Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ruth Paine IDs March 20 as the Day Oswald ordered the rifle


Recommended Posts

Glenn,

The only way a person can believe in Lee Harvey Oswald's "innocence" is for that person to just completely ignore (or misrepresent) the dozens of pieces of evidence (and Oswald's own actions) which point unwaveringly to Oswald's guilt in the two murders he was officially charged with in November of 1963.

Do you, Glenn, wish to ignore all of that evidence? And if so---why?

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

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

as predicted, your overuse of inconsequential adjectives and adverbs weakens your argument even more than its clear lack of any factual basis.

Edited by Glenn Nall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David... I knew if anyone had that info it would be you...

:up

Maybe you can help explain something then... The FBI and SS both knew the order date was the 12th and that Klein's stamped the 13th at the top of the order blank.

March 20th is when they shipped the rifle. Was this just Curry's generality or do you think he was told the 20th by the FBI/SS... ?

Thanks again for the assist - if nothing else you have one of the best collections of video and ability to recall what's on them around...

Now if I could only appeal to you to use them for good instead of evil... :D;)

I'm not sure how discussions evolve around to these things. There was NO 'order date', there was no 'ship date' These are creations of the conspirators, that has been proven so many times where all the 'created info' came from. this just feeds the nutters goals.

Yet Kenneth, there was physical evidence offered which had dates and times and descriptions.

Them being "creations of the conspirators" is true yet I am not sure the "where they came from" part has been flushed out as I will be offering next week on CTKA.

For example, was the ORDER BLANK of which we are talking created from scratch or a repurpose of a real order for a C20-T750?

Was the Money Order created from scratch or repurposed, altered from the real one with that real #?

We are definitely seeing things the same way... All I am saying is that "according to the evidence offered" March 20 was the ship date, March 13th was the day Klein's rec'd the order and deposited the PMO and MArch 12 is the cancellation date on the envelope, all supposedly in the FBI's hands by 6am DC time on Nov 23rd.

Someone called DPD Curry to tell him this date. Who, when and why did they get it wrong? or did Curry?

At this point it is my belief all we have left in the evidence is the ability to reconstruct the conspiracy. Any talk of WCR conclusions being accurate or reflective of the situation does not even enter the conversation. The LNer is left with having to find a way to authenticate incriminating evidence that can't be.

The conversation has to change.... CTs don't need to prove his innocence and shouldn't try. LNers need to prove guilt.

Anything else is tap dancing around the issues and denying the core fundementals of the law - innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

Was the Money Order created from scratch or repurposed, altered from the real one with that real #? It was pulled from the stack of still unsold PMO's at the Dallas Post office and the details put in. Forgetting to put the correct endorsements on the back. Completely created.

All I am saying is that "according to the evidence offered" March 20 was the ship date, March 13th was the day Klein's rec'd the order and deposited the PMO and MArch 12 is the cancellation date on the envelope, all supposedly in the FBI's hands by 6am DC time on Nov 23rd. Having been created before midnight on 11/22. Actually it turns out that there were 2 PMO's found/created. One of them later disappeared, once they realized their mistake. And of course the rifle was never owned by Kleins and never shipped to anyone from Klein's. Any evidence to the contrary was, of course, entirely fabricated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone called DPD Curry to tell him this date. Who, when and why did they get it wrong? Or did Curry?

Why do you insist upon nitpicking the Klein's dates to death?

When looking at the dates that were available to the FBI on 11/23/63 via the Klein's microfilm records, and given a choice of which date to choose for a press release to Chief Curry and to the world (if I had to pick only ONE date, that is) -- I think I, too, might very well have told America (and Jesse Curry) that the rifle transaction had taken place on March 20, 1963. Because from the available information supplied by Klein's Sporting Goods on November 23rd, the March 20 date is the date that confirms that the sale of the rifle to Oswald/Hidell had been completed (i.e., shipped by Klein's to Oswald/Hidell). So what's wrong with using the shipping date in the press releases?

Yes, Chief Curry told reporters that "This purchase was made on March 20th", which technically is not quite 100% accurate, since Oswald had actually dropped his order form for the rifle in the mailbox on March 12th, but we're really only talking about a very tiny difference in terms here -- with the "ordering" of the gun by Oswald occurring on March 12th, and the "shipping" of the gun taking place on March 20th.

But why on Earth would anyone, even a conspiracy theorist, make a big deal out of this "March 12 vs. March 20" date thing? You think that by saying the rifle was "purchased" on March 20, this somehow means the rifle transaction between Oswald and Klein's is all shot to hell -- even though that exact date (March 20) is on the Klein's internal order blank?

This entire argument about the March 20 date is just another example of a totally frivolous argument being made by CTers in a feeble attempt to cast doubt (somehow) on a piece of evidence connected to JFK's assassination. And this particular frivolous argument concerning the March 20 date is even more useless and nonsensical than most other arguments put forth by CTers. (And that's really saying something.)

Yes, Chief Curry told reporters that "This purchase was made on March 20th", which technically is not quite 100% accurate, since Oswald had actually dropped his order form for the rifle in the mailbox on March 12th, but we're really only talking about a very tiny difference in terms here -- with the "ordering" of the gun by Oswald occurring on March 12th, and the "shipping" of the gun taking place on March 20th.

But why on Earth would anyone, even a conspiracy theorist, make a big deal out of this "March 12 vs. March 20" date thing?

Yeah, that's right. Why would anyone question 'the tiny little details' ? I mean, really. LHO was on the 2nd floor when the shots were fired, but that's just a 'tiny' little detail. I mean, really, just one little bullet was fired from in front of the car, that 'tiny little detail' is not 'really' important is it. It still could have been LHO firing from the 2nd floor lunchroom, right? What's all this business about 'tiny little details' anyhow? Who's paying attention to that?

I guess we're gonna have to change DVP to TLD, no one would notice, it's just a 'tiny little detail', right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davey:

Did you tell everyone about Ruth's asterisk?

Or do I have to?

In Post #6 of this thread.

With lots more about your incredibly silly "asterisk" theory at my webpage below....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html#Ruth-Paine-Calendar

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

Glenn,

The only way a person can believe in Lee Harvey Oswald's "innocence" is for that person to just completely ignore (or misrepresent) the dozens of pieces of evidence (and Oswald's own actions) which point unwaveringly to Oswald's guilt in the two murders he was officially charged with in November of 1963.

Do you, Glenn, wish to ignore all of that evidence? And if so---why?

The only way a person can believe in Lee Harvey Oswald's "innocence" is for that person to just completely ignore (or misrepresent) the dozens of pieces of evidence

Got that backward didn't you, TLD? uh,,or uh, DVP.

In actuality, you have to believe that LHO was innocent because no one has turned up any evidence that would prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I realize that is a 'TLD', but that is what the legal system is built on. Even if you think they are 'not important'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TLD er, uh, DVP I changed my signature to include another one of your 'sayings'. I'm sure a lot of people agree with you that the 'Tiny Little Details" aren't 'really' important. That's why the world has discussed them for 52 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kenneth... in my article I will show that 4 PMO's were "found" within the evidence offered...

One of them in Kansas City in fact.

I hope the article will change how people see the evidence and the FBI/SS's creation of it along with their reports which wind up contradicting themselves.

I introduce a new term... "closed loop corroboration" whereby the evidence corroborates itself, as long as no other evidence related to but outside the closed loop is examined.

When looking at the different items of evidence, look to see if that which is offered to make it appear the evidence is authentic is an example of how it is ALWAYS done or just specific to the item of evidence being corroborated...

The best example? There were 99 other rifles in that shipment in Feb 1963 and Klein's was selling this in one version or another from Feb 1962 to Nov 1963 as C20-T750 (although the "T" was dropped later April 1963)

Have we ever seen any one of these other 99 rifles. Ever. Anywhere? Not a single soul in the entire US bought or has one of these rifles? There is no record of any other C20-T750 rifle sold to anyone, ever?

You wont believe what happened to the "remaining inventory" at Klein's on Nov 25th.

The rifle story had been done up pretty good. I think I've added enough back story to show HOW the items of evidence came to be and why they cannot be trusted.

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not even ironic that as enters DVP the thread, so enters conflict.

It's more a given, really.

Gee, there's a surprise. An LNer in conflict with CTers. Amazing, huh?

in fact it IS disappointing and none at all necessary, David. contrary to what appears to be your own experience, there do exist adults who can vehemently disagree and still avoid conflict with mature, impersonal and reasonable discussion, debate. conflict is something different.

what's amazing is that this would need to be pointed out to you at your age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...