Ruthie Paine's Confusing Calendar

[John Iacoletti]

I have no idea why you're saying this. AFAIK, there's nothing in the records to show exactly what date the Seaport revolver or the Klein's rifle arrived at the post office. What are you basing your above comment on?

In fact, there’s no evidence that they ever arrived at the post office.

[John Iacoletti]

March 25, 1963: LHO picks up the weapons.

This is another one of those assumptions masquerading as a fact that LN evangelists like Parnell are so fond of. There is no evidence whatsoever of Oswald picking up these (or any) weapons at the post office or REA.

[John Iacoletti]

It depends on what you mean by "When the orders arrived". Are you talking about when the order forms arrived at Klein's & Seaport?

Yes.

These documents do not tell you that.

[John Iacoletti]

This, folks, is called Denial (a common malady amongst conspiracy fantasists). The biggest example of which can be seen HERE.

I can’t think of a more blatant example of denial than the notion that a wedding ring in a cup constitutes evidence of murdering the president.

Seriously, one of your examples of these “provable lies” is that Oswald said he didn’t shoot the president. That’s not just circular — it’s ridiculously circular.

[David Von Pein]

These documents do not tell you [when the order forms arrived at Klein's/Seaport].

Yes they do.

[David Von Pein]

I can’t think of a more blatant example of denial than the notion that a wedding ring in a cup constitutes evidence of murdering the president.

The fact that Oswald left his wedding ring behind at the Paine house on the morning of November 22nd (something he had never done before) is most definitely one of the pieces of circumstantial evidence that leads in the direction of Oswald's guilt. Only a staunch CTer would think otherwise.

But I'm not surprised that hardened conspiracists are unable to admit that such a change in Oswald's behavior is indicative of LHO's guilt. Just as no CTer on Earth will admit that Oswald's first-ever Thursday trip to Irving or his carrying a large-ish paper bag into the TSBD on 11/22 and lying about the contents of that bag to Buell Frazier are significant things at all. All of these things just roll off the backs of the ABO CT crowd. And most of the time CTers just simply ignore all of this important stuff. Just like Oliver Stone did in his 1991 movie. Which are just more examples of CTer Denial At Its Finest.

[David Von Pein]

An appropriate addendum to my last post....

"Oliver Stone, in his movie 'JFK', never saw fit to present for his audience's consideration one single piece of evidence that Oswald killed Kennedy! So a murder case (the Kennedy assassination) where there is an almost unprecedented amount of evidence of guilt against the killer (Oswald) is presented to millions of moviegoers as one where there wasn't one piece of evidence at all. There oughta be a law against things like this." -- Vincent Bugliosi

[David Von Pein]

Why would you need to quote a whackjob like Bugliosi to support your fantasy?

Otto shows up (right on cue). It's just as I said above....

"Most of the time CTers just simply ignore all of this important stuff."

So tell me, Otto, do you think Bugliosi's quote above is an accurate one or not? If you don't think it's accurate, then please provide us with just one piece of LHO-incriminating evidence that Mr. Stone utilized in his 1991 film.