Jump to content
The Education Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Sandy Larsen

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    Gloria Calvery and her friends did indeed watch the motorcade from the sidewalk on Elm. But immediately after the shooting they ran back to the TSBD steps. The following photo shows them at each place. The main photo is a frame from Darnell, and the inset is from Zapruder. Gloria Calvery arrived at the steps at #3 and went inside at #6. What I show in the photo above is 100% consistent with the first-day statements of Lovelady and Frazier. And thanks to you, I now know it is consistent with the first-day statements of Frazier and Molina as well. In Lovelady's first-day statement, he said only that he went back inside the building after the shooting. He said nothing about leaving the steps. So what you are saying here about Lovelady's first day statement is wrong. It wasn't till later (1964, I believe) that he added the part about leaving the steps immediately and talking to Calvery at the concrete island.
  3. Yes. See the last paragraph in the 6/3/1960 document from Hoover below.
  4. David Boylan

    Priscilla L. Johnson

    Johnson as a CIA contact for ZRLIMNITE and ZREARTH. http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/104-10119-10285.pdf
  5. Steve Thomas

    Anatomy Of Lee Harvey Oswald's Interrogations

    Bart, I think this had to be just before he is led into the "showup" room and is asked by a reporter if he shot the President, and he responds, "No, the first time I heard that is when I was "aksed" that question by a reporter out in the hall". He is also still wearing his brown shirt. He had been stripped of that shirt by Saturday. Steve Thomas
  6. Today
  7. Ah, I see. A "wrong browser" lead you to this thread and my posts. Uh-huh. How does that work? Still using the old Payette's Posts edition of Google Chrome? And this browser forces you to read my drivel, does it? That must be the Gotta Read Payette's Posts edition of Chrome, which I understood was pulled from the market shortly after it was issued. You have a rarity there, hang on to it. Your need to respond vehemently and with ad hominem attacks to everyone who dares to disagree with you, even an unworthy former Arizona lawyer, is really quite comical. I don't believe I've ever met anyone who takes himself so seriously and simply exudes self-importance, and I mean that sincerely. How many witnesses do I need to place Oswald at Bannister's office? More than are, or better than there are, I guess. Even if I thought that were true, I wouldn't find this inconsistent in the slightest with what I believe were Oswald's efforts to establish himself as a bona fide infiltrator of the anti-Castro community. The notion that Oswald's views were consistent with Bannister's right-wing lunacy is frankly a disservice to Oswald and simply doesn't square with reality. Just trying to think logically and critically, it seems to me that placing the 544 Camp Street address on the flyers is probably precisely what Oswald would not have done if his associations with Bannister had been as you believe they were. The fact is, as you surely know, that this was not Bannister's address and his office could not be accessed from this entrance - but still, why raise this red flag when he could have chosen any address in New Orleans to show the national FPCC that he had rented an office? The address did have past associations with Carlos Bringuier and the Cuban Revolutionary Council. If the address had any meaning at all, I tend to believe it was part and parcel of Oswald's effort to provoke a confrontation with Bringuier in furtherance of his objective to establish his credentials as a pro-Castro agitator for the benefit of his intended audience at the FPCC and in Cuba. Just trying to think logically and critically, would it not have been rather stupid and counterproductive to have allowed Oswald to be seen by multiple witnesses in association with Bannister if the plan were to use him as a patsy and shift the blame for the assassination to the pro-Castro community? When the plan actually was hatched, do you suppose one of the guiding geniuses might have said "Gee, do you think this guy is going to be a plausible patsy? Aren't there like 493 people who can connect him to Bannister and Ferrie?" Again we seem to have the odd phenomenon of the conspirators being diabolical geniuses at steps 1-3-5-7-9 and inept bumbling fools at steps 2-4-6-8-10.
  8. John Butler

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    I don't think Groden would have mixed two films together. Why? Where is the proof? As far as I know the Darnell film starts out with Darnell out of the vehicle standing on the south side of Elm and facing Ike Altgens and the Newmans north of Elm by the Grassy Knoll. It could be this is a hoax film by the laughing fellow shown but, it is posted as the Darnell film. Or, it could really be reality. If Groden had pasted two films together what would be the point? What would that do to his credibility? It would be found out over time. Would he risk his credibility and financial possibilities doing something stupid and risky. I need more proof before accepting Unger's statements.
  9. Jim, Didn't Hoover post an international alert in 1960 that somebody might be using Oswald's birth certificate? Steve Thomas
  10. Jeff, There was a list of TSBD employees that was shown to Jack Revill when he testified. I've always referred to it as Revill's list, but it was actually drawn up by Detectives Westphal and Parks in the Special Service Bureau. Special Services were headed up by Lt. Revill and Gannaway. One of the things that Bureau investigated was subversives. This list of employees can be found in CE 2003 in vol. 24, page 259 of the Hearings and Exhibits. (24H259). https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1140#relPageId=277&tab=page That list has three columns, and the middle column is labeled Ref.Int. For the longest time, I thought the Int. meant interview, but then I realized that it meant Intelligence File. In his book, No More Silence, Detective Westphal told Larry Sneed that he had gone home, and that Gannaway called him at home and told him to go back to the Special Services office at the Fairgrounds and cross-reference the list of TSBD employees against the Department's Intelligence files. That list has None for a record of Oswald in the DPD Intelligence files. I once did a cross-reference of those employees with the DPD police officer who interviewed them and whether that interview consisted of a full interview, or just a deposition. I personally found it kind of revealing and would be happy to share that with you if you'd like. Steve Thomas
  11. I’ve thought about this a lot over the years. I don't think Hoover had foreknowledge of the assassination, but he most certainly had foreknowledge of two Oswalds. For example…. BANISTER, former head of the Chicago FBI office, was very close to Hoover and spoke with him almost every day. Banister had to have known that Ferrie had LEE Oswald in his CAP in 1955, and that both he and Ferrie knew HARVEY Oswald in 1963. Both men were eliminated because they knew about Harvey and Lee. Hoover sent agents to Stripling JHS on Saturday morning to confiscate LHO's school records. Hoover sent agents to Tujague's on Friday afternoon; he most certainly knew that LEE had worked at Tujague's from July 1955 through Aug/Sept, 1956, because the FBI took all of LHO's time cards. Hoover sent agents to Pfisterer's Monday morning; employees were told not to discuss the LHO matter with anyone; all records were confiscated. FBI created/forged all w-2 forms for LHO's employment in 1955-56 FBI secretly received 225 LHO possessions the evening of 11/22/63 and three days later returned 455 items, many of which belonged to LEE Oswald. FBI obtained and then destroyed all original NYC school records; "located" and obtained from the US Post Office the uncashed money order allegedly used to pay for the rifle. Hoover knew about Ralph Yates and tried endlessly to discredit him. Hoover knew from FBI interview of McBride that LHO was in New Orleans in 1957-58 and lived at the Hotel Senator. He sent FBI agents to the Hotel Senator who asked for hotel records from 1955-56--intentionally avoiding 1957-58, when Harvey Oswald was actually there.
  12. Her phones WERE tapped, there are documents on this. The feds understandably needed to find out if she was involved in some kind of conspiracy. Which is one of many facts that points away from there actually being one.
  13. Thanks, Kirk. Only in Jim World can someone quote Jim's own words introducing his latest essay and then be accused of "conflating two essays of mine." I'm heartened that even within the conspiracy community at least some people can see the obsessional hero worship that underlies Jim's perspective on the assassination. And yet sycophants come out of the woodwork to assure me that Jim is correct and decades of polls of Presidential historians are "deeply flawed." Even Jim insists the reason that JFK doesn't rank higher is that he "was only in office for something less than three years." Well, yes, a President's place in history is evaluated by historians on the basis of what he did, not on the basis of what he might have done if he had been in office longer. This statement of Jim's underscores the very point I am making. The mindset that "JFK would have been the greatest of Presidents if he had lived and the America of today would be a far better place" feeds right into the mindset that "Deep Dark Forces prevented this greatness from flowering and are still at work today." I don't care if someone wants to worship JFK and then respond with obvious nonsense like "What Payette is doing is conflating two essays of mine" when someone else points this out. What does strike me is (1) the extent to which this unacknowledged worship influences thinking about the assassination, and (2) the unwillingness of the conspiracy community, or at least the Church of Conspiracy Thinking that sites like this represent, to recognize and call out this sort of thing. "Who is responsible for the assassination of JFK?" should be a strictly historical, evidence-driven question, but it clearly isn't. This is one of the most glaring flaws that I see with much thinking about the assassination. I may even believe that JFK would have been among our greatest Presidents if he had lived and that America and the world would be a better place today, but this has no direct relevance to the historical question. In fact, I need to be very careful not to let this attitude skew my analysis of the historical question. No historian operates in a vacuum or completely free of personal agendas, but it seems to me that with much conspiracy thinking (and, indeed, some Lone Nut thinking) the inquiry is absolutely driven by the sort of thinking that Jim exemplifies. In all my areas of belief (which include some distinctly non-mainstream beliefs) I at least try to constantly challenge myself as to whether I'm really thinking rationally and critically and basing my views on the best evidence or have gone over the edge into some sort of religious or quasi-religious zealotry. I've also been heartened to see that the recognition of the "JFK worship" mindset within the conspiracy community is hardly original to me. Essays have been written about this for years. I was first struck, as I've previously mentioned, when I spent more than a year reading Walt Brown's massive JFK chronology on my Kindle. I was struck again and again by how his near-worship of JFK seemed to influence his perspective. When I came to his description of his reaction to the assassination at the time it occurred, when he was approximately the same age as I was (young teenager), I was positively agog. What was for me (and my apolitical parents) just a big news story was for Walt Brown a truly cataclysmic personal catastrophe. There is nothing wrong with this, of course, but I do think that one has to be careful not to let it skew one's thinking on the historical question.
  14. But has she ever stated that she lied in her testimony or McMillan's book as opposed to just being "ashamed"? In every interview I ever read she stated that she believes in a conspiracy but her testimony and the book were truthful.
  15. See my post just above. Is disinformation the intent of the quotation style in the Enquirer article? If someone has the Dick Russell book, they might accurately quote Marina's statement in full context within this thread.
  16. Be that as it may Lance, it is paragraph three of the statement that drew my attention and is relevant to this thread. On the other side Fritz made such a great impression when Ruby shot Oz did he not?
  17. Yes, I see that now. So it's old news trotted out for the gala 55th anniversary. Quotations from the Russell chapter were probably made under Fair Use, so nobody was interviewed or paid for this. The Enquirer pastiche reads: "She also believed she was caught up in the conspiracy, her phones were tapped and she was being watched by various spooks - who she even believed could murder her! " 'Maybe Lee was in the same kind of predicament - a double or triple agent - and he did not know who he was really serving,' said the Russian-born mother of three." Because of Enquirer style and ethics, we have no idea whose situation 'the same kind of predicament' refers to - anyone interested would have to read Russell to find out. The second Enquirer paragraph quoted barely seems to connect to the first. Hoo Noes?!
  18. I have got issues with Jones, Steve, he is economical w the truth to say the least. Weiss who took the calls from Stringfellow made no mention of Hidell whatsoever. This 112th stuff is getting more intriguing the more I read about it.
  19. Jeff, Your timeline is interesting. At 1:52 PM, Sgt. Jerry Hill announces on the DPD radio that "the suspect in the Tippit shooting of the police officer has been apprehended and is enroute to the station" At 2:00 Oswald arrives at the station At 2:20 as per Fritz, Fritz begins questioning Oswald. Fritz and Curry both say that they do not know who Oswald is and did not know he was living in Dallas. Revill says he had never heard of Oswald, and from what I have seen, I believe that he was not in the DPD Intelligence Files. At 2:30 PM DPD officers are dispatched to Irving. Because of the delay waiting for Sheriff's Deputies to arrive,they don't enter the premises until 3:30. At 2:40 PM DPD officers are dispatched to 1026 N. Beckley and arrive at 3:00 PM. At 3:15, Hosty arrives at the station and tells Revill that Oswald is a communist. In the "early afternoon" Robert Jones of the 112th INTC in San Antonio received a call from Region II (Dallas), that an A.J. Hidell had been arrested in Dallas. "I do not remember the exact time" Testimony of Robert Jones before the HSCA https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/unpub_testimony/Jones_4-20-78/html/jones_0019a.htm page 19 He immediately begins searching his records. Police Officers Adamcik (7H202), Rose (7H227) and Stovall (7H186) are unanimous in saying that Captain Fritz dispatched them to Irving at 2:30 PM. They are also unanimous in saying that when they arrived at this address, they had to wait for 35-40 minutes for the Deputy Sheriffs to arrive since Irving was outside their jurisdiction. In his after-action report filed with Chief Curry (City of Dallas archives - JFK Collection) Box 3, Folder# 1, Item# 3 http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box3.htm Guy Rose wrote that after the Deputies showed up, they arrived at the front door at 3:30PM. They search the place and come up with pro-Castro material Harry Weatherford, Buddy Walthers, and J. L. Oxford were the deputies dispatched to Irving. You can find their accounts in the Supplementary Reports they filed with Sheriff Decker in volume 19 of the WC Hearings. Walthers, Weatherford and Sheriff Decker all said that Ruth Paine gave them a telephone number where Oswald could be reached and that they criss-crossed that number and came up with the Beckley St. address. At 2:40 PM, W.E. Potts, B.L. Senkel and Lt. E.L. Cunningham were dispatched to 1026 N. Beckley. Potts wrote in his after-action report (Box 2, Folder# 9, Item# 32) http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box2.htm that after he finished taking some affidavits, Fritz dispatched them to the Beckely St address at 2:40 and they arrived at Beckley at 3:00PM. Steve Thomas
  20. Bart Kamp

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    Sandy Larsen, you are wrong, see below in bold. Frazier and Molina were standing at the top of the TSBD steps at the time of the shooting. 20 to 30 seconds after the shots, Truly went inside the TSBD. Afterward, a girl who had earlier walked away from the steps -- to get a better view of the motorcade -- returned to the steps with someone else and told several people that Kennedy had been shot. Let's assume that these two people were Gloria Calvery and her female companion, with whom Molina would later speak inside the TSBD lobby. Calvery and her three pals Hicks, Reed and Westbrook left the building and stood between the Stemmons Freeway sign and the lamp post. Frazier heard what Gloria Calvery and her companion told the others, and shortly thereafter went back inside the TSBD. Molina went into the TSBD lobby. Gloria Calvery and her female companion went into the TSBD lobby and spoke with Molina there about the shooting. Several minutes later the Police arrived and entered the TSBD. But Bart adds this statement: "Recently we have spoken with Frazier and he told us that Calvery came by after the police officer(s) went in!" This 50-year-old memory contradicts my timeline above, because my timeline shows Calvery arriving at #3, whereas according to Bart, Frazier has her arriving at #8... after the police arrived several minutes later. There is nothing wrong with the timeline above, but you are wrong for inserting Calvery 2x! She should not be at position 3 at all. If what Frazier reportedly said is true, it means that the girl and her companion in #3 and #4 are not the same as Calvery and her companion in #6. And it means that the following took place: Shortly after the shooting, some girl and her companion told the people on the steps that Kennedy had been shot; then the people went inside; several minutes later the police arrived; and AFTER ALL THAT, Gloria Calvery and her companion finally arrived, went inside, and told everybody what they already knew by then... that Kennedy had been shot. Molina must have been the only one left in the dark, given that his response was, "Are you sure?" Rather than, "Yes, we've already heard. That's why the police are here." I don't care what Frazier says in all honesty, he is all over when it comes to his statements. In his HSCA interview he said Shelley and Lovelady had left the steps before the limo went on Elm! Only to be confronted with Altgens 6 shortly after. And closer checking of Frazier's claim is that he meant Baker, yet in his WC testimony he never saw him go in. So if anyone is all over the place with his statements it is Frazier. And I should have clarified that in my original post. But even so it males no difference besides the fact that Calvery is nowhere near on those steps in Darnell. I'm afraid that Bart is relying too much on fifty-year-old memories and not enough on first-day statements. Ha ha ha, you must be joking there. If anyone disregards first day statements it is you. Shelley's DPD and Lovelady FBI first day statements speak volumes, with regards them leaving immediately and speaking to Calvery across away from those steps. Something Doyle and Graves ignore as well. BTW, if Molina's testimony is correct about Truly going into the TSBD 20 to 30 seconds after the shooting, and before anybody (e.g. Gloria Calvery) had arrived announcing that Kennedy had been shot, then the identification of Truly in Darnell must be wrong. Because that man in Darnell is clearly not inside, or even on his way inside, the TSBD at that time. And Gloria Calvery and her companion clearly have arrived at the TSBD steps, as shown here with them talking to Billy Lovelady: Laughable assertion and speculation Sandy, if if if. So Truly is not Truly just because Doyle's, Graves' and your pet theory is blown to smithereens.
  21. Robin Unger

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    splitting the two films. Couch brakes to the left, Darnell brakes to the right. JFK Assassination - Darnel Couch SloMo[SD,854x480].mp4
  22. Robin Unger

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    We have Groden to thank for the confusion regarding Couch/Darnell. In his assassination films DVD he spliced the Couch and Darnell films together and represented them as one film.
  23. Julia Postal seems to infer that Callahan would have seen “Oswald”: ”He, perhaps I said, he passed Oswald. At that time I didn't know it was Oswald. Had to bypass him, because as he went through this way, Oswald went through this way and ducked into the theatre there.” (WC testimony) Despite this there doesn’t appear to be any statement from or interview with Callahan. Walter Cronkite, citing Julia Postal as a source, reported early evening Nov 22 that Oswald on the main floor of the theater “moved from seat to seat.” What cop-killer on the run calls attention to himself like that? So Westbrook and other DPD members, with military intelligence connections, operate with apparent foreknowledge of the assassination and Oswald. In Washington, the FBI holds a high-level meeting approx 3-3:30 PM (2-2:30 Dallas time) and afterwards Hoover contacts RFK to tell him the assassin is Oswald and he acted alone, while in Dallas Hosty drives to DPD HQ and announces that JFK was killed by “a communist” (Oswald). Do you think the FBI (Hoover) also had foreknowledge, or were they suddenly privy to information revealed from another source (i.e. connected to the military) which drives the conclusion reached during that meeting?
  24. Ron Bulman

    Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

    Thank you Robin. I've never seen these other than clips of them. Interesting how Baker disappears behind the cowboy hat/man in it so instantly in the Darnell film.
  25. The meeting with Marina Oswald, arranged by Dick Russell, occurred in November 1993. The NE article is referring to an article republished in Russell's "On The Trail of the JFK Assassins".
  26. Tom Neal

    I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak

    Hello Ray, Glad to see you're still posting! Sorry about that..I was going from memory and got your name wrong. And apparently your comment. This was in regard to Larsen's statement that a long slender bone fragment (from an unknown bone) broken loose by a bullet fragment on a vertical trajectory was propelled "pointed end" forward on a horizontal trajectory, and remained stable from its point of (unknown) origin until it stopped at the neck tie. He offers no explanation as to how the bullet which TANGENTIALLY impacted the skull at the EOP then fragmented. Full jacketed bullets (FMJ) don't break up when they impact a 0.27" thickness skull. Frangible bullets don't break up upon impact with bone. They require blood or soft tissue to increase their internal pressure which causes the bullet to fragment. So what caused the bullet to fragment? At this point, the fragment tunneled along between the scalp and skull. i.e. This supersonic fragment could not penetrate the scalp (These same mass fragments passed through brain tissue for the full length of the skull causing severe damage...), yet this same scalp provided enough force to push the fragment into a circular path! Supersonic bullets do NOT tunnel, however virtually spent bullets can. If a bullet fragments into a hundred equal pieces, then EACH piece travels at the full bullets velocity. However, it retains 1/100 the mass of the original, and therefore only 1/100th of the total energy. Note that this small but tenacious fragment managed the following Odyssey... Next, this lone fragment (the other frags were propelled upward into the brain and visible on x-rays) traveled through the cervical vertebrae creating no damage, turned from a horizontal trajectory to a vertical trajectory, created a long slender 1/4" diameter pointed bone fragment off an (unknown bone) traveling with enough energy to tear the trachea, pass through tissue, skin and 4 layers of shirt. 1. a tangential trajectory to the EOP is impossible to achieve from the TSBD which Larsen has chosen as the bullets origin, thus tunneling can NOT occur 2. neither FMJ nor frangible bullets frag upon contact with bone, thus NO fragments 3. supersonic bullets or fragments do NOT tunnel; if the bullet tunneled then it had virtually no energy and would have stopped in a short distance 4. a tunneling bullet is scraping along the skull losing energy from friction, this fragment however retains or increases its energy 5. the trajectory of a fragment tunneling along the skull becomes horizontal at the base of the skull 6. no explanation as to how this fragment turns from a horizontal trajectory to vertical and retains energy 7. No damage to C1, so how does the fragment get from posterior to anterior of the spine, and it would lose velocity 8. no explanation as to how the trajectory turns from vertical to horizontal (see Perry's statement re trajectory) 9. how is this 1/4" diameter long slender bone frag created? 10. from which bone did this originate? 11. how did a small bullet fragment (after completing this journey from EOP to trachea) retain enough energy to propel a 1/4" diameter bone frag through trachea, tissue, skin & cloth? 12. why is the propelling frag not visible embedded in whatever bone the frag came from? 13. Note the size of the largest frag visible in brain tissue; compare the mass of this bullet fragment to the mass of a "long slender" 1/4" diameter bone fragment 14. How did a small frag that could NOT puncture the scalp at supersonic velocity, have enough energy to propel a bone with a larger mass to a velocity that tore the trachea, and punctured the skin (much tougher than scalp). 15. The above statement neglects the velocity losses from EOP to skin, and proves more velocity was required at the END of this journey than Larsen claims it could have add when it failed to penetrate the scalp! If anyone would like to refute any of 1-15, please do so. My goal here is seeking the truth by eliminating falsehoods. If anyone would like to AGREE with ANY of the above, please do so. Having received no responses, I conclude there is NO INTEREST in this subject, so unless there are comments this is my last post on this subject...
  27. Kirk, Was GHWB in Dallas on 11/22/63? Yes. Was Dubya there, or at Andover? Who knows? Where was he? Any confirmed history from Andover? Also, there are two different photos from Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 that appear to show GHWB. As for policy issues before and after JFK's murder, and the falsified popular histories of those issues, there is excellent emerging documentation about, 1) Vietnam policy, 2) Indonesia, 3) Cuban relations, and 4) Civil Rights. And, yes, the falsified histories of JFK's presidency and murder are still being cranked out in the mainstream media. That is, precisely, what Mr. DiEugenio's latest work reveals, in great detail. BTW, I have seen a de-classified CIA document from 1964 in which all agency personnel were ordered to do whatever was necessary to promote popular acceptance of the Warren Commission Report. Are you familiar with that document? What do you make of that strange mandate?
  1. Load more activity