• Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We are opening registration!! If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We require you use your real name, a valid email address, and your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. Additionally, you will have to send us your photo for use as an avatar and submit a brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

George Sawtelle

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About George Sawtelle

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Jeffrey Would you buy ex-CIA agent and CIA agent on loan as the organizers? The plotters were helped tremendously by the arrest of Oswald within an hour to an hour and a half of the assassination. You can thank Phillips for that. The arrest was crucial since it gave the plotters time to get the cover-up mechanism in motion. Then the CIA and FBI did their cover up magic and the public was pacified. The troops were a contingency and it turned out they weren't needed. Many people inside the government knew`Kennedy would be hit but they didn't know who was planning the hit. They had heard rumors. But they kept their mouth shut and waited. In that respect they were complicit and I think that is what upset Proutty. So in that aspect you're right it was`all hands on deck. But I disagree when you write it was not a talented few. It was. Two people doing the planning with little or no help from other government agencies. I believe two other people were instrumental in the plot. That means only four people knew who planned and executed the assassination. Only four people, sworn to secrecy all these years, and all four are dead. That is the main reason the case`has been so difficult to crack.
  2. The question ... who ordered the army to deploy troops to Wash DC the day of the assassination is one of the keys to solving the assassination. Because whoever ordered the troops to Wash DC to protect the coup had to be one of the plotters. We know it could not have been the CIA simply because the army would not blindly follow the CIA. And it follows then that the CIA did not plan the assassination or coup because protection of the coup by the army (troops) is an integral part of any coup.
  3. Paul T I agree that Banister handled Oswald for a different purpose. Banister wanted Oswald to help him identify the communists in NOLA while Phillips wanted Oswald to help him kill the president.
  4. Paul T David Phillips was Oswald's handler. If Phillips sat on the sidelines during the assassination then Oswald would have stayed in NOLA and not ventured to Dallas. Phillips had to have had hand in the planning of the assassination to place Oswald in the position to become the patsy. You use that word clueless rather loosely, you need to look at yourself.
  5. Paul B That is not what I'm suggesting. I never have said the military played a primary role in the assassination. They were not the leaders. They did what they were told as always. My entire point is that the military would not blindly follow the CIA. I don't believe they trusted the CIA and thus would not undertake an operation to work hand and hand with the CIA unless they were told to do so.
  6. Paul T pg 42 "Destiny Betrayed" James DiEugenio One of the most interesting aspects of the Taylor Commission report is the testimony of Allen Dulles. Dulles understood that his job and career were on the line. Therefore his answers to difficult questions were evasive. When Admiral Arleigh Burke asked him if the responsibility for the conduct of the operation was not all at CIA, the following dialogue appeared, Dulles But that was done by military personnel. Burke But not under our command structure. General Lyman Lymnitzer, chair of the Joint Chiefs at the time, also scored Dulles on this point. When asked if he "or the Joints Chiefs were the defenders of the military aspects of the operation, or was it the CIA?" Lymnitzer replied that "The defenders of the military parts of the plan were the people who produced it and that was the CIA. We were providing assistance and assuring the feasibility of the plan." And just what did the military advise the CIA on the operation. Well it can be summed up with the following, pg 295 "The Brothers" Stephen Kinzer At the next Special Group meeting, on December 28, discussion turned to military requirements for the exile invasion. This time Allen deferred not to Bissell, but to Colonel Jack Hawkins, a Marine Corps amphibious warfare expert who had been detailed to organize the landing. Hawkins was forceful - and chillingly prophetic. "It is axiomatic in amphibious operations that control of air and sea in the objective area is required", he said. "The Cuban airforce and naval vessels capable of opposing our landing must be knocked out or neutralized before our amphibious shipping makes a final run at the beach. If this is not done, we will be courting disaster ... The operation [should] be abandoned if policy does not provide for use of adequate tactical air support." It definitely seems like the military and the CIA were not on the same page. In fact I would say the military threw the CIA under the bus. Relations between the two were not good. What are your thoughts Paul?
  7. Paul T You don't believe Prouty. Apparently his disclosure about a military unit on standby has no place in your theory. No problem. However save your lecture on what I should read and what I should believe.
  8. Paul B The military and the CIA competed for the same resources. The CIA had begun to undertake overt military operations without the help and consent of the military (Bay of Pigs). The military had begun to develop a dislike for the CIA for muscling in on their territory. I doubt the military would expect any plan developed by the CIA would succeed `after their disastrous Bay of Pigs fiasco. They wouldn't be a part of anything created by the CIA.
  9. Paul T Who had the power to place a brigade of troops on standby over Wash DC in case of rioting as per Prouty? \
  10. The plotters of the coup need the backing of the military. They need troops on the ground when it becomes necessary to control rioting or small scale engagements or firefights if they break out as a result of the assassination. Without the backing of the military the plotters could be captured and executed if something goes wrong. Who among the various groups named by one or more researchers as responsible for the assassination could get the backing of the military to provide soldiers and weapons to defend the objectives of the coup if necessary?
  11. Paul T Only Allen Dulles had the resources on hand to pull off the assassination and then cover it up. No other man, entity or country could have done it. Can you imagine how many parts were needed to pull this off? Only Dulles was able to marshall the forces required.
  12. David VP There is no reason for us to continue. It is obvious to all on this forum that Doctor Gregory was used to boost the SBT. His statement makes no sense. And you know it but you must defend him because what he said is needed to validate the SBT. You are not after the truth and our little sparring session proves it.
  13. David VP Why would Doctor Gregory look for a BULLET embeded in Connally's thigh if the wound is superficial? There would be no reason to look for a bullet within Connally's body. Without an x-ray (assuming no x-ray right David) where would he look? The missile could be in his foot for all anyone knows. As I stated previously Doctor Gregory's statement is full of errors. You can't use Doctor Gregory's statement to beef up the assertion that the magic bullet was found on Connally's stretcher. Look for other testimony that makes sense.
  14. David VP I sense desperation in your post. You didn't think intuitively about the bullet entering Connally's body. If you had we wouldn't be arguing now. Doctor Gregory said the bullet "struck the thigh in a reverse fashion", i.e., butt end first, apparently scrathed the skin of the thigh but did not enter the thigh and "was found in the clothing". He goes on to say in the same quote that the bullet was not found in the clothing. WTF? Back to intuitive thinking. The bullet enters butt end first, tears a hole in the pantleg and then dies and falls onto the pantleg. The bullet had to have momentum to tear a hole in the pantleg with the butt end of the bullet but then the fabric stopped most or all of the momentum and it didn't enter Connally's thigh. Doctor Gregory's statement is riddled with errors. It's a false statement. I would hope you address these discrepancies before we proceed since you base your assertion about the magic bullet and where it was found on Doctor Gregory's statement.