Bart Kamp's Lancer presentation

[Tony Krome]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Interesting.  The operations manager, Truly, and, the building manager Campbell.  Did Oswald come back in after being on the front steps to hide in the closet before leaving because he figured out, he was the patsy?

One thing that stands out as a fact in the Campbell article, is the word "storage room". The reporter could not have known about the storage room unless he got that from Campbell. However, the reporter could have embellished with "raced into", so not sure of the timing here.

Here is something else that stands out. If the WC really were interested in how and when Oswald exited the front door, they would have called Campbell.

[Alan Ford]

20 hours ago, Miles Massicotte said:

"Then went outside to watch P. Parade" is about as clear and unambiguous as it gets. These are contemporaneous notes. What other explaining needs to be done here. It doesn't mean that Oswald actualy was outside watching the parade, but it clearly means that Hosty recorded/recalled Oswald saying that. 

The most important thing about the Hosty draft interrogation report is of course its contents. The second most important thing is that its contents were suppressed. Mr. Oswald's claim that he "went outside to watch P. Parade" could not be revealed publicly.

This latter fact speaks loudly to the all-important question of whether or not Mr. Oswald's claim was true.

[Alan Ford]

19 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

The most important thing about the Hosty draft interrogation report is of course its contents. The second most important thing is that its contents were suppressed. Mr. Oswald's claim that he "went outside to watch P. Parade" could not be revealed publicly.

This latter fact speaks loudly to the all-important question of whether or not Mr. Oswald's claim was true.

No less to the point!

A decade ago (in the famous "Oswald Leaving TSBD?" thread on this very forum), Mr. Sean Murphy, working only from the OFFICIAL interrogation reports, made the following deductive claim:

1. Mr. Oswald told Capt. Fritz he visited the second-floor lunchroom PRIOR TO the motorcade

2. Mr. Oswald told Capt. Fritz he then went down to the first floor to eat lunch (still PRIOR TO the motorcade)

3. Mr. Oswald told Capt. Fritz he then went out front----------------FOR THE MOTORCADE.

Six years later, Mr. Murphy's deduction received stunningly precise confirmation thanks to the diligence of Mr. Bart Kamp:

Team Keep LHO Away From Dem Steps has been playing bad-faith defense ever since.....................

Edited December 9, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Sandy Larsen]

8 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

3. Mr. Oswald told Capt. Fritz he then went out front----------------FOR THE MOTORCADE.

 

How did Sean Murphy make that deduction from the interrogation reports?

According to the interrogation reports, Oswald said he went outside with Bill Shelly after his 2nd floor encounter with Officer Baker. Which, of course, would have been after the motorcade.

Having asked and said that...

According to the reports, Oswald said that he went to the 2nd floor to get a coke, had his encounter with Baker, and then went to the first floor and ate lunch. Which is nonsense... Oswald ate lunch before the motorcade even went by.

But if you remove from the report the part about the 2nd floor encounter, then all is well. Oswald's story then is that he was on the first floor for lunch, but went to the 2nd floor for a coke. He then returned to the first floor and ate lunch. After that, he went out front with Bill Shelley. Presumably to watch the motorcade. (I demonstrated this, many, many years ago on the forum, but got no response.) The same holds true with Fritz's handwritten notes... the thing about the 2nd floor encounter could easily have been added later. That is to say, there was room to fit it. (Another thing I demonstrated.)

Uncle Malcolm and Bart Kamp later produced Hosty's P. Parade note, which supports the Prayer Man hypothesis. (And corroborates what I had demonstrated.)

 

[Alan Ford]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

How did Sean Murphy make that deduction from the interrogation reports?

According to the interrogation reports, Oswald said he went outside with Bill Shelly after his 2nd floor encounter with Officer Baker. Which, of course, would have been after the motorcade.

Having asked and said that...

According to the reports, Oswald said that he went to the 2nd floor to get a coke, had his encounter with Baker, and then went to the first floor and ate lunch. Which is nonsense... Oswald ate lunch before the motorcade even went by.

But if you remove from the report the part about the 2nd floor encounter, then all is well. Oswald's story then is that he was on the first floor for lunch, but went to the 2nd floor for a coke. He then returned to the first floor and ate lunch. After that, he went out front with Bill Shelley. Presumably to watch the motorcade. (I demonstrated this, many, many years ago on the forum, but got no response.) The same holds true with Fritz's handwritten notes... the thing about the 2nd floor encounter could easily have been added later. That is to say, there was room to fit it. (Another thing I demonstrated.)

Uncle Malcolm and Bart Kamp later produced Hosty's P. Parade note, which supports the Prayer Man hypothesis. (And corroborates what I had demonstrated.)

 

The key thing was the relationship between the first Bookhout/Hosty JOINT REPORT and the subsequent Bookhout SOLO report. The former hedged, whereas the latter mendaciously shifted the timeframe to post-assassination.

In the mix also was Officer Baker's same-day affidavit, which described a different encounter to the lunchroom encounter that became canonical.

The gaslighters who would have us believe there is no explosive significance in the Hosty draft report spent the years between 2013 and 2019 waving away Mr. Murphy's claim with the dismissive declaration, 'There is zero evidentiary support for the crazy idea that Oswald claimed to have gone out front'.

Since 2019 they have insulted our intelligence by trying to convince us that Agent Hosty heard Mr. Oswald say something like the following---------------

Well, when the cops were searching the building, I was in the lunchroom on the second floor buying a Coke. A cop came in and pointed a pistol in my gut. Mr. Truly told the cop I worked there, and the cop ran off. I then went downstairs and ate my lunch. Then I went out front to see what all the commotion was about.

---------------and, being brain-damaged, wrote it up as follows:

It's beyond laughable.

The inescapable fact is that the Hosty draft report makes sense of the official reports in just the same way that Mr. Murphy did.

This is not at all complicated: Mr. Oswald's actual claim about when he went out front was distorted beyond recognition------------------------------it had to be, because it happened to be true.

The Warren Gullibles attack this 'Duh' conclusion. Of course they do. They're Warren Gullibles.

But what's truly sad is the phenomenon of Lunchroom-Gullible 'nothing-to-see-here' CTers attacking with everything they've got Mr. Oswald's own claimed alibi.

Thankfully, however, they ain't got much. The unearthing of the Hosty report brought this whole thing into its endgame.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Bill Brown]

 

Reporter: "Were you in that building at the time?"

Oswald: "Naturally if I work in that building, yes sir."

 

[Alan Ford]

1 minute ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Reporter: "Were you in that building at the time?"

Oswald: "Naturally if I work in that building, yes sir."

 

Already addressed, Mr. Brown.

Shouldn't you be working on your letter to Santa Claus?

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

The key thing was the relationship between the first Bookhout/Hosty JOINT REPORT and the subsequent Bookhout SOLO report. The former hedged, whereas the latter mendaciously shifted the timeframe to post-assassination.

In the mix also was Officer Baker's same-day affidavit, which described a different encounter to the lunchroom encounter that became canonical.

The gaslighters who would have us believe there is no explosive significance in the Hosty draft report spent the years between 2013 and 2019 waving away Mr. Murphy's claim with the dismissive declaration, 'There is zero evidentiary support for the crazy idea that Oswald claimed to have gone out front'.

Since 2019 they have insulted our intelligence by trying to convince us that Agent Hosty heard Mr. Oswald say something like the following---------------

Well, when the cops were searching the building, I was in the lunchroom on the second floor buying a Coke. A cop came in and pointed a pistol in my gut. Mr. Truly told the cop I worked there, and the cop ran off. I then went downstairs and ate my lunch. Then I went out front to see what all the commotion was about.

---------------and, being brain-damaged, wrote it up as follows:

It's beyond laughable.

The inescapable fact is that the Hosty draft report makes sense of the official reports in just the same way that Mr. Murphy did.

This is not at all complicated: Mr. Oswald's actual claim about when he went out front was distorted beyond recognition------------------------------it had to be, because it happened to be true.

The Warren Gullibles attack this 'Duh' conclusion. Of course they do. They're Warren Gullibles.

But what's truly sad is the phenomenon of Lunchroom-Gullible 'nothing-to-see-here' CTers attacking with everything they've got Mr. Oswald's own claimed alibi.

Thankfully, however, they ain't got much. The unearthing of the Hosty report brought this whole thing into its endgame.

 

Yeah, when you remove the 2nd floor encounter from the interrogation reports, everything starts falling into place. Which is why the content of the Hosty P. Parade memo didn't come to us as a surprise, but rather corroborated what we we had already accepted as fact.

But, as you said, there are still a handful of CTers who hang onto the 2nd floor encounter. I recall John Armstrong getting angry with me when I tried to explain why the encounter was a fabrication. That was several years ago, not long after I became a forum member. So he could feel differently now.

 

[Miles Massicotte]

3 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Reporter: "Were you in that building at the time?"

Oswald: "Naturally if I work in that building, yes sir."

 

If you are being led down a hallway in a giant commotion of press reporters and a reporter asked you if you were in the building at the time, and in a split second you've got to think it over, you are probably either going to answer yes or no. If you answer no, it makes it sound like you were somewhere else other than the TSBD. Oswald answered yes, clearly understanding the implication of the question (i.e. you are suspected of shooting the president, shots came from the building, were you in the building?). It doesn't in any way rule out that he could have been on the steps, which, while outside the TSBD, is still the TSBD. Interpreting that way is taking his answer way too literally. We would have all liked Oswalds response to have been "Yes, I was at the TSBD, but on the steps by Elm St." or "No I was in Saskatchewan" or "Yes I was in the 6th floor window shooting at that son of a bitch pew pew" but that's not how real life works. 

[David Von Pein]

47 minutes ago, Miles Massicotte said:

Oswald answered yes, clearly understanding the implication of the question (i.e. you are suspected of shooting the president, shots came from the building, were you in the building?). It doesn't in any way rule out that he could have been on the steps.

But Oswald's response to the reporters [in the "I'm Just A Patsy" TV news film] generally matches the alibi that Oswald gave to Dallas Police Captain Will Fritz that same day, with Oswald telling Fritz that he was "having his lunch about that time [of the assassination] on the first floor" (Warren Report; Pg. 600).

Fritz never said that Oswald told him that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" or "standing on the top step in front of the building with Wesley Frazier" as the assassination was taking place. Oswald specifically said that he was inside the building on the first floor (which was a big fat lie, of course). But, per CTers, I guess I'm supposed to believe that Captain Fritz was the person telling a bunch of lies, instead of Mr. Oswald.

But the main point I always stress to CTers when this topic comes up is....

When given several chances to shout out to the world (via the live television cameras and microphones that were being shoved in his face on both November 22nd and 23rd at Dallas City Hall), Lee Harvey Oswald never uttered a word about being on the front steps of the Book Depository at precisely 12:30 PM on November 22.

Don't you think that's mighty strange if Lee Oswald had, in fact, been located on those steps when JFK was being killed?

More.....

DVP's JFK Archives / Oswald's Whereabouts At 12:30 PM On Nov. 22nd

 

Edited December 10, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Alan Ford]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yeah, when you remove the 2nd floor encounter from the interrogation reports, everything starts falling into place.

Indeed. And there is no cop encounter mentioned in the Bookhout/Hosty joint report------------because it's a messy halfway house between the Hosty draft report and the Bookhout solo report.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Alan Ford]

4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

But Oswald's response to the reporters [in the "I'm Just A Patsy" TV news film] generally matches the alibi that Oswald gave to Dallas Police Captain Will Fritz that same day, with Oswald telling Fritz that he was "having his lunch about that time [of the assassination] on the first floor" (Warren Report; Pg. 600).

Fritz never said that Oswald told him that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" or "standing on the top step in front of the building with Wesley Frazier" as the assassination was taking place. Oswald specifically said that he was inside the building on the first floor (which was a big fat lie, of course). But, per CTers, I guess I'm supposed to believe that Captain Fritz was the person telling a bunch of lies, instead of Mr. Oswald.

Yes, since 2019 we have proof that Captain Fritz lied about what Mr. Oswald actually said

[Alan Ford]

4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

But the main point I always stress to CTers when this topic comes up is....

When given several chances to shout out to the world (via the live television cameras and microphones that were being shoved in his face on both November 22nd and 23rd at Dallas City Hall), Lee Harvey Oswald never uttered a word about being on the front steps of the Book Depository at precisely 12:30 PM on November 22.

Don't you think that's mighty strange if Lee Oswald had, in fact, been located on those steps when JFK was being killed?

~Yawn~

Yes, you always 'stress this point to CTers', but then just as always ignore the explanation that has already been given to you multiple times. Kind of like your notorious habit of excerpting from forum discussions with CTers on your site in a way that always gives you the last word. Pathetic behavior.

[David Von Pein]

29 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Kind of like your notorious habit of excerpting from forum discussions with CTers on your site in a way that always gives you the last word.

What would you expect, for Pete sake? It's MY own site.

I find it difficult to believe that even a conspiracy fantasist like yourself is actually silly enough to expect that the final words that I choose to print in any of my various articles/pages on MY website (the "sign off" for those pages, IOW) would feature comments written by some conspiracy theorist.

If you think that, you're living on Planet Venus.

(Also --- Do you ever wonder if an "LNer" ever gets "the last word" on Kennedys & King or any other site run by a CTer? I sure don't wonder. I know the answer.)

 

Edited December 10, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Alan Ford]

5 hours ago, Miles Massicotte said:

If you are being led down a hallway in a giant commotion of press reporters and a reporter asked you if you were in the building at the time, and in a split second you've got to think it over, you are probably either going to answer yes or no. If you answer no, it makes it sound like you were somewhere else other than the TSBD. Oswald answered yes, clearly understanding the implication of the question (i.e. you are suspected of shooting the president, shots came from the building, were you in the building?). It doesn't in any way rule out that he could have been on the steps, which, while outside the TSBD, is still the TSBD. Interpreting that way is taking his answer way too literally. We would have all liked Oswalds response to have been "Yes, I was at the TSBD, but on the steps by Elm St." or "No I was in Saskatchewan" or "Yes I was in the 6th floor window shooting at that son of a bitch pew pew" but that's not how real life works. 

Don't think I've ever seen the point put so well. Thank you.

Had there been time for the reporter to ask a follow-up, we might well have gotten the following exchange:

---Did you shoot the President?

---I work in that building.

---Were you in the building at the time?

---Naturally if I work in that building, yes, sir.

---Where in the building were you?

---Front steps.

There would have been no logical contradiction whatsoever here between Mr. Oswald's penultimate answer and his final answer.