CATCH OF THE DAY

FOUND THESE IN MY FILES TODAY

13 FROM 100 EQUALS 87 PER CENT OF AMERICANS REJECT THE WARREN REPORT.

Below is the FBI warning hoover said never existed.

CAN ANYONE SEE "WHY" THEY NEVER RELEASED THE COMPOSITE OF THE SUSPECT? ? ?>>>

Fo those who don't know about evidence/testimony in the 26 volumes..

HOW 'BOUT DAT FOLKS? NO HIDELL ALLOWED TO GET MAIL AT OSWALD'S P O BOX ! !

GOOD OLE DANNY BOY ! ! !

The bullet hole in JBC"S jacket is "NOwHERE NEAR the lapel.

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

It looks like we Caught mucher1 Lying AGAIN...

"yeuhd" <needleswaxman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:3e1c7318-f5bc-46ff-8720-fc2e2fc43df1@q21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...

1. All WC witnesses were allowed to claim immunity from prosecution
based on their testimony. See Appendix 3, pp. 473-474, of the Warren
Report:

I Post>>>

FBI Gemberling Report 9/19/64.

JURISDICTION (WCR Page 454) BELOW

claviger asked...

More:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7590&pid=167636&mode=threaded&start=#entry167636
"In 1959, Mohrenschildnt married Jean LeGon, who worked at a high end
fashion store in Dallas called Nardis. The owner of this was Abraham
Zapruder. Mohrenschildnt might have met LeGon through Zapruder, as
both were members of the Dallas Council on World Affairs, one which
both were members. Others members included Clint Murchinson, H.L.
Hunt, George Bush, Sarah Hughes (who would later swear in LBJ on Air
Force One in Dallas the day of assassination), Mr. Byrds, who was the
owner of the Book Depository, and George de Mohrenschildt’s brother,
Dimitri von Mohrenschildt. Allegedly, the Dallas Council on World
Affairs was sponsored by the CIA, though I’ve yet to confirm this."

I ANSWER...

FOR YEUHD

The bullet hole in JBC's jacket was NOWHERE near the lapel.

The ALLEGED phone call to Twiford came in LATE OCTOBER ! ! !

Emory Roberts own Report states that Rybka was to be in the back seat of the follow up car.

FOR CHUCKIE;

FOR ShutterBun.

for steve

FBI Instructs NBC to "Shoot Down Garrison".

PROOF that the CIA did not destroy the Mexico City audio tape !

FOR TIMMY BRENNAN

The above is from the HSCA Executive Session of March 9, 1977.

Motorcades usually go down Main St. in Dallas.

Stemmons AND industrial Intersect AT the Trade Mart>>>

"UPWARD TRAJECTORY" FOR BACK WOUND

HSCA VOLUME VII PAGE 175

GUNBELT RESIDUE

FOR CLAVIGER

From Jean Davidson's book "Oswald's Game"

IT's A NOVEL ! ! !

From HSCA Volume VI page 109 (below)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARSH SCREWS UP AGAIN

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 "Six Seconds in Dallas" page 107.

See Further screw-ups from Marsh below.

RECORDING ROOM

ONLY 2 SHELLS FOUND

Below is page 109 from HSCA Volume VI stating that the boxes in the snipers nest Moved within 2 minutes of the shooting. shooting.

WOW ! ! !

The Gov't should have Hired this Oswald guy.

He can be in TWO (2) places at the same time.

1 Dallas @ Sylvia Odio's./Mexico City

2 Sixth Floor/Second Floor.

WAIT A MINUTE, THEY DID ! ! !

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/lho.htm

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/U-2.htm

Here's a Beauty (below) from Coup d'Etat in America

FOR YEUHD

Ask someone to read the captions marked as "X" & "Y"

Timmy wrote;

timstter@gmail.com <timstter@gmail.com>

Clarification already given, Robsie Crapper. He was travelling in
Mexico under the name Harvey LEE. That's quite a stretch from Lee
OSWALD, Robsie Crapper.

LOL! This bloke, Robsie Crapper, is an IDIOT. Numbers are about evenly
split on this board, by my reckoning. Let's start by counting the
CTers. OK, robcap, that's one. Curiousgeorge1, that's two. Waitaminit
we're still @ one, LOL! :-)

Clarification already given, Robsie Crapper. He was travelling in
Mexico under the name Harvey LEE. That's quite a stretch from Lee
OSWALD, Robsie Crapper.

Well, I read it as you accepting the letter as genuine; a letter we
have at least THREE sources on. If it wasn't genuine, why are we
bothering to explore the claim in it that he was travelling in Mexico
under a false name?

He was travelling under the name Harvey LEE, according to his tourist
visa and the way he signed the hotel register. That's a long way from
the name Lee OSWALD, which was the name the CIA heard him give when
they were monitoring his calls.

Huh? Have you ever looked at CE 2123, Robsie Crapper? It includes a
copy of Oswald's Mexican tourist card (# 24085) issued to Mr Harvey
Oswald LEE, photographer.

Do a bit more reading in CE 2123, Robsie Crapper. I think you'll find
a hotel register signed by a Mr Harvey Lee, if you look hard enough.
No, shown he was travelling as Harvey LEE, when his real name was Lee
OSWALD.

Start with CE 2123. If you need more, let me know.

No, already explained. He was travelling under the name Harvey LEE.
His REAL NAME was Lee OSWALD.

Huh? Garbage! There is a mountain of evidence to say Oswald went to
Mexico.

Your question was answered, Robsie Crapper. Oswald was travelling in
Mexico under the name of Harvey LEE. His real name was Lee OSWALD.
Even someone as stupid as you should be able to discern the
difference.

I say Lee OSWALD was travelling in Mexico under the name of Harvey
LEE, Robsie CRAPPER. Got any evidence he wasn't?

LOL! Garbage! A mountain of evidence Oswald went to Mexico! Already
shown he was travelling under a false name, Harvey Oswald LEE, when he
was in Mexico.

Already explained, ad nauseum. His travel papers were issued in the
name of Harvey LEE. He signed the hotel register as Harvey LEE.
Evidence in the 26 volumes supports that contention. All you have is
the opinion of Robsie Crapper, er, I mean Rob Caprio, so far. He
appears UNABLE to produce a SINGLE bit of evidence that Oswald NEVER
visited Mexico City in late 1963, as he contends.

Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

HERE are the pages from Volume XXIV (BELOW)

Someone traveled to Mexico City under the name Lee Harvey Oswald!

ALSO SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm

RFK was "Opposed" to the CIA's plans to Assassinate Castro.

(From Schweiker Subcommittee Report)

"Walt" <papakochenbrot@evertek.net>

wrote in message news:f4d3544f-3e9e-487d-a13d-076cc7754a7e@a5g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

On 3 Mar, 09:01, much...@gmail.com wrote:

Duh.... Of course the story doesn't say but anybody who knows anything
about the assassination knows that all available manpower was
concentrated on "investigating" ( covering up) the facts.
Ya see Mark, if it's not written in the Warren Report you are lost,
because you are unable reason and assimilate the information that is
there.... but unwritten. Any intelligent person can understand that
the police weren't pursuing domestic squabbles, or cold cases that
weekend. One has to wonder how that short article got published,
because the cops sure as hell were NOT investigating the possible
connection between the Walker hoax and the murder of President
Kennedy....So WHO told Lorrie Brook to write that short article????
It's obvious to me that "someone" was trying to prod the police into
investigating the possibilty that Oswald was involved in the Walker
hoax, because a reporter had asked Chief Curry if there was any
connection the previous evening. Curry had not picked up on the
suggestion and so "someone" attempted to get the DPD's attention a few
hours later when the paper went to press. At the same time the paper
was being printed Walker was talking to a Helmut Muench, a reporter in
Germany and telling him that Oswald had been the man who had shot at
him and RFK had ordered the police to release Oswald after that
attempt.

It's very obvious to me that "someone" was desperately trying to tie
Oswald to the Walker hoax........

Walker's phone conversation from Germany>>>

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>>>

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

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.