WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:
>>> "He [Arnold Rowland] said that he thought the guy was a security guard. He KNEW that Oswald was NOT a security guard..." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
LOL.
Therefore, per what Walt seems to be implying here -- The ONLY possible way that ANY gunman seen by Rowland in the TSBD could have been legitimately and positively identified by Arnold Rowland is if that gunman turned out to REALLY BE A "SECURITY GUARD", since the man doing the identifying (Arnold Rowland) THOUGHT that the gunman was a security guard at 12:15 PM CST on November 22.
LOL replay.
Let's see Walt's next brainstorm....(as my bladder weakens still more)....
>>> "He [Rowland] was shown pictures of Oswald and he had seen him on TV and yet he said he could NOT identify the "security guard" as Oswald. He described physical features of the security guard that did NOT fit Oswald" <<<
This just keeps getting better and more hilarious all the time.
The kook named Duncan-Hines (aka Cakebread) now seems to believe that Rowland really did see a security guard on the sixth floor. (The kook should have put "security guard" in quotes that second time up above too.)
Maybe Rowland's merely THINKING (incorrectly, of course) that the man with the gun (Oswald, of course) was a "security guard" has rubbed off on the feeble mind of a kook named Walt. Ya think? It could happen. After all, this kook named Walt actually seems to think Oswald didn't kill J.D. Tippit.
>>> ".... Early thirties, black hair...light colored sport shirt open at the collar with a T shirt beneath the outer shirt." <<<
If that, in fact, was Arnold Rowland's exact description of the sixth-floor gunman (and I haven't got his testimony memorized; I'd have to check it, and I probably should too*, because trusting this kook named Walt to get anything right is like trusting Lee Oswald to tell the truth about his Carcano mail-order purchase), then that description certainly does nothing whatsoever to EXCLUDE Oswald (not even the age estimate, given the fact that other people said the SAME THING about Oswald looking older than he was), you idiot.
And to emphasize this once more, if Rowland said "early 30s"*, then we have on the record just one additional example of the CONSISTENCY with which people described Oswald's age -- e.g., Baker, Brennan, the 10th Street witness responsible for the 1:22 APB concerning Tippit's killer (whoever that was), and now Rowland too*.
But to a kook, consistency like this regarding LHO equates to Oswald's complete innocence. Somehow. (Don't ask me how. Go ask a kook. Walt?)
* Footnote:
I just now checked Rowland's testimony...and yes, he did say "early thirties":
"I think I remember telling my wife that he appeared in his early thirties. This could be obscured because of the distance, I mean." -- 1964 W.C. TESTIMONY OF ARNOLD L. ROWLAND
So, thanks Walt, for providing that quote from Rowland re the age of the sixth-floor gunman....which matches perfectly the testimony of DPD Officer Marrion Baker (who we KNOW saw Oswald just after the shooting) and Howard Brennan and at least one other 11/22 witness.
>>> "Have ya finished messing yer pants now??" <<<
I doubt it very much. Not unless you finally want to stop typing out the hilarious bladder-busting idiocy that you've been typing out tonight.
The more Walt types, the more I hope the bathroom isn't occupied.
>>> "Let's hear you lie." <<<
Okay, I'll do my best.
Here's the biggest lie I'll ever tell (bar none):
Walter Cakebread is a genius! He's the #1 JFK researcher that history has ever seen. He deserves a Nobel Prize for his incredible work in rooting out the truth about the way JFK died in November 1963. (Especially that "Rowland Thought The Gunman Was A Security Guard, Which Evidently Means That The Gunman WAS A Security Guard" gem.)
Coming up with true and believable bombshells like that "Rowland/Security Guard" thing makes us all wonder why Walt wasn't selected to speak at the 2008 Wecht Conference. He should have been the keynote speaker, for Christ's sake!
David Von Pein
October 9, 2008
