Jump to content
The Education Forum

Help Please - need to see FBI Item D-77: Kleins orders


Recommended Posts

DiEugenio totally misrepresents Frazier's "repeated" comment (as expected). Frazier was talking about the NUMBER being repeated on rifles, but a prefix letter is then added if there's a repeat number. Hence the reason we have a 2766 and a C2766....and there's probably a D2766 and a G2766, etc.

End result: No two rifles ever have the exact same complete serial number on them.

I wonder why Jimbo cannot fathom that concept?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Quote
If no FC rifles were ever sent for C20-T750 orders... that we cannot see a single seriel # of a FC rifle on one of these orders HIDELL's order sticks out like a sore thumb.

Why are you so obsessed with this, David?

I don't find it unusual in the least that we have never seen OTHER (non-Oswald) orders from Klein's files. I wouldn't EXPECT to see any non-LHO orders from Klein's ... because, as stressed previously, any non-C2766 orders were IMMATERIAL when it came to the FBI's investigation into the JFK murder case. They were searching for ONE specific serial number. No other number or order mattered. I wonder why it matters to you so much? It's crazy.

In a related topic, has anybody ever seen any other order forms filled out by Seaport Traders for other revolvers shipped to non-Oswald customers? I never have. Have you, David? And if you haven't, are you going to start belly-aching about fake evidence in the Seaport files regarding the revolver that Oswald ordered?

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to repeat this comment I made earlier (which is very important and means the CTers who love the idea of multiple "C2766" rifles don't have a leg to stand on, and never did):

"Even if I'm dead wrong, and there are 150 additional Carcano 91/38 rifles in the world today with the number "C2766" on them, it's totally immaterial anyway.

Why?

Because we know that only ONE particular Carcano rifle with C2766 on it was the weapon that killed President Kennedy in Dallas. And that one particular C2766 rifle is CE139, the one with Lee Oswald's prints on it that was found in the building where Lee Oswald worked." -- DVP

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Frazier asked how many rifles were manufactured total?

Don't know.

Uh, waiting for an answer Davey. Do you think he knew how many?

Don't know.

[Then] why wasn't he asked that?

Probably to frame poor sap Oswald. Right, Jimmy?

Plus each rifle had the origin of its manufacture imprinted on it to eliminate confusion.

And by the way, the Italian government recently admitted they sent no such documentation about the peculiarity of the serial number to the Warren Commission.

Common sense alone tells any reasonable person that there weren't "40 to 50" MC 91/38 rifles with the exact same number on them. You DO know what the significance of a "serial number" is, don't you, Jim?

SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia, From 2008) -- "...A unique number assigned for identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a fixed discrete integer value."

Why even put serial numbers on their guns if there are going to be "40 to 50" in existence that have the exact same number (per Thomas H. Purvis)? That's just nuts, Jimmy. And even you, an outer-fringe CTer if ever one existed, must realize it's nuts.

Was Oswald's instance the first and only one in which Klein's sent a forty inch, differently classified rifle to the purchaser?

I have no idea. And neither do you.

But I like the way you've completely ignored the detailed list of the Klein's ads for the year 1963 that Gary Mack supplied a while back, wherein we can see that the February ad for the 36-inch model was either the last or next-to-last month in '63 that Klein's was advertising the 36-inch model. All other months in '63 they were showing the 40-inch gun in their ads.

Hence, it's not at all unreasonable to assume that even though Oswald used an ad that advertised a 36-inch gun, Klein's simply ran out of stock of the 36-inchers shortly before they received Oswald's mail-order form, and they merely substituted the 40-inch (almost identical) weapon in its place.

And, as I've stated before, it's my guess that Oswald didn't even know the difference. And it's also my guess that he wouldn't have cared if he HAD known the difference. (Do you think LHO got out a tape measure and noticed it was 4 inches longer than the one he ordered?)

>>> "Isn't that an important point to demonstrate?" <<<

Not when some ordinary common sense is applied to the "36-inch" vs. "40-inch" debate.

>>> "Did Klein's run out of 36 inch rifles to ship? OK, when did this happen." <<<

See my earlier reply.

>>> "Is there another case in which they [Klein's] sent the wrong rifle?" <<<

Probably. Because we know their stock of thirty-six-inch guns must have been exhausted at SOME point prior to when they changed their ads in the magazines.

Do you really think that things lined up absolutely PERFECTLY with regard to the number of 36-inch rifles Klein's had in stock in early 1963 and the number of mail-order coupons that Klein's received from customers that had the 36-inch gun advertised?

It's ridiculous to think that the number of 36-inch rifles ran out at the EXACT moment they received their very last mail-order request from a magazine that was advertising that exact length weapon. There were bound to be a few customers who ordered the 36-incher, but got the 40-incher. And Lee Harvey Oswald was one of those customers.

Addendum:

BTW, Jimmy, do you still think the "12" on Oswald's postmarked envelope represents a Dallas zone code? You've been nailed on that issue, and now you're silent. I wonder why?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim,

You're actually only proving that your conspirators who you think faked all the rifle-purchasing documents were (once again) members of the "Idiot Patsy-Framers Of America Club".

Because you think that ALL of the documents ARE fakes...which means some goofy plotters deliberately put into the record of this case a fake mail-order form for a 36-inch carbine, and those same plotters (I assume it's the same group, right Jimmy?) also put into the record of this case Waldman #7, which shows that C2766, a 40-inch gun, was mailed to the proverbial patsy.

Can't even YOU, Jimbo, see the problem here?

Therefore, your plotters made a really stupid error (seemingly on purpose), but Klein's couldn't possibly have simply run out of 36-inch rifles a little earlier than they had intended. Is that it, James?

Jimmy, the problem is not with people like me (LNers). It's always been with the CTers (like you) who never, ever evaluate the evidence properly or with a granule of common sense attached. And this rifle-length silliness is a prime example of your continued and never-ending failings when it comes to assessing virtually everything connected with the JFK assassination.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVEN THOUGH KLEIN"S DID NOT PUT SCOPES ON THE FORTY INCH MODEL!

~sigh~ Yet another CTer claim that is so obviously mythical--and dead wrong.

And even Mitchell Westra, who talked about scope-mounting in an interview with the HSCA, didn't say that Klein's NEVER mounted scopes on 40-inch guns. In fact, he specifically told the HSCA that "undoubtably Klein's mounted some" scopes on forty-inch rifles (those are the HSCA's words in quotes, paraphrasing what Westra told the HSCA; see photo below). The CTers apparently want to totally ignore those words from Westra.

HSCA-Westra.jpg

In the final analysis, it seems quite obvious from the various 1963 Klein's advertisements pictured below that Klein's DID mount scopes on the 40-inch carbines they shipped to customers in 1963.

The three Klein's ads shown in the photo below are almost identical when it comes to the description being used concerning the scope, with one of the ads (the one from February 1963 that Lee Oswald used to order his rifle) indicating a 36-inch carbine, while the other two show a 40-inch weapon:

Klein%27s-Ads.jpg

So to say that Klein's never mounted scopes on its 40-inch rifles is practically the same as totally ignoring all of the many ads that Klein's Sporting Goods was placing in magazines in mid to late 1963.

Was Klein's lying to its mail-order customers when it said that a customer could purchase a 40-inch carbine with scope ("as illustrated") -- i.e., the scope is attached to the gun itself?

I suppose a conspiracy theorist can always argue that the words "as illustrated" (or, as is the case with the November 1963 ad, just the word "illustrated", without the word "as" preceding it) doesn't have to mean the scope will be attached to the gun itself when Klein's ships it to a customer. The CTers can always claim that "as illustrated" only refers to the scope itself, and not its "mounted" status on the gun.

But I think another fair and even more accurate and reasonable interpretation of those words ("as illustrated") is an interpretation that I'm guessing a lot of people would have when they read that ad -- and that is: the scope is going to be mounted on the rifle I'm ordering, because that's what is "illustrated" in this ad.

But in any event, we can know for certain that Klein's Sporting Goods of Chicago absolutely, positively DID mount a scope on a forty-inch Mannlicher-Carcano rifle for at least one of its customers in March of 1963 -- and that customer was Lee Harvey Oswald.

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#Guns-Backyard-Photos-And-Other-Evidence

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Westra then backtracks since he does not want to look like an idiot.

Unbelievable.

The internal illogic and "xxxx, xxxx" rhetoric of outer-fringe JFK conspiracy theorists is staggering.

So, per DiEugenio, the only reason Westra said that Klein's undoubtedly mounted scopes on "some" 40-inch rifles was so that he wouldn't look like an "idiot".

Therefore, DiEugenio has just added another xxxx to his growing list of liars connected with this case -- Mitchell Westra.

IOW -- Westra didn't really believe what he was telling the HSCA in February 1978. He only said what he said so he wouldn't look foolish, which is a silly explanation provided by DiEugenio. Why would Westra have looked like a fool by merely saying he didn't mount the scope on Oswald's rifle but that somebody else probably did mount it? (Which is precisely what he was saying.)

If we were to take a detailed tally of the people on DiEugenio's Liars list, the total would surely be nearing four digits by now.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If no FC rifles were ever sent for C20-T750 orders... that we cannot see a single seriel # of a FC rifle on one of these orders HIDELL's order sticks out like a sore thumb.

Why are you so obsessed with this, David?

I don't find it unusual in the least that we have never seen OTHER (non-Oswald) orders from Klein's files. I wouldn't EXPECT to see any non-LHO orders from Klein's ... because, as stressed previously, any non-C2766 orders were IMMATERIAL when it came to the FBI's investigation into the JFK murder case. They were searching for ONE specific serial number. No other number or order mattered. I wonder why it matters to you so much? It's crazy.

In a related topic, has anybody ever seen any other order forms filled out by Seaport Traders for other revolvers shipped to non-Oswald customers? I never have. Have you, David? And if you haven't, are you going to start belly-aching about fake evidence in the Seaport files regarding the reviolver that Oswald ordered?

Thanks again Dave... you're like a broken clock, well maybe not.... even a broken clock is right twice a day....

The FBI did not want to show us any other C20-T750 orders because .... wait for it......

They would show that FC rifles were NEVER sent for orders of the Item #, until the April 1963 order... 2 months after HIDELL's order coupon

And since they NEVER sent FC rifles - except as recorded, IN HANDWRITTING, on HIDELL's order form... wait for it again Dave.....

We can conclude that the Kleins order form... of which the original no longer exists, and is a copy of a microfilm print... was CREATED to link HIDELL to C2766...

Unless of course, we can show the PATTERN from these Kleins orders that they were shipping the FC rifles based on Waldman writing the seriel #'s and VC #'s on the orders....

What are you so afraid of Dave? These orders have just as much chance of supporting the FC shipment hypothesis, as it does refuting it.

Does evidence that MAY exonnerate Oswald terrify you LNers that much....

I could actually HEAR GMACK peeing his pants thru the emails when considering the implications of there not being a single other Kleins order that lists a FC rifle for aC20-T750 shipment.... that the HIDELL order was the one and only....

So rather than continue HIJACKING THIS THREAD over the seriel #..... PROVE THAT KLEINS SENT FC RIFLES FOR ALL C20-T750 ORDERS...

Or you gonna pee your pants as well and change the subject... and avoid ansering even themost basic common sense questions....

Let us know where you stand on this Dave... answering these questions will not make you look any less the shill LNer than you are...

but they may teach you something about logic....

1) Do you believe C20-T750 was ordered and purchased by anyone other than HIDELL between 4/62 and 2/63?

2) Do you blieve that any orders for said Item # would have the Seriel # and VC # written on it JUST LIKE THE HIDELL ORDER?

3) Do you contend that starting with the cancellation of the TS order, C20-T750 orders were shipped a scoped 40" FC EACH TIOME and that 40" FC rifle seriel numbers woulld be written on these orders?

4) Do you understand that if they WERE SHIPPED FC RIFLES this would provew that Kleins WAS shipping the FC and you can now prove it

5) Do you also understand that if the rifles shipped for C20-T750 orders was NOT the 40"FC but some other rifle(s), your case for Kleins having shipped a FC to HIDELL is severely weakened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...answering these questions will not make you look any less the shill LNer than you are...

but they may teach you something about logic...

LOL.gif

A CTer who thinks LHO never ordered a rifle by mail order in '63 and who thinks ALL of the paperwork connected with that rifle purchase is fake and fraudulent is preaching to me about "logic".

Oh, my weak bladder! Have at least some pity on it, will ya Davey!

LOL.gif

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...answering these questions will not make you look any less the shill LNer than you are...

but they may teach you something about logic...

LOL.gif

A CTer who thinks LHO never ordered a rifle by mail order in '63 and who thinks ALL of the paperwork connected with that rifle purchase is fake and fraudulent is preaching to me about "logic".

Oh, my weak bladder! Have at least some pity on it, will ya Davey!

LOL.gif

Let's try this in small, spoonsize bites for Mr Big Brain here....

David,

1) Do you believe C20-T750 was ordered and purchased by anyone other than HIDELL between 4/62 and 2/63? Simple yes or not will do

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jim...

I've been talking with Armstrong and asked him if he tried to get those orders....

He told me that when he was there in the mid-90's they told him there was no such cannister of microfilm.. even though it was a WCR exhibit.

=======

The above is a pretty simple question to answer, even for DVP.... only a fool would believe the HIDELL order was the only C20-T750 ordered in all those months...

So we will assume a "yes" on Q1

2) Do you believe that any orders for said Item # would have the Seriel # and VC # written on it JUST LIKE THE HIDELL ORDER?

C'mon now Dave.... since there HAD to be other C20-T750 orders... did Waldman write the seriel # shipped on ALL of them?

Would these seriel numbers be from the list of 99 other FC rifles? Waldman #4... or from a different type of rifle?

STOP telling me what I think, and start telling us what you believe here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, that is just bonkers.

So we have a picture of a canister which does not exist.

Now we have a nixie package that doesn't exist.

The problem with the latter is this: I talked to Carol Hewitt about this package. Because in my new book I wrote a few pages about it and I knew she knew about this subject. Well, she did. You know how well?

She held it in her hands!

And now they say its not there.

Funny things are happening in advance of the 50th. And the Archives may not be the archives anymore.

With the help of a few members, Tom Hume assembled an impressive set of links on that topic:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16665&st=210#entry209617

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...