WWI USMC Scope Case...

[cplnorton]

Jim I did use a female researcher and what does it matter in any of this?

I told you many, many times. Almost everything I found at Cody, I found at the archives. So your money would be more well spent at the archives. But spend your money how you like.

The problem with your researchers and why you never find anything Is a researcher is only as good as the person giving them directions on where to look. So you havr to pinpoint exactly where you want them to look through

The exception to this is Andrew Stolinski. I don't need to tell Andrew which box to look in. I just tell him what I want and he finds it.

But Andrew is the only researcher I have ever used that has found me stuff without telling them specifically what boxes to look in.

[Kaliman]

Jim, my spelling is fine, are you confused ? And it's obvious you're coming from a position of weakness if my spelling is something you are trying to use against me.

Research of course can be a combination of efforts. How we, you fail in major areas that any successful research requires to be successful. The first is ethics. You've used other people's research without credit. Ever notice how authors cite sources in the back of the book? The next is peer discussion. You refuse to participate. Instead of having a professional discussion about findings and theories, where both parties are open to differing opinions, you seek to continually discredit anyone that does not agree with you. That's not how research works in academia (have you not heard of that word?).

The only one not reading here is you, Jim. I've posted multiple examples of you contradicting yourself and being plain close minded. Those are not signs of good researches. You then take it a step further and decide to personally attack people. Jim, do us a favor and take your own advice - making wild claims [or inflammatory statements] does not enhance ones credibility.

Maybe you can start acting like an adult. I won't hold my breath.

[cplnorton]

Who might you be? If you are referring to the ledger entry, I got that from JB, not Norton, and I haven't used it for anything. Covering what tracks? You obviously have not been reading the posts..

John gave you that document but also told you he got it from me. And you used it as the only form of credibility you have in this post other than what you can research in a Google search. In fact I don't know if I have ever seen you post anything you didn't acquire from another researcher or that can't be acquired in an online archives or google.

Kalman is a huge Marine Collector and a Marine.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

...You've used other people's research without credit....

Cite any instance of my using anyone's research without credit.

I wont bother to address your other comments, as you obviously are speaking of things you know little about..

[Kaliman]

Post #47 you post a photo of a ledger. Not once mentioning who or where it came from. Figured you would remember that because it is quite literally the only research you've posted here - and it's not even your own.

[Kaliman]

I wont bother to address your other comments, as you obviously are speaking of things you know little about..

My reply, in your own words.

Oops. I think I hit a nerve.

Does this mean you aren't gong to respond to the post?

[cplnorton]

Cite any instance of my using anyone's research without credit.

I wont bother to address your other comments, as you obviously are speaking of things you know little about..

Jim you have stolen my research many times. Tom Jackson and John Beard both told you that the documents that they gave you were mine. Both times you posted them because you don't have any real research to back up your claims, and tried to pass them off as yours.

The only other real research I've seen you have that isn't acquired by google is the Niedner docs which Michael Petrov gave you.

At this point, even though you have claimed for many years to have all this documentation and research, I don't believe any of it.

You found a niche marked with the A5 and claimed expert status and other than John Beard no one could fact check you. And John is too nice a guy to expose you.

Well you exposed yourself by saying you don't have the docs. So why are you even commenting or arguing what the WRA rifles are?

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The highly touted picture showing the Marine sergeant kneeling down and aiming a sniper rifle in France is staged in my opinion (a common practice with the Signal Corps) for several reasons. First, there were no sergeant snipers; and second, he is wearing his campaign hat. The rifle may indeed be a rifle team rifle used to stage the picture. As far as Norton dating the picture using the SC numbers, just take a look on the back of the second picture, which is actual the same picture with a different contrast, and note when it was taken and when it was turned in to the Signal Corps for cataloguing. Taken in 1917, received on 5 Feb 1918. How many hundreds if not thousands of SG pictures rolled in during that interval? Chronological order is most definitely out the window. By the way, if you go to the Signal Corps web site, they specifically state the SC is a six digit number. It appears someone added several digits to the SC number of this picture. So we only know it was taken in 1917. Note the two pictures, although the same picture, have different titles. It appears the "U. S. Marines in France" was added at a later date. I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from that picture.

I am going to post a page from one of the Marine documents I have previously referenced. I picked that particular page in that particular document because it addresses a lot of issues at once. It shows the date the rifles were first issued, it shows that only Privates could be snipers, that training began before OSD was opened, and it shows who issued the rifles. The picture attached is of one of the Marines who was issued a rifle that day. I know the serial number of that rifle and the man who currently owns the matching named scope and case. It is the A5 scope in modified #2 mounts and tapered bases in an 8-loop "Penguin" scope case.

I helped the current scope owner (some of you know him) trace the original sale of the scope back to the sniper's family. I have a collection of these, and all the rifles are the same. I have a copy of the course curriculum, pictures of the snipers, pictures of some of the instructors, and a picture of the training facility at OSD.

I think I am prepared to defend my position.Sniper with His Rifle 1.jpgPage From One of the Sniper Documents 1 R.jpg

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Jim you have stolen my research many times. Tom Jackson and John Beard both told you that the documents that they gave you were mine. Both times you posted them because you don't have any real research to back up your claims, and tried to pass them off as yours.

You are lying. Tom Jackson has sent me nothing. I haven't had contact with Tom in years. The ledger document I posted because you claimed JB sent me a copy of the contract, but he sent me a copy of a ledger entry (look at your post). You weren't mentioned.

The only other real research I've seen you have that isn't acquired by google is the Niedner docs which Michael Petrov gave you.

Are you in for a surprise, or what. Keep on making stupid and unfounded statements.

Michael Petrov asked me to find the serial numbers of the Niedner rifles and I agreed to do so. He was an old oil field hand as am I. I got into this arena as a favor to Michael.

At this point, even though you have claimed for many years to have all this documentation and research, I don't believe any of it.

Stay tuned.

You found a niche marked with the A5 and claimed expert status and other than John Beard no one could fact check you. And John is too nice a guy to expose you.

John Beard told you this?

Well you exposed yourself by saying you don't have the docs. So why are you even commenting or arguing what the WRA rifles are?

What "docs" are you ranting about? There are many documents I don't have, but I have never claimed to have a document I didn't have as you have. If you are referring to the contracts, I have stated for years, and in several places within this thread, that I do not have copies of the contracts. can you comprehend that statement? To be honest, I am getting tired of repeating myself.

I know you want to be the "expert" so bad you will go to any lengths. I am no expert, and you will never FIND ANY POST WHERE I MAKE SUCH A CLAIM. You keep repeating this over and over again. It really does disturb you to no end when someone disagrees with you, doesn't it? You are doing more damage to your reputation right now than anything I could do, and I have no desire to damage your reputation. You repeatedly lied to me throughout that Cody business. You purposely sabotaged my search and you cost me a lot of money. Why on earth would you do such a thing? You are one sad case, Norton. I will forget about Cody and let it pass. I'll even forget your unfounded and ungodly rude accusations that seem to stream out of your mouth. I just ask one thing of you. Read and think about each post you make. That is all I ask.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Post #47 you post a photo of a ledger. Not once mentioning who or where it came from. Figured you would remember that because it is quite literally the only research you've posted here - and it's not even your own.

If you had bothered to read Norton's previous posts, you would know he had already stated how and from where I got the document. How are your clown college studies coming along?