Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[Jerry Freeman]

... a possible virus filled external link is a waste of everybody's time.

Right. How thoughtless it is to contaminate someone with objectiveness.

... it's time to grow up.

Patronizing isn't he?

[John Iacoletti]

Omg, not yet another "LOL" rebuttal, YAWN!

Stop presenting conjectures as facts and evidence, and I’ll stop LOLing.

[John Mytton]

I'm perfectly calm, thank you.

It's usually a waste of time reinventing the wheel that's why I provided the link to a handy paper detailing why the WC couldn't support their claims, the same problem you're facing now.

Your answer to my question, which BTW didn't address what I was asking, put forward yet another claim by stating "...Oswald ordered C20-T750 and Oswald received C20-T750."

Two problems here

1) You left out that he ordered C20-T750 from the February issue
2) There is zero evidence of C20-T750 (what ever that might be) was picked up by Oswald or even was delivered to his P.O. Box.

Claims piling up...

I'm perfectly calm, thank you.

If this is you when you're calm, I'd hate to see you when you're angry!

It's usually a waste of time reinventing the wheel that's why I provided the link to a handy paper detailing why the WC couldn't support their claims, the same problem you're facing now.

No, it's just better to present an argument in your own words.

Your answer to my question, which BTW didn't address what I was asking, put forward yet another claim by stating "...Oswald ordered C20-T750 and Oswald received C20-T750."

Let's be honest, all you are trying to do is invent a problem where there was no problem to begin with. The WC didn't have to address every time the wind changed direction, they just dealt with the facts.

1) You left out that he ordered C20-T750 from the February issue

No, in my first or second response to your I showed the following graphic. But what you keep leaving out is that Oswald didn't order his rifle in February.

2) There is zero evidence of C20-T750 (what ever that might be) was picked up by Oswald or even was delivered to his P.O. Box.

C20-T750 is the catalogue number that Kleins used for both the 36 and 40 inch Italian Carcano's and that fact is never going away.
The proof that Oswald received the rifle is that he ordered the rifle, he was photographed with the rifle, he left his prints on the rifle, the rifle was found with Oswald's prints and Oswald was identified on the 6th floor holding a rifle. How much evidence do you think was manufactured and how many liars, my narrative simply involves Oswald whereas yours involves half of Dallas.

Claims piling up...

No worries, keep em coming and let's see who else you can get involved in your massive conspiracy.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Stop presenting conjectures as facts and evidence, and I’ll stop LOLing.

The facts and evidence in this case have been well established for many decades and the fact that you are still trying to argue otherwise 55 years later just proves my point. Thanks for your participation.

JohnM 

[Martin Weidmann]

No, in my first or second response to your I showed the following graphic. But what you keep leaving out is that Oswald didn't order his rifle in February.



JohnM

It doesn't matter if the coupon was received by Klein's in February or March. The coupon came from "Department 358" which indicates the February issue of American Rifleman Magazine, which advertised a 36" rifle.

Mr. BELIN. Can you just give us one or more of the magazines in which this coupon might have been taken?
Mr. WALDMAN. Well, this coupon was specifically taken from American Rifleman Magazine, issue of February 1963. It's identified by the department number which is shown as--now, if I can read this--shown as Department 358 on the coupon.
Mr. BELIN. And that number also appears in the address on the envelope to you, is that correct, or to your company?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

The April advertisment had not even been published at that time, so why is Klein's sending a 40" rifle to a client who ordered a 36" rifle?

[John Mytton]

It doesn't matter if the coupon was received by Klein's in February or March. The coupon came from "Department 358" which indicates the February issue of American Rifleman Magazine, which advertised a 36" rifle.

Mr. BELIN. Can you just give us one or more of the magazines in which this coupon might have been taken?
Mr. WALDMAN. Well, this coupon was specifically taken from American Rifleman Magazine, issue of February 1963. It's identified by the department number which is shown as--now, if I can read this--shown as Department 358 on the coupon.
Mr. BELIN. And that number also appears in the address on the envelope to you, is that correct, or to your company?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

The April advertisment had not even been published at that time, so why is Klein's sending a 40" rifle to a client who ordered a 36" rifle?

If Kleins themselves differentiated between different Carcano models then they would have used two catalogue numbers but both the 36inch and the 40inch models had the exact same catalogue number.
Department 358 is not a specific department within Kleins but is merely a way of tracking where the ads are coming from, Kleins received Oswald's order and gave him the C20-T550 rifle that they had in stock, it's not rocket science!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

If Kleins themselves differentiated between different Carcano models then they would have used two catalogue numbers but both the 36inch and the 40inch models had the exact same catalogue number.
Department 358 is not a specific department within Kleins but is merely a way of tracking where the ads are coming from, Kleins received Oswald's order and gave him the C20-T550 rifles that they had in stock, it's not rocket science!

JohnM

If Kleins themselves differentiated between different Carcano models then they would have used two catalogue numbers

Pure speculation, you have no clue what Klein's would or would not have done.

but both the 36inch and the 40inch models had the exact same catalogue number.

That may be the case, but the coupons from the February and April issues of A.R.M. had different department numbers, which is how they differentiated!

Department 358 is not a specific department within Kleins but is merely a way of tracking where the ads are coming from

Exactly, that's how Waldman knew it came from the February issue of A.R.M..... and that's how they knew which rifle they needed to send.

Kleins received Oswald's order and gave him the C20-T550 rifles that they had in stock, it's not rocket science!

Indeed... it's not rocket science, it's idiotic. You don't send a 40" rifle, which was not even advertised yet, to a client who ordered a 36".

[John Iacoletti]

No, in my first or second response to your I showed the following graphic. But what you keep leaving out is that Oswald didn't order his rifle in February.

What you keep leaving out is that the alleged Klein’s order wasn’t made in April either.

The proof that Oswald received the rifle is that he ordered the rifle, he was photographed with the rifle, he left his prints on the rifle, the rifle was found with Oswald's prints and Oswald was identified on the 6th floor holding a rifle.

lololololol