Firearms experts who say; ?I can't do it so it can't be done?, cannot be trusted

[Walt Cakebread]

...what is the name of the agent and what is he carrying in his left hand?

Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun.

I have no idea who is the "agent" carrying the firearm. Why should I?

So what was the point of the "gun quiz"?

What was the point of the "agent quiz".

Neither are relevant to the Subject.

I could be wrong, BUT...   The man carrying the shotgun could be Weatherford.....

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

...what is the name of the agent and what is he carrying in his left hand?

Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun.

I have no idea who is the "agent" carrying the firearm. Why should I?

So what was the point of the "gun quiz"?

What was the point of the "agent quiz".

Neither are relevant to the Subject.

"Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun."

Really? You're kidding, right? I hope you were kind enough to thank him.

Neither are relevant? Are you feeling ok?
You do not have the ability to be objective.

[Ross Lidell]

"Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun."

Really? You're kidding, right? I hope you were kind enough to thank him.

Neither are relevant? Are you feeling ok?
You do not have the ability to be objective.

"Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun."

Really? You're kidding, right? I hope you were kind enough to thank him.

Look at 3 posts previous to yours.

Neither are relevant? Are you feeling ok?

Neither are relevant to the Subject... indisputably.

You do not have the ability to be objective.

An assertion unsupported by any facts or knowledge.

A G A I N

-- So what was the point of the "gun quiz"?

-- What was the point of the "agent quiz".

Neither are relevant to the Subject....
However, I'm still keen to know what you were driving shooting at?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

"Walt Cakebread says the firearm was a pump-action shotgun."

Really? You're kidding, right? I hope you were kind enough to thank him.

Look at 3 posts previous to yours.

Neither are relevant? Are you feeling ok?

Neither are relevant to the Subject... indisputably.

You do not have the ability to be objective.

An assertion unsupported by any facts or knowledge.

A G A I N

-- So what was the point of the "gun quiz"?

-- What was the point of the "agent quiz".

Neither are relevant to the Subject....
However, I'm still keen to know what you were driving shooting at?

Show the proof. All you have is tainted evidence from a bumbling police department. You can't place LHO  at that window. You have no gun. No motive. You are unable to keep your story straight. A few days ago you explained away the Mauser using a quote from Seymour W. "it was an honest mistake" but later you said he wasn't the one who handled the weapon.  It is odd that they all said, Mauser, even the dope Fritz who used a magnifying glass as he looked at it. One man, Seymour W. who didn't handle the weapon gets to decide everyone was mistaken. Anything goes is how Ross sees it

All laid out for you. It's easier for you to dismiss than it is for you to explain. Lazy Lazy

Full of deception from a so-called expert

[Walt Cakebread]

Show the proof. All you have is tainted evidence from a bumbling police department. You can't place LHO  at that window. You have no gun. No motive. You are unable to keep your story straight. A few days ago you explained away the Mauser using a quote from Seymour W. "it was an honest mistake" but later you said he wasn't the one who handled the weapon.  It is odd that they all said, Mauser, even the dope Fritz who used a magnifying glass as he looked at it. One man, Seymour W. who didn't handle the weapon gets to decide everyone was mistaken. Anything goes is how Ross sees it

All laid out for you. It's easier for you to dismiss than it is for you to explain. Lazy Lazy

Full of deception from a so-called expert

Fer cryin out loud, Pete....  Stop makin a fool of yourself.....  The rifle that was found WELL HIDDEN beneath boxes of books was a Mannlicher Carcano.  There are dozens of photos and film that verify the rifle was a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano short rifle.  The cretins that were setting Lee up knew that there was a photo that showed Lee holding a Carcano that was similar to the rifle they were going to plant.   And they knew there was a paper trail for the purchase of a carcano that lead to Lee Oswald.

They would have been certifiable idiots to have planted a mauser.....

[Ross Lidell]

I am not a rifle shooter so I have no expertise at all on which I can draw on from my own experience.

However, I find it strange someone can dismiss the comments of such people as Craig Roberts, Carlos Hathcock and Hubert Hammerer but then rely on people that have never used THE rifle from the 6th floor window against a similarly moving target with the tree in the middle of the shots.

Could Lee Harvey Oswald have made the shots? Possibly he could but why not make sure and shoot him as he came down Houston in a straight line and getting bigger ever second? Why not shoot when the limo was going barely a few miles per hour right beneath the window, hell he could have thrown the rifle at him.

When someone uses CE139, from the 6th floor window and replicates the shots attributed to Oswald THEN and only then can we say it was possible. It would also need to be done by someone that was the same ability at shooting that Oswald was. Or do you think the 3 Master riflemen that were used to test the rifle that fired from only half the height at stationary targets is a fair recreation of the scenario then you might as well say that Oswald could run 100m in 10 seconds because Usain Bolt can

The comments (professional opinions) of expert marksman are worth consideration if they have gone to the crime scene. If your boys (Roberts, Hathcock and Hammerer) have not traveled to Dallas and looked out the 6th floor window of the TSBD from where the shots were fired, their estimates are of little value.

Would their opinions be based on descriptions of the shooting by the:

--  Warren Commission?

--  House Select Committee on Assassinations?

--  the writers of various books and articles?

-- assessments or reconstructions in Television documentaries?

Probably some or all.

Your speculation as to what's better in terms of direction and trajectory are "either/or propositions". Do you comprehend: The assassin might choose the poorer of two potential shooting methods and yet still be successful.

All assertions about "the best or better way" shooting sequences are subjective... and they do not consider the "wrong way still worked" possibility.

My "boy", the late Howard Donahue participated in the 1967 CBS tests and made the shots. It was not a perfect reconstruction but similar enough to prove that the shots attributed to Oswald were possible.

We are way off-topic... but hey it's my Subject and I'm obliged to answer all comments or I'll be branded a "dodger".

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

The comments (professional opinions) of expert marksman are worth consideration if they have gone to the crime scene. If your boys (Roberts, Hathcock and Hammerer) have not traveled to Dallas and looked out the 6th floor window of the TSBD from where the shots were fired, their estimates are of little value.

Would their opinions be based on descriptions of the shooting by the:

--  Warren Commission?

--  House Select Committee on Assassinations?

--  the writers of various books and articles?

-- assessments or reconstructions in Television documentaries?

Probably some or all.

Your speculation as to what's better in terms of direction and trajectory are "either/or propositions". Do you comprehend: The assassin might choose the poorer of two potential shooting methods and yet still be successful.

All assertions about "the best or better way" shooting sequences are subjective... and they do not consider the "wrong way still worked" possibility.

My "boy", the late Howard Donahue participated in the 1967 CBS tests and made the shots. It was not a perfect reconstruction but similar enough to prove that the shots attributed to Oswald were possible.

We are way off-topic... but hey it's my Subject and I'm obliged to answer all comments or I'll be branded a "dodger".

  "not a perfect reconstruction"   "similar enough" who said? Your boy Dan Rather? When you cut corners you create reasonable doubt. Too bad for your failed ideas Ross. LHO would have never faced a trial because of the lack of evidence. I am sure you will agree after you think with common sense. Take your time

[Ross Lidell]

  "not a perfect reconstruction"   "similar enough" who said? Your boy Dan Rather? When you cut corners you create reasonable doubt. Too bad for your failed ideas Ross. LHO would have never faced a trial because of the lack of evidence. I am sure you will agree after you think with common sense. Take your time

Assertion, assertion, assertion ad infinitum. No proof... just silly speculation.

No trial for Lee Harvey Oswald (had he not been killed by Jack Ruby) you say?
An impossible occurrence that would only be postulated by a fool.

Lee Harvey Oswald would have been, tried, convicted and sentenced for the murders of John F. Kennedy and JD Tippit. After the routine appeal he would have been executed. To put it plainly, the history books would record that Lee Harvey Oswald: Died in the electric-chair in Huntsville Texas.