The LHO Escape -- Panic and Shock

[John Mytton]

Ok, then for Oswalds motive , it’s a combination of failure and disappointment to reconcile his marriage PLUS a feeling of betrayal? perceiving JFK having apparently reversed his position about cooperation with USSR with a newspaper report?

So basically Oswald just lost all hope at this point in time which then turned to anger at the JFK whom  Oswald had perhaps at one time admired only to perceive JFK at the later time after presumably Oswald reading the paper, that JFK was just the same as Walker, ie.. just another Fascist whom should be shot?

Maybe… if he was Bipolar / schizophrenic which there’s some plausibility to that but just do not have any science like Royal s team to prove it just yet

You can also add that Oswald didn't treasure his life.

1. In Oswald's Historic Diary he admits to attempting suicide.
2. In the Walker Note he indicates that he may die in a shootout with Police.
3. At the Texas Theatre, pulling a out a gun and pulling the trigger on so many armed Police, was a definite attempt of suicide by cop, but luckily the Dallas Police wanted this Son of a Gun alive.

JohnM

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Ok, then for Oswalds motive , it’s a combination of failure and disappointment to reconcile his marriage PLUS a feeling of betrayal? perceiving JFK having apparently reversed his position about cooperation with USSR with a newspaper report?

So basically Oswald just lost all hope at this point in time which then turned to anger at the JFK whom  Oswald had perhaps at one time admired only to perceive JFK at the later time after presumably Oswald reading the paper, that JFK was just the same as Walker, ie.. just another Fascist whom should be shot?

Maybe… if he was Bipolar / schizophrenic which there’s some plausibility to that but just do not have any science like Royal s team to prove it just yet

If he "liked" JFK so much and was such a political person who kept abreast of political matters, why did he have no interest in what happened to JFK outside the place where he worked? According to all accounts he talked to no co-worker about what happened, he inquired to no one about the events (it was chaos outside the TSBD with people running around) and he showed no interest in listening to the radio or watching TV about news about what happened. Nothing.

He returns to his rooming house where the TV is on providing reports on the assassination. Does he stop and watch it? Talk to Roberts about the latest news? Stay around to find out? No, he leaves to go see a movie.

Again: if he admired JFK and was, as is shown, a political person then why act like this? No interest at all?

As towards his views on JFK and the US. We do have this account from a German visitor who talked with Oswald at a party in February of '63: Volkmar Schmidt.
Schmidt said: "Lee Harvey Oswald brought up in the conversation with me the fact that he really felt very angry about the support which the Kennedy administration gave to the Bay of Pigs invasion. It turned out that Lee Harvey Oswald really idealized socialism of Cuba, while he was critical of the socialism in the Soviet Union. And he was just obsessed with his anger towards Kennedy."

Schmidt was interviewed by the FBI shortly after the assassination and never mentions this. So his account is questionable.

Oswald also reportedly complained to the Soviets when he visited their embassy in Mexico City that the US government was after him, that he was being mistreated and that he needed to carry a revolver to protect himself. He said "I am afraid...they'll kill me!!"

The Schmidt quote is here: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oswald/etc/script.html
The Soviet Embassy statement is here: https://archive.org/details/passporttoassass0000nech/page/76/mode/2up?q=terrible

[John Mytton]

If he "liked" JFK so much and was such a political person who kept abreast of political matters, why did he have no interest in what happened to JFK outside the place where he worked? According to all accounts he talked to no co-worker about what happened, he inquired to no one about the events (it was chaos outside the TSBD with people running around) and he showed no interest in listening to the radio or watching TV about news about what happened. Nothing.

Outstanding Steve, a brilliant irrefutable observation.

And we know where Oswald was, Oswald was on the 6th floor in his Sniper's Nest, aiming his rifle at Kennedy's head and pulling the trigger.

JohnM

[Mitch Todd]

The Department Number 358 isn't a specific Department within the Kliens warehouse

Nobody said it was, except you of course...

but is a code which applied to every product ordered on that unique Kleins Advertisement,

You can try to muddy the water as much as you like, but the Department Number identified the magazine where the coupon came from. That, in turn, identified the exact item ordered.

Who said that Klein's used the department number on the ad to identify a particular item? No one from Klein's claimed that. Nor does the department number appear on the Waldman exhibit 7 order form, although the C20-T750 code does.

This is another case where you simply suppose something must work a certain way because you want to believe it so, and have run out any other arguments to make your dream-world work.

[John Mytton]

Who said that Klein's used the department number on the ad to identify a particular item? No one from Klein's claimed that. Nor does the department number appear on the Waldman exhibit 7 order form, although the C20-T750 code does.

This is another case where you simply suppose something must work a certain way because you want to believe it so, and have run out any other arguments to make your dream-world work.

Hi Mitch, check your messages.

JohnM

[Mitch Todd]

Hi Mitch, check your messages.

JohnM

OK. It's faint enough in the versions I'm looking at that I can't tell if it's supposed to be "358" or "633" or maybe something else, even with glasses. Even if it is 358, it's set off by itself, and not associated with the C20-T750 order code the way the other identifiers like the control number, item description, and serial number are. As such, it still doesn't give any real credence to the idea that it's some sort of extension to the catalog number. If Klein's really thought that the 36" and 40" rifles were different things, they wouldn't have had the two sizes sharing the same order number. And, if Klein's didn't have any 36" rifles available, "358" is meaningless as some kind of disambiguator. They may have simply fulfilled the order with what they had, figuring that the people buying these things weren't liable to be the type to be picky about the exact length. They just wanted a serviceable rifle cheap, cheap, cheap, and there would be few complaints. Those who did object could then be given the choice of sending it back for a refund or exchange with a 36" model, but they not be many. I've seen this kind of thinking on both ends of the exchange before.

[John Mytton]

OK. It's faint enough in the versions I'm looking at that I can't tell if it's supposed to be "358" or "633" or maybe something else, even with glasses. Even if it is 358, it's set off by itself, and not associated with the C20-T750 order code the way the other identifiers like the control number, item description, and serial number are. As such, it still doesn't give any real credence to the idea that it's some sort of extension to the catalog number. If Klein's really thought that the 36" and 40" rifles were different things, they wouldn't have had the two sizes sharing the same order number. And, if Klein's didn't have any 36" rifles available, "358" is meaningless as some kind of disambiguator. They may have simply fulfilled the order with what they had, figuring that the people buying these things weren't liable to be the type to be picky about the exact length. They just wanted a serviceable rifle cheap, cheap, cheap, and there would be few complaints. Those who did object could then be given the choice of sending it back for a refund or exchange with a 36" model, but they not be many. I've seen this kind of thinking on both ends of the exchange before.

The bottom line is, if Kleins were concerned about sending out two different sized Carcano's they would call one C20-T750 and the other one perhaps C20-T751.

Also worth noting is Kleins were advertising the 36 inch Carcano in Guns Magazine as C20-T50 until July63 which directly conflicted with American Rifleman advertising the 40 inch model from April63 to July63 as C20-T750, which indicates that they didn't give a Royal stuff.

Warehouse staff are not designated to think, they receive an order and go to the appropriate shelf and fill out the order with the given Item Number. To believe that they have to cross reference product item numbers with department numbers across a number differing magazines across a number of months across hundreds of various sporting items just doesn't work in the real World.

The Warehouse staff at Kleins, like Oswald in the Depository would be given orders on a clipboard and would go away and fill them. The following crop of Waldman 7 is all they would be concerned with, which they would write in the serial numbers by hand and then take the product and paperwork to despatch.



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

OK. It's faint enough in the versions I'm looking at that I can't tell if it's supposed to be "358" or "633" or maybe something else, even with glasses. Even if it is 358, it's set off by itself, and not associated with the C20-T750 order code the way the other identifiers like the control number, item description, and serial number are. As such, it still doesn't give any real credence to the idea that it's some sort of extension to the catalog number. If Klein's really thought that the 36" and 40" rifles were different things, they wouldn't have had the two sizes sharing the same order number. And, if Klein's didn't have any 36" rifles available, "358" is meaningless as some kind of disambiguator. They may have simply fulfilled the order with what they had, figuring that the people buying these things weren't liable to be the type to be picky about the exact length. They just wanted a serviceable rifle cheap, cheap, cheap, and there would be few complaints. Those who did object could then be given the choice of sending it back for a refund or exchange with a 36" model, but they not be many. I've seen this kind of thinking on both ends of the exchange before.

If Klein's really thought that the 36" and 40" rifles were different things,

Are you for real? How in the world can you consider a 36" rifle and a 40" rifle to be the same thing?

They may have simply fulfilled the order with what they had, figuring that the people buying these things weren't liable to be the type to be picky about the exact length.

What a load of BS. It only shows the LN desperation to "explain" how a 36" rifle that was ordered somehow morphed into a 40" rifle. It's pathetic. At least the WC was wise enough not to touch the subject. When they took testimony from Waldman, they just ignored the issue all together. Just like they did not show bullet CE399 to Tomlinson when they took his deposition. If you don't ask, you can't get an answer you don't like.