JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[GBinOz]

Don’t accuse me of subterfuge George when you’re spewing out this infantile nonsense.

Both noticed a large bulky package - maybe they were some f****ng huge sandwiches or normal sized sandwiches in a huge package? The size is irrelevant because they were making estimates based on a brief look. It’s just nitpicking which is what conspiracy theory is.

Frazier saw Oswald’s lunch packet numerous times but on this occasion there was clearly something different about it. It was bigger. We know this because Frazier and Randle both tell us this. It cannot be clearer. For you to be correct you have to accuse Frazier of lying. There is no escaping this.
Complete nonsense. Bigger doesn't mean big enough to contain a rifle, which the witnesses specifically excluded.
Frazier stated specifically, definitely and with absolutely no doubt, hesitation or question that Oswald told him that the package contained curtain rods (so maybe he took a huge baguette to work for a change?) So are you accusing Frazier of lying?

This one is black and white…..either Oswald lied or Frazier lied about the curtain rods. Sensible, reasoned, logical, common sense thinking suggested that Oswald was clearly lying but you’ll probably say that Frazier was lying despite having absolutely no motive for doing so.
I'm not saying Frazier was lying. There had been discussion on other days about curtain rods so there could have been some misunderstanding, or is that, and mistakes, only allowed for apologists? So if there were curtain rods in the bag, it would only show that it wasn't a gun, because the witnesses said it wasn't big enough for a gun.
Oswald lied….the package contained the rifle….the packaging was found with Oswald’s fingerprints on on the 6th floor. Take those bloody conspiracy goggles of just for once George.

I am not accusing anyone of lying. You are misrepresenting the testimony of the witnesses. I have posted a transcription of the cross examination by Day, and the witnesses described the manner in which the package was held, the approximate length, and each stated, on two occasions, that the bag they saw was much too short to have contained the rifle, even in its disassembled state. Size is of the utmost relevance. It is irrelevant whether the package was too big for sandwiches or whether it could have contained curtain rods. The relevant point is that the witnesses stated that it was too small to contain a rifle. These witnesses were Texans and would have experience and knowledge in handling guns beyond just watching Elmer Fudd cartoons. They would be well aware of the size of a rifle and whether a bag was too small to contain it.

Are you saying that their testimony is falsified. Can you post an official cross examination where the witnesses use the words "large bulky package"? Only someone with zero knowledge of firearms would suggest that a rifle could fit in a bag the size of a brief case, and that's the size they were talking about.

[GBinOz]

I’m tired of listening to the downright silliness that’s being posted on here by posters that will swallow absolutely any old guff created by conspiracists loonies. I’m also sick to the back teeth of you two constantly expecting me to answer question when you both steadfastly refuse to respond to my points or answer my questions. It’s a one way show on this thread and it smacks of cowardice. I’m expected to read this, and watch this when you to exhibit textbook bias by point blank refusing to read anything that isn’t written by some witless, nothing-better-to-do conspiracy fantasist.

Anyone who thinks that……. someone wanting the President dead wouldn’t want a simple plan, with as few as possible involved, with as little as possible that could go wrong in favour of framing a man who acted about as guilty as possible, for whom they had to falsify a connection to purchasing two guns, for whom they had to falsify fingerprints, falsify ballistic records, falsify the medical records, have control over the public as witness (with or without cameras) control the Doctors at the hospital, alter wounds, gather together a whole Commission of highly respected men and get them to treasonable falsify a report and then hope that not one single one of these 100’s of people veers from the script or speaks out of line……is little short of deranged.

Not a chance. No one would get involved in a conspiracy involving so many agencies and with so many people either directly or indirectly involved. If you really believe in that then I despair for the human race. All I can say is……GROW UP.

Herlock, you don't answer questions. You just resort to endless repetitions of the same posts. When Fishy or I provide answers to your questions you ignore them as though they were never posted. But when you resort to applying words such as loonies, cowardice, deranged and infantile you cross the line. In future you can conduct your tantrums with someone else.

[GBinOz]

Your kidding right ? You tell him George, i cant waste time with with silly magic bullet theory that has so clearly been proven to be nonsense.

Hi Fishy,

Those with no firearms knowledge don't seem to know that it is the pointy end that does the damage. When a bullet hits bone it deforms and crushes from the front. The WC conducted experiments with goats and a cadaver and published the photos of the crushed bullets as exhibits, thus disproving their own pristine single bullet theory.

But the magic bullet theory fails to clear the first hurdle UNLESS the location of the back wound is FALSIFIED by relocating it from 5-6 inches below the shoulders to in the back of the neck. There is no doubt as to the actual location. It is even shown on Humes autopsy report.

Cheers, George

[FISHY1118]

Hi Fishy,

Those with no firearms knowledge don't seem to know that it is the pointy end that does the damage. When a bullet hits bone it deforms and crushes from the front. The WC conducted experiments with goats and a cadaver and published the photos of the crushed bullets as exhibits, thus disproving their own pristine single bullet theory.

But the magic bullet theory fails to clear the first hurdle UNLESS the location of the back wound is FALSIFIED by relocating it from 5-6 inches below the shoulders to in the back of the neck. There is no doubt as to the actual location. It is even shown on Humes autopsy report.

Cheers, George

Thank you George , im glad you picked up on that about the the bullet , it was a pretty novice attempt to divert from the clean undamaged front end of it. But then again thats how the Warren Commission convinced the masses with this method and many more just like it .

[Herlock Sholmes]

Your kidding right ? You tell him George, i cant waste time with with silly magic bullet theory that has so clearly been proven to be nonsense. And is that a personal insult i see there Herlock?, hmmmmmm. Be careful ,you know the rules do it again and you just might find yourself getting chucked off here real quick, even if i have to go too . So keeep your insults to yourself .

And that’s the second time recently that you’ve hinted at me getting ‘chucked.’ Clearly your intention. The point that I made was clearly not a personal insult.

And yes….”You tell him George,” because you have no answer. It was exactly the same on the TOD thread. No proper content but you just stood on the sideline cheering on posters who agreed with your point. It wasn’t a pristine bullet as can be seen from the photo. Trouble is of course that the CT’s tend to forget to show that one.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This is what a desperate post looks like when all else fails . When the evidence contradicts your arguement simply apply the Audrey Bell rule

1 Everyboby lied

2 They dont exist

3 There a bunch of morons

That Warren Commission succeeded in convincining the weak ,narrow minded , uneducated masses, a loan gunman killed the president when the amount of contradiory evidence suggest otherwise . And the happy masses lapped it up because thats what they were told .

Im not going to keep responding to your biased silliness. I’ll ask you 2 simple questions Fishy to compared to yours.

Dr. James Humes, who actually performed the autopsy on JFK, and was absolutely categorical that Kennedy’s head shot came from behind. So was it a case of…..

1. Humes lied.

2. Humes didn’t exist.

3. Humes was a moron.

Buell Wesley Frazier gave Oswald a lift to work something that he regularly did (he also worked at the TSBD)

1. Frazier lied.

2. Frazier didn’t exist.

3. Frazier was a moron.

Just a couple of easy questions for you to ignore.

[GBinOz]

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did.
Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."
--Jesse Curry, Dallas Police Chief (" 'Not Sure' on Oswald Author Curry
Indicates," 'Dallas Morning News', Nov. 6, 1969)

[FISHY1118]

And that’s the second time recently that you’ve hinted at me getting ‘chucked.’ Clearly your intention. The point that I made was clearly not a personal insult.

And yes….”You tell him George,” because you have no answer. It was exactly the same on the TOD thread. No proper content but you just stood on the sideline cheering on posters who agreed with your point. It wasn’t a pristine bullet as can be seen from the photo. Trouble is of course that the CT’s tend to forget to show that one.

The answer was in Georges response it was that obvious a 3 year old would have spotted it .

[FISHY1118]

And that’s the second time recently that you’ve hinted at me getting ‘chucked.’ Clearly your intention. The point that I made was clearly not a personal insult.

And yes….”You tell him George,” because you have no answer. It was exactly the same on the TOD thread. No proper content but you just stood on the sideline cheering on posters who agreed with your point. It wasn’t a pristine bullet as can be seen from the photo. Trouble is of course that the CT’s tend to forget to show that one.

So calling me ''Pathetic'' isnt a personal insult ?

[FISHY1118]

Im not going to keep responding to your biased silliness. I’ll ask you 2 simple questions Fishy to compared to yours.

Dr. James Humes, who actually performed the autopsy on JFK, and was absolutely categorical that Kennedy’s head shot came from behind. So was it a case of…..

1. Humes lied.

2. Humes didn’t exist.

3. Humes was a moron.

Buell Wesley Frazier gave Oswald a lift to work something that he regularly did (he also worked at the TSBD)

1. Frazier lied.

2. Frazier didn’t exist.

3. Frazier was a moron.

Just a couple of easy questions for you to ignore.

If Humes is correct and Audrey Bell is correct we have a problem then dont we , as far i know Humes or anybody else claimed that Audrey Bell was in incorrect with her statement about the bullet . Show me Warren Commission evidence that contradicts what Bell said ?, show me on what page of the warren commission report the evidence thats ties paper bag to the rifle .

FBI expert James Cadigan. Cadigan said ''explicitly'' that he had been unable to find any marks, scratches, abrasions, or other indications that would tie the bag to the rifle. Those negative findings assume greater significance in the light of an FBI report (CE 2974) which states that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was in a well-oiled condition. It is difficult to understand why a well-oiled rifle carried in separate parts [as the WC claimed] would not have left distinct traces of oil on the paper bag, easily detected in laboratory tests if not with the naked eye. The expert testimony includes no mention of oil traces, a fact which in itself is cogent evidence against the Commission's conclusions.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I am not accusing anyone of lying. You are misrepresenting the testimony of the witnesses. I have posted a transcription of the cross examination by Day, and the witnesses described the manner in which the package was held, the approximate length, and each stated, on two occasions, that the bag they saw was much too short to have contained the rifle, even in its disassembled state. Size is of the utmost relevance. It is irrelevant whether the package was too big for sandwiches or whether it could have contained curtain rods. The relevant point is that the witnesses stated that it was too small to contain a rifle. These witnesses were Texans and would have experience and knowledge in handling guns beyond just watching Elmer Fudd cartoons. They would be well aware of the size of a rifle and whether a bag was too small to contain it.

Are you saying that their testimony is falsified. Can you post an official cross examination where the witnesses use the words "large bulky package"? Only someone with zero knowledge of firearms would suggest that a rifle could fit in a bag the size of a brief case, and that's the size they were talking about.

You keep obfuscating George.

From the WC.

Frazier: When he rode with me, I say he always bought lunch except that one day on November 22 he didn’t bring his lunch that day.

So for the first time Oswald altered his routing to get to the Paine’s on the evening before the assassination.


then:


Ball: Would he bring it in a paper sack or what kind of container?

Frazier: Yes, sir; like a little paper sack you get out of the grocery store.


So Oswald always brought his lunch in a little sack.


Later:

Frazier: I told her (his sister) that he had rode home with me and told her he said he was going to come home and pick up some curtain rods or something.

So, unless you accuse Frazier of lying, Oswald lied.


Later:

Bell: This night, this evening, do you remember did you talk to her (his sister) about the fact that he had come home with you?

Frazier: Yes, sir. I believe she said why did he come home now and I said, well, he says he’s going to get one curtain rods.


He mentions the curtain rods to Linnie Mae Randle.


Then when asked about the package on the back seat:

Frazier: if, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center , right. But I say like I said just roughly estimate and that would be around 2 feet, give and take a few inches.


The package was on the back seat when he saw it. Frazier was clearly estimating. Are we back to saying that estimations can’t be wrong (as some do on the JTR threads)


Ball: How wide was the package?

Frazier: Oh, say, around 5 inches, something like that. 5, 6 inches or there.


And did his sister remember the curtain rods story?


Randle: What Wesley told me. That Lee had road home with him to get some curtain rods from Mrs Paine to fix up his apartment.

So yes, 2 people confirm the curtain rods story. Did these 2 perfectly ordinary people come up with this random lie? Or did Oswald lie? Reason gives us only one answer to that one.


Describing the package she said:

Randle: He was carrying a package in a sort of heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me.


A package that clearly stood out as bulkier that a pack of sandwiches.


She estimated its length at a little bit more than 2 feet.

Another estimation.


……..


So the questions are obvious, and easy to answer. Which is the likelier?

a) Frazier and Randle completely invented the story about the curtain rods and they concocted the suggestion that the package was bulkier than Oswald’s lunchbox.

or,

b) These two perfectly ordinary people with no axe to grind told the truth about Oswald’s ludicrous curtain rods story but their estimation of the length of the package was a few inches short due to the fact that they didn’t pay any great attention to it. Frazier having only glanced at it when it was on the seat behind him.

I know which one I go for.

[FISHY1118]

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did.
Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."
--Jesse Curry, Dallas Police Chief (" 'Not Sure' on Oswald Author Curry
Indicates," 'Dallas Morning News', Nov. 6, 1969)

Imagine LHO,s Lawyer at his trial saying this to the jury ?


And some people have the cheek to claim he was guilty without a ''DOUBT'' !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! . The mind truly Boggles

[Herlock Sholmes]

If Humes is correct and Audrey Bell is correct we have a problem then dont we , as far i know Humes or anybody else claimed that Audrey Bell was in incorrect with her statement about the bullet . Show me Warren Commission evidence that contradicts what Bell said ?, show me on what page of the warren commission report the evidence thats ties paper bag to the rifle .

FBI expert James Cadigan. Cadigan said ''explicitly'' that he had been unable to find any marks, scratches, abrasions, or other indications that would tie the bag to the rifle. Those negative findings assume greater significance in the light of an FBI report (CE 2974) which states that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was in a well-oiled condition. It is difficult to understand why a well-oiled rifle carried in separate parts [as the WC claimed] would not have left distinct traces of oil on the paper bag, easily detected in laboratory tests if not with the naked eye. The expert testimony includes no mention of oil traces, a fact which in itself is cogent evidence against the Commission's conclusions.

Do some work yourself for a change Fishy. I’m not spoonfeeding you.

In any discussion on an issue like this who would any thinking person favour? A nurse doing whatever she did or the guy that performed the autopsy? It couldn’t be clearer. Humes trumps Bell. Perhaps you can find the janitors opinion?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Imagine LHO,s Lawyer at his trial saying this to the jury ?


And some people have the cheek to claim he was guilty without a ''DOUBT'' !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! . The mind truly Boggles

That’s the issue. You find a quote that you like and immediately believe it.

Conspiracy theorists are the worlds most gullible people.

[FISHY1118]

Do some work yourself for a change Fishy. I’m not spoonfeeding you.

In any discussion on an issue like this who would any thinking person favour? A nurse doing whatever she did or the guy that performed the autopsy? It couldn’t be clearer. Humes trumps Bell. Perhaps you can find the janitors opinion?

Show me where humes saw the bullet bell saw ? You dodged the question