It's not about bragging, it's about truth

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy, one thing you have to keep in mind is that many of the hispanic people have more than three names like Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, please don't confuse yourself this Eugenio is one and the same. Many of them would be named after their mother and father's last name.

Sincerely hope that helps,

Scott

No, Scott. Actually I'm more confused than ever.

Is the mugshot that James provided to us a mugshot of one of the guys who killed JFK?

James says the guy in the mugshot was 18 years old in 1963.

--Tommy

Edited November 26, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Scott Kaiser]

Tommy, one thing you have to keep in mind is that many of the hispanic people have more than three names like Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, please don't confuse yourself this Eugenio is one and the same. Many of them would be named after their mother and father's last name.

Sincerely hope that helps,

Scott

No, Scott. Actually I'm more confused than ever.

Is the mugshot that James provided to us the mugshot of one of the guys who killed JFK?

James says the guy in the mugshot was 18 years old in 1963.

--Tommy

Tommy,

Please open these document and read them. I don't know where James received the information that this person was 18 years old in 1963. I suppose if it is true, then that would have made him 21 in 1966 when he went to Cuba.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=86046&search=Saldivar#relPageId=3&tab=page

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy, one thing you have to keep in mind is that many of the hispanic people have more than three names like Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, please don't confuse yourself this Eugenio is one and the same. Many of them would be named after their mother and father's last name.

Sincerely hope that helps,

Scott

No, Scott. Actually I'm more confused than ever.

Is the mugshot that James provided to us the mugshot of one of the guys who killed JFK?

James says the guy in the mugshot was 18 years old in 1963.

--Tommy

Tommy,

Please open these document and read them. I don't know where James received the information that this person was 18 years old in 1963. I suppose if it is true, then that would have made him 21 in 1966 when he went to Cuba.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=86046&search=Saldivar#relPageId=3&tab=page

Scott,

Is the mugshot (which James posted on this thread) of the guy you're talking about, or not?

If so, is this the first time you've seen a photo of him?

--Tommy

Edited November 26, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Scott Kaiser]

It is the same man using different names, it could have been an alias, many of them would change a letter in their name and become John. It's the same Eugenio my father says was in Dallas.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Scott Kaiser

[Scott Kaiser]

Tommy, one thing you have to keep in mind is that many of the hispanic people have more than three names like Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, please don't confuse yourself this Eugenio is one and the same. Many of them would be named after their mother and father's last name.

Sincerely hope that helps,

Scott

No, Scott. Actually I'm more confused than ever.

Is the mugshot that James provided to us the mugshot of one of the guys who killed JFK?

James says the guy in the mugshot was 18 years old in 1963.

--Tommy

Tommy,

Please open these document and read them. I don't know where James received the information that this person was 18 years old in 1963. I suppose if it is true, then that would have made him 21 in 1966 when he went to Cuba.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=86046&search=Saldivar#relPageId=3&tab=page

Scott,

Is the mugshot (which James posted on this thread) of the guy you're talking about, or not?

If so, is this the first time you've seen a photo of him?

--Tommy

That is the first time I've ever seen this photo, I don't know what Eugenio looks like. I only have the address and phone number to where he stayed in Hialeah. His address has been confirmed by others who did know him. I did not show anyone in Miami that page out of my father's address book so no one would shut down on me, and after this post I know I will not be welcomed back to Miami.

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy, one thing you have to keep in mind is that many of the hispanic people have more than three names like Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, please don't confuse yourself this Eugenio is one and the same. Many of them would be named after their mother and father's last name.

Sincerely hope that helps,

Scott

No, Scott. Actually I'm more confused than ever.

Is the mugshot that James provided to us the mugshot of one of the guys who killed JFK?

James says the guy in the mugshot was 18 years old in 1963.

--Tommy

Tommy,

Please open these document and read them. I don't know where James received the information that this person was 18 years old in 1963. I suppose if it is true, then that would have made him 21 in 1966 when he went to Cuba.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=86046&search=Saldivar#relPageId=3&tab=page

Scott,

Is the mugshot (which James posted on this thread) of the guy you're talking about, or not?

If so, is this the first time you've seen a photo of him?

--Tommy

That is the first time I've ever seen this photo, I don't know what Eugenio looks like. I only have the address and phone number to where he stayed in Hialeah. His address has been confirmed by others who did know him. I did not show anyone in Miami that page out of my father's address book so no one would shut down on me, and after this post I know I will not be welcomed back to Miami.

OK.

Thanks, Scott!

--Tommy

[Scott Kaiser]

To be more specific, I did not show the entire page with Dallas under Eugenio's name, I only asked if this Eugenio was Eugenio Martinez or someone else, that is when I learned from others who owned this address.

Sincerely,

Scott

[Thomas Graves]

To be more specific, I did not show the entire page with Dallas under Eugenio's name, I only asked if this Eugenio was Eugenio Martinez or someone else, that is when I learned from others who owned this address.

Sincerely,

Scott

Good stuff, Scott.

Methodology is important.

Have you been able to confirm, independently from your friends, that he lived there? According to that Spanish-language website, he was released from Cuban prison in 1978 and returned to the Miami area. Might be listed in an old phone book...

--Tommy

[Scott Kaiser]

To be more specific, I did not show the entire page with Dallas under Eugenio's name, I only asked if this Eugenio was Eugenio Martinez or someone else, that is when I learned from others who owned this address.

Sincerely,

Scott

Good stuff, Scott.

Methodology is important.

Have you been able to confirm, independently from your friends, that he lived there? According to that Spanish-language website, he was released from Cuban prison in 1978 and returned to the Miami area. Might be listed in an old phone book...

--Tommy

He lived at that address prior to 1978, my father was killed in 1977. That would have been right around 1962-63 when my father was in Miami. Going to sleep now, very tried, good night.

[Ramon F. Herrera]

Sir, can you please point out where I said, "the CIA gave the most important secret in its history, as a free gift, to its worst enemy."

I was basing my statement on the premise that Castro captured the Dealey Plaza shooters, plus your identification of that pair of Cubanos being the shooters.

Had that been the case, the inescapable conclusion would be what you see above in quotes.

-Ramon

[Scott Kaiser]

Sir, can you please point out where I said, "the CIA gave the most important secret in its history, as a free gift, to its worst enemy."

I was basing my statement on the premise that Castro captured the Dealey Plaza shooters, plus your identification of that pair of Cubanos being the shooters.

Had that been the case, the inescapable conclusion would be what you see above in quotes.

-Ramon

Well, then sir, may I kindly suggest that you shouldn't base your premise on what you think to be hearsay, and start quoting me by fact per se? If you don't, you'll begin to make an ass/u/me. Thanks!

Scott

Edited November 26, 2015 by Scott Kaiser

[Ramon F. Herrera]

Well, then sir, may I kindly suggest that you shouldn't base your premise on what you think to be hearsay, and start quoting me by fact per se? If you don't, you'll begin to make an ass/u/me. Thanks!

I guess I should not have this kind of debate with people who haven't had any courses of Logic.

A premise can be anything: "Assume that a flying saucer lands on top of the White House ..."

Next, you develop the consequences in a logical manner. One possible technique known as reductio ad absurdum.

If we assume that Fidel Castro captures the Dealy Plaza snipers that you sent to Cuba (something much more likely than the spacecraft mentioned above) to kill El Comandante, then the INESCAPABLE consequence is that "the CIA gave the most important secret in its history, as a free gift, to its worst enemy."

-Ramon

Edited November 27, 2015 by Ramon F. Herrera

[Jon G. Tidd]

Scott,

How do you account for the massive cover-up?

I can't believe the cover-up has been aimed at [a] causing the American people to distrust the U.S. government in order to protect some anti-Castro Cubans. That makes no sense to me. The American people for years would have accepted that anti-Castro Cubans killed JFK; and it certainly would have gotten the CIA, LBJ, and others off the hook.

[James Richards]

Tommy, no idea regarding the name Xinques other than it appeared in some of the news stories of the day and in some on the agency generated files.

The mug shot of Eugenio Zaldivar Cadenas I posted earlier is of the man who was part of the Tony Cuesta led mission of 1966. Zaldivar was born in Camaguey, Cuba on April 28, 1945. He entered the US in 1960 and joined the ranks of Commandos L in 1963.

When Castro gave George McGovern a list of agency sponsored raiders who were sent to kill him, Eugenio Zaldivar Cadenas was one of them.

[Scott Kaiser]

Hi James, funny you mention McGovern, because he too was targeted, the anti-Castro Cubans didn't take it to lightly regarding the photo of Castro and McGovern, in-fact, there were quit a few Democrats targeted including Ted Kennedy. I will never know if my next publication will ever get off the ground, and frankly, I don't care, I just as soon publish the entire PDF for reading, in a step by step illustration I explain Watergate, what their expectations were as well as the purpose of Watergate it's quit detailed in the rest of my Howard Liebengood transcripts, which includes my father's testimony.

Mr. Tidd, there is no easy explanation for what seems to be a massive cover-up, truth is, the cover up wasn't as massive as we may think. You have LBJ who ordered the car to be stripped just days after the assassination which destroyed any and all possible evidence. you have Ford commenting a federal crime which he was never convicted of, the crime was moving the bullet hole in order for it lineup with the single bullet theory, you have Arlen Specter presenting a criminal explanation to his theory which was accepted by the Federal Government as fact, truth is, his theory is not fact,, but nevertheless, it has been bought and paid for from all those who think Oswald acted alone. LBJ, I believe was at the forefront of this cover-up in order to prevent war. In-fact, LBJ seemed to enjoy his new position as Commander in Chief. And, make no mistake, I am not saying he was the key figure behind the assassination, what I'm saying is that he was able to enjoy the riches of his inheritance. LBJ could've easily ordered altered photos, x-rays, received suggestions from his cohorts, mums the word. Recommendations could have very well been made by those who reaped the same rewards as LBJ. The Secret Service may have been the first agency to have viewed the film or were they? From what I understand, Life Magazine paid something like 30,000 or 60,000 thousand dollars I don't remember the exact amount, but they paid Zapruder a ridiculous number and talked Zapruder into releasing the film, after sneaking out the back door with the tape, who's to say if the agency didn't get ahold of it first?

I completely understand there will be differences of opinions on the assassination, everyone has one. But, what seems to be this huge cover-up, this conglomerate conspiracy is not that big at all. As Larry Hancock says, someone would have talked, problem is, everyone has. I would ask the question, why would they need to cover it up? LBJ right from the get-go covered up the assassination as soon as the limo hit the Ford factory, and the car was stripped, all evidence was lost. The autopsy, the altered Zfilm, X-rays, photos and so on, why was everything tapered with? When you think about it, the answer is really quit easy, right there in-front of us, as with most things when we lose something. But, rather than looking for where we last put something, we want to tear the house apart. Most folks build this mountain out of a molehill, and it's unnecessary, but I'm not going to be heard, because it's more fun building a mountain. LBJ needed to covered this up regardless of the circumstances, but why? To really avoid WWIII, and be doing so, he basically allowed the conspirators to walk free. Everyone wanted LBJ to invade Cuba and or blame the Russians, then all hell would break out. Even Fidel Castro gave a six hour speech the very next day, imagine that, that's how fast news traveled, but why wouldn't Fidel wait a few days before giving his speech? Why not wait a week or two allowing the family to morn? Because he feared an invasion.

You see, my father worked with many men who were involved in blowing up ships, Russians freighters, and Cuban finishing boats, ships that were docked in port that would have a time delayed bombs on them so when they reached open waters, the bomb would go off, and the ship would sink. This way those who were responsible could also claim plausible deniability. There was a time my father tried to prevent a Russian ship from getting bombed. So, why was all this going on?

Because if they couldn't continue invading Cuba, and continue making runs into Cuba because the government was cracking down on them, the only other way was to start a war that would drag America into it with Cuba. However, Russia would have possibly gotten involved, and to avoid all this, what folks believe to be this giant cover up, wasn't as giant at all, it was formed from the beginning, it had to take place, now, I wouldn't blow the Secret Service out the water, blaming the Secret Service for not doing their job, they did do their job, problem is, Kennedy wanted to be seen, he didn't want to be crowded with SS around his car, that was his choice, and certainly they're not going to be able to react faster than a speeding bullet unless their supermen, while there is some fault by the SS to a certain degree, they can't be fully liable for their actions. I think that fully blaming them for what happened is false.

I could go into much more detail, but when some folks already have their minds made up, it's not worth my time pointing out the obvious. This assassination was not an LBJ, Nixon, military industrial Complex, Kennedy's generals, bankers, Jackie or Connally did it assassination. There's no need to have every top agency in the world going after Kennedy, true, Kennedy did not make many alliances, he did seem to make more adversaries, more foes than friends. if you think about it, it's the most simplest plot ever that unfolded with compartmentalized CIA trained assassins that were going to find away to start a war no matter what to free Cuba, set up Oswald, and, assassinate the president, why do you suppose LBJ did not want to run a second term? Why did they take out Nixon when he shut-down JM/WAVE?

It's really not as complicated as everyone what's this to be. But, everyone has a theory, and everyone wants to write a book on what they believed happened, or who they believed was involved. So, these folks write these books using their own creative writing, when I ask myself, why in God's name does everyone have to make Kennedy's assassination so complicated that there's now a million different theories.

Maybe, I'm just wasting my time spelling it out. Listen, I pulled my book from Trineday, I asked that it no longer be printed, and I told Kris that I would like to submit my material to a larger publisher, if it gets picked up great, if it doesn't, oh well, that's great too. Either way, I have no agenda, but to tell my father's story, and the truth. That's all that matters to me.

Scott

Edited November 27, 2015 by Scott Kaiser