Then went inside with the curtain rods

[Walt Cakebread]

You must be in your LNer mode: If you believe things are provable, then I guess you don't reside on the far shores of the lunatic fringe after all. 

Not so fast ......Chappie.     I said I wanted to prove that Lee Oswald was NOT GUILTY by PROVING that he could NOT have placed the carcano on the floor where two DPD detectives verified (with precise maps ) that it was located before anybody touched it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94APWcGDMyY

[Steve M. Galbraith]

There is no evidence of the bag containing curtain rods which Oswald denies bringing to work. Then either Oswald had a pancake for lunch or he didn't see the bag carried from the front, as he said in testimony.

You’ve just quoted Bugliosi as saying "he left his wedding ring in Irving, so he must have killed the President”. Cite that, please. And show us where anyone other than you said "he went to a movie, so he must have killed JFK"

Oswald "just" went to a movie. He "just" left his wedding ring. He "just" left the building shortly after the shooting. He "just" took a bus. He "just" took a cab when the bus was caught in traffic. He "just" showed no interest in the assassination. He "just" owned a rifle. He "just" was seen carrying a large package to work that day. He "just" surprised his wife by visiting her in the middle of a week. He "just" held radical anti-American views. He "just" he "just" he "just".

He "just" did all of these things.

See what they do? They strip every single act that he took - give it an innocent (and partial) explanation - and then remove it from any larger context at all. Each of these acts are judged in isolation from each other.

That's how a Mark Lane, a defense attorney operates. Imagine using this type of thinking in evaluating any other historic event? You'd be laughed out of the room. But in Oswald defender world it's all about defending him.

[Bill Chapman]

Not so fast ......Chappie.     I said I wanted to prove that Lee Oswald was NOT GUILTY by PROVING that he could NOT have placed the carcano on the floor where two DPD detectives verified (with precise maps ) that it was located before anybody touched it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94APWcGDMyY

Not so fast, Waldo. You have yet to thank me for providing you with information about Tony Fratini.

[Alan Ford]

You've bailed I see. Not so confident in Meros now?
I guess you've finally read Buell's wc testimony

You've got the wrong guy completely, Mr Chapman. Apology accepted!

[Alan Ford]

Oswald "just" went to a movie. He "just" left his wedding ring. He "just" left the building shortly after the shooting. He "just" took a bus. He "just" took a cab when the bus was caught in traffic. He "just" showed no interest in the assassination. He "just" owned a rifle. He "just" was seen carrying a large package to work that day. He "just" surprised his wife by visiting her in the middle of a week. He "just" held radical anti-American views. He "just" he "just" he "just".

He "just" did all of these things.

See what they do? They strip every single act that he took - give it an innocent (and partial) explanation - and then remove it from any larger context at all. Each of these acts are judged in isolation from each other.

That's how a Mark Lane, a defense attorney operates. Imagine using this type of thinking in evaluating any other historic event? You'd be laughed out of the room. But in Oswald defender world it's all about defending him.

Ah, Mr Galbraith, the very man! How do you-----------with your much-vaunted rational approach to the evidence------------account for the information and dates on this document?



Cordial request: please do NOT run away from this like you did before! 

[Walt Cakebread]

Not so fast, Waldo. You have yet to thank me for providing you with information about Tony Fratini.

Ok,  Mr Ego, Thanks for the info.....

[Walt Cakebread]

You must be in your LNer mode: If you believe things are provable, then I guess you don't reside on the far shores of the lunatic fringe after all. 

No,Chappie.... I'm not in a LNer mode....  I'm in the mode I'm always in....An open minded researcher.

However... I'll confess that I am heavily biased in my belief that Lee Oswald was screwed by the government, the police, and the press.  Because the evidence indicates to me that the official US government created and approved tale is utterly ridiculous, and only a simple minded fool would accept it as the truth.

[Zeon Mason]

I don’t see why just 2 curtain rods would have been in a 8”x 34” paper bag constructed with tape , not why the rods would be left behind in the TSBD absent the bag

Nor why just 2 rods would have even been considered important if randomly found by a TSBD employee

This is why I have speculated that Oswald may have taken an entire SET of Rods AND blinds (rolled up) and actually in  the original mailing package bag on the shelf in Paines garage. ( Mrs Paine I think mentioned having mail ordered this set of blinds)
address of Paines residence on this package would be significant.

Now if THIS package was discovered by some TSBD employee  then it makes sense WHY such object would be significant enough to report and once it became apparent to some dedicated WC theory authority  , this bag negated official WC theory, that the bag HAD to be returned to Paines garage before Mrs Paine became aware the package was missing

Question though, who would be so dedicated to the official LN theory that they would willingly attempt to suppress or confuse evidence? I mean besides, Will Fritz (shells tossed and boxes moved, Lt Day, (the “palm print”)and Mr. Belin( Dorothy Garner who?)