This is how the rifle was gotten into the building

[Alan Ford]

I've asked you a couple of very simple questions to test the veracity of your otherwise baseless theory that Oswald carried some curtain rods to work.  Thus far you have refused to even attempt to answer.

Oh Mr Smith, you old rascal--------I was waiting for you to offer a meaningful answer to the question I asked you first:

Where did the numbers 275 and 276 come from?

'From the WC' doesn't cut it-------you need to explain when and why those specific numbers were assigned.

Can you do that? Or would you prefer to deflect and run away again?

1) Why would "Mr. Oswald" himself lie and deny that he carried curtain rods that day if he in fact had done so?

 

What a terrible waste of your first question, Mr Smith!

We don't know that Mr Oswald did in fact deny it. I am proposing that he didn't. Prove my proposition wrong!

Now! If you answer my question, I'll happily move on to your second one. Hopefully it won't be so garbage-based as your first one! 

[Walt Cakebread]

Oh Mr Smith, you old rascal--------I was waiting for you to offer a meaningful answer to the question I asked you first:

Where did the numbers 275 and 276 come from?

'From the WC' doesn't cut it-------you need to explain when and why those specific numbers were assigned.

Can you do that? Or would you prefer to deflect and run away again?

 

What a terrible waste of your first question, Mr Smith!

We don't know that Mr Oswald did in fact deny it. I am proposing that he didn't. Prove my proposition wrong!

Now! If you answer my question, I'll happily move on to your second one. Hopefully it won't be so garbage-based as your first one! 

would you prefer to deflect defecate and run away again?       

[Gary Craig]

https://www.maryferrell.org/photos.html?set=NARA-BLANKET
Photo Set: NARA Evidence Photos: Blanket, Bag, Rods

[Ross Lidell]

It beggars belief that no one in the FBI had thought to ask Ms Paine back in November whether any curtain rods were missing from her home.

Why would they ask?.....When they knew the curtain rod story was BS!

Holy cow Walt! Are you coming over to the "light side".

[Rick Plant]

ESTIMATED: Like Buell Frazier and Linnie May Randle ESTIMATED Oswald's "Friday morning package" to be 2 feet give or take a few inches. That means as much as 27 inches. The shortest the package could have been (if it contained Oswald's Carcano rifle) was 35 inches. When disassembled, the longest part was the wooden stock which was 34.8 inches long. A discrepancy of 8 inches is accounted for by the fact that Randle and Frazier did not "measure" Oswald's package: they ESTIMATED its length.

So let's have no more of that claim: The package that Randle and Frazier saw Oswald carry on the morning of 22 November 1963 was "too short" to contain the Carcano rifle.

And that I believe is CHECKMATE.

Buell Frazier years later obtained a similar rifle and stated Oswald couldn't have been carrying one under his arm.                 

[Ross Lidell]

Buell Frazier years later obtained a similar rifle and stated Oswald couldn't have been carrying one under his arm.               

Really! What's to be derived from that?

This is immaterial to whether Oswald's long package contained HIS Carcano rifle (disassembled) or not.

[Rick Plant]

Really! What's to be derived from that?

This is immaterial to whether Oswald's long package contained HIS Carcano rifle (disassembled) or not.

Frazier measured the similar style rifle and held it under his arm coming to the conclusion the package was not a rifle based on the length. Is scientific? No. But based on the length he concluded it was not.               

[Ross Lidell]

The second way is most likely how Oswald carried his "Carcano" package

And there is your wishful thinking again..... speculative and worthless as always and only designed to not deal with what the witness actually said.

This perfectly reasonable (and possible) option explains why Frazier-

Only an unreasonable person considers his own conclusions to be reasonable.

And that I believe "is" CHECKMATE.

Which is exactly why you should not play chess.... you haven't got a clue how to...


It's pretty pathetic to ignore what Frazier said and make up your own story instead, for which there is not a shred of evidence, and then call the conclusion reasonable.

Another pointless, essentially non-specific reply born out of a compulsion to attack for no good reason.

And there is your wishful thinking again..... speculative and worthless as always and only designed to not deal with what the witness actually said.

I dealt with it. The witness (Frazier) "estimated" the package to be 8 inches shorter than it would have to be if it contained the disassembled Carcano rifle. He described the way Oswald carried the package: Cupped in his hand and under the armpit. Due to human anatomy and physics, it was possible for the top of the package to protrude forward of the torso rather than be wedged in the armpit. The fact that Frazier did not consider this possibility is immaterial. It's possible for Frazier to be honest but honestly mistaken.

Only an unreasonable person considers his own conclusions to be reasonable.

Only? So you're saying it's impossible for a "reasonable" person to consider his own conclusions "reasonable". Explain that.

It's pretty pathetic to ignore what Frazier said and make up your own story instead, for which there is not a shred of evidence, and then call the conclusion reasonable.

It's not a "story". It's an explanation of how Oswald's long package (containing the disassembled Carcano) "could" have been carried and not be seen above LHO's shoulder--by Buell Frazier.