POLL. Is John Iacoletti right to separate the coupon from the envelope in CE773?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Guess what? When you produce the microfilm, you will then be able to say that it is in itself the evidence proving it exists. Not that complicated, a reasonable person will not roll over just because you tried to answer a question with a question.

You said there was microfilm

I said "Where is it?

Your answer --well, you did not have an answer instead you pick a game of tennis by saying "where's the evidence that it is missing?"

My answer to that question is I did not claim it exists or does not exist. I sure am not going to take your word for it, you yourself don't even know if it does or not.

BTW This is exactly why you are unable to make a point and if you ask "were they lying too?" I don't know who is lying but they sure fooled you

[John Mytton]

Guess what? When you produce the microfilm, you will then be able to say that it is in itself the evidence proving it exists. Not that complicated, a reasonable person will not roll over just because you tried to answer a question with a question.

You said there was microfilm

I said "Where is it?

Your answer --well, you did not have an answer instead you pick a game of tennis by saying "where's the evidence that it is missing?"

My answer to that question is I did not claim it exists or does not exist. I sure am not going to take your word for it, you yourself don't even know if it does or not.

BTW This is exactly why you are unable to make a point and if you ask "were they lying too?" I don't know who is lying but they sure fooled you

For a start the microfilm was verified by Waldman to be authentic, you lose.

Btw Einstein, even if the microfilm was examined, who is left alive to verify that the microfilm actually came from Kleins, that boat has long sailed, try something new.

JohnM

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Where is it?

[John Mytton]

Where is it?

Wow you really don't get it do you!
I don't know where the microfilm is and I don't care, Waldman the Vice President of Kleins verified that the microfilm was genuine!
CASE CLOSED!

JohnM

[Denis Pointing]

Where is it?

If you're that interested do a little research and find out! You are familiar with that word I presume, r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h? Here's a clue to get you started; "Storage of the microfilm in a room with a controlled environment is extremely important."

[John Iacoletti]

"Unscientific"!  LOL.

Handwriting "analysis" is unscientific.  Deal with it.

  Let's see: there are prints,

What prints?

photos,

Photos of what?

an order form in Oswald's handwriting,

LOL.

serial number match,

Match to what?

Oswald's PO Box,

What about it?

an alias linked to Oswald

How is this alias "linked to Oswald"?

via a fake ID in his possession at the time of arrest,

Do you have any evidence that this ID was in his possession at the time of arrest -- beyond "cop said so after he was dead"?

the rifle is found at his place of work,

Lots of people worked there.

there is no accounting for any other rifle in Oswald's possession.

There is no accounting for THAT rifle in Oswald's possession either.

  Whew.

Whew indeed.  Your rhetoric overfloweth.

  It's hard to imagine what more evidence there could be.

Rhetoric and unsupported claims aren't evidence.

  I wonder what constitutes "scientific" evidence if all of this does not do the trick.

Do you have any understanding of the scientific method?  Handwriting "analysis" is not a hard science.  Especially in 1964.  No standards, no tests, no demonstration of accuracy, not measurable, not repeatable, not falsifiable.  And even more unreliable on a tiny sample from a copy.

How much such evidence is there to link John Wilkes Booth the gun he used to kill Lincoln?

Not this false analogy again.  There is much better evidence against Booth than "who may have bought the gun".

[John Iacoletti]

I don't know where the microfilm is and I don't care, Waldman the Vice President of Kleins verified that the microfilm was genuine!

How would Waldman know this?

[Richard Smith]

When it is noted that Oswald is linked to the alias used to order the rifle via an ID found in his possession upon arrest, the dishonest contrarian suggests further proof of this is necessary by dismissing the word of those who arrested Oswald (i.e. the very people who were there).  That is asking for a time machine and implying nothing can ever be proven.  The direct implication is that those present lied about the ID since they confirmed it was found on Oswald.  The only explanation given for them to lie is they were "cops" and "Oswald was dead."  Perplexing how that raises any doubt whatsoever about the confirmation of Oswald being in possession of the fake ID.  If there were any doubt whatsoever (and there is not), the same alias is also found on a PO Box form linked to Oswald.  Let me guess, we need a time machine to go back and confirm the post office didn't forge that form.  It's a slam dunk that the alias used to order the rifle can be linked to Oswald. There is zero doubt.

Another example.  The serial number is a match - to which the dishonest contrarian asks "a match to what?"  Hmm. Let's think about that one.  According to Klein's, a rifle with a unique serial number was mailed to Oswald's PO Box.  A rifle with that same serial number was found at the TSBD (Oswald's place of employment).  Now think real hard about where the match is.  When it is noted that the rifle was found at Oswald's place of employment, the response is that "lots of people worked there."  LOL.  It is mind boggling to understand how that is relevant since none of these other employees have any link whatsoever to the rifle.  How many of these "other people" who worked there had this particular rifle sent to their PO Box under an alias that could be linked to them?  How many left their prints on that rifle? How many were photographed holding it?  How many carried a long package that morning that could never be accounted for then lied about it?  It wouldn't matter if a million people worked there because there is not a single other person who worked there that has even one iota of evidence that links them to the rifle and yet that is what the contrarian suggests could be the explanation for the rifle's presence while dismissing a mountain of evidence linking the rifle to Oswald.  Good grief.