• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories VII: Late November back in '63...

Status
Not open for further replies.

HSienzant

Philosopher
HSienzant
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
5,086
Location
Never Mind
This is a continuation from part VI. As is usual the split point is arbitrary and participants are free to refer to posts in the previous iterations of the thread.
Posted By: Agatha






manifesto said:
No, I’m claiming that nowhere in the thread is Larsen conflating ’should’ with ’shall’.

On the contrary, he repeatedly says that the regulations is just that, regulations, and if someone can show that this regulation was arbitrarily followed, the argument for a forgery based on the absence of bank stamps disappears.

I agree.

1. Yes, the regulations states that certain bank stamps should be present on PMO’s 1963, absent on the Hidell PMO.

2. What does it say about the authenticity of said Hidel PMO.

Well, it depends on how common it was that this regulation was followed.
Click to expand...

It also depends on what the meaning of 'should' is.

In a legal sense, 'should' doesn't mean mandatory. It means 'optional but recommended'.

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/shall_we_abandon_shall/

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575768
"Edit: "should" means a person is "encouraged" to do something while "must" and "shall" mean they are required to do it." ​

http://reqexperts.com/blog/2012/10/using-the-correct-terms-shall-will-should/
Shall – Requirement: Shall is used to indicate a requirement that is contractually binding...
Should – Goals, non-mandatory provisions. Should is used to indicate a goal...​

Keep pretending you don't understand or never saw the point being made.

Hank
 
Last edited by a moderator:
manifesto said:
No, I’m claiming that nowhere in the thread is Larsen conflating ’should’ with ’shall’.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, you and he are pretending 'should' means 'required' or 'must' but it doesn't.

It means 'recommended but optional'.

Hank
 
manifesto said:
How do you know it was ”paid”?
Click to expand...

William Waldman testified Klein's made a deposit of $13,827.98 on March 13th, 1963, of which one of the items was a deposit of 21.45. The money order from "A. Hidell" (Oswald's known alias) in the amount of #21.45 passed through their system on that day, March 13th, and would have been deposited to the bank on that day (the idea in business is to book sales as quickly as possible and pay vendors as late as possible).

== QUOTE ==
Mr. BELIN. You have just now stamped Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 with your endorsement stamp?
Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.
Mr. BELIN. Do you have any way of knowing when exactly this money order was deposited by your company?
Mr. WALDMAN. 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.
Mr. BELIN. You're reading from Waldman---
Mr. WALDMAN. From a Mr. A. Hidell of Post Office Box No. 2915, from Dallas, Tex.
Mr. BELIN. And you are now reading from Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7?
Mr. WALDMAN. 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.​
== UNQUOTE ==

Hank
 
HSienzant said:
William Waldman testified Klein's made a deposit of $13,827.98 on March 13th, 1963, of which one of the items was a deposit of 21.45. The money order from "A. Hidell" (Oswald's known alias) in the amount of #21.45 passed through their system on that day, March 13th, and would have been deposited to the bank on that day (the idea in business is to book sales as quickly as possible and pay vendors as late as possible).

== QUOTE ==
Mr. BELIN. You have just now stamped Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 with your endorsement stamp?
Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.
Mr. BELIN. Do you have any way of knowing when exactly this money order was deposited by your company?
Mr. WALDMAN. 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.
Mr. BELIN. You're reading from Waldman---
Mr. WALDMAN. From a Mr. A. Hidell of Post Office Box No. 2915, from Dallas, Tex.
Mr. BELIN. And you are now reading from Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7?
Mr. WALDMAN. 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.​
== UNQUOTE ==

Hank
Click to expand...

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Any other questions from he who has read "everything" there is concerning the assassination, that is on the CT side, not the reality side?
 
HSienzant said:
It also depends on what the meaning of 'should' is.

In a legal sense, 'should' doesn't mean mandatory. It means 'optional but recommended'.

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/shall_we_abandon_shall/

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575768
"Edit: "should" means a person is "encouraged" to do something while "must" and "shall" mean they are required to do it." ​

http://reqexperts.com/blog/2012/10/using-the-correct-terms-shall-will-should/
Shall – Requirement: Shall is used to indicate a requirement that is contractually binding...
Should – Goals, non-mandatory provisions. Should is used to indicate a goal...​

Keep pretending you don't understand or never saw the point being made.

Hank
Click to expand...
But you do agree that the federal regulations states that PMO’s ’should’ be stamped with bank endorsements on both sides in a prominent way?

Yes or no.
 
manifesto said:
Well, how do you know that?
Click to expand...

That is very simple also, A. Hidell's hand writing on the MO was positively as LHO.


How many more posts/bandwidth are you going to continue this fruitless search for someone to answer your pointless questions.
The money order was paid, LHO got the weapon used in the assassination, to the exclusion of every other weapon in existence.
 
bknight said:
That is very simple also, A. Hidell's hand writing on the MO was positively as LHO.
Click to expand...
Photographs and Xerox copies of documents can’t be conclusively identified by analysing alleged handwriting.

Therefore the original is needed. Was it available to the hand writing experts consulted?


How many more posts/bandwidth are you going to continue this fruitless search for someone to answer your pointless questions.
The money order was paid,
Click to expand...
Well, that is the issue presently under consideration. Do you have any new evidence you would like to provide or are you just waiting time and space, aserting religionsly contrived dogma?

LHO got the weapon
Click to expand...
How do you know?

used in the assassination, to the exclusion of every other weapon in existence.
Click to expand...
I’ll take it you know this by actually studying the alleged evidence?
 
RoboTimbo said:
You ;) will need to provide evidence for your claim. Start with: who do CTs claim owned the rifle? We'll need to see the bill of sale and a properly endorsed money order.
Click to expand...
Fortunatly, this is not how it works. It’s the positive claim, that he purchased and owned the rifle that needs supporting evidence.

Have any?
 
manifesto said:
But you do agree that the federal regulations states that PMO’s ’should’ be stamped with bank endorsements on both sides in a prominent way?

Yes or no.
Click to expand...

Asked and answered. By my count at least four times now.

Yes, but it depends on what the meaning of 'should' is. In a legal sense, 'should' doesn't mean mandatory. It means 'optional but recommended'.

Hank
 
manifesto said:
Where do Larsen ”pretend” this?

Show us.
Click to expand...

Larsen in that thread you or MicahJava linked to a few pages back.
You in this thread.

Do you agree with the below? If not, why not:

In a legal sense, 'should' doesn't mean mandatory. It means 'optional but recommended'.

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/a...abandon_shall/

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=575768

"Edit: "should" means a person is "encouraged" to do something while "must" and "shall" mean they are required to do it."

http://reqexperts.com/blog/2012/10/u...l-will-should/

Shall – Requirement: Shall is used to indicate a requirement that is contractually binding...
Should – Goals, non-mandatory provisions. Should is used to indicate a goal...

Hank
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom