Did Captain Fritz show Mr Oswald a Mauser?

[Martin Weidmann]

Same old song and dance, indeed.  Your "mountain of evidence" is a mountain of conjecture, assumption, and false claims about the evidence.

Indeed, neither "Richard" or that clown, Chapman, for that matter are able to have a normal discussion about the evidence. All they do is repeat the same old weak and implausible narrative and ignore and dismiss anything that does not fit in that narrative. It reminds me of Albert Einstein's famous line: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

[Richard Smith]

explain to me why your fantasy conspirators would leave a rifle that wasn't used in the crime to frame Oswald?

Duh.... The conspirators knew that they would need to plant a rifle like the one seen in Lee's hands in the BY photo.   And naturally the spent shells they had would need to be the type that fit the rifle.   It didn't make a damn bit of difference if the shells were freshly fired, or the rifle had been fired recently ....They were the conspirators and the investigators.   They could tell the trusting pissants anything and nobody would argue with them.   

The fact that you believe that the Carcano was the murder weapon in spite of the evidence that's been presented that indicates it could not have been the murder weapon is an excellent example of how simple, trusting and naive fools, can be tricked.

Now then try to use your little pea brain and explain how a rifle that allegedly had been fired just hours before it was examined and found to have rust and dirt in the barrel , could have that dirty and rusty bore?    Do you believe the tightly fitting, high velocity  bullets, wouldn't have scoured that bore.

And explain why not a single trained police officer detected any trace of he smell of burned gunpowder when the rifle was found?
If that rifle had been fired less than an hour earlier the smell of gunpowder down in that enclosure of boxes of books would have been very noticeable.

Please explain how a 5 ' 9", 135 pound, man could reach out and place the rifle at the bottom of a five foot deep well from five feet away.....??  And then stack a couple of boxes over the top of the "well" opening?

If you can answer the questions.... Then you MIGHT have a plausible case that the carcano was the murder weapon.   

 

So your explanation for why the fantasy conspirators used a different rifle to assassinate JFK than the rifle that was planted to frame Oswald is that they had to plant one to match the rifle in the BY photos!  HA HA HA.  This gets better and better.  They had to have access to Oswald's MC rifle (i.e. the one in the BY photo) to have planted it at the TSBD and place fired bullet casings from that rifle at the scene.   Right?  So if they had this rifle in their possession, why not use it to assassinate JFK instead of using an entirely different rifle?  Do you fully understand the complications of using a different rifle to assassinate JFK when trying to frame Oswald with another rifle not used in the crime?  Obviously not.  It is laughable.

[Richard Smith]

Indeed, neither "Richard" or that clown, Chapman, for that matter are able to have a normal discussion about the evidence. All they do is repeat the same old weak and implausible narrative and ignore and dismiss anything that does not fit in that narrative. It reminds me of Albert Einstein's famous line: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Oswald is linked to the rifle by the evidence (i.e. documents, prints, photos, witness testimony, serial number, PO box, use of an alias associated with him).  The rifle is linked to the assassination by overwhelming evidence (i.e. found at the crime scene, fired bullet casings, bullets and bullet fragments from that rifle).  Your rebuttal is simply that all this evidence could be faked or planted.  That is not a basis to raise any doubt.  It is an exercise in applying an impossible standard of proof to the facts and evidence to raise fake doubt.

[Walt Cakebread]

Oswald is linked to the rifle by the evidence (i.e. documents, prints, photos, witness testimony, serial number, PO box, use of an alias associated with him).  The rifle is linked to the assassination by overwhelming evidence (i.e. found at the crime scene, fired bullet casings, bullets and bullet fragments from that rifle).  Your rebuttal is simply that all this evidence could be faked or planted.  That is not a basis to raise any doubt.  It is an exercise in applying an impossible standard of proof to the facts and evidence to raise fake doubt.

You are very naive ...and gullible Mr "Smith"

[John Iacoletti]

So your explanation for why the fantasy conspirators used a different rifle to assassinate JFK than the rifle that was planted to frame Oswald is that they had to plant one to match the rifle in the BY photos!  HA HA HA.  This gets better and better.  They had to have access to Oswald's MC rifle (i.e. the one in the BY photo) to have planted it at the TSBD and place fired bullet casings from that rifle at the scene.

Like you actually know the rifle in the photos is the same one supposedly found in the building.

HA HA HA

[John Iacoletti]

Oswald is linked to the rifle by the evidence (i.e. documents, prints, photos, witness testimony, serial number, PO box, use of an alias associated with him).

Nope.  The only thing that links Lee Oswald personally with a rifle from Klein's (a similar rifle, not an identical rifle) is unscientific and biased handwriting "analysis" of two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon.  From microfilm that is now "missing".  Everything else is your assumptions.

  The rifle is linked to the assassination by overwhelming evidence (i.e. found at the crime scene, fired bullet casings, bullets and bullet fragments from that rifle).

Nope.  There is nothing that links that rifle to any bullet that can be demonstrated to have gone through Kennedy or Connally or that puts that particular rifle in Oswald's hands at 12:30 on 11/22/63.  Other than your imagination.

  Your rebuttal is simply that all this evidence could be faked or planted.  That is not a basis to raise any doubt.  It is an exercise in applying an impossible standard of proof to the facts and evidence to raise fake doubt.

Nope.  The evidence doesn't have to be "fake or planted".  It still doesn't demonstrate who pulled the trigger.  Not without a giant exercise in assumption and handwaving.

[Walt Cakebread]

Like you actually know the rifle in the photos is the same one supposedly found in the building.

HA HA HA

There is some very visible differences between the BY photo carcano. and the TSBD carcano....Primarily the Sling.

And yes you can make up excuses to explain the differences....but that does NOT prove that the BY carcano is the same as the TSBD carcano 

[John Iacoletti]

There is some very visible differences between the BY photo carcano. and the TSBD carcano....Primarily the Sling.

And yes you can make up excuses to explain the differences....but that does NOT prove that the BY carcano is the same as the TSBD carcano

Facts don't matter to "Richard".  If he wants them to be the same, then *poof*, they are the same.