Jump to content
The Education Forum

A revealing rifle.?


Recommended Posts

Is anyone willing to debate an alternative rifle theory? (sorry if done already). 

The Conspiracy narrative for the rifle is often stated as 'Oswald didn' t bring the rifle, and the rifle was very poor for the job intended'. For this debate no further rifle related concerns are necessary. 

What if Oswald did bring the rifle? What if he was well aware of its deficiencies, and that is what reveals his willingness to deliver it. If he had examined it he would know it was not in a fit state to use. Could this have been re-assuring to him? If he had been advised to smuggle in a rifle, perhaps for a fake assassination attempt, or for an FBI sting operation, then he may have been content to take the risk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

What if Oswald did bring the rifle?

Means he had a plan.....  https://kennedysandking.com/content/oswald-on-november-22-1963

that comes together like clockwork at precisely the correct moments.

IF he was going to do this, that would be the last rifle he'd use.... and without a scope for sure....

So much is accepted as real, like a scoped, bolt action rifle is a better weapon for multiple shots on a moving target at reasonably close range (for a scope).

====

Not sure what there is to debate Eddy...  :cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

IF he was going to do this, that would be the last rifle he'd use.... and without a scope for sure....

So much is accepted as real, like a scoped, bolt action rifle is a better weapon for multiple shots on a moving target at reasonably close range (for a scope).

Ditto!

Wouldn't be my choice.  Eddy needs to watch an old boy on the YouTube videos of Hitchok45 as he demonstrates various rife capabilities at Dealey Plaza ranges.  This would be my choice or the rifle it replaced. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vqMIz9ZaMk

If I am remembering correctly the late 50s and early 60s were a time of dumping WWII weapons from the US, England, Germany, and the Italian abominations.  You could pick up a good hunting rifle for about 10 bucks.

 

Edited by John Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure either of these responses hit the mark. I am asking 'could Oswald have willingly smuggled in a rifle for someone else to make use of'.  I am not making a lone nut argument. 

I have read about the pieces of evidence that purport to exclude him from doing so. To me they don't completely preclude it. What if he brought bits on different days? 

What possible 'Patsy' purpose was Oswald willing to carry out, possibly for an intelligence agency?That would incriminate him with the killing, but not require a timed location within the building? I think delivery of a weapon that he knew to be ineffective might be plausible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

'could Oswald have willingly smuggled in a rifle for someone else to make use of'

It happened that way Eddy...

You've read the story of Ralph Leon Yates?  The FBI institutionalized him days after his Jan 1964 polygraph at age 27...
He died 12 years later, still institutionalized, at 39.

Yates also claimed that the man showed him 1 of the Backyard photos... with Yates recognizing it was the man in the car with him...

Yates drops him off at Elm/Houston with his package...  so in a real sense "an" Oswald does what you claim... just not the guy Ruby killed.yates.jpg.ac9741c83db3c98dc0d1e45ec73f9cfe.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2020 at 6:48 PM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Is anyone willing to debate an alternative rifle theory? (sorry if done already). 

The Conspiracy narrative for the rifle is often stated as 'Oswald didn' t bring the rifle, and the rifle was very poor for the job intended'. For this debate no further rifle related concerns are necessary. 

What if Oswald did bring the rifle? What if he was well aware of its deficiencies, and that is what reveals his willingness to deliver it. If he had examined it he would know it was not in a fit state to use. Could this have been re-assuring to him? If he had been advised to smuggle in a rifle, perhaps for a fake assassination attempt, or for an FBI sting operation, then he may have been content to take the risk. 

What if the rifle was fired 3 times from the sixth floor window, but was fired to distract attention and not to hit anyone?  An accurate and reliable gun is not required for this scenario, just something rather noisy that can be seen poking out of a window.

In other words Oswald was more of a hired decoy than an innocent patsy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Mark Tyler said:

What if the rifle was fired 3 times from the sixth floor window, but was fired to distract attention and not to hit anyone?  An accurate and reliable gun is not required for this scenario, just something rather noisy that can be seen poking out of a window.

In other words Oswald was more of a hired decoy than an innocent patsy.

Hi Mark, David Josephs has linked to his article in this thread which shows the evidence is against Oswald actually shooting from the sixth floor. I am less convinced about his exoneration for rifle smuggling. I hadn't seen the Ralph Leon Yates story before, but it adds to the two-trips suggestion for rifle delivery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eddy.... are you thinking Oswald brings this rifle before Friday morning?  If so... How?  If not... my article rests my case...

Dougherty here does a good job refuting Wesley. (see testimony excerpt below) and there's Danny-boy here...

This is a sister protecting her brother/family....

Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.

1644169185_Ratherbagtoobigtoo.thumb.jpg.b8a502ff9d1f95c862342f9c9b7aedb2.jpg

And Wesley's mother shows her kids to be protecting each other...    FBI uses neither WESLEY of FRAZIER and then uses the RANDLE address...

Think they were trying to hide this?  she was not called of course...

1922868400_essiemaewilliamsfbistatement.thumb.jpg.2637200f4a9e0384bcbbfa3db90b80b6.jpg

 

How many times does Ball have to ask and re-ask the same questions?

Mr. BALL - "I started to work today, 11-22-63, at about 7 a.m. o'clock".
Did you tell them that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - The statement says, "I recall vaguely having seen Lee Oswald, when he came to work at about 8 a.m. today."
Mr. DOUGHERTY - That's right.
Mr. BALL - Now, is that a very definite impression that you saw him that morning when he came to work?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, oh--it's like this--I'll try to explain it to you this way--- you see, I was sitting on the wrapping table and when he came in the door, I just caught him out of the corner of my eye---that's the reason why I said it that way.
Mr. BALL - Did he come in with anybody?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - No.
Mr. BALL - He was alone?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone.
Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did.
Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time.
Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so.
Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - The back door on the first floor?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - It was in the back door.
Mr. BALL - Now, that back door is the door that opens onto what? That back door would be the first floor?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - And it opens where?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - On the back deck--on the back dock side over there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2020 at 5:30 PM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Mark, David Josephs has linked to his article in this thread which shows the evidence is against Oswald actually shooting from the sixth floor. I am less convinced about his exoneration for rifle smuggling. I hadn't seen the Ralph Leon Yates story before, but it adds to the two-trips suggestion for rifle delivery. 

Thanks for the tip about David's article, which does cast reasonable doubt on Oswald firing the shots based on the witness evidence.  Like you, I don't think Oswald was merely an innocent bystander.  I struggle to believe the curtain rods story and his lack of interest in the motorcade, so I feel he had prior knowledge of what was going to happen and was simply lying to cover his tracks.  Whether he was the mastermind of events, or just a bag carrying lackey, I'm not sure.  The only certainty is that he fled the scene quickly afterwards, which seems rather suspicious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never discovered any statement from DPD or Sheriff officers who discovered the Carcano (or Mauser) stating that they sniffed the barrel to prove that their discovery had been fired.

Strange that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

I have never discovered any statement from DPD or Sheriff officers who discovered the Carcano (or Mauser) stating that they sniffed the barrel to prove that their discovery had been fired.

Strange that!

The test could have only shown the rifle was not fired in some time... as he says, a single bullet cleans the barrel, but if no bullet was fired it would reveal the rust still in the barrel...  FBI expert doesn’t even test to see if rifle had been fired... par for the course...
 

Mr. McCLOY - When you examined the rifle the first time, you said that it showed signs of some corrosion and wear? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. 
Mr. McCLOY - Was it what you would call pitted, were the lands in good shape? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; the lands and the grooves were worn, the corners were worn, and the interior of the surface was roughened from corrosion or wear. 
Mr. McCLOY - Was there metal fouling in the barrel? 
Mr. FRAZIER - I did not examine it for that. 
Mr. McCLOY - Could you say roughly how many rounds you think had been fired since it left the factory, with the condition of the barrel as you found it? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I could not, because the number of rounds is not an indication of the condition of the barrel, since if a barrel is allowed to rust, one round will remove that rust and wear the barrel to the same extent as 10 or 15 or 50 rounds just fired through a clean barrel. 
Mr. McCLOY - Thank you. 

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...