testimony as likely as there being a second Oswald.

Who is ignoring the evidence? not me. The report states "further identification of this individual as Oswald, Moore said, arose when he had seen Oswald on television in the course of his travel from the Dallas Police Department prior to his being shot by Ruby. At this time, he recalled the name and the identification of Oswald as the customer in his store the previous day." Am I right in assuming this has been missed or ignored in all other assessments of this document?

Addressed above....There are no quotes around that statement Greg and I feel you are assuming a conclusion that may not be accurate.... Moore’s report state 8:30 am, Friday, Nov-22-63 on both page 1 and 2. Worthington’s statement states early morning, Friday Nov-22-63, prior to the assassination of the president

With regard to the ID: I have already dealt with that: he had a long time prior to the interview to get the month and year of birth of Oswald from the newspapers. Take that recall of the birth date away and there is zip evidence any ID was shown. In regard to his memory... you can't have it both ways and say he misremembered the day it happened but had perfect recall of Oswald's date of birth from the driver's licence.

”Take away the recall of the birth date” ?? why? Because you want it to go away? Moore saying the man said, “Sure I got ID.” And He did not misremember the date Greg... that is a poor assumption on your part – three times and from corroborating witnesses place the event Friday morning 11-22-63. If Moore or Worthington expressed any doubt about that don’t you suppose the FBI would have recorded it that way? Such as, “Either Friday or Saturday morning... Mr Moore claims......” Read the report again Greg – it was obviously Friday and Moore obviously saw and remembered something. Is it perfect? No. But much more substantial that you are trying to make it appear.

Here is the quote from the report on the ID issue: "Identification of ID as Oswald, Moore said, arose when he asked for identification as to proof of age for purchase of two bottles of beer. Moore said he figured the man was over 21 but the store frequently requires proof by reason of past difficulties with local authorities for serving beer to minors."

Be honest. How many little stores like that back in '63 do you think asked someone who looked over 21 for ID? He fabricated the request to look at the ID and then came up with an excuse why he asked for it when it would have been common knowledge that such requests were rarer than assassins buying guns through the mails.

Assumptions again Greg... nothing but your suppositions.

But I'll be back with a response line by line as you so graciously offered me - and I appreciate your time and manner Greg - as well as respect your position... as long as you support it with more than you interpretation or assessmento f the info but with the info itself - taken with other info in the same area - and offer your conclusions.

[edit done here]

I have supported it with a thorough analysis of the evidence -- and the ONLY evidence is the FBI reports. This is far more support than offered any where else. Others have put the cart before the horse by virtue of the information being left unfiltered through any thought processes and simply slotted straight into a pre-determined theory . I'm not offering a theory. I'm offering an analysis based solution.

If you think others have better support their positions on the "Jiffy Store Incident" with the evidence, I'd like to see that additional evidence. And if you believe I am wrong that those others have indeed given due thought and consideration to the contents of the two documents, then please explain how they missed such a simple thing as Moore placing the event on Saturday?

Because he obviously did not place the event on Saturday as you are interpreting, and as I referenced above. Taking “the previous day” to be a literal statement against 3 references to Friday morning Nov 22, 1963 in the same FBI report you are quoting... why aren’t the 3 other references enough to show you that “the previous day” was not meant to mean Saturday... but looks like an expression of speech.

If the FBI agent who recorded this believed he meant Saturday... after spelling out “Friday morning Nov 22, 1963” three times would he not mention that to show how impossible Oswald being at the store Saturday would have been – obviously a mistake... but that’s not what the report says Greg. So once you explain those three specific date references away versus your assumption and interpretation of a word I’ll have a better understanding of why you choose only parts of the FBI reports to make your point and not the entire thing.

[end edit]

Surely you can't argue that the OSWALD recorded on tape and film at the Mexican Embassy was actually Oswald... Someone used his name... why? and how is that any different from someone using his ID the morning of the assassination other than to confuse and stick out like a sore thumb...?

David, one provable example of someone impersonating Oswald does not validate all other sightings. That just defies logic.

Never said it validated it Greg, what I said was that if you put this report in the context of what we now know was going on with Oswald being impersonated and incriminated that day and in the weeks before, it is not so much of a stretch, from that report, to conclude the person in the Jiffy Store that morning bought the only thing that required ID.

One point on your side that you did not present was the physical description of this person included the age 21. If Moore sees the license and also suggests he sees a birth year of 1939... one would assume either he or the FBI agent would know that adds to 24.

Just trying to understand it myself as well Greg. I found that a bit odd yet the repetition of the Friday morning time and date points to the event happening on the 22nd.

To finish up – if we are looking at statements regarding Oswald and his whereabouts... Baker’s says he met a man “walking away from the stairs as we reached the 3rd and 4th floors”. Truly says the man works there... The lunchroom is on the 2nd floor and nowhere in this statement.... They testify to an entirely different scenario without repercussion.

IMO that was the Oswald look alike and when they found witnesses to the 2nd floor lunchroom and Oswald just sitting there... something got changed to put Baker and Truly in that room... although there is no evidence at all from that day to the day of the testimony that the lunchroom scene even happened.

Greg, thanks for the patience – life has been a bit busy and I’ve been working on this an and off the past few days.

Of course we wish this was a bit more cut and dried but nothing about this case is. If you feel the incident was not an Oswald sighting I respect that... as I’ve said and agreed to – there are some inconsistencies... yet I feel there are just as many if not more consistencies both in the Moore’s story and in the context of the assassination to believe him.

DJ

[Greg Parker]

David,

I'll try and make this as easy as possible for you.

THE CASE FOR IT BEING THE TSBD OSWALD (WHICH AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMES A FRIDAY SIGHTING)

TIME OF DAY: "FRED MOORE, 2611 Aster, Dallas, Texas, employed as a clerk at the Jiffy store, 310 South Industrial, Dallas, Texas, advised of the following concerning a report that he had waited on LEE HARVEY OSWALD as a customer at the Jiffy Store at about 8:30 a.m."

What you don't seem to understand is that 8:30 was not Moore's timing of it. That was only what the unknown informant stated to the FBI.

Here is what Moore said: "The timing of OSWALD'S presence in the store on the morning of Friday, November 22, 1963, Moore said was difficult to place. He came in and departed before the manager, GEORGE WORTHINGTON, came to work, usually that being between 9 a.m. and 10 p.m."

Worthington told the FBI that he "arrived at the store on this morning at about 9:30 a.m. He had entered from the rear as the person whom MOORE identified as OSWALD was leaving at the front. WORTHINGTON did not see this individual but learned about him from MOORE who did say something at the time..."

I make it 9:30 since it appears that Worthington just barely missed seeing the person leave. And we know that this was the first visit – that is – the visit in which the beer was purchased because Moore told the FBI that he remembered the ID because "WORTHINGTON, the store manager who came into the store as this individual left, that "LEE OSWALD" was a good Jewish name.

Please take careful note of the quote marks. None of that is based on any interpretation or assumption. If this incident happened on Friday, it happened at 9:30, taking the report at face value.

Now I could be wrong, but going from memory, there were no sightings of Oswald in the TSDB between 9 a.m and 10 a.m – or if there was one – the timing of it was uncertain or vague.

What you have to ignore in making this a Friday Oswald sighting is this from the report: "Further identification of of this individual as OSWALD, MOORE said, arose when he had seen OSWALD on television in the course of his travel from the Dallas Police Department prior to his being shot by RUBY. At this time, he recalled the name and identification of OSWALD as the customer in his store on the previous day." Your position that this could mean Friday is not commiserate with English grammar. If the report stated "on a previous day" you may have had a point. That could be any day prior you want or need it to be. But THE previous day means SATURDAY and ONLY SATURDAY. Your other objection (stated elsewhere) had already been addressed. This was an inadvertent slip.

Bottom line: If the incident happened on Friday and the person did have ID in the Name "Lee Oswald", there is no reason to assume it it was anyone other than the TSBD Oswald when Oswald is not properly accounted for at work. Furthermore as I have already explained, Lee Oswald had a history of disappearing from work for periods of time while employed at Riley's. He also had a history of having fake ID cards.

Do I actually believe that it was Oswald? No, I do not. All I am saying is that it is theoretically possible. Do I believe it was an Oswald impersonator? No. Is it theoretically possible it was an impersonator? Yes, but why posit a fake Oswald when it actually could have been the real one? Only one reason to do that: It helps support a particular pet theory.

*******

THE CASE FOR IT BEING SATURDAY:

In visiting Moore, the FBI was seeking information it had received that Moore had served Oswald on Friday at 8:30 am.

When interviewed, Moore put the time as actually having been at the time his boss arrived at work which was usually between 9 and 10. When interviewed, his boss said he had arrived at 9:30 that day and didn't see the person leave but recalled Moore saying something, though nothing about "Lee Oswald" being a good Jewish name.

I submit that 8:30 was what Moore had been telling friends/customers and/or relatives and that one of those people had then contacted the FBI with the "8:30" information.

However, by the time the FBI turned up, Moore had read that a little past 8:00 am was the time Oswald had arrived at work, so he moved his time forward from 8:30 to "between 9 and 10" to make it a less tight timeframe.

In essence, what we have is two times given for the initial beer purchase – 8:30 and 9:30. We also have two days given – Friday and Saturday.

Solution: The real incident occurred at around 8:30 am on Saturday and therefore could not have been Oswald. Nor does it make sense for any conspiracy to be bringing attention to a fake Oswald on a day when the real Oswald is in jail. That is flagging the the whole thing as a set-up probably perpetrated by an intelligence agency. And even a half hearted investigation of that possibility would point to CIA – not KGB or G2.

Moore, to perhaps pump up his self-worth, turned the virtual non-event Saturday incident into a Friday incident involving the hottest name in the news – Lee Oswald.

So what did happen on Saturday? Moore gives little clues in his statement. He had in the past been selling beer to underage teenagers. The person he served did not stay and drink inside like folk usually did, indicating that this person did not want to be noticed. Why? BECAUSE HE WAS UNDER AGE. The person came back within a half hour and purchased some Peco Brittle and this time stayed in the store "pacing nervously" as he ate. That he came back within half an hour indicates he drank the beer very close to the store, and I assume there was a little alleyway on one side where you could drink in relative privacy without being noticed. He went back in to chew on something to mask the smell of beer on his breath because he was worried it would be noticed when he went home. Moore did say something to Worthington, but it was most likely a joke about how nervous the kid was buying beer. Good enough reason for Worthington to "forget" exactly what had been said. The remark about a good Jewish name was most likely made on Sunday in relation to Ruby and got tied to this incident as it helped him recall the nervous beer drinking kid. In talking to the FBI, Moore's own nervousness caused him to slip up and reveal the correct day.

*******

Now, specifically in relation to some of your comments:

You said: "It seems to me that you are trying very hard to make what Moore says, not what he says."

No. That would be you. Moore never told the FBI it happened at 8:30. But you insist he did. Why?

You said: "Funny how much you sound like the FBI/SS though Greg.... 3 bullets, no more... don't care what you saw, heard or say. So Moore's wrong because you want him to be? You going to say the same about Odio as well?

Funny how you are now trying to suggest, on the one hand, that the FBI is dishonest, but on the other hand, the report concerning Moore is completely trustworthy.

The reality is, that I AM like the FBI in one respect. I have been trained in taking and interpreting statements.

As for Odio, again any genuine incident of someone impersonating Oswald has no bearing on this incident. By your logic, if an "Oswald" had been reported as roller skating nude down some otherwise deserted side street singing All things Bright and Beautiful and it was duly reported to the FBI, you would have to accept it as genuine and any interpretation of such an incident which adequately explains it in any fashion other than as a genuine Oswald impersonator sighting is to be dismissed with any and all arguments. no matter how contrived, ill-informed, or plain silly such protestations are.

You said: "I also want to say that of course it is possible the entire thing was made up... there were many leads claiming to have seen Oswald – at some point though Greg, connected evidence starts to trump assumption."

Firstly, it is an evaluation of an FBI report – not assumptions about it. Secondly, this incident cannot be tied to any other incident until such time as it can be proven to a reasonable degree to be truthful. And even then, such a connection to other incidents needs to be built far more carefully than it has been.

You said: "Assumptions Greg... pure assumption on your part. I can just as easily assume his buying beer at 8:30 – which required ID – and then to return for Candy... left more than enough of a memory for Mr. Moore – whether you accept it as such or not. And what you describe as "nervous" does not even appear as a statement attributed to Moore – sorry if I don't accept FBI reports on face value.... Seems that ANYTHING could have been and was written on these reports that had NOTHING to do with what was said.

My assumption now."

If the idea was to create a scene – which is the reason given for the sports-drome and Bolton Ford incidents, among others – then it failed miserably. Moore stated "Several other persons were in the store at the time..." yet none ever came forward. And our man, instead of swigging his beers inside like everyone else and creating a scene a-la all the other "impersonators", this lad slinks off to drink alone, unseen. Some "incident"!

As for the "nervous" comment... here is the quote: "The man seemed to be nervous while in the store pacing the aisles while eating the candy." I hope you're not going to posit THIS was the attempt to create a scene? Whose gonna take any notice of someone eating candy – even if they are pacing up and down nervously? Any scene creation would have been during the drinking. As I've said, this conjures up a youth who has just bought his first beers and is nervously trying to consume candy to mask it before going home. And we KNOW – we KNOW from Moore's own admission he had no qualms about selling beer to minors. Any statement to the effect that he no longer did such things was merely self-serving.

I do find it difficult to reconcile your statement that you don't take FBI reports at face value with your posts here which show – apart from some misreading – that is exactly what you have done.

You said: "One point on your side that you did not present was the physical description of this person included the age 21. If Moore sees the license and also suggests he sees a birth year of 1939... one would assume either he or the FBI agent would know that adds to 24."

Thank you David. I had noticed it early on, then forgot about it again.

You said: "To finish up – if we are looking at statements regarding Oswald and his whereabouts... Baker's says he met a man "walking away from the stairs as we reached the 3rd and 4th floors". Truly says the man works there... The lunchroom is on the 2nd floor and nowhere in this statement.... They testify to an entirely different scenario without repercussion."

FWIW, I think I was probably the original proponent of this scenario. There is still work being done on it, and I await those results.

You said: Greg, thanks for the patience – life has been a bit busy and I've been working on this an and off the past few days.

Of course we wish this was a bit more cut and dried but nothing about this case is. If you feel the incident was not an Oswald sighting I respect that... as I've said and agreed to – there are some inconsistencies... yet I feel there are just as many if not more consistencies both in the Moore's story and in the context of the assassination to believe him.

I can empathise with you here, David. It sometimes, (as it has here) takes hours for to do a post like this as I do it between customers, and other work commitments throughout the day. I do agree, it not cut and dry. Obviously, my preference, based on that personal view, differs from yours (and just about everyone else's) but I can live with that, and accept that there are other scenarios which are at least theoretically possible... regardless of how stridently I may sometimes put my case

[David Josephs]

Greg,

After first read I believe you are correct about the Jiffy Store... what did it was your comment about his lack of him making a scene like other genuine sightings....

and really, what does it accomplish. I kept turning pages in the 201 file thinking these reports might help... you know other sightings and comments... uhhh, not so much

Not really sure why I bit so hard into that one with you... but thanks for playing along

You have to admit though... Oswald looked much thinner and ragged in Nov than in August. Time wore hard on the man....

In terms of the thread... which I surely didn't mean to hijack... Oswald not on that bus is a game changer, a breakthrough, but only if you know what that means.

And how much does one need to understand to know what that means? A ridiculous amount... that's how much.

and how does proving him off the bus get him out of the window killing the president in the minds of the masses?

People want to see a photo of Oswald while the president is being shot.... or someone to say they saw him as the shots were fired.

He needs an alibi and he doesn't have one...

[William Kelly]

Greg,

After first read I believe you are correct about the Jiffy Store... what did it was your comment about his lack of him making a scene like other genuine sightings....

and really, what does it accomplish. I kept turning pages in the 201 file thinking these reports might help... you know other sightings and comments... uhhh, not so much

Not really sure why I bit so hard into that one with you... but thanks for playing along

You have to admit though... Oswald looked much thinner and ragged in Nov than in August. Time wore hard on the man....

In terms of the thread... which I surely didn't mean to hijack... Oswald not on that bus is a game changer, a breakthrough, but only if you know what that means.

And how much does one need to understand to know what that means? A ridiculous amount... that's how much.

and how does proving him off the bus get him out of the window killing the president in the minds of the masses?

People want to see a photo of Oswald while the president is being shot.... or someone to say they saw him as the shots were fired.

He needs an alibi and he doesn't have one...

I was wondering how far apart the Jiffy store is from the Top Ten Records shop?

Could the guy who bought the beer be the same guy who bought the ticket to the Dick Clark concert?

Oswald has an alibi if you believe Baker and Truly ran into him on the second floor at 12:31:30 -

Oswald was seen on the first floor at 12:15, when a man with a rifle was seen on the Sixth Floor, so if the man with the gun wasn't Oswald, who was it?

Also, according to Bob Groden, Geraldine Reid, who worked at the TSBD, told him that she was with Oswald at the time of the assassination.

According to the Warren Report Reid encountered Oswald as he was walking through the second floor offices with his coke and told him the President was shot, and Oswald mumbled something but she didn't hear what he said.

BK

[Kathleen Collins]

Please allow me to tell you what my "breakthroughs" have been regarding Kennedy. I was the one who discovered that Donald O. Norton was living in Avon Park, FL (which everyone knew) and he opened a fishing store near there, which ultimately failed. He also ran charter boats for people who wanted to fish. No one else came forward with information like this.

Mae Brussels said that the young man who had been sending her "guilt money," or something to that effect, was Lee Oswald, Lee Harvey's lookalike. He went by the name Donald O. Norton.

I also presented a theory about the murder of Karyn Kupcinet, the 22-year-old actress. Karyn was the daughter of Irv Kupcinet, known lovingly as Mr. Chicago. When Ruby shot Oswald, Irv managed to track down Paul Dorfman (mobster) out in Palm Springs to talk to him about Ruby. Ruby was born and raised in Chicago. Dorfman knew him. I think Dorfman was annoyed that he could be tracked down on the Assassination weekend. It seems to me he was staying under the radar. But Irv found him.

Also in Palm Beach that weekend was Irv's daughter, Karyn. She was with her boyfriend Andrew Prine, actor, and Earl Holliman and his girl. So to my mind, the possibility existed that Paul Dorfman saw her there. And then a plan started to form in Dorfman's mind. Something that would keep the Chicago mob off of page one of the Chicago newspapers. Murder Karyn Kupcinet and the windy city will be so shocked they'll forget all about Ruby. Karyn was murdered shortly afterward. They never found the killer. She died on Thanksgiving Day, 3 days after Oswald was shot. But she wasn't found for 3 days. They couldn't even tell what drugs she may have had in her system. They couldn't tell much. Added to this was the autopsy surgeon who had a fetish about strangled women. They exhumed 2 women and they had died through other means. He was brought to court and fired.

So my personal discoveries are above re the Kennedy Assassination. Jack White recently posted that "so-called Researchers have muddied the waters" regarding Donald O. Norton. I think not.

I also found Ralph Geb on a site. I looked him up and found he was involved with faking Oswald before the Assassination. This really shocked me because I never heard of him. It was a gut instinct.

Thank You,

Kathy C

[William Kelly]

Please allow me to tell you what my "breakthroughs" have been regarding Kennedy. I was the one who discovered that Donald O. Norton was living in Avon Park, FL (which everyone knew) and he opened a fishing store near there, which ultimately failed. He also ran charter boats for people who wanted to fish. No one else came forward with information like this.

Mae Brussels said that the young man who had been sending her "guilt money," or something to that effect, was Lee Oswald, Lee Harvey's lookalike. He went by the name Donald O. Norton.

I also presented a theory about the murder of Karyn Kupcinet, the 22-year-old actress. Karyn was the daughter of Irv Kupcinet, known lovingly as Mr. Chicago. When Ruby shot Oswald, Irv managed to track down Paul Dorfman (mobster) out in Palm Springs to talk to him about Ruby. Ruby was born and raised in Chicago. Dorfman knew him. I think Dorfman was annoyed that he could be tracked down on the Assassination weekend. It seems to me he was staying under the radar. But Irv found him.

Also in Palm Beach that weekend was Irv's daughter, Karyn. She was with her boyfriend Andrew Prine, actor, and Earl Holliman and his girl. So to my mind, the possibility existed that Paul Dorfman saw her there. And then a plan started to form in Dorfman's mind. Something that would keep the Chicago mob off of page one of the Chicago newspapers. Murder Karyn Kupcinet and the windy city will be so shocked they'll forget all about Ruby. Karyn was murdered shortly afterward. They never found the killer. She died on Thanksgiving Day, 3 days after Oswald was shot. But she wasn't found for 3 days. They couldn't even tell what drugs she may have had in her system. They couldn't tell much. Added to this was the autopsy surgeon who had a fetish about strangled women. They exhumed 2 women and they had died through other means. He was brought to court and fired.

So my personal discoveries are above re the Kennedy Assassination. Jack White recently posted that "so-called Researchers have muddied the waters" regarding Donald O. Norton. I think not.

I also found Ralph Geb on a site. I looked him up and found he was involved with faking Oswald before the Assassination. This really shocked me because I never heard of him. It was a gut instinct.

Thank You,

Kathy C

Kathy,

I don't know that Mae Brussell knew if she was dealing with Donald O. or Donald P. Norton.

I'd like to see more photos of Ralph Geb, if you have access to any, as well as any info that he was involved with faking Oswald before the assassination.

BK

[Kathleen Collins]

Kathy,

I don't know that Mae Brussell knew if she was dealing with Donald O. or Donald P. Norton.

I'd like to see more photos of Ralph Geb, if you have access to any, as well as any info that he was involved with faking Oswald before the assassination.

BK

Bill, I'm fairly certain Mae Brussels was dealing with Donald O. Donald P. was a gay entertainer being blackmailed by the mob.

I will look for Ralph Geb through my photos. I have 2 hard drives going. I may not get to it till tomorrow. But I'll be thorough.

There's a member of this Forum who was going to write a book about Karyn Kupcinet with Karyn's niece, Kari Kupcinet Kriser. But she's had 3 kids now and a business and has more or less lost interest. I gave them a lot of info, so much so that a member here thought I knew the family. In a way, I guess I do.

Irv and Essee's names are in the Social Security Death Index, but not Karyn's (Cookie).

Kathy C

[David Josephs]

Thanks Jim...

regardless of what one thinks... a laymen like myself can be pretty intimidated by the wealth of knowledge and skill of presentation seen on these pages. My desire from day one was to find something unfound or unnoticed... and be right about it.

just an fyi... Josephs'

I came across a mention of this in Unspeakable as well.. yet Douglass claims incorrectly that the Trade Mart being only 5 minutes from Dealey and a 12:30 start time means the motorcade was passing the window at 12:25 - so he claims the limo was only 5 mins late. I will go find the actual footnote but I was surprised he did not present anything beyond this declaration to set the time of the limo passing the TSBD like the actual arrival time of the plane and driving timeline already available in writting.

Still working on that article/paper...

Now you got me motivated to move a bit faster.

much appreciated

DJ

Edited February 25, 2011 by David Josephs