Oliver Stone Talks to Jacobin About JFK’s Killing

[Richard Smith]

Funny. 

In my experience as an older individual, companies in general used to substitute items-I assume to avoid losing a sale because they didn't have an item in stock.

You are dealing with contrarians that will take the discussion down the rabbit hole of the history of business practices regarding substituting items instead of dealing with the evidence in this case.  Oswald was sent a specific rifle with a specific serial number.  It was sent to his PO box.  He is pictured holding that rifle.  There is no accounting for that rifle except as the rifle found at his place of employment on 11.22.63.  That rifle has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent him.  It has his prints on it.  There is absolutely no doubt base on the evidence that Oswald was sent a specific rifle, he possessed that rifle, and it is the one found at the TSBD.   Even if it could be demonstrated that Klein's was the only company in the history of the world to substitute items, it makes no difference regarding what the evidence demonstrates happened in this case.  The contrarians can't deal with the evidence.  So the rabbit hole deflections are their preference.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

You are dealing with contrarians that will take the discussion down the rabbit hole of the history of business practices regarding substituting items instead of dealing with the evidence in this case.  Oswald was sent a specific rifle with a specific serial number.  It was sent to his PO box.  He is pictured holding that rifle.  There is no accounting for that rifle except as the rifle found at his place of employment on 11.22.63.  That rifle has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent him.  It has his prints on it.  There is absolutely no doubt base on the evidence that Oswald was sent a specific rifle, he possessed that rifle, and it is the one found at the TSBD.   Even if it could be demonstrated that Klein's was the only company in the history of the world to substitute items, it makes no difference regarding what the evidence demonstrates happened in this case.  The contrarians can't deal with the evidence.  So the rabbit hole deflections are their preference.

The photographic experts for the HSCA concluded that the rifle in the photos was the same rifle recovered by the Dallas Police. I know, I know, they don't accept the legitimacy of the photos. Even if they did, they'd reject the photographic analysis too.

I mean, we go round-and-round on this and they just won't accept it.



Source/link: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0036b.htm

[Martin Weidmann]

You are dealing with contrarians that will take the discussion down the rabbit hole of the history of business practices regarding substituting items instead of dealing with the evidence in this case.  Oswald was sent a specific rifle with a specific serial number.  It was sent to his PO box.  He is pictured holding that rifle.  There is no accounting for that rifle except as the rifle found at his place of employment on 11.22.63.  That rifle has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent him.  It has his prints on it.  There is absolutely no doubt base on the evidence that Oswald was sent a specific rifle, he possessed that rifle, and it is the one found at the TSBD.   Even if it could be demonstrated that Klein's was the only company in the history of the world to substitute items, it makes no difference regarding what the evidence demonstrates happened in this case.  The contrarians can't deal with the evidence.  So the rabbit hole deflections are their preference.

instead of dealing with the evidence in this case.

Let's see who is the one not dealing with the evidence.....

Oswald was sent a specific rifle with a specific serial number.  It was sent to his PO box.

Really? What's the evidence for that? Any shipping documents you can produce?

And before you go there; Waldman 7 does not provide proof of any rifle actually having been send.

He is pictured holding that rifle.

Says who?

There is no accounting for that rifle except as the rifle found at his place of employment on 11.22.63.

Which means that there is no evidence for that rifle having ever been stored in Ruth Paine's garage, right?

It has his prints on it.

No it doesn't. The FBI found no usuable prints on the rifle.

There is absolutely no doubt base on the evidence that Oswald was sent a specific rifle, he possessed that rifle, and it is the one found at the TSBD.

No doubt? Really? In your opinion, perhaps, but your opinion is not proof of anything, except perhaps that you have no standard of proof and swallow up, without questioning, just about everything the official narrative tells you.

Even if it could be demonstrated that Klein's was the only company in the history of the world to substitute items, it makes no difference regarding what the evidence demonstrates happened in this case.

Funny 

[Martin Weidmann]

The photographic experts for the HSCA concluded that the rifle in the photos was the same rifle recovered by the Dallas Police. I know, I know, they don't accept the legitimacy of the photos. Even if they did, they'd reject the photographic analysis too.

I mean, we go round-and-round on this and they just won't accept it.



Source/link: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0036b.htm

Even if that conclusion by the HSCA is correct, how does that even begin to show that the rifle found at the 6th floor was owned by Oswald?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

You are dealing with contrarians that will take the discussion down the rabbit hole of the history of business practices regarding substituting items instead of dealing with the evidence in this case.  Oswald was sent a specific rifle with a specific serial number.  It was sent to his PO box.  He is pictured holding that rifle.  There is no accounting for that rifle except as the rifle found at his place of employment on 11.22.63.  That rifle has the same serial number as the one Klein's sent him.  It has his prints on it.  There is absolutely no doubt base on the evidence that Oswald was sent a specific rifle, he possessed that rifle, and it is the one found at the TSBD.   Even if it could be demonstrated that Klein's was the only company in the history of the world to substitute items, it makes no difference regarding what the evidence demonstrates happened in this case.  The contrarians can't deal with the evidence.  So the rabbit hole deflections are their preference.

Good point-thank you.

[Jon Banks]

The photographic experts for the HSCA concluded that the rifle in the photos was the same rifle recovered by the Dallas Police. I know, I know, they don't accept the legitimacy of the photos. Even if they did, they'd reject the photographic analysis too.

I mean, we go round-and-round on this and they just won't accept it.



Source/link: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0036b.htm

BBC: The troubling flaws in forensic science
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150512-can-we-trust-forensic-science

Forensic science is highly subjective even without considering how difficult it is to give conclusive answers based on photographic evidence alone. So while I take into account what experts say about these matters, their conclusions aren't infallible.


Unless someone physically witnessed Oswald taking the backyard photos, it's impossible to say with 100% certainty that the rifle in the photos is the same as the Sixth Floor rifle.

The most obvious discrepancy is the location of the straps between different Carcano models. In the BYP, the straps appear to be on the bottom of the rifle, not on the side of the barrel like the rifle from the Sixth Floor of TSBD.

[Martin Weidmann]

Good point-thank you.

Isn't it amazing how LNs start attacking critics the moment they get caught in presenting a selfserving assumption as if it had any factual significance and/or their own lies.

[Jerry Freeman]

Yes it was quite common for companies to substitute a very similar item in the pre-Internet age.

For firearms especially?----Nonsense.