CATCH OF THE DAY

This will be a Temporary Page with different official records placed here for a day or two.

MORE OSWALD Codes?

From Volume XXII page 848

Did Oswald own 25 socks?

Did Oswald have 40-41 shoes?

Did Oswald own 56 hats?

Did Oswald own 37 shirts?

Did Oswald own 48 overcoats?

Did Oswald own 48 undershirts?

WALLY WROTE; (caught in another lie)

> And in addition he COULDN'T have read what he claimed he
> read because 7.65 Argentine Mausers are NOT stamped on the barrel, nor
> are they stamped in the fashion described by Roger Craig.

Walt also posted>>>

Dear Stupid lying Bastard..... Now you want to blame me for your
inability to READ....

I've always said that Roger Craig was lying when he said that he saw
"STAMPED RIGHT THERE ON THE BARREL...7.65 MAUSER" I've always made
it clear to a person who can READ that Mausers are NOT stamped on the
BARREL of the rifle...

And NOW that it becomes clear to you that I knew what I was talkin
about you want to blame me for your ignorance of the nomenclature of a
rifle and your inability to comprehend what you read....You're sick
Rob... Get some couch time.

I POST;

See Walt's other lies HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/wally_world.htm

FOR HARRY

From Hosty's book

FOR JUSTME

Motorcades usually go down Main St. in Dallas.

Stemmons AND industrial Intersect AT the Trade Mart>>>

Marsh wrote

How many times do you have to be told? Pay attention this time.
McClelland did not draw that.

>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/head2.gif

I write;

Not only did he draw that picture....

He wrote so ON the picture & Signed the picture

Here's the one from Josiah Thompson's book "Sis Seconds in Dallas" page 107.

See Further screw-ups from Marsh below.

BOBBY & THE WARREN REPORT.

ARRB Report Chapter 1 page 11 footnote 17.

MORE THAN 3 TRAMPS

For JGL aka cdddrasftsman

For my Good Friend Russ (Helen Keller) Burr

FOR DAVID V P

GUNBELT RESIDUE

ANY COMMENTS ON #17?

ANY COMMENTS?

ONLY TWO SPENT SHELLS FOUND. (11/22/63)

AGAIN;

Only TWO (2) spent shells Found.

AGAIN

Only 2 spent shells found

FOR MY VERY BEST FRIEND BUD WHATZISNAME.

Stuffed hand puppet resembling a dog.

Closeup

In White House Garage later.

TIMMY;

From cover of "Four Days". For Timmy (below)

Timmy; Show us the "white flower" you speak of.

ps, Timmy;

Pages 12-13 are even Clearer (below

Did we catch Martin Shackleford LYING AGAIN??

Martin wrote>>>

"Martin Shackelford" <mshack4@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:aI0kj.402$uE.50@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...

> Because he looked exactly like Oswald. This isn't rocket science.
>
> Martin

I wrote;

WHY don't you post a photo of John Masen

I decided to do it Myself.

HERE are photos of Masen/Oswald

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:_30jVi3oJUYJ:www.dealeyplazauk.co.uk/John%2520Masen.htm+John+Masen&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us

FOR DAVID V P

Looks like JBC found an "EXTRA" bullet from his leg in the operating room.

This comes from page 18 of JBC's book "In History's Shadow".

How 'bout dat! ! ! ! !

For Yo(Momma)Harvey

FOR CLAVIGER (Who wrtote Below)

> claviger's posts prove he's High on Theories/Low on evidence/testimony.
>
> He refuses to address these>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm

Yes, exactly the same as you, who refused to address my challenge to
your claim that I knew "very well" that there was a book which
identified the cameraman in New Orleans who documented Oswald
distributing leaflets, & who was posting here, as an FBI informant. Yet
strangely, for almost the first time ever, although you had almost never
failed to reply to me before, you suddenly stopped posting any replies
to me starting on the day that I challenged you to prove that I even
knew THE NAME OF THIS SUPPOSED BOOK.

I still don't know the name of the book.

I furthermore asked you, over & over & over, in numerous articles, to
tell me the name of this book, & although you had almost never failed to
reply to me before, strangely, you suddenly stopped replying to me, for
the first time ever in the entire time I've posted to this newsgroup, &
appeared to be deliberately refusing to tell me the name of this book
that, according to you (& no other poster) I had already "known" when I
had posted the original article in which I had challenged you about this
cameraman.

Let's see: it has now been a year at least, & I'm still waiting &
waiting & waiting for you to prove this statement of yours, that you
addressed to me personally, to be true:

"As a Learned man you know very well it isn't MY claim that jwrush was
an FBI Informant. You know darned well that the claim came from a book."

Could it be that (gasp!) the reason you refused, in article after
article after article to tell me the NAME of this book (as in the
"title" of the book) is that no such book actually exists?

More to the point: why don't you ever admit that you have no possible
way of knowing that at that time, or now, you had the slightest idea
whether or not I even knew of the *existence* *of* *this* *book* (if it
does exist; strange that the name [title] of the book has not yet been
quoted)? Why don't you ever admit that you have no possible way of
knowing whether or not I have ever, to this day, read the book, or even
known of its existence?

You are one of the primary reasons I almost never post to this newsgroup
anymore. You make absolutely unprovable claims about me personally,
then ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to back up your claims with even the most meager
shred of evidence.

When a poster ignores/refuses/fails/whatever to back up a claim, any
claim, when directly challenged to do so, over & over & over, should
anyone take any claim that poster makes seriously, whether it's about
the JFK assassination or any other subject??

I call everyone who reads this newsgroup, even if they never post here,
to note that this person has never, not even once, even *tried* to back
up his claim that I knew "darned well" that the claim that jwrush was an
FBI informant came from any book that has ever been published in any
book, in any country, in any language, on this planet. I furthermore
call everyone to note that this same poster has not once in my
experience even *tried* to *name* the TITLE of this book, or its
*author*, or its *publisher*, or its ISBN, or any other information
other than the 100% uncorroborated claim (as far as I know, & as far as
any reply this person has ever made to me) that any such "book" was ever
"published," in any language, on Earth, even in very limited printings
by an extremely obscure publisher. This poster has, as far as I know,
merely claimed that there was some book or other that supposedly named
jwrush as such, but this same poster ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to NAME WHICH
BOOK THIS IS, EVEN WHEN ASKED OVER & OVER & OVER TO NAME IT.

Gasp! O Heavens Above! Surely...it can't be...that no such book
ACTUALLY EXISTS!

(Most reasonable people would almost immediately assume that if there's
the slightest delay in naming the book, even after being challenged day
after day after day to name it, that the book more likely than not was
never published, anywhere, in any country, in any language, by any
publisher. Most people, upon claiming that such a book exists, would
almost immediately utter its title when so challenged.)

You are just as bad as the LN, Joe Zircon. He accused me, falsely, of
saying something I never said, then openly stated that he absolutely
refused to locate even one article that I ever posted in which I "said"
what he claimed I said, & continued to refuse to quote such an article
verbatim after I challenged him in multiple articles, on multiple dates,
to do so.

Tacit refusal is just as bad as stated refusal. If you were anywhere
close to as periodic a poster to this newsgroup as me that would be one
thing, but you were a *regular* poster during the *entire* *time* that I
challenged you to back up what you claimed about me, & though you
continued to post numerous articles in numerous threads here, you
suddenly, for the first time ever, stopped replying to me starting on
the very day that I challenged you to either back up this assertion, or
admit you didn't know for sure whether or not your claim about me was
correct. You did neither, even though I myself have many, many times
freely admitted my own errors in this same newsgroup.

Which one of us will most reasonable people assume to have the greater
credibility, you or me?

I LOVE supplying LN's with their own records.

It Proves they don't know what they're TALKING ABOUT.

HERE'S THE BOOKI>>>

HERE'S THE PAGE>>>

The SAME information I gave him a Year ago.

This time I included the photos.

NIXON-RUBY CONNECTION

FOR TONY MARSH

more for marsh

tomnln wrote:
>
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_marsh@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:TvOdnVOMz_ivZt_anZ2dnUVZ_rLinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> tomnln wrote:
>>>
>>> "mark foster" <barloop23@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9js3k3pdccr832kttkiqin9n0iebmj6u0b@4ax.com...
>>>> On 19 Nov 2007 15:06:29 -0500, "Gerry Simone $O$"
>>>> <newdecentpro@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A friend of mine called me to tune in my FM radio (99.1) to hear
>>>>> someone
>>>>> interviewed on Radio CBC about the JFK Assassination.
>>>>>
>>>>> I told her it could have been Bugliosi.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed it was (he was somewhere in the States - Colorado I believe).
>>>>>
>>>>> It had already started so I only caught the last 15 minutes or so.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bugliosi believes that anyone who reads his book will be convinced
>>>>> 95% that
>>>>> Oswald was the lone assassin and that there was no conspiracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem though is, will the majority of people read his massive
>>>>> tome?
>>>>> (He's aware of this).
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose this is the reason for the miniseries.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wish I was able to phone in and argue with him on a couple of
>>>>> points.
>>>>
>>>> What exactly would you want to argue with him about? He seems to have
>>>> accurately addressed virtually every remaining issue.
>>>
>>> Did he address the Lies of officer Baker?>>>
>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
>>>
>>> Did he address the Officer J M Smith IDing the S S Agent behind the
>>> fence ACCURATELY?
>>> BY LAPEL PINS?
>>>
>>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> No one said anything about lapel pins. Why do you invent false arguments?
>
> Are you Denying that ALL Secret Service Agents working the Presidents
> Dallas visit were ID'd by "Lapel Pins"???
>

Ah, there's the rub. ALL detailed agents were accounted for. Smith could
think it was a local SS agent on the ground.

> Are you Denying that ALL DPD working that visit were shown photos of
> those Lapel Pins???
>

Yes.

> How did YOU think the S S Agents were ID'd by Smith??

The man showed him genuine SS identification.