I don't know if he needed them or not. Maybe he just wanted new ones. Maybe the ones that were there were broken and the story about a news reporter breaking them was contrived to explain an inconvenient photo.
Why would they have "had to have given permission"? Have you seen the lease?
I don't see how that makes anything "urgent".
No it doesn't. You're assuming that he went to Irving to get his gun and then interpreting his actions under that light. There's no evidence that he ever got a gun.
Does that mean he couldn't have been carrying anything? Does that mean he couldn't have taken something with him when he left and dropped it somewhere else, given it to somebody, left it at the bus station, or any number of other possibilities?
If he actually had curtain rods, why would he not take them home? Let's suppose that he was carrying a package of curtain rods when he left the TSBD that the police, the bus driver, bus passengers, taxi driver and Earlene Roberts all missed. Where are the curtain rods?
How do you know he lied about the contents when you don't know what the contents were or even exactly what he said about it? The answer is, you don't.
Oswald denied he had curtain rods. Why would he say that if he actually had curtain rods? If Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randall did not collude to fabricate their evidence, then Oswald lied about the curtain rods. So you are essentially saying that BF/LMR lied. So I guess they were in on the conspiracy to assassinate JFK. That does not explain Oswald's behaviour in leaving the TSBD getting his gun, killing Officer Tippit, and pulling his gun in the Texas Theater and saying "It's all over now". Oh, right, you don't believe that evidence so it is not evidence - just assumptions.
Marina saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle rolled up in a blanket in early October. How is that evidence that the C2766 rifle was in the Paine's garage on 11/21-22?
By itself, it is not conclusive. But there is evidence that Oswald owned only one rifle and no evidence that he owned more than one rifle. So if she saw a rifle stock, that is evidence that tends to show that Oswald's rifle was there. The paper trail linking C2766 to Oswald via his mail box and his use of the A.J. Hidell ID card is evidence that Oswald's rifle was the C2766 rifle. The back-yard photos are consistent with Oswald holding a gun that is identical to C2766 in every respect. Add to that the behaviour of Oswald subsequent to the assassination and you can conclude, quite reasonably, that Oswald was involved in the assassination. Oh, right, you don't believe that evidence so it is not evidence - just assumptions.
Evidence of what? 3 fibers that couldn't be tied to any specific blanket?
Evidence of what. That Oswald was holding a rifle that may or may not have been C2766 in a photo taken in March or April?
What evidence is there that he owned or possessed another rifle? Marina said it was the same rifle that he used to shoot at Gen. Walker.
Evidence of what? That unscientific handwriting analysis of 2 block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon was claimed to have been written by Oswald?
Evidence of what? That an ID card that nobody ever mentioned in any report or interview prior to Oswald's death suddenly turned up in the evidence stream?
No, you are confusing the two concepts as everything you're claiming to be evidence doesn't actually support your claim that "his gun was taken to the TSBD from the Paine's garage". You're accepting that as true without proof.
Oh, right, you don't believe that evidence so it is not evidence - just assumptions. You believe the evidence to be false. You believe the police and FBI were all in on an enormous conspiracy. I don't. Let's leave it at that.
