Jump to content
The Education Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. This interview alone seals the case. Mr. Frazier confirmed very clearly without any hesitations that a lady stood to his left, not to his right. This is consistent with the person, which I have estimated earlier to be 5'4'', standing behind Mr. Shelley's right shoulder and to the left of Mr. Frazier. There was enough space there, and Mrs. Stanton obviously needed space since she was a huge lady. This puts her in the back row of spectators and this is the reason we only see glimpses of her figure in Darnell.
  3. James DiEugenio

    Evidence of collaboration between Garrison and RFK?

    Let me add two things, as I said, Sheridan's family refused to turn over the outtakes on his NBC hatchet job to the ARRB. Which makes it odd that Talbot would trust them. Secondly, he was authorized to do what he did--bribe and intimidate witnesses--directly by the Sarnoff family who owned NBC. I spent a lot of time and work on this whole NBC issue for Destiny Betrayed, Second edition,( see pp 237-49) But since no one reads my books I have to keep on recycling this info. Also, according to RFK Jr, his father was very interested in what Garrison was digging up. He remembers him picking up a magazine at a newsstand with Garrison on the cover and asking his aides what they thought about the case he had.
  4. James DiEugenio

    Evidence of collaboration between Garrison and RFK?

    Talbot is simply wrong on this issue and I criticized his book for this: From my review: By page 325, we see why Talbot has set things up this way. And this directly relates to Talbot's portrait of Walter Sheridan. I was going to write that it is so warm and fuzzy that it could have been written by Sheridan's family. But I can't write that because, in large part, it was written by Sheridan's family. Namely his widow and son. Talbot interviewed the woman five times and uses her profusely and without question. Now if you are going to use people like Guthman, and Sheridan's family to profess to his good character, it leaves you with a serious problem. You now have to explain all the ugly and unethical things Sheridan did to destroy Garrison. Talbot achieves this in two ways: 1.) By recycling debunked mainstream media deceptions, and 2.) By leaving out integral parts of the story. Concerning the former, Talbot tries to excuse Sheridan by saying that Sheridan thought Garrison was ignoring mobster Carlos Marcello. He even goes as far as saying that Garrison gave Marcello a "free pass" and referred to him as a "respectable businessman" (p. 327) This canard has been exposed for years, in fact for over a decade. Garrison busted at least three bars in New Orleans which were run either by Marcello or his associates. (Davy, pgs 154-155) Talbot does not source his "businessman" quote, but it appears he has confused Garrison with one or more local FBI agents. And it is not true that Garrison never investigated the Mafia aspect, he did. (He actually wrote a memo on it.) But he came to the conclusion, as many others have, that the Mob was a junior partner in the crime, not the engine running the machine. Talbot then writes something even more unsubstantiated. He says that what really got Sheridan upset with Garrison is that Garrison had somehow discovered the CIA Castro assassination plots, and how they might have backfired against JFK. For one, in the book's own terms, this is illogical. For this chapter, Talbot now writes that the plots had been "supervised by Bobby". Yet, he has clearly established previously, and convincingly, that this was not the case. The CIA had done them on their own. Secondly, I have been through a large part of the extant Garrison files. His son Lyon Garrison allowed me to copy them in New Orleans. I then had them shipped to Los Angeles and filed them in chronological and subject order. I found no evidence that Garrison himself had discovered these CIA managed plots in early 1967, which would have to be true if Talbot's thesis is to hold water. Interestingly, Talbot gives no source for Sheridan's knowledge of what Garrison was on to or how he discovered it. Even more interesting, he avoids mentioning the famous Jack Anderson/Drew Pearson story, which aired at the time. This story actually did mention the CIA plots, and did say that RFK was involved with them. And considering Anderson's role as an FBI informant on Garrison, it was probably done to confuse the DA. But there is no evidence Garrison ever took the (false) insinuation of RFK's involvement seriously. Having no factual basis for this concept, Talbot then uses the bare assumption as the excuse for why Sheridan went to the CIA to get their input on Garrison. By this time, I had become quite curious as to why Talbot was cutting Sheridan so much slack. So I flipped a few pages forward and discovered the reason. The book maintains that Sheridan in New Orleans was not acting as any kind of intelligence operative, but rather on RFK's behalf. He goes on like this for a couple of paragraphs -- quoting Sheridan's reliable wife again--and then comes this stunning statement: "And there is no evidence Sheridan and agency officials did in fact end up joining forces against the DA." (p. 331) When I read that my eyes popped. Consider: in a legal deposition, among other places, Gordon Novel admitted that he was being paid by Sheridan on a retainer basis for spying on Garrison. Since Novel was writing letters to people like Richard Helms at the time, it's fair to say he was working with the Agency. Further, Garrison discovered that Sheridan was getting the expense money for people like Novel through a local law firm, which was laundering it for the CIA. And a declassified FBI memo reveals that NBC had given instructions that the special was meant to "shoot him [Garrison] down". Further in Robert Kennedy and his Times, Arthur Schlesinger quotes Kennedy as saying that it was NBC who sent Sheridan to New Orleans, and further that he felt Garrison might be on to something. (p. 616) As many commentators have noted, including Carl Bernstein -- who Talbot uses (p. 390) -- the major networks worked with the CIA on issues like defending the Warren Report. And the chairman of NBC at the time, General David Sarnoff, had worked in intelligence during World War II. In a further imbalance, Talbot barely discusses Sheridan's intelligence background, devoting all of two sentences to it. (p. 330) I could go into much more length about Sheridan's activities in New Orleans, and how they continued even after RFK was dead. And I could point out even more errors Talbot makes on this issue. For instance, he writes that Garrison "turned the tables" on Sheridan and arrested "him for bribing witnesses. (The charges were later dropped.)" (p. 329) Thus he insinuates that it was Garrison who was bribing witnesses and not Sheridan. Which is exactly wrong. (Davy on pgs 135-137 chronicles some of Sheridan's efforts in this aspect.) Further, the charges were not dropped. Sheridan got an entourage of proven CIA affiliated lawyers for his defense. (Ibid, p. 143) And in a recurrent tactic, they got the charges switched to federal court where they were eventually thrown out. Finally, let me make one more cogent observation about Sheridan. He clearly did not like Garrison's focus on the CIA in the JFK case. He then worked a lot with the HSCA, Dan Moldea, and Robert Blakey pushing the Mafia/Hoffa angle, which was certainly prominent in the HSCA Report and volumes. Yet on the day the report was issued Marcello's lifelong friend, lobbyist Irving Davidson, told an acquaintance that he had talked to Sheridan and that he agreed that the HSCA report was a piece of crap too. (Vincent Bugliosi, Reclaiming History, p. 1175) So if Sheridan did not believe the CIA was involved, and he thought Blakey's focus on the Mafia was B.S., what did he believe then? The Warren Report maybe? The mystery of Walter Sheridan -- who he was, and why he did what he did -- is a long, serious, and complex one. Talbot does not even begin to plumb its depths. For that reason, among others, I believe -- and I can demonstrate -- that every tenet of this chapter is just plain wrong.
  5. Thank you for your response. I thought I'd seen some sort of organizational chart for JMWAVE several years back in a book or on line and thought some of it might be updated in the last few years if not officially by anyone then by coalescence of what is known and a little new info. Yep, too long of a sentence. Forgive my grammar (Grief?). Helms promoted Dez Fitzgearld to head of JMWAVE when Harvey was sent to Italy for insubordination/pissing off RFK. Harvey was no longer technically in charge of ZRRIFLE, the Castro assassination project within the CIA the Kennedy's weren't aware of. Then Helms promoted Joannides to run the DRE, reporting directly to him. Yet El Indio, David Sanchez Morales was in charge of covert operations for JMWAVE. IE, he technically worked for Dez Fitzgearld, and was the supervisor of Joannides. But he was much more tight with David Altee Phillips and the pear, Harvey. How deep go the connections between Angleton, Harvey, and Italy? Didn't Harvey go fishing with Roselli off the coast of Florida in the spring of 63? isn't that documented? Maybe Morales was there on the beach or at the hotel … Larry Hancock? I appreciate criticism.
  6. Ron Bulman

    Alternative Assassins (names)

    Wasn't Ezra Pound an early idol of James Jesus Angleton? Yet JJA saved many Jew's through the German ratline in Italy at the end of WWII. And after JFK's execution he gave them the material necessary for their "Nuclearization". Isn't that why they established two monuments for him? Wasn't he in charge of the Israeli desk at the CIA when the Patriots on the USS Liberty were sacrificed, For Nothing? https://www.bing.com/search?q=uss+liberty&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=da554dbd8a5041b7a2145cd38f92b290&sp=-1&pq=uss+liberty&sc=10-11&qs=n&sk=&cvid=da554dbd8a5041b7a2145cd38f92b290 None of these links suffice. The Horror of being attacked by allies, to set up an attack on "Communist" Egypt, is detailed in Faustian Bargains by Joan Mellen . The men on the Liberty saw the Star of David on the planes and helicopters, as they fired on them. THIRTY FOUR of them Died, Intentionally, from "Friendly Fire". Angleton was in charge of the Israeli Desk of the CIA at that time.
  7. Ron Bulman

    Trump and the Unspeakable? Part II

    They are screwing up so bad. Kids in basically prisons crying for mom and dad, not knowing when, if, ever they will see them again. Terrible. Then today they attack social security. Ted Cruz ain't waffling, he's a pancake flip flopping. The frying pan's getting too hot too handle. Sorry, off the soap box.
  8. Paul your question would be a great one for a responsible researcher/journalist to address him with. I doubt anyone in the MSM would, none of them know enough about the subject to ask the question. Jim D, Lisa Pease and David Talbot are all mentioned in his book. One of them might have his e-mail. An actual interview by any one of them might be a National Treasure in terms of True History. While I'm sure they would be polite, it wouldn't be softball.
  9. Steve Cearfoss

    Alternative Assassins (names)

    Quote from above: ‘For instance, the poet Ezra Pound, who had attempted to expose the people behind World War II, was locked up in a mental institution for 13 years.’ I don’t know if this quote is from Mr. Pope or Mr. Phillips, but the suggestion that Pound had the goods on a cabal that was behind the war is without merit; the quote is also by implication, malodorous. See the following from The Guardianhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/oct/27/michaelellison ‘Pound broadcast four times a week from 1940 until Mussolini's arrest in July 1943, starting with the words: "Europe calling, Ezra Pound speaking." He blamed Jews for the economic conditions he believed had caused the war and described the US president as Franklin D Frankfurter Jewsfeld and the Chinese leader as Chiang Kike Chek. "You have got to learn a little, at least a little, about the history of your allies," he told his listeners. "About Jew-ruined England. About the wreckage of France, wrecked under yid control. Lousy with kikes.’
  10. Concise, to the point. In addition to being usually deep and prescient/relevant that's what I admire about your work Bart. It's just about always enlightening. Wish I had more time to dig myself. Thanks for doing so for the rest of us.
  11. Paul Brancato

    Evidence of collaboration between Garrison and RFK?

    Wonder if RFK Jr. has anything to add that would shed light on Sheridan and RFK?
  12. I find these two documents to be fascinating..... The Iguvine tablets.... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iguvine_Tablets And the Lapis Niger (or, more accurately, the inscription found thereapon.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapis_Niger In an imaginary world I would have friends with whom who I could discuss this kind of stuff, but that is not the case. If I did, and I was going to give a friend the low down on what I think the Lapis Niger says, I would tell them that it is a warning, like a road construction sign, that passers-by should take care while passing the coming religious precinct. They should take care because there may be religious ceremonies goin on and auguries being taken and they should not disturb these rituals, under pain of punishment of the King. Indeed, one should remove the yoke from his oxen such that the chance that their or might drop a loaf would be reduced. Now, I know almost nothing about Latin. The Latin inscribed on the Lapis Niger is very old and obscure. It is sometimes claimed to be the oldest Latin inscription known. Indeed, to me, it looks a bit like Greek, literally. Expert attempts at translation frequently point out that their attempts are a best-effort, and its meaning is still obscure. So, to my hypothetical pal, to whom I would be bantering, would get a similar qualification from me. Yet, now, I have discovered a translation of a portion of the Iguvine Tablets which illustrates quite well the kind of message which I think the Lapis Niger is attempting to purvey. Here it is, a copy and paste from Wikipedia..... " VI Side a Lustration of the arx Introductory auspices: as in I the sacrifice is to be preceded by the taking of the auspices. Formulae passed between the augur and the arfertur (legum dictio); warning against noises, interruptions, meddling; boundaries of the augural templum; formulae of announcement of the auspices (conspectio, nuntiatio); prescriptions applying to the ensuing sacrifice concerning the military rod (pirsca arsmatia), the disposition of the pots and the fire." And that ends my post. Cheers, Michael
  13. You know, something that just bugs me about the Garrison investigation is that here we have a duly elected official with the capacity as DA to subpoena witnesses and follow due process. This is someone who has come to believe, and I think rightly so, that NOLA is at the center of the plotting of the assassination. But other elected or appointed officials such as RFK, Sheridan, and news outlets such as NBC, have no trouble treating Garrison and his investigation as though they came out of the sewers and had no legality at all. There is not the slightest modicum of respect. I remember watching the "White Paper" and Garrison's interview on the Tonight Show and wondering who these people think they are. I still do, in fact.
  14. Chapter 7, starting on p 309 of the pb version of BROTHERS, has a good discussion of RFK, Sheridan and Garrison. Talbot's hypothesis is that RFK felt Garrison was going in the wrong direction, and would interfere with what he wanted to do when he was elected president, which, of course, is mostly hypothetical imo. But the chapter itself is well worth reading. Talbot is more objective than I would have thought, even though he does skewer the Garrison investigation at the end.
  15. David Talbot says on p330 of BROTHERS that, "It is certain Walter Sheridan was acting on Robert Kennedy's behalf, not as an intelligence agent, when he went to New Orleans," so it would seem that whether he acted under RFK's direct orders or not would be a valid topic for discussion.
  16. JFK’s would-be assassination was revealed a month before his murder. The revealer was U.S. army cryptographer Eugene B. Dinkin. An early source of this information is Bloody Treason by Noel Twyman, and it’s mentioned in LBJ, the Mastermind of the JFK Assassination by Phillip Nelson. The following excerpts from Nelson’s book are found on pages 360-362: What happened to Dinkin? From Phillip Nelson we have: In short, Eugene Dinkin received the psychiatric services that had been offered to certain other people. For instance, the poet Ezra Pound, who had attempted to expose the people behind World War II, was locked up in a mental institution for 13 years. The writer and cartoonist Percy Crosby, who had bedeviled the FDR administration, was locked up in a mental hospital in which he died 16 years later: http://www.dcdave.com/article5/061210.htm, http://www.dcdave.com/article5/101003.htm. James V. Forrestal, America’s first Secretary of Defense, was relieved of his position after he opposed the creation of Israel, and was soon thereafter sent to a hospital to seek treatment for his “mental health issues.” Seven weeks later, Forrestal was found outside the hospital, having fallen from his 16th floor room in an “apparent” suicide act: http://dcdave.com/article4/040927.html. Dinkin exposed the plan to kill JFK using hitmen. Researcher Steve Rivele later interviewed French-Corsican hitman, heroin trafficker, and international spy Christian David who confirmed that the contract to kill JFK had been delivered to Antoine Guerini, leader of a French-Corsican mafia in Marseilles which had contacts with the OSS and its newer avatar, the CIA. David initially only gave the first name of an assassin who killed JFK, Lucien. He said that there were two others but didn’t name the other two because they were alive at the time and would seek David’s head for snitching. Rivele was able to determine through his contacts in the journalistic, police, and intelligence communities that this man was probably Lucien Sarti. Upon being asked to comment on Sarti, David essentially confirmed that this was the right Lucien. When asked if there was someone who could confirm him, David mentioned Michel Nicoli, a former narcotics-trafficker-turned-government-informant who had been “disappeared” by the U.S. government. Rivele managed to track down Nicoli through a U.S. DEA contact. Nicoli corroborated David on most counts, and named the other two assassins of JFK. When confronted with these two names, David essentially confirmed that these two men were the other two assassins. Rivele didn’t say who handed out the contract to kill JFK, but taking into account what David and Nicoli told Rivele about the movements of the three JFK assassins into and out of the U.S., Rivele concluded: Rivele said that American hitmen were not used to safeguard against the possibility of uncovering ties to the American mafia in the event of capture of one or more assassins. He added that because the killing was to take place in the American south, the highly skilled hitmen had to be white or close to white, thus ruling out two alternative regions from which skilled hitmen could be hired at the time, Beirut and Hong Kong. For further details on Rivele, including criticism that Rivele was involved in cover up, see this chapter by Salvador Astucia: https://web.archive.org/web/20130925030652/http://www.jfkmontreal.com/corsicans.htm Rivele didn’t name the two JFK assassins in addition to Lucien Sarti. However, using the 1973 book Contrabandista [written by Evert Clark and Nicholas Horrock] and other facts about the JFK assassination, Salvador Astucia was able to assert that the other two JFK assassins were François Chiappe and Jean-Paul Angeletti
  17. Yesterday
  18. Yes, a great revelation toward the truth article that brings many of the most highly regarded conspiracy facts into a single, clear and well lighted focus. Here is a writer who doubted the conspiracy conclusion and research and books and researchers themselves, until he finally started reading just a few highly regarded conspiracy books and couldn't help but see they made more sense than the Warren Commission findings. A must read for any person wanting to know more about the JFK and RFK events and the cumulative massive mountain of conspiracy research facts as reported by extremely intelligent and grounded writers versus, and so contrary to the WC Lone Gunman finding.
  19. Rich Pope

    The women of JFK

    Joe, You're right. Many of the students went home and asked their parents if they would give them the money to buy the book so they could keep it. So, I sold several copies when I wasn't intending to and the kids really got into the assassination. Of course the school had to purchase more books to make sure they had a full class set, but they said they didn't mind.
  20. Michael Clark

    New document releases 2017

    An informative Document on Nosenko and Golitsyn. The first page is dated to March of 1963, the next two seem to be of a different provenance. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/124-10365-10006.pdf
  21. Excellent article, Douglas. Thanks for posting it.
  22. Carolyn Arnold did not see Oswald on the second floor. Molina did not, who left at 12:15, nor did Bonnie Richey, nor did Mrs Reid who left at 12:25!!! Arnold is noted as being part of a group leaving in other witness' statements She sees Oswald through the glass in an FBI statement of the 24th. This statement is suppressed and fished out by Weisberg a few years later. 15 years after the deed and the HSCA is in full swing her name comes up and she talks to Earl Golz, Anthony Summers and The National Enq. She refuses to take part in TMWKK According to her interviews she went back to get a glass of water, as she was pregnant at the time. There are no water facilities of any kind visible in any of the shots of the 2nd floor lunch room. There is no tap, no sink. No water dispenser. In the Stone film the water fountain is depicted as next to the lunch room door, which is a fairy tale. There was nothing there. The only visible sign of a water supply was in Gary Murr's FBI drawing he nabbed from NARA: a water cooler in the corridor not far away from the office doors and the lunchroom doors. The second fl lunch room was off limits to labourers, they could get a coke and that was it. Oswald had his lunch usually in The Domino Room on the first floor. If Stanton talked w Oswald near the stairs (which ones btw??) and with a soda in his hands before the motorcade passed by then that pretty much eliminates the 2nd fl lunch room encounter by itself.
  23. This leads us to the question when did Mrs. Stanton see Lee Harvey Oswald on Friday, November 22. In my opinion, Mrs. Stanton went out early, possibly around 12.10 PM, and that was the time when she met Lee Oswald on stairs. This early time estimate refers to two testimonies: the testimony of Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady. 1. Billy Lovelady came to the first floor at 11.50 or 12.00noon: Mr. BALL - What time did you quit work that day or knock off for lunch that day? Mr. LOVELADY - Same time, 12. Mr. BALL - A little before 12? Mr. LOVELADY - Well, we came down at 10 minutes til to wash up and get ready for it. He washed his hands, went up to the second floor to buy a coke, and came back with the coke to the first floor. In the next, he saw Mrs. Stanton through the glass door and decided to go out. He saw Mrs. Stanton there: Mr. BALL - What did you do after you went down and washed up; what did you do? Mr. LOVELADY - Well, I went over and got my lunch and went upstairs and got a coke and come on back down. Mr. BALL - Upstairs on what floor? Mr. LOVELADY - That's on the second floor; so, I started going to the domino room where I generally went in to set down and eat and nobody was there and I happened to look on the outside and Mr. Shelley was standing outside with Miss Sarah Stanton, I believe her name is, and I said, "Well, I'll go out there and talk with them, sit down and eat my lunch out there, set on the steps," so I went out there. Mr. BALL - You ate your lunch on the steps? Mr. LOVELADY - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Who was with you? Mr. LOVELADY - Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton, and right behind me Mr. BALL - What was that last name? Mr. LOVELADY - Stanton. Mr. BALL - What is the first name? Mr. LOVELADY - Bill Shelley. Mr. BALL - And Stanton's first name? Mr. LOVELADY - Miss Sarah Stanton. 2. Bill Shelley confirmed the presence of Mrs. Stanton in the doorway before Billy Lovelady came out and even before he himself came out: Mr. SHELLEY - Oh, several people were out there waiting to watch the motorcade and I went out to join them.Mr. BALL - And who was out there?Mr. SHELLEY - Well, there was Lloyd Viles of McGraw-Hill, Sarah Stanton, she's with Texas School Book, and Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady joined us shortly afterwards.Mr. BALL - You were standing where?Mr. SHELLEY - Just outside the glass doors there.Mr. BALL - That would be on the top landing of the entrance? Mr. SHELLEY - yes. It should be noted that neither Bill Shelley nor Billy Lovelady would be able to spot Mrs. Sarah Stanton if she stood at Prayer Man's location. Taken together, it is impossible that Mrs. Stanton would get to the doorway at 12.25, at the time when Carolyne Arnold allegedly saw Lee Oswald on the second floor. The motorcade was due to arrive at 12.25, and that would be too late for Mrs. Stanton to start preparing for the motorcade as she was describing it to the members of her family.
  24. Joe Bauer

    The women of JFK

    That's quaintly interesting. Perhaps this new cover art approach pulled in a few younger people to want to read and learn something more about the JFK assassination event versus one that was just block lettered words and didn't ?
  25. The interview also sheds some light on the conflict between Mrs. Stanton's testimony for the FBI in which she claimed that she did not see Oswald in Friday, November 22, and her description of her encounter with Lee Oswald which she conferred to her family members. Mrs. Stanton was most likely coerced by the FBI to lie about her encounter with Lee Oswald before the shooting. Mrs. Stanton agreed, possibly in exchange for receiving some guarantees that she would never be called to testify again. Further, although she did sign the FBI statement, she did not make any statement under oath, and so she did not perjure herself. Knowing that she did not sign a truthful account, Mrs. Stanton avoided talking with anybody about her encounter with Lee Oswald on that fateful Friday, possibly because someone would flag up the contrast between her FBI statements and her true account. She did say it to people whom she trusted because she did not feel bound to lie to her family. We should be thankful to Mrs. Stanton for that. The reason for suppressing Mrs. Stanton's account was most likely the fact that Mrs. Stanton saw Lee Oswald with a soda too long before the assassination. Late edit: Mrs. Stanton's story actually played into the lone shooter theory which was well established with the FBI early on and even more so in the spring of 1964 when Mrs. Stanton was interviewed by the FBI. So, why would the FBI suppresss a testimony in which Lee is seen by another Depository employee to go upstairs, and even saying that he was going upstairs and will not have a lunch. This would fit with Lee Oswald's plan to kill the President - he went downstairs and then went back upstairs to accomplish his misdeed. Yet, the FBI was not interested in anyone hearing Mrs. Stanton's story. Why is it so? The coke is the problem: Mrs. Stanton saw Lee with a bottle of coke very early on, maybe at 12.10, or 12.15 as the latest. However, the made-up second floor encounter also needed a fresh coke (at least so it has been arranged) and that would not fare well with Mrs. Stanton's account.
  26. Yeah, I thought that for the longest time. But, if you look close there is a gap between his hands wider than a, as we use to say, pop bottle unless he was holding it end to end horizontally. All of the images I can see (and that is one heck of a problem with the poor imagery available) it is something wider, perhaps wider than a bottle. To me this is an important idea. I am being led into a wild, speculation every time I look at PM in Weigman, Darnell, and John Martin. The speculation has to do with what he is holding. Buell Frazier mentioned in the interview no one had a camera. Or, at least he didn't notice. That looked suspiciously like a practiced answer. There is no way to confirm that with a yeah or nay. I also noted that Frazier omitted PM or Oswald being there on the landing with him. Now, that is suspicious since 2 of the 3 films put a person there we call PM. If you are interested I'll type out my wild speculation in detail. I don't think it does any harm to the PM notion. Thanks for your earlier reply.
  27. The statements by Frazier, Stanton's family and Stanton and Sanders' affidavits sinks Doyle's and MacRae;s theory from the word get go. I'd expect more from MacRae but he is slacking these days. Perhaps even he thinks that the joke lasted long enough. Then again. Grey/White hair, 300 lb and obese.....The death of Prayer Woman.
  1. Load more activity
×