Discussion:
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle
(too old to reply)
Raymond
2011-12-29 00:40:40 UTC
Permalink
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE

There have long been problems with how the rifle allegedly used in the
assassination of President Kennedy came to be linked with Oswald.
Raymond Gallagher shows us, astonishingly and with documentation, that
the rifle was shipped before Oswald had ordered it. How could that
be?

Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE

Copies of these back issues can be ordered from The Last Hurrah
Bookstore.
http://www.lasthurrahbookshop.net/

Today, due to people like Raymond Gallagher, (Probe Vol. 5 No. 6, p.
10) and especially John Armstrong, we can show that it is highly
doubtful that Oswald ever ordered that rifle. Evidence from the
official records suggests that the sixth floor rifle was not the rifle
delivered to Lee Oswald in March of 1963

Raymond Gallagher, new to PROBE, delves into the unique sales history
of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. How did the bank deposit Oswald's
money order for the weapon before Oswald wrote it ?

Louis Feldsott of Crescent Arms told the FBI that C 2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18,1962, yet Waldman , at Klein's, did not order the
rifles until January 24, 1963. (SEE Waldman Testimony Warren
Commission Hearings: Vol. VII - Page 362 )

To my knowledge, no one has explained the difference. But there is an
even further discrepancy. Waldman testified that Klein's received
Oswald's money order of $21.45 on March 13, 1963 and it was deposited,
along with other money orders and checks, into a company account at
the First National Bank of Chicago. Waldman testified to the
Commission attorney David Belin that the postmark date of the money
order leaving Dallas was March 12 ( WC Vol,7, p. 366.) Waldman further
testified that the deposit was made on the 13th. and it was part of a
total deposit of $13,827.98.

( Belin did not ask him to explain how, before the advent of computers, an
order could be shipped 700 miles, received, processed and deposited in 24
hours) But yet, the bank deposit slip, the extra copy provided by the
bank at the time of the transfer, reads FEBRUARY 15, 1963, not March 13
th.This is about one month before Oswald sent the coupon for the rifle by
air mail to Chicago .

( See Waldman Exhibit no. 10 p. 706 ) Of course, if the February date is
correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then C 2766 could not be the
correct serial number on the rifle in the so-called back yard photographs.

See deposit slip deposited with The First National Bank of Chicago Date
2/15/63

Total deposit: $13,827.98 deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods
Inc. ( 50 91144 ) 4540 W. MADISON ST. CHGO 24 ILL

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...

SEE Feldsott Affadavit The following affidavit was executed by Louis
Feldsott on July 23. 1964.
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Country of Rockland, ss:

I, Louis Feldsott, being duly sworn say:
1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th Street,
New York 18, New York.
2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if
Crescent Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning .the sale of an
Italian made 6.5 m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.
3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc., Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.
4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation
of the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.

Signed the 23d day of July 1964.
(S) Louis Feldsott,
LOUIS FELDSOTT.

Waldman:
Mr. Waldman.
Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles
in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is
filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by
Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two
dates here.

Mr. Belin.
Go ahead.

Mr. Waldman.
The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our
premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department.

This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering
10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from
Crescent Firearms.

As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7.

Now, we CANNOT SPECIFICALLY SAY when this money order was deposited,
but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show AN ITEM of $21.45, as
indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified
by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.

Mr. Belin.
And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which
appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by
your company; is that correct?

Mr. Waldman.
That's correct.

Mr. Belin.
And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total
deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?

Mr. Waldman.
That's correct.

However, the date on that deposit slip was 2/15/63

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...

THE RIFLE
The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=487...

THE SECOND CARCANO

http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html

(Klein's and Seaport Traders) were under investigation by the Dodd
Committee at the time of the orders.Despite considerable evidence to
the contrary, some critics have questioned whether Lee Harvey Oswald
really owned the revolver used to shoot Officer J.D. Tippit. Recently,
allegations have been made based on a 1974 unpublished manuscript by
Fred T. Newcomb and Perry Adams titled, Murder From Within.

According to Newcomb and Adams, a 1964 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee
looking into mail-order firearms trafficking published a chart which
showed that Seaport Traders, the firm Oswald ordered his .38 caliber
Smith and Wesson revolver from, never shipped any .38 revolvers to
Dallas, Texas in March 1963 - the month of Oswald's order. Newcomb and
Adams concluded that "Oswald's gun, in effect, did not exist."

Although critics have clung to Newcomb and Adams' assertions as proof
positive of forged documents, cover-ups, and the alleged framing of
Oswald, little has been done to substantiate Newcomb and Adams’
claims. In fact, a review of the record shows Newcomb and Adam's
allegations to be false and misleading.

Was Oswald a Dodd Committee Investigator?
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.htm

Orering the Rifle
by Martha Moyer
http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf

John F. Kennedy assassination rifle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle

See Extra Copy deposit slip
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0365b.htm
Raymond
2011-12-29 01:15:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
There have long been problems with how the rifle allegedly used in the
assassination of President Kennedy came to be linked with Oswald.
Raymond Gallagher shows us, astonishingly and with documentation, that
the rifle was shipped before Oswald had ordered it. How could that
be?
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
Copies of these back issues can be ordered from The Last Hurrah
Bookstore.http://www.lasthurrahbookshop.net/
Today, due to people like Raymond Gallagher, (Probe Vol. 5 No. 6, p.
10) and especially John Armstrong, we can show that it is highly
doubtful that Oswald ever ordered that rifle.  Evidence from the
official records suggests that the sixth floor rifle was not the rifle
delivered to Lee Oswald in March of 1963
Raymond Gallagher, new to PROBE, delves into the unique sales history
of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. How did the bank deposit Oswald's
money order for the weapon before Oswald wrote it ?
Louis Feldsott of Crescent Arms told the FBI that C 2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18,1962, yet Waldman , at Klein's,  did not order the
rifles until January 24, 1963.  (SEE  Waldman Testimony Warren
Commission Hearings: Vol. VII - Page 362 )
To my knowledge, no one has explained the difference. But there is an
even further discrepancy. Waldman testified that Klein's received
Oswald's money order of $21.45 on March 13, 1963 and it was deposited,
along with other money orders and checks, into a company account at
the First National Bank of Chicago. Waldman testified to the
Commission attorney David Belin that the postmark date of the money
order leaving Dallas was March 12 ( WC Vol,7, p. 366.) Waldman further
testified that the deposit was made on the 13th. and it was part of a
total deposit of $13,827.98.
( Belin did not ask him to explain how, before the advent of computers, an
order could be shipped 700 miles, received, processed and deposited in 24
hours)  But yet, the bank deposit slip, the extra copy provided by the
bank at the time of the transfer, reads FEBRUARY 15, 1963, not March 13
th.This is about one month before Oswald sent the coupon for the rifle by
air mail to Chicago .
( See Waldman Exhibit no. 10 p. 706 ) Of course, if the February date is
correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then C 2766 could not be the
correct serial number on the rifle in the so-called back yard photographs.
See deposit slip deposited with The First National Bank of Chicago Date
2/15/63
 Total deposit: $13,827.98  deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods
Inc.  ( 50 91144  ) 4540 W. MADISON ST. CHGO  24 ILL
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
SEE  Feldsott Affadavit The following affidavit was executed by Louis
Feldsott on July 23. 1964.
 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th Street,
New York 18, New York.
 2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if
Crescent Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning .the sale of an
Italian made 6.5    m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.
 3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc., Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.
 4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation
of the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.
 Signed the 23d day of July 1964.
 (S) Louis Feldsott,
 LOUIS FELDSOTT.
Mr. Waldman.
 Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles
in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is
filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by
Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two
dates here.
 Mr. Belin.
 Go ahead.
Mr. Waldman.
The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our
premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department.
This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering
10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from
Crescent Firearms.
As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7.
Now, we CANNOT SPECIFICALLY SAY when this money order was deposited,
but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show  AN ITEM  of $21.45, as
indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified
by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.
Mr. Belin.
And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which
appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by
your  company; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
 Mr. Belin.
And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total
deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
However, the date on that deposit slip was 2/15/63
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
 THE RIFLE
 The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
 Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=48716&relPageId=44..
 THE SECOND CARCANO
 http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html
(Klein's and Seaport Traders) were under investigation by the Dodd
Committee at the time of the orders.Despite considerable evidence to
the contrary, some critics have questioned whether Lee Harvey Oswald
really owned the revolver used to shoot Officer J.D. Tippit. Recently,
allegations have been made based on a 1974 unpublished manuscript by
Fred T. Newcomb and Perry Adams titled, Murder From Within.
According to Newcomb and Adams, a 1964 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee
looking into mail-order firearms trafficking published a chart which
showed that Seaport Traders, the firm Oswald ordered his .38 caliber
Smith and Wesson revolver from, never shipped any .38 revolvers to
Dallas, Texas in March 1963 - the month of Oswald's order. Newcomb and
Adams concluded that "Oswald's gun, in effect, did not exist."
Although critics have clung to Newcomb and Adams' assertions as proof
positive of forged documents, cover-ups, and the alleged framing of
Oswald, little has been done to substantiate Newcomb and Adams’
claims. In fact, a review of the record shows Newcomb and Adam's
allegations to be false and misleading.
Was Oswald a Dodd Committee Investigator?http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.htm
Orering the Rifle
by Martha Moyerhttp://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf
John F. Kennedy assassination riflehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle
See Extra Copy  deposit sliphttp://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
wgroom
2011-12-29 19:25:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
There have long been problems with how the rifle allegedly used in the
assassination of President Kennedy came to be linked with Oswald.
Raymond Gallagher shows us, astonishingly and with documentation, that
the rifle was shipped before Oswald had ordered it. How could that
be?
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
Copies of these back issues can be ordered from The Last Hurrah
Bookstore.http://www.lasthurrahbookshop.net/
Today, due to people like Raymond Gallagher, (Probe Vol. 5 No. 6, p.
10) and especially John Armstrong, we can show that it is highly
doubtful that Oswald ever ordered that rifle.  Evidence from the
official records suggests that the sixth floor rifle was not the rifle
delivered to Lee Oswald in March of 1963
Raymond Gallagher, new to PROBE, delves into the unique sales history
of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. How did the bank deposit Oswald's
money order for the weapon before Oswald wrote it ?
Louis Feldsott of Crescent Arms told the FBI that C 2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18,1962, yet Waldman , at Klein's,  did not order the
rifles until January 24, 1963.  (SEE  Waldman Testimony Warren
Commission Hearings: Vol. VII - Page 362 )
To my knowledge, no one has explained the difference. But there is an
even further discrepancy. Waldman testified that Klein's received
Oswald's money order of $21.45 on March 13, 1963 and it was deposited,
along with other money orders and checks, into a company account at
the First National Bank of Chicago. Waldman testified to the
Commission attorney David Belin that the postmark date of the money
order leaving Dallas was March 12 ( WC Vol,7, p. 366.) Waldman further
testified that the deposit was made on the 13th. and it was part of a
total deposit of $13,827.98.
( Belin did not ask him to explain how, before the advent of computers, an
order could be shipped 700 miles, received, processed and deposited in 24
hours)  But yet, the bank deposit slip, the extra copy provided by the
bank at the time of the transfer, reads FEBRUARY 15, 1963, not March 13
th.This is about one month before Oswald sent the coupon for the rifle by
air mail to Chicago .
( See Waldman Exhibit no. 10 p. 706 ) Of course, if the February date is
correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then C 2766 could not be the
correct serial number on the rifle in the so-called back yard photographs.
See deposit slip deposited with The First National Bank of Chicago Date
2/15/63
 Total deposit: $13,827.98  deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods
Inc.  ( 50 91144  ) 4540 W. MADISON ST. CHGO  24 ILL
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
SEE  Feldsott Affadavit The following affidavit was executed by Louis
Feldsott on July 23. 1964.
 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th Street,
New York 18, New York.
 2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if
Crescent Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning .the sale of an
Italian made 6.5    m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.
 3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc., Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.
 4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation
of the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.
 Signed the 23d day of July 1964.
 (S) Louis Feldsott,
 LOUIS FELDSOTT.
Mr. Waldman.
 Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles
in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is
filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by
Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two
dates here.
 Mr. Belin.
 Go ahead.
Mr. Waldman.
The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our
premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department.
This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering
10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from
Crescent Firearms.
As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7.
Now, we CANNOT SPECIFICALLY SAY when this money order was deposited,
but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show  AN ITEM  of $21.45, as
indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified
by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.
Mr. Belin.
And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which
appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by
your  company; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
 Mr. Belin.
And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total
deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
However, the date on that deposit slip was 2/15/63
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
 THE RIFLE
 The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
 Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=487.....
 THE SECOND CARCANO
 http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html
(Klein's and Seaport Traders) were under investigation by the Dodd
Committee at the time of the orders.Despite considerable evidence to
the contrary, some critics have questioned whether Lee Harvey Oswald
really owned the revolver used to shoot Officer J.D. Tippit. Recently,
allegations have been made based on a 1974 unpublished manuscript by
Fred T. Newcomb and Perry Adams titled, Murder From Within.
According to Newcomb and Adams, a 1964 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee
looking into mail-order firearms trafficking published a chart which
showed that Seaport Traders, the firm Oswald ordered his .38 caliber
Smith and Wesson revolver from, never shipped any .38 revolvers to
Dallas, Texas in March 1963 - the month of Oswald's order. Newcomb and
Adams concluded that "Oswald's gun, in effect, did not exist."
Although critics have clung to Newcomb and Adams' assertions as proof
positive of forged documents, cover-ups, and the alleged framing of
Oswald, little has been done to substantiate Newcomb and Adams’
claims. In fact, a review of the record shows Newcomb and Adam's
allegations to be false and misleading.
Was Oswald a Dodd Committee Investigator?http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.htm
Orering the Rifle
by Martha Moyerhttp://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf
John F. Kennedy assassination riflehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle
See Extra Copy  deposit sliphttp://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
Never, he never ordered a Mannlicher-Carcano.

What Is The Origin Of The Unused $21.45 Money Order?

It appears that the unused, never-deposited money order was removed
from the middle of a stack of postal orders at the Dallas GPO by a
postal employee on the afternoon of November 23 (circa 3:00 pm).


Note: **The serial number of the money order, No. 2,202,130,462,
*indicates that it came from money orders that were not sold by the
GPO in Dallas until late 1964 or early 1965.


The postal employee who removed the money order then used a cancellation
stamp from the Dalls GPO to stamp the front side "MAR 12, 63 DALLAS, TEX
GPO." The money order was then flown to Washington DC and arrived a few
hours later *(which may explain why Harry Holmes told postal inspectors in
Fort Worth the serial number of the money order at 3:30 pm but waited
several hours before advising the money order could be located in
Washington, DC)*.


After arriving in Washington, DC the $21.45 money order was either planted
among used money orders at the Federal Records Center or given directly to
Robert Jackson, an employee of the National Archives. Jackson hand carried
the postal money order to J. Harold Marks who then gave it to Secret
Service Agent Parker who gave it to the FBI.


*Who was the Dallas postal employee who could have fabricated the
$21.45 money order? To answer that question we only need to look at
the facts surrounding the money order and the Dallas postal employee
who:


o Provided the FBI and Secret Service information following the
assassination.
o Allegedly found a postal money order "stub" which disappeared.
o Knew the serial number of the $21.45 money order (circa 3:30 pm).
o Advised the money order could be located in Washington, DC (circa
6:30 pm).
o Told the WC the delay in finding the money order was caused by the
FBI.
o Told several different stories about finding a Nov, 63' issue of
*Field and Stream.*
o Never discussed postal regulations concerning firearms with the WC.
o Lied about statements made during Oswald's interrogation.


** The Dallas employee was most likely Inspector/FBI Informant Harry
Holmes.**


1964 - The Warren Commision Pieces The Evidence Together


(The Seven Points Of Contention For Proof)


We have now learned many of the facts surrounding the Italian rifle
that was ALLEDGELY ordered and paid for by Oswald using the alias "A.
Hidell." We shall now see how the FBI and Warren Commission
manipulated and twisted the facts, evidence, and witness testimony to
create the illusion that was published in the Warren Report.


The Warren Commission's job was not to investigate the murder of the
President, but to evaluate evidence given to them by the FBI and
question witnesses. In order to conclude that Oswald *purchased and
received a ***40-inch*** Mannlicher -Carcano rifle, SN C2766, from
Klein's in March 1963* the Commission needed to piece together
evidence and "prove the following:


1) There was only one Mannlicher-Carcano with SN C2766
2) Klein's had C2766 in inventory in February 1963
3) Oswald ordered a rifle from Klein's on March 12, 1963
4) Oswald paid for the rifle with a $21.45 postal money order
5) Klein's deposited the money order into their bank account
6) Klein's shipped C2766 to "A. Hidell"
7) Oswald received C2766


1) Prove There Was Only One Mannlicher-Carcano With SN C2766


The WC needed to prove there was only one Mannlicher-Carcano with serial
number C2766 and questioned Klein's Vice-President William Waldman. When
Waldman told Commission Atty David Belin that Mannlicher-Carcano's were
made by a number of ***different manufacturers*** Belin responded by
asking, "Does the ***same manufacturer*** give different serial numbers
for each weapon?" Waldman answered, "The gun manufacturers imprint a
different number on each gun. It's stamped into the frame of the gun and
serves as a unique identification for each gun."


*David Belin obviously asked William Waldman the wrong question. He
should have asked if ***different manufacturers could have used indentical
serial numbers.*** When the FBI interviewed William Suchet, the owner of
International Firearms Ltd. of Montreal, he said that different
manufacturers in Italy sometimes used the same serial numbers on
Mannlicher-Carcano rifles.


The Commission, using the testimony they received from Waldman, wrote in
their final report, "..the number C2766 is the serial number." The
Commission concluded, "The number 'C2766' is the serial number of the
rifle, and the rifle in question is the only one of its type bearing that
serial number."


NOTE: **The fact that David Belin failed to ask Waldman if different
manufacturers could have used identical serial numbers clearly
demonstrates the Commission's willingness to manipulate testimony in order
to frame Oswald.**


2) Prove That Klein's Had C2766 In Inventory In February
1963


The FBI probably knew , from advertisements placed in the ***American
Rifleman*** and discussions with Klein's officials, that Klein's sold only
***36-inch*** Italian carbines from February 1962 through March 1963.
The 10 shipping slips which Feldsott gave to the fBI (dated 6/18/62) were
almost certainly ***36-inch*** rifles. The serial number on one of those
rifles was C2766 and matched the serial number of the rifle found on the
6th floor of the TSBD. The problem was that ***C2766 was sold and
delivered to Klein's in June 1962 and not early 1963<*** *which is why the
3 FBI agents who reviewed microfilm records at Klein's on the early
morning hours of November 23 found no records for the sale of C2766 in
March 1963.*


To create the illusion that C2766 was available for the sale by Klein's in
February 1963, the FBI simply needed to show that C2766 was in their store
on or before March 1963 when "A. Hidell's" order was ALLEDGELY received.
To accomplish this the FBI and the WC needed to match Crescent's 10
***undated*** shipping slips (100 rifles which included C2766) with an
order for 100 rifles placed by Klein's in early 1963. *This was easy
because the FBI had the 10 undated shipping slips and Klein's microfilm in
their custody.*


The FBI gave the WC a ***copy*** of the Klein's purchase order for 100
rifles from Cresent Firearms dated January 24, 1963 (Waldman Ex. NO 1).
WC attorney David Belin showed the copy to Klein's vice president William
Waldman on May 20, 1964 and said, "Mr. Waldman, I hand you what is being
marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit 1 and ask you tostate if you know
what that is." Waldman answered, "I do...This constitutes a purchase
order of Klein's directed to Crescent Firearms for Italian Carcano rifles
prepared on January, 2, 19-, oh, wait aminute; hold that a moment, January
24, 1963, calling for 200 units at a cost of $8.50."


After obtaining testimony that Klein's ordered 100 rifles from Crescent
Firearms on January 23, 1963, the Commission needed to show that
***C2766*** was one of the rifles. They wanted to track ***C2766*** from
its origin in Italy, to the dock in New Jersey, and to Klein's in Chicago
and offered as "proof" the following documents:


o A bill of lading which showed that Waterfront Transfer Company
delivered 520 cartons of rifles (5200 rifles) from the *Elleetra
Fascio* to the Harborside Terminal on October 25, 1960 (FBI Ex.
D-178). Carton #3376 contained 10 riles, one of which was C2766.
o Billing copy from Harborside Terminal (dated 11/9/60) which
listed 520 cartons of "38 E91 I 6.5" calibre rifles (FBI Ex. D-189).
o Five delivery orders (891.38, 14473, 03403, A01640, A0062)
which
showed that gun dealer Fred Rupp removed cartons of rifles from the
Harborside Terminal from August thru October 1962 (FBI Ex. D-190).
**But carton #3376, which contained ***C2766***, was not listed on
any
of these delivery orders.**


NOTE: ** Keep in mind that Crescent Firearms sold
***C2766*** to Klein's on June 18, 1962, ***two months before*** Fred
Rupp began removing the 520 cartons of rifles from harborside.


o An undated shipping order which shows that North Penn Transfer
picked up 10 cartonof rilfes from Fred Rupp (FBI Ex. D-152). **But
carton #3376, which contained C2766, was not listed on this shipping
order:**
o A delivery receipt which shows that North Penn Transfer delivered 10
cartons of rifle to Lifschultz on February 13, 1963 (FBI Ex. D-169).
**But carton #3376 which contained C2766 was not listed on this delivery
receipt.**
o Lifschultz Fast Freight-Chicago Run Sheet, which shows that
Lifschultz delivered 10 cartons of rilfes to Klein's Sporting Goods in
Chicago on February 21, 1963 (FBI Ex. D-170). **But carton #3376, which
contained C2766, was not listed on the run sheet.**


Not one of these shipping documents listed carton numbers or serial
numbers of rifles. From these documents it is impossible to know
***when*** carton #3376 left the Harborside Terminal or ***where*** it was
delivered. ***The absence of serial and carton numbers on these
documents*** is what allowed the FBI, *and the Warren Commission, to
fraudulently claim that ***C2766*** was shipped to Klein's in early 1963.*


After "proving" that ***C2766*** was shipped to Klein's the Commission
needed to show that Klein's ***received*** the rifle. They introduced a
***copy*** of Klein's "receiving record," which was purportedly a list of
rifles received by the receiving department on February 21, 1963. But
instead of questioning J. A. Mueller, the head of the receiving
department, Commission attorney David Belin questioned Klein's General
Operating Manager, Mitchell J. Scribor and vice- president William
Waldman.


Belin handed Waldman the ***copy*** and said, "I hand you what has been
marked as Waldman Exhibit No 4 (FBI Ex. No D-167). and ask you to state if
you know what this is." Waldman answered, "This is the record created by
us showing the control number we have assigned to the gun together with
the serial number that is imprinted on the frame of the gun....Our control
number for that is VC-836."


On the upper right side of this document is the notation "1259" and on the
upper left side of the document is the notation "RR 1243." The "1259" was
not identified by the Commission, but "RR 1243" was identified as
"receiving record 1243." The "1243" matched the Klein's order number for
100 rifles placed on January 24, 1963 (1/24/3). *This only one of two
documents which the Commission used to link C2766 to the January 24, 1963
order (the other document was a copy of Crescent form #3178 which
contained hand written entries for 10 carton numbers.)


NOTE: ** An FBI Airtel of 3/13/64 (FBI Ex. No. D-167) *states, "One
photstatic copy of a ***list prepared by Mitchell Scibor on 11/23/63.***
This Airtel suggests that scibor may have printed a copy of the receiving
record from Klein's microfilm on 11/23/63.**


In an honest investigation the WC would have deposed J. A. Mueller, the
man in charge of the Klein's receiving department, and simply asked him
who prepared "RR 1243." Instead, the Commission interviewd William
Waldman and Mitchell Scibor who spent little time, if any in the company's
shipping and receiving department and had no idea if the copy of the
receiving record they were shown was authentic.


Commission attorney David Belin then gave ***copies*** of Lifschultz Fast
Freight bills of lading to William Waldman and said, "I'm going to hand
you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit 2 and ask you to
state if you know what that is." Waldman answered, "I do...this is a
delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering 10 cases of
guns deliverd to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from Crescent
Firearms....The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise ame
to our premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department." The delivery
receipt was signed by J.A. Mueller, the head of Klein's receiving
department.


NOTE: ** Waldman probably never saw these bills of lading prior to
his testimony. The Lifschultz documents showed only that 100 rifles
were delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, but listed ***not
carton or serial numbers*** of rifles.


**Readers should remember that the weight of the 10 cartons of rifles
delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963 clearly indicated they were
***36-inch*** rilfes. The Commission was trying to prove that Klein's
received a shipment of ***40-inch*** rifles on February 21, 1963 (C 2766
was a ***40-inch*** rifle).


Belin then handed Waldman copies of Crescent's 10 ***undated shipping
forms*** *(which Louis Feldsott said were from June 1962)* and said, "I'm
going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit 3 and
ask you to state if you know what this is." Waldman answered, "Yes; these
are the memos prepared by Crescent Firearms showing serial numbers of
rifles that were shipped to us and each one of these represents those
rifles that were contained in a case."


Belin then tried to get Waldman to say the 10 shipping forms ***(from
6/18/62)*** represented the 100 rifles that were delivered to Klein's on
February 21, 1963. Belin said, "Now, you earlier mentioned that these
(Waldman Ex. No. 3) were packed with the case." Waldman replied, "Well, I
would like to correct that. This particular company (Crescent) ***does
not include these with the cases***, but sends these memos separately with
their invoice."


NOTE: ** At this point the Commission had ***no testimony*** that linked
Crescent's 10 undated shipping forms from June 18, 1962 to the delivery of
100 rifles to Klein's on February 21, 1963.**


David Belin, obviously unsatisfied with Waldman's answer, THEN TOLD
WALDMAN THE SERIAL NUMBERS LISTED ON THE UNDATED SHIPPING FORMS MATCHED
THE ORDER FOR THE 100 RIFLES. Belin said, "Referring to Waldman Dep. Ex.
No. 3, ***which ***ARE*** the serial numbers of the 100 rifles which were
made in this shipment from Crescent Firearms to you,*** and Waldman Dep.
Ex. No. 5, which is the invoice from Crescent Firearms which has stamped
on it that it was paid by your company on March 4, is there any way to
verify that this payment pertained to rifles which are shown on Waldman
Dep. Ex. No 3?"


NOTE: ** The fact that David Belin told Waldman the undated shipping forms
matched the order for 100 rifles clearly demonstrates the Commission's
willingness to manipulate testimony in order to frame Oswald.


Waldman did not acknowledge the first part of Belin's question, but to the
second part of his question answered, "The forms submitted by Crescent
Firearms, showing serial numbers of rifles included in the shipment
covered by their invoice No. 3178, indiciate that the rifle carriying
serial No. ***C-2766*** was included in that shipment." *This is not true.
Waldman Dep. Ex. No. 5, dated February 7, 1963 which lists invoice #3178
(FBI Ex. D-165) ***does not list any serial or carton numbers
whatsoever.***


There is, however, a ***handwritten*** form dated February 7, 1963 which
lists invoice #3178 (FBI Ex. D-172). This is a ***copy*** of a document
which the FBI ALLEGEDLY obtained from Louis Feldsott and contains a
***handwritten*** list of the numbers of 10 cartons of rifles in the
middle of the page. One look at the ***handwriting*** on the copy of this
form clearly shows that *the person who filled out the form originally was
not the same person who wrote the numbers of the 10 cartons of rifles.*


This form, *which was not published in the Warren Volumes,* was the second
item that linked Crescent's 10 undated shipping forms (from June, 1962)
with a Klein's order received on February 21, 1963 *(the other was Klein's
receiving record)*. If this form had been shown to Louis Feldsott by the
Warren Commission he would have immediately identiifed it as a forgery,
*but Feldsott was never interviewed by the Commission.*


The Commission then introduced Klein's check #28966, in the amount of
$850, to rove that payment for 100 Model T-38 rifles was made on March 1,
1963 (FBI Ex. No. D-166). However, there are no notations on the Klein's
check stub that refer to the number of Crescent's shipping form, carton
numbers, or the serial numbers of any of the 100 rifles- *only Crescent
invoice #3178 is listed on the check stub.*


NOTE: ** There is no doubt that Klein's ordered and received 100 rifles in
early 1963, but these were not the same rifles identified on Crescent's 10
undated shipping slips from June 18, 1962 (C2766).


**************************************************


A Final Thought About The Crescent Shipping Forms: The WC knew the 10
shipping forms (including ***C2766***) came from Louis Feldscott, *and
they also knew that Feldsott provided an affidavit in which he said that
Crescent sold ***C2766*** to Klein's in June 18, 1962.* Their failure to
depose Feldsott and resolve this conflict is inexcusable and probably
intentional. Had Feldsott testified he would have indentified Crescent
form #3178 as a forgery and he would have testified that the 10 undated
shipping forms represented 100 rifles sold to Klein's on June 18, 1962,
***and not in early 1963.***


The owner of Klein's Sporting Goods, Milton Klein, knew something was
wrong with the FBI investigation but no longer had his company's microfilm
records and was therefore unable to dispute their conclusions. Klein told
reporters again and again that Oswald ordered a ***36-inch*** rifle, *but
was unable to explain how the Dallas Police managed to find a
***40-inch*** rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD.*


In the early 1960's nearly everyone trusted and admired the FBI and on
one, including Milton Klein, believed the Bureau would manipulate and/ or
fabricate evidence. But with Klein's microfilm records in their custody
as of 5:00 am on November 23, 1963, the FBI could print copies of any of
Klein's microfilm records, alter the paper copies, and then re-microfilm
the altered copies. One of the best indications that the Bureau did alter
Klein's microfilm records is the fact that Klein's microfilm DISAPPEARED
***while in FBI custody.*** With no other records available, there was
simply no way that Milton Klein or anyone else could challenge the
conclusions of the FBI and the Warren Commission.


3) Prove Oswald Ordered A Rifle From Klein's On March 12, 1963


Commission attorney David Belin questioned William Waldman about the order
Klein's received from "A. Hidell" on March 13, 1963. Waldman said, "We
have a-this microfilm record of a coupon clipped from a portion of one of
our advertisements, which indicates by writing of the customer on the
coupon that he ordered our catalog No C20-750; and he has shown the price
of the item, $19.95, and gives as his name A. Hidell, and his address as
Post Office Box 2915, in Dallas, Tex...The coupon overlays the envelope in
which the order was mailed and this shows in the upper left-hand corner
the return address of A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, in Dallas, Tex.
There is a postmark of Dallas, Tex., and a postdate of March 12, 1963,
indicating that the order was mailed by airmail."


Belin next asked Waldman about the coupon sent with the order and said,
"Now, I see another number off to the left. What's that number?"
Waldman replied, "The number that you referred to, C20-T750 is a catalog
number.catalogue number C20-T750 describes the Italian carbine rifle with
a four-power scope, which is sold as a package unit." David Belin had the
testimony he needed, and was careful not to allow Waldman to describe the
length of the rifle.


*Belin carefully framed the questions he asked Waldman and avoided
discussing the order coupon in detail. He knew the coupon contained the
notation "Dept. 358," which meant that it came from the February, 1963
issue of ***American Riflemn*** when Klein's sold only ***36- inch***
Mannlicher-Carcano rifles. Belin didn't want testimony in the public
record that showed "A. Hidell" ordered a ***36-inch*** rifle but somehow
received a ***40-inch*** rifle.


NOTE: ** Klein's assigned catalog number C20-T750 to the ***40- inch***
Italian carbine, with scope, but not until the summer of 1963.


4) Prove Oswald Sent A $21.45 Postal Money Order To Klein's


The FBI obtained US postal money order No. 2,202,130,462 from the Secret
Service and gave it to the Warren Commission. The money order was made
payable to the order of "Klein's Sporting Goods," the purchaser was listed
as "A. Hidell," and the address was listed as "P.O. Box 2915, Dallas
Texas." The first order of business for the Commission was to show that
"Lee Harvey Oswald" purchased the money order. To "prove" their claim the
Commission asked the FBI for a handwriting analysis.


FBI document "experts" Alwyn Cole and James Cadigan examined the money
order and gave their opinions to the Commission. Cole testified that the
writing on the *money order with the known writing of Oswald.* Cadigan
testified the writing on the money order was done by Lee Harvey Oswald
*but only by comparing the words "Dallas, Texas" with Oswald's know
writing.*


The Commission then needed to show the money order was purchased and the
airmailed from Dallas before noon. *If the mony order was mailed from
Dallas after 10:00 noon, it could not have reached Chicago and could not
have been deposited into Klein's bank account the following day.*


NOTE: ** It is extremely unlikely that a letter mailed from Dallas in
1963 could have reached Klein's office, in Chicago, the following day.**


Harry Holmes told the WC, "The money order had been issued ***early in the
morning*** of March the 12th, 1963. *Belin failed to ask Holmes how he
knew the money order was issued ***on the morning*** of March 12.


NOTE: ** There is nothing on the front or backside of the money order
that indicates it had been issued on the morning of March 12. There was,
however, a postmark of 10:30 AM on the mailing envelope which allegedly
contained the money order and coupon. But Klein's allegedly discarded the
envelope when the received "Hidell's" order and the only copy of the
envelope was on Klein's microfilm, which had been given to the FBI at 5:00
am on November 23 and was not seen again until William Waldman's testimony
in Chicago, on May 20, 1964. There is no legitimate way for Harry Holmes
to have known about the 10:30 am postmark on the mailing envelope.


Klein's Vice President William Waldman discussed the mailing envelope with
the Commission and said, "This shows in the upper left-hand corner the
return address of a. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex."
*Waldman apparently never noticed the "12" following, "Dallas, TX," *which
indicated the letter was mailed in postal zone 12, which was several miles
from downtown Dallas.*


NOTE: ** David Belin should have asked Waldman why Klein's microfilmed
the envelope in which the order was received, yet ***failed to microfilm
the postal money order.***


David Belin asked Waldman about depositing the money order into Klein's
bank account and said, "I hand you what has been marked as Commission
Exhibit No, 788, which appears to be a US Postal money order payable to
the order of Klein's Sporting Goods....And on the reverse side there
appears to be an endorsement....I wonder if you would read the
endorsement, if you would, and examine it, please."


As an experienced attorney and businessman Belin knew that the stamp on
the backside of the money order was a "deposit endorsement." He also knew
that the money order did not have ***a single bank endorsement or date
stamp*** and no indication whatsoever that it was ever deposited into a
bank or financial institution.


Belin asked Waldman when the money order was deposited to the Klein's bank
account and he replied, "I CANNOT specifically say when this money order
was deposited by our company......" Waldman could not determine the date
of deposit was *because there was no bank endorsement or date stamp
anywhere on the money order.*


NOTE: **Both Waldman and Belin should have realized that a postal money
order with no bank endorsement or date stamps could not possibly have been
deposited to Klein's bank account, routed through the US banking system,
or returned to the US Post Office. IT is difficult to believe that
neither the FBI, Secret Service, Dallas Police, Warren Commission members,
their staff attorneys, nor anyone who examined this postal money order
noticed that bank endorsements and dates were missing.**


** By ignoring the fact that the postal money order lacked a single bank
endorsement or date stamps, and therefore could not have been deposited
into any financial institution, the Commission demonstrated their
willingness to manipulate evidence in order to frame Oswald.


5) Prove Klein's Deposited The Money Order Into Their Account


David Belin ignored the fact that the $21.45 money order contained no bank
endorsement stamps and asked William Waldman, "Do you have any way of
knowing when exactly this money order was deposited by your Company?"
Waldman said, "I cannot specifically say when this money order was
deposited by our company; however, as previously stated, a money order for
$21.45 passed through our cash register on March 13, 1963....we show an
item of $21.45 as indicated on the ***Xerox copy*** of our deposit slip
marked, or identified by-Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10." Belin added,
"And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45 out of a total deposit
that day of $13,827.98; is that correct? Waldman answered, "That's
correct."


The item for $21.45 appears in the first column under the heading
***"Checks other Chicago Banks"*** and, if accurately recorded, was a
***CHECK*** in the amount of $21.45 from another Chicago bank. *If Belin
had conducted an honest investigation he would have wanted to know why a
money order from Dallas, Texas was listed under "Checks ***other Chicago
Banks."***


Waldman Dep. Ex. No 10 is a 4-page list of deposits made to Klein's
account in which a single entry for $21.45 appears with over 1000
entries. The deposit slip contained the following totals:


Total on the
Bank
$28.24
Total out of Town
Banks
$9,992.43
Total other Chicago
Banks
$3,804.67
Cash send by registered
mail
$2.64


total deposit $13,827.98


All items listed on the First National Bank of Chicago deposit slip were
taken directly from the entry totals from the 4 pages of deposits. *But
there is another list of deposits that appears on page 707 of Volume 21
and totals $2116.91. There is a 2nd entry for $21.45 on this list of
deposits, but this deposit ***had nothing to do with the $13,827.98
deposit.***


NOTE: ** On November 23, 1963 FBI agents allegedly questioned Robert
Wilmouth, Vice President of Operations for the First National Bank of
Chicago. Wilmouth ***allegedly*** advised that Klein's made a $13.827.98
deposit on March 13 and said that two depostis in the amount of $21.45
were included with a deposit of $1536.11, which in turn was included in a
group total of $6178.00 *But ***neither $1536.11 nor $6178.00 were listed
on the First National Bank of Chicago deposit slip,*** which totals
$13,827.98, and this glaring discrepancy remains unresolved.**


In addition to the discrepancies mentioned above, the First National Bank
of Chicago deposit slip of $13,827.98 is dated ***February 15, 1963- a
month before the $21.45 money order was purchased!!***


In order for the Commission to conclude that a postal money order
purchased by Oswald in the amount of $21.45 was deposited to Klein's bank
account in March, they had to ***IGNORE*** the date of February 15 on the
First National Bank deposit slip (February 15, 1963), ***IGNORE*** the
fact statement of Robert Wilmouth, ignore the list of deposits totaling
$2116.91, ***IGNORE*** the fact that the $21.45 entries came from "Other
Chicago banks, and ***IGNORE*** he fact that ***money order No.
2,202,130,462 was never deposited into any financial institution.*** *The
fact that the Commission made no attempt to resolve any of these
discrepancies clearly demonstrates their willingness to manipulate
evidence in order to help fram Oswald.*


Today, it is impossible to verify the date of any of the entries to
Kleins' bank account. Klein's microfilm records *DISAPPEARED WHILE in FBI
custody,* Klein's Sporting Goods went bankrupt in December, 1973, and
their bank records were destroyed long ago. But the fact remains that
money order No. 2,202,130,462, published on page 677 of Volume 17, was
never deposited to any bank or financial institution and ***could not have
been used to pay for a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle or anything else.***


6) Prove that Klein's Shipped a 40-Inch Rifle (C2766) to A.
Hidell


After "proving" that "A. Hidell" paid for an Italian rifle the Commission
needed to show that Klein's shipped a ***40-inch rifle***(not a 36-inch
rifle) to PO Box 2915 in Dallas. The Commission knew the Dallas Police
found a ***40-inch*** rifle on the sixth floor of the Book Depository, and
also knew that "A. Hidell" ordered a *36-inch* rifle from the ***American
Rifleman*** in February of 1963. *Butthey wanted to keep the public from
finding out *that Hidell/Oswald ordered a ***36-inch*** rifle.*


Commission attorney David Belin kept references to a ***36-inch*** rifle
out of the record by deposing only two of Klein's employees, William
Waldman and Mitchell Scibor, and by carefully framing his questions.
Belin said, "Now, I also note on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No, 1, under
the item number-some letters here or numbers..." Waldman interrupted and
said, "C20-T749." Belin asked, "What does that signify?" Waldman
answered, "This is an identification number assigned by us for internal
operating purposes," *Belin immediately stopped questioning Waldman and
held a short discussion OFF THE RECORD.* When Waldman's testimony resumed
there was no further discussion about catalog number C20-T749 or Model 91
TS rifles, *because BOTH were 36-inch rifles.*


NOTE: ** The Commission ws very concerned about keeping all references to
***36-inch*** rifles out of the record. If they had any interest in
conducting an honest investigation and wanted to know when Klein's began
receiving ***40-inch*** rifles, all they had to do was ask Crescent
Firearms President, Louis Feldsott. He could have provided the Commission
Crescent's shipping records and billing invoices that showed the date
Crescent first shipped ***40-inch*** rifles to Klein's. Or they could
have asked Klein's advertising department for a list of advertisments
placed in magazines for *36- inch* and *40-inch* rifles But the Commission
did not interview Feldsott and they did not ask Klein's about their
advertisements. The simply chose to keep all references to a ***36-inch***
rifle out of the record.


**The Klein's employees who were the most knowledgeable abut the
Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, gun buyer Mitchell W. Westra and gunsmith
William Sharp, were never questioned.**


Belin then created the illusion that Oswald ordered a ***40-inch*** rifle
by introducing a Klein's advertisement from the November, 1963 issue of
***Field and Stream*** magazine, **furnished by Dallas Postal Inspector
Harry Holmes.** On April 2, 1964 Belin interviews Holmes and asked him to
read a portion of the advertisement into the record:


"....it says, '6.5 Italian carbine,' in big black letters, And underneath
it says, 'Late military issue. Only ***40-inches overall.*** Weighs 7
lbs.....And underneath that it says, 'C20-750, carbine with a brand new 4x
3/4" diameter scope (illustrated) $19.95....."


This was the only advertisement for a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that was
published by the Warren Commission, and it showed a ***40-inch*** rifle
that matched the length of rifle found by Dallas Police. *The Commission
dared not publish the Klein's advertisement from the February 1963 issue
of ***American Rifleman*** because it showed a ***36-inch*** rifle.


Thanks to David Belin and Postal Inspector/FBI Informant Harry Holmes, the
Commission was able to create an illusion that Oswald ordered a
***40-inch*** rifle. *But by failing to publish the correct
advertisement, the Warren Commission once again demonstrated their
willingness to manipulate evidence and testimony in order to frame Oswald.


7) Prove That A. Hidell Received A Rifle At PO Box 2915 In Dallas


The WC was very concerned that the name "A Hidell" did not appear on
Oswald's application for PO Box 2915. In a memo to Mr. Conrad FBI
official W.D. Griffith wrote, "It should be noted that although Oswald
used the name "A. Hidell" in placing the order for the murder weapon, this
name *does not appear* on his application for the P.O. Box to which the
gun was shipped."


The Warren Commission also knew that "A. Hidell's" name ***was not on the
application,*** which they published on page 286 of Volume 19 and
identified as Cadigan Exhibit No. 13. *But in their final report the
Commission ignored this problem by ***claiming the application had been
thrown away by the post office.*** They wrote:


* ***"It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915
listed 'A. Hidell' as a person entitled to receive mail at this box.*** In
accordance with postal regulations, the portion of the application which
lists names of persons, other than the applicatn, entitled to receive mail
was ***thrown away after the box was closed on May 1963."*** *


After "explaining" how "A. Hidell" could have received mail at a box
rented by Oswald, the Commission wondered if any postal employees
remembered deliverinig a large package to box 2915. Harry Holmes told the
Commission that exhaustive efforts were made at the Dallas GPO to
determine if postal employees remembered handling or delivering a large
package to "A. Hidell," **without success.** *But the Commission did not
ask, nor Harry Holmes volunteer, any information about postal form 2162,
which required the signature of the shipper and receiver of a firearm sent
through the US mail (postal regulation 846.53a). The Commission was never
able to "prove" that Oswald received a rifle through his post office box.


Harvey and Lee, How The CIA Framed Oswald, J. Armstrong pgs. 467-77
aeffects
2011-12-29 21:43:35 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 29, 11:25 am, wgroom <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

good post...
wgroom
2012-01-05 22:39:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by aeffects
<snip>
good post...
Now give it to Ben, make him read it, and quiz him for his
midterm...:)

wg

Raymond
2011-12-30 02:46:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by wgroom
Post by Raymond
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
There have long been problems with how the rifle allegedly used in the
assassination of President Kennedy came to be linked with Oswald.
Raymond Gallagher shows us, astonishingly and with documentation, that
the rifle was shipped before Oswald had ordered it. How could that
be?
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
Copies of these back issues can be ordered from The Last Hurrah
Bookstore.http://www.lasthurrahbookshop.net/
Today, due to people like Raymond Gallagher, (Probe Vol. 5 No. 6, p.
10) and especially John Armstrong, we can show that it is highly
doubtful that Oswald ever ordered that rifle.  Evidence from the
official records suggests that the sixth floor rifle was not the rifle
delivered to Lee Oswald in March of 1963
Raymond Gallagher, new to PROBE, delves into the unique sales history
of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. How did the bank deposit Oswald's
money order for the weapon before Oswald wrote it ?
Louis Feldsott of Crescent Arms told the FBI that C 2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18,1962, yet Waldman , at Klein's,  did not order the
rifles until January 24, 1963.  (SEE  Waldman Testimony Warren
Commission Hearings: Vol. VII - Page 362 )
To my knowledge, no one has explained the difference. But there is an
even further discrepancy. Waldman testified that Klein's received
Oswald's money order of $21.45 on March 13, 1963 and it was deposited,
along with other money orders and checks, into a company account at
the First National Bank of Chicago. Waldman testified to the
Commission attorney David Belin that the postmark date of the money
order leaving Dallas was March 12 ( WC Vol,7, p. 366.) Waldman further
testified that the deposit was made on the 13th. and it was part of a
total deposit of $13,827.98.
( Belin did not ask him to explain how, before the advent of computers, an
order could be shipped 700 miles, received, processed and deposited in 24
hours)  But yet, the bank deposit slip, the extra copy provided by the
bank at the time of the transfer, reads FEBRUARY 15, 1963, not March 13
th.This is about one month before Oswald sent the coupon for the rifle by
air mail to Chicago .
( See Waldman Exhibit no. 10 p. 706 ) Of course, if the February date is
correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then C 2766 could not be the
correct serial number on the rifle in the so-called back yard photographs.
See deposit slip deposited with The First National Bank of Chicago Date
2/15/63
 Total deposit: $13,827.98  deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods
Inc.  ( 50 91144  ) 4540 W. MADISON ST. CHGO  24 ILL
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
SEE  Feldsott Affadavit The following affidavit was executed by Louis
Feldsott on July 23. 1964.
 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
 ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
 PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
 STATE OF NEW YORK,
 1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th Street,
New York 18, New York.
 2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if
Crescent Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning .the sale of an
Italian made 6.5    m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.
 3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc., Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.
 4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation
of the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.
 Signed the 23d day of July 1964.
 (S) Louis Feldsott,
 LOUIS FELDSOTT.
Mr. Waldman.
 Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles
in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is
filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by
Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two
dates here.
 Mr. Belin.
 Go ahead.
Mr. Waldman.
The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our
premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department.
This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering
10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from
Crescent Firearms.
As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7.
Now, we CANNOT SPECIFICALLY SAY when this money order was deposited,
but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show  AN ITEM  of $21.45, as
indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified
by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.
Mr. Belin.
And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which
appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by
your  company; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
 Mr. Belin.
And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total
deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?
 Mr. Waldman.
 That's correct.
However, the date on that deposit slip was 2/15/63
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
 THE RIFLE
 The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
 Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=487.....
 THE SECOND CARCANO
 http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html
(Klein's and Seaport Traders) were under investigation by the Dodd
Committee at the time of the orders.Despite considerable evidence to
the contrary, some critics have questioned whether Lee Harvey Oswald
really owned the revolver used to shoot Officer J.D. Tippit. Recently,
allegations have been made based on a 1974 unpublished manuscript by
Fred T. Newcomb and Perry Adams titled, Murder From Within.
According to Newcomb and Adams, a 1964 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee
looking into mail-order firearms trafficking published a chart which
showed that Seaport Traders, the firm Oswald ordered his .38 caliber
Smith and Wesson revolver from, never shipped any .38 revolvers to
Dallas, Texas in March 1963 - the month of Oswald's order. Newcomb and
Adams concluded that "Oswald's gun, in effect, did not exist."
Although critics have clung to Newcomb and Adams' assertions as proof
positive of forged documents, cover-ups, and the alleged framing of
Oswald, little has been done to substantiate Newcomb and Adams’
claims. In fact, a review of the record shows Newcomb and Adam's
allegations to be false and misleading.
Was Oswald a Dodd Committee Investigator?http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.htm
Orering the Rifle
by Martha Moyerhttp://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf
John F. Kennedy assassination riflehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle
See Extra Copy  deposit sliphttp://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
Never, he never ordered a Mannlicher-Carcano.
What Is The Origin Of The Unused $21.45 Money Order?
It appears that the unused, never-deposited money order was removed
from the middle of a stack of postal orders at the Dallas GPO by a
postal employee on the afternoon of November 23 (circa 3:00 pm).
Note:  **The serial number of the money order, No. 2,202,130,462,
*indicates that it came from money orders that were not sold by the
GPO in Dallas until late 1964 or early 1965.
The postal employee who removed the money order then used a cancellation
stamp from the Dalls GPO to stamp the front side "MAR 12, 63 DALLAS, TEX
GPO."  The money order was then flown to Washington DC and arrived a few
hours later *(which may explain why Harry Holmes told postal inspectors in
Fort Worth the serial number of the money order at 3:30 pm but waited
several hours before advising the money order could be located in
Washington, DC)*.
After arriving in Washington, DC the $21.45 money order was either planted
among used money orders at the Federal Records Center or given directly to
Robert Jackson, an employee of the National Archives. Jackson hand carried
the postal money order to J. Harold Marks who then gave it to Secret
Service Agent Parker who gave it to the FBI.
*Who was the Dallas postal employee who could have fabricated the
$21.45 money order?  To answer that question we only need to look at
the facts surrounding the money order and the Dallas postal employee
o Provided the FBI and Secret Service information following the
assassination.
o Allegedly found a postal money order "stub" which disappeared.
o Knew the serial number of the $21.45 money order (circa 3:30 pm).
o Advised the money order could be located in Washington, DC (circa
6:30 pm).
o Told the WC the delay in finding the money order was caused by the
FBI.
o Told several different stories about finding a Nov, 63' issue of
*Field and Stream.*
o Never discussed postal regulations concerning firearms with the WC.
o Lied about statements made during Oswald's interrogation. ...
read more »- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
This below is among many notes sent to me via email from a well known
and highly respected researcher.
-- Raymond
--------------------
".... Another thing that bothers me – Lee supposedly bought the MO at
Dallas Main Post Office (Zone 1). The windows did not open until 8 am.
However - his work records indicate he was toiling away at his job
eleven blocks away at that time. More believable because he worked on
various jobs and he had to note the time he stopped and started so
the company could charge accordingly. Close look at the envelope used
to mail the MO – postage mark is stamped 10 am Area 12 . Area 12 is
clear out across Trinity river – five or so miles from Main Post
Office. So somehow Lee managed to buy his MO – walk to work eleven
blocks - stop and fill it out – (wonder where he got stamp and
envelope?) then meander into main office to be dropped into outgoing
mail. Oddly enough there were no post offices in Zone 12 at that
time. Letter was dropped into a mailbox and was processed in
Zone ...."
-----------------------------------
And compare the script handwriting word "Chicago", on the envelope
used to order the rifle from Klein's, with the script "Chicago
order" written on A BOX on the fifth floor of the TSBD. What the
Hell is that about? It does not take a hand writing expert to suspect
that the word "Chicago" was written by the same person whether it was
LHO or someone else.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0116b.htm

CE 773
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wcexlink.htm
The envelope addressed to Klein's (item 30) was available only in the
form of a microfilm enlargement. This is even less satisfactory than a
photocopy as a basis for an opinion on handwriting. It can only be
said that as far as the pictorial aspects of form or design.
proportions, alignment, slant, and connecting strokes are concerned,
the writing on this envelope, although it purports to be that of one
Hidell, conforms with the original writing submitted for examination
which purported to be that of Lee Harvey Oswald. (142) (Question. Was
the diary (item 16) written from day to day, as it is dated, or was it
written at one sitting? 247 (143) Opinion. While the diary was
submitted for examination in original form, it was almost completely
unsuitable (with the exception of p. 11) for document examination
because of treatment with fingerprint developer. Little patches of ink
were unobscured, but these were insufficient as a basis for a definite
conclusion. From the patches of ink that could be studied, there are
indications that the same pen and, ink could have been used to write
the: entire diary. However, this observation is based solely on
microscopic examination; no chemical tests were made or authorized.
Use of the same pen and ink (particularly when, as here, a fountain
pen or a dip pen, rather than a ballpoint pen, was used) is more
consistent with the diary having been prepared at one time, or over a
few consecutive writing sessions, than it is with execution from day
to day over the extensive period covered.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/parnell/hscahand.htm
http://www.scribd.com/doc/41200551/The-Framing-of-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Envelope-of-Oswald-s-Order-Form-for-a-Rifle-Suggests-Forger

Happy New Year to all of the interesting contributors to the
assassination research cause

Rob Caprio
2012-01-03 16:03:44 UTC
Permalink
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano! Period. ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!

This is what the evidence shows us.
Walt
2012-01-03 16:55:59 UTC
Permalink
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
You're right..... Oswald simply ordered the rifle illustrated in the
Klein ad without any concern about it's actual length.

Oswald ordered the "Italian carbine" in the illustration. However the
illustration did NOT show a "CARBINE" The illustration depicted a 40 inch
long model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano short rifle. The Mannlicher Carcano
carbine was a different gun, and it was 36 inches long. The fact that Lee
Oswald had Marina take a photo of him holding a 40 inch long MC just like
the one in the Klein ad is proof that he received the gun he ordered.

None of the above is evidence that Lee Oswald murdered JFK, nor does it
indicate that there was an plot afoot to murder JFK at the time the
picture was taken ( April 5, 1963)
bigdog
2012-01-03 19:28:59 UTC
Permalink
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
When you are dealing with a mail order, catalog, or e-tailer, what you
order isn't always what you get, especially if you are talking about
second hand merchandise. You are going to get what they have. What they
had was both short and long Carcanos and when they got Oswald's order,
they just grabbed one and sent it to him. It wouldn't even surprise me if
they didn't even know their batch of second hand war surplus rifles were
in different lengths. Essesntially, they were acting as a liquidators for
this batch of weapons. What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano
C2766, which was a 40 inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on
the 6th floor of the TSBD. Does it really matter that Oswald thought he
was ordering the 36 inch model.
Raymond
2012-01-04 02:25:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
When you are dealing with a mail order, catalog, or e-tailer, what you
order isn't always what you get, especially if you are talking about
second hand merchandise. You are going to get what they have. What they
had was both short and long Carcanos and when they got Oswald's order,
they just grabbed one and sent it to him. It wouldn't even surprise me if
they didn't even know their batch of second hand war surplus rifles were
in different lengths. Essesntially, they were acting as a liquidators for
this batch of weapons. What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano
C2766, which was a 40 inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on
the 6th floor of the TSBD. Does it really matter that Oswald thought he
was ordering the 36 inch model.
Louis Feldsott was never called to give live testimony before the
Commission and only gave a sworn affidavit. In that affidavit, however,
Feldsott swore that Crescent's records showed that rifle C2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18, 1962, not in February 1963.

Why would that have been a problem ?

BECAUSE PRIOR TO 4/13/62, KLEIN'S RIFLE ORDER WAS FOR THE 91/38 TS,
WHICH ONLY CAME IN 36" LENGTHS. There's no way that Fred Rupp could
have prepared a shipment between 4/13 and 6/18. That's only two
months. The February 1963 shipment took him five months to prepare.

THE RIFLE

The Warren Commission concluded that in March of 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald,
using the alias, "A.Hidell" ordered a Model 91/38 Italian Mannlicher
Carcano bolt-action rifle from Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago to be
delivered to his post office box 2915 in Dallas, Texas. The Commission
provided evidence to support its conclusion, including copies of the order
blank, money order and envelope filled out by "Hidell". It concluded that
Oswald had ordered the weapon from an advertisement in the February 1963
edition of American Rifleman magazine. It was this rifle, the Commission
said, a 40.2" weapon bearing serial number C2766, that was found on the
sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository by Dallas Police 45
minutes after the shooting of President Kennedy and Governor Connally.

EVIDENCE THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE WAS NOT PART OF THE FEBRUARY SHIPMENT TO
KLEIN'S

TRACKING THE RIFLE

In 1958, Crescent Firearms (under the name Adam Consolidated Industries)
purchased 500,000 rifles from the Italian Government. The final shipment
of those rifles ( 520 cartons ) left Italy's port of Genoa after being
identified as lot number 91594 and arrived in the New York via the steamer
Elettra Fassio on October 25, 1960. The 520 cartons were removed and
trucked by the Waterfront Transfer Company to the Harborside Terminal, a
bonded warehouse in New Jersey.

As one can see, the CARTON NUMBERS are listed on the manifest. For
example, "3086/3094" means that all cartons numbered from 3086 thru 3094
inclusive were on this shipment. The third entry down, 3305/3436, means
that all cartons bearing numbers in that range were part of this shipment,
including the carton 3376, which allegedly contained a rifle with serial
number C2766, the same serial number as the rifle found on the sixth floor
of the TSBD.

The shipment was placed in storage and remained there for the next two
years.

This is where the paper trail for carton 3376 ends.

Fred Rupp was a federally-licensed gun dealer who had a contract with
Crescent Firearms to pick up rifles at the Harborside Warehouse and
inspect, clean, test-fire, repack and ship them to Crescent's retail
customers. Klein's purchase order of 1/15/62 requested that 400 model 91TS
rifles ( 36" troop specials ) be delivered.

According to Harborside delivery order # 89138, Rupp removed the
first 170 cartons on August 29, 1962.
A list of the numbers of the cartons removed was on the manifest.
CARTON 3376 WAS NOT AMONGTHEM.

Importers of rifles and gun dealers were required BY LAW to maintain a
list of SERIAL NUMBERS of the rifles they imported. Rupp was required by
law to keep a list of the serial numbers he removed from the warehouse (
which he did on the 8/29/62 manifest ) and the name of the retail customer
he shipped them to. And Klein's was required to keep the serial numbers of
rifle they sold to retail customers. ( 7 H 371 )

During the month of October, 1962, Rupp removed 264 more rifles from
lot 91594.

90 on October 4th

70 on October 16

64 on October 24

and the last 40 on October 31

On all of the subsequent shipping manifests of the rifles removed from
Harborside Warehouse by Fred Rupp, THE LIST OF CARTON NUMBERS IS ABSENT,
even though on the 10/24 manifest, it is clearly marked "list numbers of
cases shipped".

Rupp removed a total of 434 Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 rifles in the month
of October 1962 from the lot of 520 rifles ( 91594 ) belonging to Crescent
Firearms. He told the FBI that he kept no record of the carton numbers or
serial numbers of the rifles he removed from Harborside. ( CD 7, pg. 180 )
In other words, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT CARTON 3376 WAS AMONG the 434
rifles removed by Rupp, even though the FBI said it was.

The Warren Commission used two documents to "prove" that carton 3376 was
shipped to Klein's Sporting Goods.

The first one is Crescent Firearms invoice # 3178.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, referring to Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3,
which are the serial numbers of the 100 rifles which were made in this
shipment from Crescent Firearms to you.......is there any way to verify
that this payment pertained to rifles which are shown on Waldman
Deposition Exhibit No. 3?

Mr. WALDMAN. The forms submitted by Crescent Firearms showing serial
numbers of rifles included in the shipment covered by their invoice No.
3178 indicate that the rifle carrying serial No. C-2766 was included in
that shipment. ( 7 H 368 )

Of course, it shows no such thing.

Because if you look closely at invoice # 3178, you'll see that ALL OF THE
CARTON NUMBERS HAVE LITTLE CHECKS ABOVE THEM EXCEPT CARTON NUMBER 3376.

Which means that in verifying the carton numbers in that shipment,
3376 was never verified as being a part of that shipment.

The FBI's " tracking of the rifle " included unsigned and undated
documents and manifests.

One such undated and unsigned example of document was Waldman Exhibit
3, the second document the Warren Commission used to "prove" that
carton 3376 was shipped to Klein's.

Waldman Exhibit 3 is an undated and unsigned list of ten carton slips
which allegedly made up the February shipment from Crescent to Klein's.
Listed on each of the ten carton slips are the serial numbers of the 10
rifles in each carton, including carton 3376. Since there are no dates on
any of the slips in Waldman Exhibit 3, it serves no purpose in proving
that carton 3376 and thus the C2766 rifle was part of the February
shipment.

In fact, the ten carton slips, including slip 3620 which contained the
list of rifles in carton 3376, could have been filled out at any time. If
one looks at the slip numbers, which are pre-printed at the bottom of each
slip, one will see that the numbers are not in sequence, which one would
expect them to be if they were created at the same time by the same person
and for the same shipment.

The slip numbers are 3672, 3504, 4376, 3813, 3789, 3661, 3762, 3544, 3620
and 3770.

The Klein's Witness

William Waldman was anything but an expert. He knew so little about the
M-C rifle, that when he was shown the order form from his company to
Crescent Firearms, ( Waldman Exhibit 1 ) he testified that the order had
been changed from a 91TS to a 91/38EFF:

Mr. BELIN. Now, I notice on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. I a date well,
I might read everything under the column of description; it says Italian
Mannlicher-Carcano, Model 91TS, bolt action 6-shot rifle; and then
cal.--that's for caliber--6.5, and then there is an "X" and 52 mm
Italian-select, clean, and test-fired, changed to Beretta Terni M19, then
a slash line 38 EFF, and then the date of 4/16/62. Explain that date and
that description.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; this general style of rifle was made by a number of
different manufacturers over a period of time and there were minor
modifications made by---developed by each of the manufacturers.

Mr. BELIN. Would this be similar to a number of manufacturers making the
Springfield rifle in this country?

Mr. WALDMAN. As for example, the different manufacturers making the
Springfield rifle. Basically, the weapons were of the same general design,
but as I say, there were details that were different. We originally had
ordered one style of Carcano rifle, one that was known as the Model 91TS.
As time went on, we changed to another model known as the Model 91/38EFF,
this on April 13, 1962. ( 7 H 362 )

The problem is, that there is no such thing as a 91/38EFF. The "EFF" on
the form was short for the word "effective" followed by the date 4/13/62.

Waldman not only had no knowledge of the model of rifle his company
handled, he had no knowledge of the language used on shipping forms.
Waldman didn't fill out those slips. He didn't fill out the order for the
rifles. He didn't accept the shipment of the rifles, yet he was the one
who gave testimony. The people at Klein's whose responsibility it was to
handle such measures were never called to testify to the origin of the
documents.

He never should have been called as a witness in regard to the processing
of the rifle sale.

In fact, the Commission even had him giving testimony about documents that
were clearly from Crescent Firearms.

Why would they do that ?

Because at Crescent Firearms there WAS someone familiar with rifle sales.
But Louis Feldsott was never called to give live testimony before the
Commission and only gave a sworn affidavit. In that affidavit, however,
Feldsott swore that Crescent's records showed that rifle C2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18, 1962, not in February 1963.

Why would that have been a problem ?

BECAUSE PRIOR TO 4/13/62, KLEIN'S RIFLE ORDER WAS FOR THE 91/38 TS, WHICH
ONLY CAME IN 36" LENGTHS. There's no way that Fred Rupp could have
prepared a shipment between 4/13 and 6/18. That's only two months. The
February 1963 shipment took him five months to prepare.

That means that if rifle C2766 was sold to Klein's as part of a shipment
on 6/18/62 in response to their 1/15/62 order, Rupp would have had to have
started preparing the shipment right after the order, and that means that
the rifles in that order would have been 36" rifles. Because the order for
the 91/38's didn't go into effect until 4/13/62, the order change would
have been much too late to have altered a shipment that had already been
started and would be delivered on 6/18.

In addition, Rupp told the FBI that the rifle bearing serial number C2766
which he serviced was a 36" rifle. ( Armstrong, Harvey & Lee, pg. 446 )

This information is significant, I believe, because it proves that there
was more than one rifle, in this case a 36" rifle and a 40.2" rifle,
bearing the serial number C2766.

The rifle serial number

It was imperative for the Commission to show that the Depository rifle was
the only one with the serial number C2766 in order to establish that that
was the rifle shipped to "A. Hidell" at box 2915 in Dallas.

In its report, the commission said that, "Information received from the
Italian Armed Forces Intelligence Service has established that this
particular rifle was the only rifle of its type bearing serial number
C2766." ( Chap.4 , pg. 119 ) The Commission went on to say that, "the
number "C2766" is the serial number of the rifle, and the rifle in
question is the only one of its type bearing that serial number" (
Appendix X, pg. 554 ). The FBI also told the Commission that although
rifles might have the same serial number sequence, some were preceded by a
letter and some were not ( i.e. 2766 vs. C2766 ). ( 3 H 393 )

If there was ever proof that there was more than one rifle with the serial
number C2766, it would come from the most unlikeliest of sources, Warren
Commission supporter the late John K. Lattimer. In his book Kennedy &
Lincoln ( 1980 ) , on page 250 he alludes to an experiment he did with his
sons back in the 70's using a Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 rifle with a serial
number of C2766.

The Commission never considered that the serial number of the rifle in
evidence may have been modified.

Without knowing it as fact, it just stated that "This rifle is the
only one of its type bearing that serial number."

Even if none of the rifles had duplicate serial numbers, how hard would it
have been for someone looking to frame Oswald to have added a final "6" to
the serial number "C276" ? The hardest part would have been trying to line
up the stamp so the numbers were all in a straight line. Otherwise, the
final number may have shown up askew to the rest of the numbers and that
would have looked odd.

SEE Picture of rifle serial number
http://www.giljesus.com/jfk/rifle.htm

EVIDENCE THAT THE "$ 21.45" ENTRY ON KLEIN'S BANK STATEMENT WAS NOT
THE "HIDELL" MONEY ORDER
The Klein's deposit & its deposit slip

Still another problem with the purchasing of the rifle involves the
alleged deposit of the "Hidell" money order by Klein's Sporting Goods.
Waldman 10 shows that the $13,000 deposit had a deposit slip of 2/15/63.
If you look at that exhibit, you'll see that the date at the bottom of the
bulk statement is the date "3-13"63". I believe that these two documents
represent a deposit which was made on 2/15/63, the bulk list being a bank
statement of account action for the period ending 3/13/63.

SEE Waldma n Exhibit 10
SEE
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/440b111e0db1e96f/efec7baed8ac2d7d?q=Bluerhymer+and+bank+deposit+from+kleins

Before the naysayers respond that the deposit slip could have been in an
honest mistake, I would like to point out that BOTH the month AND the day
are wrong ( if you buy the deposit being made on 3/13/63 ). I could see an
error on the month at the beginning of the month, but an error on the
MONTH AND DAY in the MIDDLE of a month ?

IMO, it's pretty hard to believe it's an honest mistake.

From the evidence I've seen, the FBI apparently used a 2/15/63 deposit
of an American Express Money Order and tried to pass it off as a
3/13/63 deposit of a postal money order.

Let me explain why I believe that.

I believe that we're looking at TWO documents, dated a month apart,
for the SAME deposit. the first is the February 15, 1963 deposit slip
with a total of $ 13,827.98 in deposits from Klein's sporting goods to
be deposited into their account in the First National Bank of Chicago.
( 21 H 706 )

The second ( the bulk statement ) appears to me to be a bank
statement, mailed to Klein's ONE MONTH LATER, dated March 13, 1963 and
listing all of the checks and money orders deposited on 2/15 and part
of that exhibit ( Waldman 10 ) includes one other separate deposit of
$ 2,116.91 , date unknown ( below ). If Klein's bank statements were
tallied as of the 13th of the month, then a deposit on the 15th of
February would not show up until March 13th's statement.

Unfortunately, the date for this second "deposit" is cut off, making
it impossible to determine its exact date.

That is, I believe, why the "deposit" has two different dates. One is
for the actual deposit and the other is for the bank statement
received by Klein's the following month. If true, then the FBI took a
bank deposit for February 15th, 1963 that included TWO items for $
21.45 and tried to pass one of them off as a deposit of the "Hidell"
money order, using the date of the statement as a date of deposit.

Again, my opinion is that they couldn't have used an actual March
deposit slip because that one would have included a bank statement
dated the middle of April.

It seems to me, looking at the evidence, that Klein's never had a
deposit of $ 21.45 in March of 1963 but had 2 in February.

The problem with a February deposit, obviously, was that neither of
the deposits could have been a "Hidell" postal money order with a
postal stamp of 3/12. So the FBI took the bank statement dated
3/13/63, which was actually for the 2/15 deposit, and claimed that it
was all part of a 3/13 deposit.

Again, that's my opinion, based on what I've seen.

Absent the dated stamp of the bank, it was IMPOSSIBLE to say when and
IF the money order had been deposited. It was particularly difficult
for Waldman in his testimony to nail down the WHEN.

Mr. WALDMAN. ..... Now, we cannot specifically say when this money
order was deposited, but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show an
item of $21.45, as indicated on the XEROX COPY OF OUR DEPOSIT SLIP
marked, or IDENTIFIED by--AS WALDMAN DEPOSITION EXHIBIT No. 10.

Mr. BELIN. And I have just marked as a document what you are reading
from, which appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of
Chicago by your company; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a
total deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct ?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

( 7 H 367-368 )

We know that the $ 21.45 deposit they are referring to is an American
Express Money Order and NOT the "Hidell" postal order because it is
described IN DETAIL by Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First
National Bank of Chicago, Klein's bank. His description is so precise that
he described the entries listed before and after the "$ 21.45" in Waldman
10 to their exact penny.

That's pretty credible to me.

Needless to say, Robert Wilmouth never appeared on the FBI's witness list
to testify before the Commission and identify the "Hidell" money order as
having passed through his bank, either in live testimony or by deposition.

If the deposit was made in February, as I suggest, then the $ 21.45 in
Waldman 10's deposit of $ 13.827.98 couldn't possibly be the "Hidell"
money order . And there's evidence showing that it wasn't.

In Commission Document 7, pg. 192 ( below ) , Wilmouth told the FBI that
there were TWO deposits of $ 21.45 and the one in the $ 13,827.98 deposit
( Waldman 10 ) was an American Express money order, NOT the postal money
order sent by "A.Hidell". He said that "the item appeared on a tape
between an item of $ 15.08 and an item of $ 14.36, precisely where David
Belin put a mark on Waldman 10.

Wilmouth was specific in his identification of the AmEx money order.
He said that it was on a tape between deposits of $ 15.03 and $ 14.36,
precisely the deposit that the WC said was the postal money order sent
by "A.Hidell".

http://www.giljesus.com/jfk/rifle.htm

SEE RECEIVING THE RIFLE
OSWALD'S HANDWRITING
EVIDENCE THAT THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE IS NOT THE RIFLE IN THE FAMOUS
"BACKYARD" PHOTOGRAPHS
Although some may argue that the rear sling mount was attached to the
side, whether or not it was is irrelevant because the Depository rifle
did not have two different types of sling mounts. What IS relevant is
the difference between the front sling mount which is on the bottom in
the backyard photos and the front sling mount on the Depository rifle
which is on the side.

Lyndal Shaneyfelt, the FBI photography expert testified that he had
taken photographs of CE 139 ( the depository rifle ) and compared them
to the rifle in CE 133-A ( the "backyard photo" ). He told the
Commission:

"...I did not find any really specific peculiarities on which I could
base a positive identification to the exclusion of all other rifles of
the same general configuration." ( 4 H 281 )

In other words, he couldn't positively identify the Depository rifle
as the one in the "backyard photograph".

Big surprise, huh ?

But wait, we're not done yet.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations Photographic experts
found that in examining the photos, there were distinctive marks on
the rifle in the DeMohrenschildt and CE 134 ( large photo, above ) BY
photos that matched the Depository rifle. ( 2 HSCA 428 )

What about the difference in the sling mounts ?

It was never addressed.

It would seem that IF Oswald ordered a 36" rifle and received a 36"
rifle, then the 40" Depository rifle was not his.

You can see more info on the difference in the sling mounts on this
video from my youtube channel.

EVIDENCE THAT THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE WAS NOT FIRED ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963
Normally, an investigator examining a weapon to determine if it has
been fired, will look first at the outside of the weapon. A visual
examination of the condition of the weapon, including an examination
of the condition of the firing pin. Next, he examines the inside of
the weapon, checking the inside of the barrel and examining the inside
of the operating mechanism, the bolt and its parts.

In his testimony, FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier testified that he
observed that the inside of the barrel of the Depository rifle was
"roughened from corrosion", then connected the "corrosion" to rust
with his comment that "if a barrel is allowed to rust, one round will
remove that rust."

So how could the barrel have surface rust after THREE rounds had been
fired through it ?

The Rusted Barrel

Mr. FRAZIER. The stock is worn, scratched. The bolt is relatively
smooth, as if it had been operated several times. I cannot actually
say how much use the weapon has. had. The barrel is--was not, when we
first got it, in excellent condition. It was, I would say, in fair
condition. In other words, it showed the effects of wear and
corrosion.

The Rusted Barrel

Mr. FRAZIER. The stock is worn, scratched. The bolt is relatively
smooth, as if it had been operated several times. I cannot actually
say how much use the weapon has. had. The barrel is--was not, when we
first got it, in excellent condition. It was, I would say, in fair
condition. In other words, it showed the effects of wear and
corrosion.

( 3 H 394 )

Frazier was then asked to be more specific on the condition of the
rifle barrel when he first got it for inspection.

Mr. McCLOY. When you examined the rifle the first time, you said that
it showed signs of some corrosion and wear?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. Was it what you would call pitted, were the lands in good
shape?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; the lands and the grooves were worn, the corners
were worn, and the interior of the surface was roughened from
corrosion or wear.

Mr. McCLOY. Could you say roughly how many rounds you think had been
fired since it left the factory, with the condition of the barrel as
you found it?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I could not, because the number of rounds is not
an indication of the condition of the barrel, since IF A BARREL IS
ALLOWED TO RUST, ONE ROUND WILL REMOVE THAT RUST and wear the barrel
to the same extent as 10 or 15 or 50 rounds just fired through a clean
barrel.

Frazier KNEW when he visually inspected the rifle that rust in the
barrel meant that the rifle had not been fired, because just one round
fired through it would have removed all rust. The fact that he
visually saw rust in the barrel made it clear to him that there was no
need to conduct a "swab test" to test for metal shavings and fouling
in the barrel.

Mr. McCLOY. Was there metal fouling in the barrel?

Mr. FRAZIER. I did not examine it for that.

( ibid. )

Had Frazier visually examined the barrel and found no rust, it would
have been standard procedure to next do the "swab test" to determine
if there was no rust because the barrel was clean or because a bullet
had passed through it. The "swab test" would have detected any metal
shavings from the bullet's jacket and gunpowder residue ( fouling ). A
clean swab from a barrel with no rust would have proven the rifle had
not been fired, while a swab with residue would have proven that it
had.

The ONLY thing that would have prevented Frazier from doing the swab
test would have been if his visual inspection had revealed that the
inside of the barrel was rusted and thus that no bullet had passed
through the barrel in the last 24 hours.

If there is any question as to whether or not the inside of the barrel
was susceptible to rust, that question was answered by the Firearms
Panel of the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the 1970's.
The Panel examined the C2766 rifle before it did any test firing and
reported the rifle's condition:

Continued
http://www.giljesus.com/jfk/rifle.htm
Walt
2012-01-04 19:21:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
When you are dealing with a mail order, catalog, or e-tailer, what you
order isn't always what you get, especially if you are talking about
second hand merchandise. You are going to get what they have. What they
had was both short and long Carcanos and when they got Oswald's order,
they just grabbed one and sent it to him. It wouldn't even surprise me if
they didn't even know their batch of second hand war surplus rifles were
in different lengths. Essesntially, they were acting as a liquidators for
this batch of weapons. What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano
C2766, which was a 40 inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on
the 6th floor of the TSBD.
I agree .....and you're probably right up to this point....

However, You don't know for sure that the rifle found in the TSBD is the
same rifle that Kliens sent to Lee Oswald's PO Box in Dallas.

What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano C2766, which was a 40
inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the
TSBD.

Does it really matter that Oswald thought he was ordering the 36 inch
model.

Not in the least, ......Lee was ordering the cheap stage prop that George
De Morhenschildt told him to order after giving him the postal money order
to send to Kleins. Lee didn't give the length of the rifle a second
thought.
aeffects
2012-01-04 22:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Walt
Post by bigdog
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
When you are dealing with a mail order, catalog, or e-tailer, what you
order isn't always what you get, especially if you are talking about
second hand merchandise. You are going to get what they have. What they
had was both short and long Carcanos and when they got Oswald's order,
they just grabbed one and sent it to him. It wouldn't even surprise me if
they didn't even know their batch of second hand war surplus rifles were
in different lengths. Essesntially, they were acting as a liquidators for
this batch of weapons. What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano
C2766, which was a 40 inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on
the 6th floor of the TSBD.
I agree .....and you're probably right up to this point....
However, You don't know for sure that the rifle found in the TSBD is the
same rifle that Kliens sent to Lee Oswald's PO Box in Dallas.
What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano C2766, which was a 40
inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the
TSBD.
Does it really matter that Oswald thought he was ordering the 36 inch
model.
Not in the least, ......Lee was ordering the cheap stage prop that George
De Morhenschildt told him to order after giving him the postal money order
to send to Kleins.  Lee didn't give the length of the rifle a second
thought.
bingo!
wgroom
2012-01-05 22:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Oswald NEVER ordered a 40" Carcano!  Period.  ONLY liars claim he did
and he certainly did NOT receive any rifle or package at this Dallas
P.O. Box either!
This is what the evidence shows us.
When you are dealing with a mail order, catalog, or e-tailer, what you
order isn't always what you get, especially if you are talking about
second hand merchandise. You are going to get what they have. What they
had was both short and long Carcanos and when they got Oswald's order,
they just grabbed one and sent it to him. It wouldn't even surprise me if
they didn't even know their batch of second hand war surplus rifles were
in different lengths. Essesntially, they were acting as a liquidators for
this batch of weapons. What we do know is that they sent Oswald Carcano
C2766, which was a 40 inch model, and that is the rifle that was found on
the 6th floor of the TSBD. Does it really matter that Oswald thought he
was ordering the 36 inch model.
Reading comprehension is always troubling for LNT'ers. First prove that
he ordered it. It was never picked up to the point of validation. An out
of place money order was used by Holmes who was an informant that was
taken from another box of numbers two years out of sequence, and no bank
stampings from the normal institutions were found on it, and no
needed-by-law paperwork went from Klein's to the post office. There are
about 10 more basic things that folded under scrutiny as well. Oswald
never ordered and received a rifle.

wg
Loading...