Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[Walt Cakebread]

Sorry, I can’t. My source for this info is:

http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf

“A 36-inch Italian "carbine" was advertised in Field and Stream from January, 1962, through November, 1963.”

But that can’t be right, because the 40” Klein’s ad that Holmes tried to pass off as being the one that C2766 was ordered from was supposedly the November, 1963 Field and Stream. I will continue to investigate.

At one time many years ago, I could tell you what magazine ( and the month it was published)  a particular add came from if I knew the depart number from the ad.

I no longer remember the department numbers for the various magazines and the month of publication.    The DEPT number was not actually a department number....Klein's used the "dept number' as a way of determining which magazine was most effective for advertising and sales.  When an order came in with the  coupon ( order blank) they knew which magazine it had came from.    I'm pretty sure that they changed the ad for the carcano  from 36 inches to 40 inches in April. But it's been years since I've looked at that info.

[Bill Chapman]

Therefore you should just believe what Chapman thinks probably happened. Because reasons.

Where do I say that people should agree with me.

[Walt Cakebread]

Roscoe White who worked for DPD in Nov 63 as a photography expert, had copies and a cut out of the Oswald picture in his possession when he died. White's son, upon his Fathers death, announced old Roscoe had worked for the CIA

Roscoe White who worked for DPD in Nov 63 as a photography expert,

Photography expert?   Roscoe White was a lowly patrolman, rookie, trainee.....  However,   I believe that he was hired so he would be on the police force at the time of the assassination.....  Maybe he was supposed to be in "J.D. Tippit's role???

[Martin Weidmann]

Where do I say that people should agree with me.

Where do you say anything that's even remotely significant?

[Walt Cakebread]

Sorry, I can’t. My source for this info is:

http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf

“A 36-inch Italian "carbine" was advertised in Field and Stream from January, 1962, through November, 1963.”

But that can’t be right, because the 40” Klein’s ad that Holmes tried to pass off as being the one that C2766 was ordered from was supposedly the November, 1963 Field and Stream. I will continue to investigate.

Allegedly the FBI didn't discover the Kleins ad until the early hours of SaPersonay morning ....  Holmes took the Klein's ad from Field & Stream to DPD headquarters on SaPersonay morning.....   How did Holmes know that the rifle had been ordered from Kleins

I've long believed that Holmes was an FBI informant who spied on postal patrons and reported anything suspicious to the FBI.   He knew that Lee Oswald received "communist literature"  ( actually Russian magazines for Marina.)  at the PO box, and he certainly would have noticed a rifle being sent to PO Box 2915.   Holmes knew that the rifle had been sent in March of 63, and so did J.Edgar Hoover....   The FBI knew where to go ( Kleins) to find the paper work for the rifle that was sent to PO Box 2915.....

[Vincent Baxter]

Whether Oswald had legal rights to remain silent or have counsel is not relevant to whether he lied.  In a trial, it would be relevant but here on planet earth it's not.  You have severe difficulty understanding that point.   If there had been "recordings" you would just claim those were faked as well.  How about asking yourself why the authorities would allow Oswald to speak to the press is they were so concerned with controlling what he said?  There is no supporting evidence of his lies?  You mean other than the confirmation of those present?  And a mountain of evidence like the testimony Marina that she took the BY pictures, that Oswald owned a rifle, and Frazier's testimony that Oswald carried a long package that morning that he claimed contained curtain rods.  And you are the guy who finds Oswald "suspicious" and believe he was "involved" but never utter a single word against him.  Everyone else must be lying but never your hero Oswald.

EXACTLY! if it is so blatantly obvious to all these Oswald worshippers that the Dallas police and FBI lied about everything Oswald (allegedly) said, why would they state that Oswald refused to admit he owned the rifle? Why inform the public that Oswald said the backyard photos were fake? Why report that Oswald denied putting the long brown paper package in the back of Frazier's car? Or that he didn't shoot the President or Tippit?
If it was such a stitch up and they all cohered to lie about everything in order to frame him, why not just say that he admitted to all these things or at least that he refused to comment. With no recordings they could have claimed anything so why "make up" or lie about stuff that casts doubts or could avert liability from him?

I know this point has been made by several other people on this forum but so far I have yet to see anyone come up with a suitable reply

[Tom Scully]

EXACTLY! if it is so blatantly obvious to all these Oswald worshippers that the Dallas police and FBI lied about everything Oswald (allegedly) said, why would they state that Oswald refused to admit he owned the rifle? Why inform the public that Oswald said the backyard photos were fake? Why report that Oswald denied putting the long brown paper package in the back of Frazier's car? Or that he didn't shoot the President or Tippit?
If it was such a stitch up and they all cohered to lie about everything in order to frame him, why not just say that he admitted to all these things or at least that he refused to comment. With no recordings they could have claimed anything so why "make up" or lie about stuff that casts doubts or could avert liability from him?

I know this point has been made by several other people on this forum but so far I have yet to see anyone come up with a suitable reply

Welcome! In you first sentence in your first post, you've shared the colour of your stripes. Not expecting you will post more reasonably as time progresses. Carry on!

...If it was such a stitch up and they all cohered to lie about everything in order to frame him, why not just say that he admitted to all these things or at least that he refused to comment. With no recordings they could have claimed anything so why "make up" or lie about stuff that casts doubts or could avert liability from him?...

There were representatives of three federal (SS, FBI, Post Office Inspector) investigative departments in the DPD interrogations of Oswald. These four agencies distrusted each other. The SS had removed the body of the murder victim from the hospital at gunpoint, and then hastily flew it entirely out of lawful jurisdiction, to federal custody in DC, all actions outside Texas and federal law. They defied the 62 year old, McKinley precedent, shot in Buffalo, died (days later) in Buffalo, autopsied in Buffalo.

The representatives of each did not collaborate with each other before submitting timely reports. The DPD chief and the FBI were openly hostile to each other. The DPD and SS were most defensive while Postal Inspector Harry Holmes seemed to have little exposure to the accusation of failing to protect the President during his visit to Dallas.

[Vincent Baxter]

Welcome! In you first sentence in your first post, you've shared the colour of your stripes. Not expecting you will post more reasonably as time progresses. Carry on!

Thanks for the kind welcome, Tom.
Congratulations on posting multiple times on this forum before and apologies if I have a different opinion to you.
As you could probably tell, my post was reply to a previous comment which took a swipe at people who saw Oswald as a hero, hence my use of the tag "Oswald worshippers". What I said was nothing new and something that had been said multiple times on this thread already, the point I was trying to make is that despite all the lazy claims of everything just being lies, nobody has come up with a reasonable answer for the aforementioned question, but you have now put an end to that.
I appreciate your patronising tone and your highly insightful reply and as a result I am now truly enlightened and see the errors of my way. Oswald was clearly innocent and was framed all along. Excuse me while I rush to grab my Mark Lane & Jim Garrison books from bin.

Not expecting you to post any more reasonable or less condescending comments as time progresses. Carry on!