Why are the CT's so obsessed with disproving the innocent Bus and Cab rides?

[John Mytton]

Round and round we go and now at way over 200 posts, we have 1 CT Walt giving a lame ass excuse for doubting the official version with another equally innocent explanation? So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence", so I gotta ask what are the CT's trying to accomplish here with what you must all know only amounts to worthless go nowhere arguments because it's obvious that not one of you has any interest in solving your "conspiratorial" crime and mistakenly think that creating doubt for the sake of chaos is the answer, but the answer to what?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Round and round we go and now at way over 200 posts, we have 1 CT Walt giving a lame ass excuse for doubting the official version with another equally innocent explanation? So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence", so I gotta ask what are the CT's trying to accomplish here with what you must all know only amounts to worthless go nowhere arguments because it's obvious that not one of you has any interest in solving your "conspiratorial" crime and mistakenly think that creating doubt for the sake of chaos is the answer, but the answer to what?

JohnM

So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence"

Since when does somebody's innocence needs to proven? The last time I looked the onus was and is on the prosecution to prove somebody guilty. But thank your for exposing your Salem like "guilty unless prove innocent" mindset

[Alan Ford]

Wow, so much unproven conjecture and all without even a scintilla of evidence to support this ever increasing level of paranoia, and when you have no answers to what is in fact my "supah-dupah" arguments of evidence that only Whaley exclusively knew that wasn't in the public domain, you suddenly shift the goalposts and now you're reduced to this new level of absurd arrogance that all the inconvenient witnesses lied and all the problematic evidence was manufactured, go away and try and convince someone/anyone of your unsubstantiated ideas and let's see how far that gets you.

Let's translate: The suggestion that the investigating authorities would lie about what LHO said in interrogation can be safely dismissed on the basis that it would require the investigating authorities to lie about what LHO said in interrogation. Wow, a real knockdown argument you got there, Mr Mytton! 

What a pathetic attempt to score points, I was the one who first EDITED my previous post and directed you to the EDITED post and I was the one who first posted the non Dallas newspaper and all the newspaper's thereafter and I was the one who first admitted that Whaley could have gained information from the newspaper article, that is if the same info was published in Dallas and when the tables were turned and I posted non public domain evidence that only Whaley and Oswald knew, you alter the rules and make endless unprovable paranoid claims in a weak attempt to defend your untenable position.

Nope, you made an ill-considered claim about Mr Whaley's supah-dupah-details about Mr Oswald's appearance and, since realizing your goof, have been pretending to be doing something other than kicking yourself for it! 

[Alan Ford]

Perhaps Whaley did see an ID bracelet on the wrist of his passenger who was wearing a BLUE JACKET and BLUE trousers.
ID Bracelets were very common ......  a large percentage of young men wore them....


But the Fact remains Lee Oswald could not have been Whaley's passenger because Lee was wearing a reddish brown shirt with a BUTTON DOWN COLLAR and he was NOT wearing a BLUE JACKET.

Yep, Mr Whaley described the arrest shirt in his affidavit----------------and, to make matters worse, could only (at this early point) describe it as "dark" (no color given). Interesting!

[Alan Ford]

Friends, common sense tells us that the answer to the question 'Why would the authorities go to the trouble of inventing a bus ride, and then a bus and cab ride, for Mr Oswald?' must lie in the answer to another question: 'What did Mr Oswald himself tell Captain Fritz, in that first interrogation session, about how he traveled?' For, if there was something in that answer from Mr Oswald that made the 'investigating' authorities deeply uncomfortable, then we have our motive for deception on the part of the 'investigating' authorities.

After all, these guys went to great efforts to bury Mr Oswald's claim to have visited the second-floor lunchroom for a coke BEFORE the P. Parade and then gone outside to watch the P. Parade. So it's no stretch at all that they would engage in similar shenanigans on this other phase of the 'investigation'.

 

[Walt Cakebread]

Round and round we go and now at way over 200 posts, we have 1 CT Walt giving a lame ass excuse for doubting the official version with another equally innocent explanation? So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence", so I gotta ask what are the CT's trying to accomplish here with what you must all know only amounts to worthless go nowhere arguments because it's obvious that not one of you has any interest in solving your "conspiratorial" crime and mistakenly think that creating doubt for the sake of chaos is the answer, but the answer to what?

JohnM

Round and round we go and now at way over 200 posts, we have 1 CT Walt giving a lame ass excuse for doubting the official version with another equally innocent explanation? So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence",

Yes,  and the reason we go round and round is because you're apparently too damned dumb to comprehend that the WC investigators found that Lee was still at the TSBD at 12:33, and he couldn't possible have been at the Greyhound bus depot in time ( at 12:3? ) to have boarded Whaley's taxi. They said that Lee would have arrived at the Taxi stand at the bus depot at about 12:48( that's three minutes AFTER Whaley dropped the man who was wearing a BLUE JACKET, off at 500 N Beckley.)   

So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative

Huh?? have you got your head so far tucked that you can't read...Lee told Fritz that he took a city bus to the theater ( read Thomas Kelley's report on page 626 of WR)   It's true that Lee said that he took one bus from Elm and Lamar and rode it all the way to Jefferson, and the Texas Theater.   ( At least that's the way the interrogators recorded Lee's answer ...But he did say that he transferred from bus to bus to reach various destinations in Dallas.)    The way I see it Lee told them that he rode a bus to the theater.  Naturally they had to cover up this statement because if he had rode a bus to the theater then he couldn't possibly have been at 10 & Patton when JD Tippit was murdered.    Thus it was crucial to eliminate Lee's statement ....

[Vincent Baxter]

So far not one CT can come up with an alternative narrative much less an alternative that proves Oswald's "innocence"

Since when does somebody's innocence needs to proven? The last time I looked the onus was and is on the prosecution to prove somebody guilty. But thank your for exposing your Salem like "guilty unless prove innocent" mindset

Yeah, and thank you for unnecessarily reiterating the legal principles of innocent until proven guilty but how about you stop sidestepping the actual issue and answer the question that was posed waaaaaaay back at start of this thread?

Innocent of the shooting or not, Oswald still got from the TSBD to his boarding house somehow. Whatever method or route he took makes no difference to what he may or may not have done on the sixth floor a few minutes earlier.
Why is it such a big deal to disprove Oswald got in Whaley's cab? What difference does it make? If he got a different cab, a helicopter or even ran the whole way, what would it prove?

[Martin Weidmann]

Yeah, thanks for unnessessarily reiterating the legal principles of innocent until proven guilty but how about you stop sidestepping the actual issue and answer the question that was posed waaaaaaay back at start of this thread?

Innocent of the shooting or not, Oswald still got from the TSBD to his boarding house somehow. Whatever method or route he took makes no difference to what he may or may not have done on the sixth floor a few minutes earlier.
Why is it such a big deal to disprove Oswald got in Whaley's cab? What difference does it make? If he got a different cab, a helicopter or even ran the whole way, what would it prove?

you stop sidestepping the actual issue and answer the question that was posed waaaaaaay back at start of this thread?

You are talking to the wrong person. The question asked at the beginning of this thread is of very little interest to me. I couldn't care less how Oswald got to the roominghouse. It is of little or no significance at all to either the Kennedy or Tippit murder. All we really need to know is - if Earlene Roberts is to be believed - is that Oswald arrived at the roominghouse at about 1 pm. Everything else is just window dressing.