Jump to content
The Education Forum

Was The HSCA's conclusion helpful to the case of certain 'Conspiracy Theories'


Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Hi Cliff.

Just a quick questions for clarification...

When you say...

Which 'debate' in particular are you meaning?

The debate over the police dictabelt, the acoustics.

The physical evidence proves 4+ shots, why debate weaker evidence?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:
1 hour ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Hi Cliff.

Just a quick questions for clarification...

When you say...

Which 'debate' in particular are you meaning?

The debate over the police dictabelt, the acoustics.

The physical evidence proves 4+ shots, why debate weaker evidence?


Not only is the acoustics evidence weaker, it is difficult for the layman to understand. It serves no useful purpose IMO and can be abused by CT critics in garbage-in garbage-out analyses that are hard to understand and debunk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:


Not only is the acoustics evidence weaker, it is difficult for the layman to understand. It serves no useful purpose IMO and can be abused by CT critics in garbage-in garbage-out analyses that are hard to understand and debunk.

 

Same goes for the head wound(s), the provenance of CE-399, Z-film alteration, computer models of trajectories, and any number of overly complex rabbit holes touted by CT Pet Theorists.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

*Put's on Devil's Advocate hat...

there seems to be, in overly simplistic terms, 3 options...

1. Oswald did not bring a rifle to work that day.
2. Oswald did bring a rifle to work that day and passed it off to someone else.
3. Oswald did bring a rifle to work that day and did not pass it off to someone else.

The question fundamentally becomes from where did the rifle come from (and when) and where did the rifle end up (and when)... as per the 'official account' the rifle came from the Paine's garage and ended up on the 6th floor of the TSBD... the question of when remains, and indeed the how...

Happy to hear thoughts on the matter. ;)

I am in camp #2.

The rifle came from LHO, who also had the rifle in Dallas and in New Orleans, according to Marina Oswald.

Ruth Paine never saw the rifle -- but Marina Oswald said that she herself saw the rifle in Ruth Paine's garage -- wrapped inside a blanket.

On the afternoon of 11/22/1963, when Marina showed the Dallas Police the blanket -- it was empty.

The testimony of Wesley Frazier is substantially true and correct, IMHO, with normal errors.   LHO brought a package to Wesley's car on the morning of 11/22/1963, but Wesley didn't take out a ruler and measure the package.   He only guessed at its size much later, when pressed and pressed for the size -- in the context of the charge that he transported the JFK murder weapon, and might be an accomplice to murder.

Nobody inside the building saw LHO with a package when he entered -- and LHO uncharacteristically hurried many paces in front of Wesley on the way to the TSBD from the parking lot that day, so the likelihood is greater that LHO handed the package to somebody outside of the TSBD before he entered the building.

As I said -- it could have been Loran Hall, or somebody else connected with Guy Banister in the context of a Kill Fidel plot.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

Same goes for the head wound(s), the provenance of CE-399, Z-film alteration, computer models of trajectories, and any number of overly complex rabbit holes touted by CT Pet Theorists.


I agree with you Cliff. And now I have a better understanding of the beef you have with those who want to use high-tech methods to prove a conspiracy.

I think you are right, that we should stick to putting forth to the public the easy-to-understand evidences and proofs. However, I also believe it it useful to study things that are not so clear-cut and use high-tech methods internally in order to better understand what happened. Because this knowledge could help us determine who the culprits were.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


I agree with you Cliff. And now I have a better understanding of the beef you have with those who want to use high-tech methods to prove a conspiracy.

I think you are right, that we should stick to putting forth to the public the easy-to-understand evidences and proofs. However, I also believe it it useful to study things that are not so clear-cut and use high-tech methods internally in order to better understand what happened. Because this knowledge could help us determine who the culprits were.

What would happen if everyone said to Von Pein -- "Replicate the Croft photo jacket-with-exposed-shirt-collar or STFU."

He'd STFU eventually.

The fact of conspiracy needs to be the subtext of our research not the context.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Nobody inside the building saw LHO with a package when he entered -- and LHO uncharacteristically hurried many paces in front of Wesley on the way to the TSBD from the parking lot that day, so the likelihood is greater that LHO handed the package to somebody outside of the TSBD before he entered the building.

As I said -- it could have been Loran Hall, or somebody else connected with Guy Banister in the context of a Kill Fidel plot.

Alternatively, someone in 'camp 3' might say that Oswald went ahead of Frazier to 'stash' the rifle somewhere instead of taking it straight in to the building...

Anyway, as you say, nobody inside the building saw LHO with a package when he entered, so whether he passed it off to someone else or 'stashed' it somewhere, at some point later the rifle must have entered the building and made it's way up to the 6th floor - the question is 'how' did it make that journey. ;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

I  stopped as soon as I started. I copied Marinas testimony and I forgot how dumbfounded it makes me....

LHO: "Hi honey, I'm home! I just took a shot at General Walker!"

Reading stuff like this stops me in my tracks. I don't know what to do with it.

Obviously, that is not the real statement of LHO. Here is a line from Marina.


Mrs. OSWALD. No; the day Lee shot at Walker, he buried the rifle because when he came home and told me that he shot at General Walker and I asked him where the rifle was and he said he buried it. 

To be sure, however,  the list is not that long, although I obviously haven't read everything.

Marina, G. De M., possibly Mrs De M., throw in the Paine's just as speculation and that very well could be it.

Edith Whitworth saw a scope, or other rifle part. There may be another gunsmith in the testimony.

I am sure that most every person ( myself included ) who has read Marina Oswald's testimony felt "stopped in their tracks" and "dumbfounded"  many times as you say you did.

I couldn't help but stop and re-frame in my mind a normal thinking reality of what Marina recounted about things she heard from her husband in regards to his shooting Walker, burying the rifle as he made his get-a-way and her reaction to this as well as GDM and his wife's reactions.

GDM lightheartedly "joking" about the rifle discovery and his inferred guess  ( hunter of fascists) that it was Oswald who took a shot at Walker, as if it was all just some mischievous teenager high jinks like discovering a stolen funny name street sign in that closet, is also gobsmacking.

In my 65 year life experience mind, I can't help but think that a normal reaction to a husband telling his wife about such aggressively violent things as the Walker incident, hijacking planes and maybe targeting Nixon would be for that wife so appalling, revolting and concerning for her baby's welfare that she would have run as fast and as far away from him as she could the first opportunity she had.

And for so-called intelligent and worldly friends who stated many times they were extremely concerned about the welfare of Marina and her baby to not feel the same upon hearing of such things, is to me, simply unbelievable.

Knowing your husband is out taking evening pot-shots at anyone, should make any young mother so terrified and traumatized she'd be looking for the first escape she could find.

But according to Marina's and the DeMohrenschild's recounting of such discoveries, it warrants no more action on their part than joking and leaving it be?

The DeM's should have been running from a dangerous gun shooting rogue like Oswald themselves.

In all the months after Marina says what she saw and heard from her husband in regards to his suggested violent gun using thoughts and actions, did she exhibit and maybe even share to anyone appalled anxiety from such "husband as political hit man" revelations?

I know Marina stated she would admonish Lee with responses such as "that's crazy talk" and tell herself he wouldn't really do such things when he spoke of his violent thoughts and schemes , but after the Walker incident when she knew that he was actually carrying these out, I just can't make sense of her not taking more action to free herself and her baby from such a dangerous person. 

I know this has all been covered 10,000 times, but it still carries huge suspicion upon Marina's part and that of the DeMohrenschilds imo.

 

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

I am sure that most every person ( me included ) who has read Marina Oswald's testimony felt "stopped in their tracks" and "dumbfounded"  many times as you say you did.

I often couldn't help but stop and re-frame in my mind a normal thinking reality of what Marina recounted about things she heard from her husband in regards to his shooting Walker, burying the rifle as he made his get-a-way and her reaction to this as well as GDM and his wife's reactions.

GDM lightheartedly "joking" about the rifle discovery and his inferred guess  ( hunter of fascists) that it was Oswald who took a shot at Walker, as if it is some teen age mischievous action like discovering a stolen funny name street sign in that closet, is also gobsmacking.

In my 65 year life experience mind, I can't help but think that a normal reaction to a husband telling his wife about such things including hijacking planes and maybe targeting Nixon would be for that wife to be so appalled and revolted and concerned for her baby's welfare in the company of such an openly violent father, that she would have run as fast and as far away as she could the first opportunity she could.

And for so-called intelligent and worldly friends who stated many times they were very concerned about the welfare of Marina and her baby to not feel the same upon hearing of such things, is to me, simply unbelievable in a normal thinking world.

Knowing your husband is out taking evening pot-shots at anyone, should make any young mother terrified and traumatized she'd be looking for the first escape she could find.

But according to Marina's and the DeMohrenschild's recounting of such discoveries, it warrants no more action on their part than joking and leaving it be?

The DeM's should have been running from a dangerous gun shooting rogue like Oswald themselves.

In all the months after Marina says what saw and heard from her husband in regards to his suggested violent gun using thoughts and actions, did she exhibit and maybe even share to anyone appalled anxiety from such "husband as political hit man" revelations?

I know Marina stated she would admonish Lee with responses such as "that's crazy talk" and tell herself he wouldn't really do such things when he spoke of his violent thoughts and schemes , but after the Walker incident when she knew that he was actually carrying these out, I just can't make sense of her not taking more action to free herself and her baby from such a dangerous person. 

I know this has all been covered 10,000 times, but it still carry's huge suspicion upon Marina's part and that of the DeMohrenschilds imo.

 

Thanks for your thoughts Joe, I just apply it the unbelievability of the testimony. I can't believe that these things actually occurred. How people were compelled to make such testimony is difficult to understand but it's easier than believing that the events actually happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

...I couldn't help but stop and re-frame in my mind a normal thinking reality of what Marina recounted about things she heard from her husband in regards to his shooting Walker, burying the rifle as he made his get-a-way and her reaction to this as well as GDM and his wife's reactions.

GDM lightheartedly "joking" about the rifle discovery and his inferred guess  ( hunter of fascists) that it was Oswald who took a shot at Walker, as if it was all just some mischievous teenager high jinks like discovering a stolen funny name street sign in that closet, is also gobsmacking.

In my 65 year life experience mind, I can't help but think that a normal reaction to a husband telling his wife about such aggressively violent things as the Walker incident, hijacking planes and maybe targeting Nixon would be for that wife so appalling, revolting and concerning for her baby's welfare that she would have run as fast and as far away from him as she could the first opportunity she had.

And for so-called intelligent and worldly friends who stated many times they were extremely concerned about the welfare of Marina and her baby to not feel the same upon hearing of such things, is to me, simply unbelievable.

Knowing your husband is out taking evening pot-shots at anyone, should make any young mother so terrified and traumatized she'd be looking for the first escape she could find.

But according to Marina's and the DeMohrenschild's recounting of such discoveries, it warrants no more action on their part than joking and leaving it be?

The DeM's should have been running from a dangerous gun shooting rogue like Oswald themselves...

Joe,

Ruth Paine would like readers to know that the Russian word for "bury" also means "hide."   So, we should try not to be too literal -- translators are sitting between ourselves and Marina Oswald.

As for George DM joking about LHO's rifle, let's get serious.  That was no joke, and George knew it.  George De Mohrenschildt was as responsible for the Walker shooting as LHO was, and he knew it.  That's why he tried to make light of it for the Warren Commission.

George DM didn't intend for LHO to go all crazy and shoot General Walker -- but George DM did spew hatred about General Walker to LHO, and he later admitted it in 1977 before he blew his brains out (see his manuscript, I'm a Patsy! I'm a Patsy!) rather than tell this to the HSCA. 

Here's how the "joke" really happened.  LHO tried to shoot General Walker on the night of Wednesday 10 April 1963.  On Thursday 11 April 1963 the early morning news hit the airwaves in Dallas with the shocking news.  It was all over the news and the talk shows and the editorials.  It was all over the coffee houses and the water coolers of Dallas.  It was the talk of the cocktail parties at night for the rest of the week.

Volkmar Schmidt, George and Jean De Mohrenschildt felt particularly guilty.  They had tried to convince LHO that General Walker was "as bad as Hitler."  We have Volkmar Schmidt on video confessing this.  George and Jeanne worried for days about how to proceed.  They knew LHO was unpredictable, but they could only hope that he wasn't this crazy.  So, at 10pm on Saturday 13 April 1963, Jeanne got a bright idea.  They would go to an all-night drug store and buy a toy Easter bunny for baby June, and drop by the Oswald's home and present them with an Easter present for baby June, and a surprise visit.  Then Jeanne would secretly and politely search their apartment in search of a rifle.

They arrived at the Oswald's house so late that the Oswald's were now in bed.  No matter.  They banged on the door until the Oswald's got up to answer the door.  Then they practically pushed their way in and started a "party."   The Oswald's gave them something to drink and sat around a few minutes talking with them.  Then Jeanne told Marina, "What a lovely apartment, Marina, show me around!"   So, Marina showed her around, and Jeanne opened this door and that door, and eventually found the rifle.  She shouted out, "George!  He has a rifle!"  And George DM died a little inside -- but he kept his composure and smiled his aristocratic smile.

Jeanne and Marina joined George and Lee at the balcony, and George sheepishly made his famous "joke."   "Lee, did you take that potshot at General Walker?"  Lee looked at Marina, as if to say, "Did you say anything?"   Marina looked back at Lee to say, "No! Did you say anything?"  Then George DM began to laugh.  He laughed and laughed.  Then Lee started laughing.  Then Marina started laughing.  They all nervously laughed this way, because nobody wanted to talk about the elephant in the room.

Soon, George and Jeanne left for the night, wishing everybody Happy Easter.  Yet we must never forget the next stage -- the De Mohrenschildt's never saw the Oswalds again in their lives.

That was no joke.  There was no mirth there.  The sad truth was on the line.  George De Mohrenschildt had truly messed up in a big way.  He would never live it down.

As for Marina -- she always said that after the Walker shooting, her relationship with Lee Oswald was never the same.  Yet she had a baby, and she was pregnant, and she had no money, and she couldn't speak English -- and Oswald's relatives were just as poor.  What choice did she have?  (Perhaps we can begin to see why Ruth Paine began to take pity on Marina Oswald.  Yet Marina was always too ashamed to tell Ruth Paine about Lee's rifle or about the Walker shooting.)

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ruth Paine would like readers to know that the Russian word for "bury" also means "hide."   So, we should try not to be too literal -- translators are sitting between ourselves and Marina Oswald.

Is burried not quite a common word in the US to mean 'hidden' - I'm sure I've heard it quite often on US shows. Anyway.

Paul just wanted to say the rest of your post is awesome, kudos. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Is burried not quite a common word in the US to mean 'hidden' - I'm sure I've heard it quite often on US shows. Anyway.

Paul just wanted to say the rest of your post is awesome, kudos. ;)

Alistair, to use buried for hidden in the US, you would almost have to be having an in-person conversation to use it, along with a nod or wink, or body motion. On the other hand, if you are talking about information, or a secret, buried works fine. 

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

Alistair, to use buried for didden in the US, you would almost have to be having an in-person conversation to use it, along with a nod or wink, or body motion. On the other hand, if you are talking about information, or a secret, buried works fine. 

Aye, 'buried evidence', figuratively of course, not literally. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...