Jump to content
The Education Forum

A Question for Richard Gilbride


Thomas Graves
 Share

Recommended Posts

Richard,

In Inside Job you write about Shelley and Lovelady:

"Why did this twosome pretend they had no contact with Oswald on the front landing? One obvious reason was that they would have been asked which direction he went [when he left at 12:34]. Did he go right, or did he go left? A left would have meshed with the story that began emerging the next day, that he had walked several blocks and boarded a city bus that soon became mired in traffic. A right meant he went toward the pergola, to wait for a pre-arranged rendezvous with a white 1961 Rambler that had picked him up on the Elm St. curb, according to Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig."

http://jfkinsidejob.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/INSIDE-JOB.pdf

Do you think Oswald was picked up by the Rambler?

If so, which Oswald are you talking about? The same one that Baker had encountered on the second floor?

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I do subscribe to the belief that Lee Harvey Oswald, the "historic" Oswald who was gunned down by Jack Ruby, was picked up by the Rambler seen by Craig. Shelley's failure to acknowledge having encountered LHO on the landing is support for that belief; he should have shared what was a run-of-the-mill sighting of LHO, but kept that secret.

John Armstrong's presentation of the Harvey & Lee TSBD movements never sat right with me, in his book. But I do believe the doppelganger Lee Oswald was used as the 6th-floor SW window sniper. The photo resemblance on p. 61 should give anyone pause for thought.

For instance, if I was Angleton, running an Oswald doppelganger program, and wanted to entrap one as a patsy, I'd sure as heck get the doppelganger Lee involved with TSBD activities on November 22nd. Just to help confuse the overall investigation, which he knew would go on for years and years. By putting him in the SW window, they had some options for cobbling together an early story, day one , day two, etc. There was further evidence the doppelganger Lee was around town on the 22nd in the Jiffy Store encounter earlier that morning, in the TF White sighting at the El Chico parking lot, and in the Robert Vinson account of a military transport's makeshift landing across from the Trinity River.

Less definitive but certainly in the mix, one can't exclude the doppelganger's role in the Tippit murder and Texas Theater.

A further doppelganger is in one of the tramps photos, in the background talking to Inspector Sawyer approx. 2:19 PM. I don't think he has a designated name yet. How's Leeski sound? Leeski, the Amerikanski.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I do subscribe to the belief that Lee Harvey Oswald, the "historic" Oswald who was gunned down by Jack Ruby, was picked up by the Rambler seen by Craig. Shelley's failure to acknowledge having encountered LHO on the landing is support for that belief; he should have shared what was a run-of-the-mill sighting of LHO, but kept that secret.

John Armstrong's presentation of the Harvey & Lee TSBD movements never sat right with me, in his book. But I do believe the doppelganger Lee Oswald was used as the 6th-floor SW window sniper. The photo resemblance on p. 61 should give anyone pause for thought.

For instance, if I was Angleton, running an Oswald doppelganger program, and wanted to entrap one as a patsy, I'd sure as heck get the doppelganger Lee involved with TSBD activities on November 22nd. Just to help confuse the overall investigation, which he knew would go on for years and years. By putting him in the SW window, they had some options for cobbling together an early story, day one , day two, etc. There was further evidence the doppelganger Lee was around town on the 22nd in the Jiffy Store encounter earlier that morning, in the TF White sighting at the El Chico parking lot, and in the Robert Vinson account of a military transport's makeshift landing across from the Trinity River.

Less definitive but certainly in the mix, one can't exclude the doppelganger's role in the Tippit murder and Texas Theater.

A further doppelganger is in one of the tramps photos, in the background talking to Inspector Sawyer approx. 2:19 PM. I don't think he has a designated name yet. How's Leeski sound? Leeski, the Amerikanski.

Richard,

How do you think Lee Harvey Oswald and all these Lee Harvey Oswald doppelgangers were chosen? Do you think they were genetically modified in vitro so they would closely resemble each other some 24 years later? Or were they chosen from thousands of volunteers, a month or two before the assassination?

(LOL)

Or was it simpler than that?

Regardless, where did the Rambler take him? Home? To the Texas Theater? To the Trinity River?

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy,

Too funny. But I am inclined to look to biology as the easiest method to produce a lookalike, from circa age 13 to circa 18 (the Mercer farm hunting photo) to age 24. That would boil it down to LHO's mother having a) fraternal twins or B) incestual relations, and so produce a lookalike. These birth records never came to light. The 1930-40 census records should be publicly available by now, but there isn't anything I know of that would show some kind of indication that Marguerite had a misbegotten child. By the way, I haven't looked, but it would be interesting to see the census data. There is the Margaret Keating enigma also, someone out there knows a heck of a lot more than I do about her. I haven't followed developments very much in recent years pertaining to Armstrong's theory.

I think the following data from Harvey & Lee relates to this issue:

p. 51) In January 1953 the HUAC in New York made reference to a "Mrs. M. Oswald" in a CIA Office of Security file. The file contained references to 1941, Nazis, and New Jersey. Judge John Tunheim, of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), wrote to Henry Hyde in an attempt to get the HUAC files on Lee and Marguerite Oswald released, but his request was refused.

I do think the Rambler took LHO home and circled around the neighborhood a couple minutes while he changed clothes and got his pistol. It picked him up across the street at the bus-stop and took him straight to the Texas Theater.

I have no idea where "Leeski" fits into the mix. Maybe to get people in the Plaza to report an Oswald sighting, their "double vision" increasing the day's confusion, just in case the conspirators' plans for the just-arrested patsy had to be changed. I think the villians had back-up patsies in mind, in case LHO didn't work.

The Trinity River accomplice of "Lee Oswald" fits the description of David Morales. They arrived by jeep and must have rendevoused somewhere not far from the El Chico parking lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy,

Too funny. But I am inclined to look to biology as the easiest method to produce a lookalike, from circa age 13 to circa 18 (the Mercer farm hunting photo) to age 24. That would boil it down to LHO's mother having a) fraternal twins or B) incestual relations, and so produce a lookalike. These birth records never came to light. The 1930-40 census records should be publicly available by now, but there isn't anything I know of that would show some kind of indication that Marguerite had a misbegotten child. By the way, I haven't looked, but it would be interesting to see the census data. There is the Margaret Keating enigma also, someone out there knows a heck of a lot more than I do about her. I haven't followed developments very much in recent years pertaining to Armstrong's theory.

I think the following data from Harvey & Lee relates to this issue:

p. 51) In January 1953 the HUAC in New York made reference to a "Mrs. M. Oswald" in a CIA Office of Security file. The file contained references to 1941, Nazis, and New Jersey. Judge John Tunheim, of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), wrote to Henry Hyde in an attempt to get the HUAC files on Lee and Marguerite Oswald released, but his request was refused.

I do think the Rambler took LHO home and circled around the neighborhood a couple minutes while he changed clothes and got his pistol. It picked him up across the street at the bus-stop and took him straight to the Texas Theater.

I have no idea where "Leeski" fits into the mix. Maybe to get people in the Plaza to report an Oswald sighting, their "double vision" increasing the day's confusion, just in case the conspirators' plans for the just-arrested patsy had to be changed. I think the villians had back-up patsies in mind, in case LHO didn't work.

The Trinity River accomplice of "Lee Oswald" fits the description of David Morales. They arrived by jeep and must have rendevoused somewhere not far from the El Chico parking lot.

Richard,

Why did Oswald, with pistol, think he was being taken to the Texas Theater?

To perform some more lookout work?

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy,

I would speculate that the Theater was pre-arranged rendevous point, mostly based on accounts of LHO changing seats often once inside.

The pistol was grabbed for self-defense; the danger was very high then that the people who knew too much could be eliminated; Oswald was keenly aware of that.

Cliff,

Absolutely, Tippit & Ruby were strung along and set up like dominoes.

The JFK conspiracy survived numerous 1st-day blunders: 1) J. Carl Day's inserting the ammo clip in the wrong side of the Carcano 2) the power shut-off to the elevators (oops! whose bright idea was this?! The anti-Oswald evidence was easily tidied up by 12:35, it's 12:42 and we got 70,000 cops storming the building, screaming to get upstairs) 3) the Mooneyham sighting ("Now remember, Jack, don't let anyone from anywhere outside see you doing this, not at anytime." "Yes, master FrankenTrulystein" ....... "Hmmm. Did boss say anyone from outside, don't let them see you? I was just up here. I don't see anyone from outside looking in." .... Oh, no. Better not tell Mr. Truly. I better get to the 5th and look at some stock) 4) the mini-conspiracy to bump off Oswald in the Theater 5) the boffo DPD investigator (either Day, Studebaker, Montgomery or Johnson- or hey, maybe they had a group conscience vote) who took the just-constructed gunsack and sample paper from the same wrapping-paper roll.

There's more, of course. A big, big key was information control, so the public could fool themselves. Vince Salandria wasn't fooled, though, as he relates in his False Mystery essay:

"On November 23, 1963, I discussed the assassination with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. I told him that we should keep our eyes focused on what if anything would happen to the suspected assassin that weekend. I said that if the suspect was killed during the weekend, then we would have to consider Oswald's role to be that of a possible intelligence agent and patsy. I told him if such happened, the assassination would have to be considered as the work of the very center of U.S. power."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy,

I would speculate that the Theater was pre-arranged rendevous point, mostly based on accounts of LHO changing seats often once inside.

The pistol was grabbed for self-defense; the danger was very high then that the people who knew too much could be eliminated; Oswald was keenly aware of that.

Cliff,

Absolutely, Tippit & Ruby were strung along and set up like dominoes.

The JFK conspiracy survived numerous 1st-day blunders: 1) J. Carl Day's inserting the ammo clip in the wrong side of the Carcano 2) the power shut-off to the elevators (oops! whose bright idea was this?! The anti-Oswald evidence was easily tidied up by 12:35, it's 12:42 and we got 70,000 cops storming the building, screaming to get upstairs) 3) the Mooneyham sighting ("Now remember, Jack, don't let anyone from anywhere outside see you doing this, not at anytime." "Yes, master FrankenTrulystein" ....... "Hmmm. Did boss say anyone from outside, don't let them see you? I was just up here. I don't see anyone from outside looking in." .... Oh, no. Better not tell Mr. Truly. I better get to the 5th and look at some stock) 4) the mini-conspiracy to bump off Oswald in the Theater 5) the boffo DPD investigator (either Day, Studebaker, Montgomery or Johnson- or hey, maybe they had a group conscience vote) who took the just-constructed gunsack and sample paper from the same wrapping-paper roll.

There's more, of course. A big, big key was information control, so the public could fool themselves. Vince Salandria wasn't fooled, though, as he relates in his False Mystery essay:

"On November 23, 1963, I discussed the assassination with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. I told him that we should keep our eyes focused on what if anything would happen to the suspected assassin that weekend. I said that if the suspect was killed during the weekend, then we would have to consider Oswald's role to be that of a possible intelligence agent and patsy. I told him if such happened, the assassination would have to be considered as the work of the very center of U.S. power."

Hi Richard

In Point # 1, you point out "J. Carl Day's inserting the ammo clip in the wrong side of the Carcano"

Could you elaborate on this a little for us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Robert, the idea derived from the long essay Walter Graf & Richard Bartholmew put together, The Gun That Didn't Smoke, over at assassinationresearch.com; somebody inserted the clip into the rifle, on its way out of the building, because it wasn't filmed with a clip on the 6th floor.

Day 1) was given the clip- but never reported who found it

2) found it himself, but never reported that

3) brought it in himself, beforehand

I can't agree with Graf & Bartholomew's assessment that a clip was requested- once the rifle was looked at, without one- and brought in from somewhere outside the building. We're dealing with a 1:22- 1:57 timeframe here, from discovery to exit. So I'm heavily disposed to possibility 3).

And, would you agree the M-C is easy to be mistaken about? Few people were familiar with its intricacies- which included loading the clip through the top of the magazine-slot. It got temporarily stuck, loading via the bottom. And I think Day got perplexed about that as he was on his way out of the building. For example, he may have loaded the clip during the elevator ride back down to the 1st.

In its jammed state he figured he'd still be OK, no one outside realized Alyea had been filming upstairs. The clip jutted out about 2 inches in the sidewalk photos. By the time it was officially examined that night, the clip had all but disappeared- as if Day wanted it to be forgotten. You can see it jutting out just a 1/4" or so in the attached Crime Lab photos. It's cockeyed, and he must have had to cram it up there pretty good to make it completely go in.

The HSCA firearms expert Monty Lutz tried to bluff his way through this problem (that's early in this article).

You probably understand the intricacies of M-Cs a whole lot better than me. Isn't there some kind of metallic rivulet/tab-thing on the side of the magazine-slot, 6 of them aligning vertically, that help the clip move down toward extrusion in its progression of firing 6 bullets? Making a little "click" after each bullet is fired? It seems to be the un-natural attempt to feed the clip through the bottom that got it stuck, jammed-up because of these rivulets. It wasn't the way the weapon was designed to be fed, and the authors educate as to the available clip-fed rifles of the era, and Day evidently wasn't a firearms expert.

This is 1:57, five minutes after Oswald's been dragged out of the Theater, and it sure looks to me like Day has just tampered with the alleged murder weapon.

(the 2nd picture will be attached momentarily)

post-7240-0-54078300-1450057923_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lutz was definitely no expert, as he did not even comprehend how a Mauser action delivers a cartridge from the magazine to the chamber. He mistakenly told the HSCA it was possible to hand feed a cartridge into the chamber and close the Carcano bolt behind it, forgetting the extractor claw (2) protruding out from the face of the bolt that would run up against the base of the cartridge, and prevent the bolt from closing. I am not an expert on Mausers but have owned several rifles with Mauser actions and they all share this feature. IF you push hard enough on the bolt, you might eventually get the extractor claw (2) past the base of the cartridge. You are just as likely to break the extractor claw, though.

Your understanding of the Carcano magazine is a little off, as the clip itself remains stationary as cartridges 1-6 are cycled through the rifle. There is a spring loaded elevator bar that rests against the bottom cartridge in the magazine. As the top cartridge is extracted, the bar pushes the remaining five cartridges up one space in the clip, allowing the next cartridge in line to be extracted. See below:

blowup.gif

The elevator bar or "follower" (31) can be seen in the lower right of this diagram. It is narrow enough to allow it to pass between the two sides of the clip. As it is the only thing supporting the clip (via the bottom cartridge), once the last cartridge is chambered, there is nothing supporting the clip and it falls out the bottom of the magazine.

However, the spring attached to the follower is also strong enough to push the entire clip back out the top of the magazine and, to prevent this, a clip latch (25) is mounted on the rear end of the magazine. When the clip is inserted, it snaps into this latch and is held stationary. To remove a full or partially full clip, the clip latch button (forward inside trigger guard) is depressed, and it is possible to remove the clip out the top side of the magazine.

I have always been intrigued that the empty clip did not fall out while the rifle was being handled so much on the 6th floor, as this clip is meant to fall out by gravity after the last cartridge is chambered. It is true that the clip was designed as a one time use/ throwaway item, and the original designers of the clip would likely be surprised to see Carcano owners possessing one clip, and using it over and over. As clips get older, they tend to spread open, and catch on the inside of the magazine instead of falling easily out the bottom. However, tests have shown that often, though not always, by the time clips reach this point, they are incapable of securely holding cartridges, and will not function properly in the Carcano rifle; causing jams instead.

C2766 is a bit of an enigma. We see it being turned every which way in Alyea's film, and still no clip is visible. Fritz carries it in an upright position to the 1st floor and half a block from the TSBD, the clip is seen protruding from the bottom of the magazine. You may be right, someone may have jammed an empty clip up from the bottom of the magazine; thinking that was the correct way to load a Carcano clip. As I do not know the consequences of inserting the clip the wrong way into the clip latch are, I was hoping that you had unearthed some information as to what might happen. It may very well be that the clip could enter at a slight angle, and get jammed into the clip latch.

The question is, was the clip found by the rifle and inserted back into the magazine, or was a clip brought to the scene? If a clip was brought later, there could not have been a cartridge in the chamber, unless someone removed the bolt, inserted a cartridge base first into the extractor claw, and re-inserted the bolt and cartridge into the rifle chamber.

http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/parts.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert,

Thanks for that detailed sketch & description. One point that the Graf & Bartholomew article made was that a mis-shapen clip wouldn't fire bullets.

IF, on the 6th floor, a clip had been in the M-C mis-shapen and spread open, how on earth does it glide out 2 inches (only- rather than completely fall out) once Day brought it outside?

No way.

Therefore, there was no clip inside the M-C when it was filmed on the 6th floor. And,

Since the weapon customarily loads from the top, one would rightly conclude that the sidewalk clip (the 2-inch clip seen jutting out) had been loaded from the bottom.

There were no fingerprints found on the clip. The Warren Report's description of the clip (p. 555) makes no mention of how it is ejected from the M-C rifle. As Accessories After the Fact outlines (p. 117), the Report's assertion that "when the rifle was found in the TSBD Building it had a clip" has 2 references in the testimony, but when one looks at these 2 references, the clip is not mentioned. Further, Day (WCH IV p. 260) added that he had dictated to his secretary re: items recovered from the 6th, which included a clip, stamped SMI, 9 x 2. Yet the official stamp was SMI 952.

One would be inclined to deduce that the DPD was faking it as regards their reports about the clip.

These factors (no prints, deceitful accounts) lead me to believe that there never was any clip found on the 6th. It was brought there, before the rifle discovery.

It was brought there by the head of the Crime Lab, J. Carl Day.

And, you can see his efforts in the Crime Lab photos I posted, trying to hide what he'd done, since he realized he'd been filmed out on the sidewalk.

Day, I'm happy to announce, was not the kingpin of the Dallas law enforcement conspirators. He was a misguided puppy, drawn into the plot by that German shepherd Fritz and his sheepdog accomplice Decker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I think the following data from Harvey & Lee relates to this issue:
p. 51) In January 1953 the HUAC in New York made reference to a "Mrs. M. Oswald" in a CIA Office of Security file. The file contained references to 1941, Nazis, and New Jersey. Judge John Tunheim, of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), wrote to Henry Hyde in an attempt to get the HUAC files on Lee and Marguerite Oswald released, but his request was refused.
Here are the facts.
The 1941 HUAC hearings were mainly, if not totally swallowed up by an investigation into Nazis in New Jersey. As part of that investigation, the HUAC published the names of all the employees of the German Library of Information - which was purportedly churning out Nazi propaganda.
One of the stenos listed as employed by the library was a "Mrs Oswald"... not "Mrs M Oswald" as Richard and/or Armstrong asserts and certainly not "Marguerite Oswald" as stated elsewhere on the net.
Marguerite Oswald was running a lotion shop in Fort Worth at the time. I could probably find out what the fake Marguerite's albi is - but I think she already has the best one ready made - she never existed
------------------------------------------------------------------
So... it's not surprising that this "Mrs Oswald" was named in a CIA office of security file dealing with Nazis in New Jersey in 1941. This Mrs Oswald was employed by said Nazis in spreading propaganda.
As interesting as all of that is, it has bugger all to do with the Lee Harvey Oswald case - though there is an entirely different connection between the Oswald case and that New Jersey Nazi investigation by HUAC - as explained in the backend of LHOCW vol 2! Thanks Richard, for the opportunity to shoot another Armstrong fish in a barrel with the added bonus of being able to plug my own book!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't want to comment on this until I had a chance to check it out. "Judge John Tunheim, of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), wrote to Henry Hyde in an attempt to get the HUAC files on Lee and Marguerite Oswald released, but his request was refused." It is another of those claims that has been copied and pasted all over the web as if a given as true - with not one - not a single person giving a citation.

This is from the ARRB final report:

6. House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)
During the 1950s and 1960s, this Committee investigated "un-American" activities of various individuals and groups. In the summer of 1996, the staff of NARA's Center for Legislative Archives did an initial survey of the HUAC files and identified files on Lee Harvey Oswald, Marina Oswald, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC), and Mark Lane (a Warren Commission critic). Under House Rules, investigative records of a House committee may be closed for fifty years after the committee finishes their investigation and shuts down.
In November 1996, the Review Board requested that Congress make these records available for inspection by the Review Board to confirm whether the records initially identified by NARA staff were assassination records and should be released to the public. The Review Board received no responses and raised the matter again in 1997. In January 1998, the Clerk's Office sought permission from the Judiciary Committee to open up the HUAC files for Review Board inspection. The Judiciary Committee initially denied the Board's request, but upon reconsideration ultimately agreed to release substantial HUAC files relating to the JFK assassination.
1. Marguerite was not identified by NARA as being in those files.
2. The vast bulk of the files were eventually handed over.
-------------------------
This tends to support my contention that the "Mrs. Oswald" in the files was indeed the Mrs. Oswald I pointed to previously.
How's that sword in the ground holding up, sport?
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...