Cliff Varnell Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 17 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Varnell and Trejo dissing each other. And its free. When are you going to whip up a cogent explanation for why Dulles went to Puerto Rico over the BOP weekend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 13 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: James, At least Cliff Varnelli makes good points and cites actual documents. Regards, --Paul Trejo Who's Cliff Varnelli? Never heard of him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said: (1) I can't say for sure who did it, but it appears that the perps may have been supra-institutional actors. It was, perhaps, a major dope ring which included people with lots of different backgrounds, including the CIA, the military, the State Dept. (2) Hoover's file on Oswald apparently included references to several LHO trips to Cuba, which never happened. (3) You can present no proof Hoover contacted Bundy -- and you insist on ignoring Hoover's attempt to frame Oswald as a Red Agent. You got nuthin'. Cliff, By the numbers: (1) I'm pretty sure you're aiming too high. Occam's Razor says the simplest answer is usually the right one -- and the simplest answer to the JFK assassination in Dallas is that people in Dallas killed JFK. (1.1) As Walt Brown said, if money was used to kill JFK, then blackmail would have ensued, and the scandal would have erupted into daylight. The best assassins are local fanatics who do it for beliefs, and not for money. This means the Radical Right. Dallas was famous for its Radical Right (Turner, 1979, Brown 1995, Caufield 2015). (2) Hoover knew damn well that Oswald never went to Cuba. Hoover was responding to James Hosty's many claims about Oswald being a Communist, a Fidel Castro supporter, a Cuba supporter, and the rumor among the Communists-did-it CTers (which was the first CT ever) that Oswald was a regular in Cuba (probably conflating Oswald with Interpen members). (2.1) Hoover was riffing on what he had heard. None of this changed his mind one iota regarding his precious "Lone Nut" theory of Oswald. Hoover was mugging for the cameras, and pretending that he was being objective. (3) You, Cliff, have no proof of any kind that Hoover ever portrayed Oswald as a Red Agent. (3.1) On the contrary -- Hoover consistently portrayed Oswald as a "Lone Nut". Consistently. I have shown document after document to demonstrate my case. I have stated my criterion -- if you can prove that McGeorge Bundy contacted AF-1 before 3pm CST, then I will concede the point. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 16, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 This is great. I feel like Churchill watching the eastern front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I have a radical approach to the case that annoys CT Pet Theorists. Mine is a truly revolutionary approach. It's not out of the box thinking it's burn the box down and start over thinking. I approach the ambush of 11/22/63 like any standard murder case. 1) A rigorous examination of the physical evidence. 2) A blank tackboard. 3) Proven liars are Persons of Interest, depending on the significance of the lies. In the context of the Kennedy assassination this approach is wholly original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said: I have a radical approach to the case that annoys CT Pet Theorists. Mine is a truly revolutionary approach. It's not out of the box thinking it's burn the box down and start over thinking. I approach the ambush of 11/22/63 like any standard murder case. 1) A rigorous examination of the physical evidence. 2) A blank tackboard. 3) Proven liars are Persons of Interest, depending on the significance of the lies. In the context of the Kennedy assassination this approach is wholly original. You've whet my appetite Cliff. Could you give me a thumbnail sketch of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Milch Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) @Jim DiEugenio Quote: 'Varnell and Trejo dissing each other. And its free'. Jim DiEugenio What's your take on all this, Jim? Both researchers can't both be correct (1963 CIA did it vs 1963 Dallas right wing did it), can they? (I didn't include David Von Pein's viewpoint 'LHO did it' because he has stated that he in not a researcher. For David, the case was settled over 53 years ago & it was neither the 1963 CIA nor the 1963 Dallas right wing; it was LHO). If you doubt it was the Dallas right wing, you'll save me & countless other EF readers from digging through libraries for Gen. Walker books. Thanks in advance (smile). BTW, what's your take on LHO tried to kill Gen Walker to save JFK's life? That angle would appear to indicate LHO did indeed order his weapons, would it not? That would make David Von Pein correct in his assessments. Could you handle that if it was the case, Jim? Respectfully & sincerely, Brad Milch Edited February 16, 2017 by Brad Milch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 On 2/16/2017 at 7:16 AM, Brad Milch said: @Jim DiEugenio Quote: 'Varnell and Trejo dissing each other. And its free'. Jim DiEugenio What's your take on all this, Jim? Both researchers can't both be correct (1963 CIA did it vs 1963 Dallas right wing did it), can they? I never said "the CIA did it." I'll outline my views in my answer to Kirk's question, later today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Milch Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) @Cliff Varnell This is getting good, Cliff (so good, in fact, I put off downloading Microsoft's free Windows 7 3+ Gigabyte ISO file to free up time until the alleged 'dissing' is over & I can get both yours & Paul Trejo's viewpoints together in one thread for reference). It kinda reminds me of the old Yankees in the last inning of the World Series: Yanks are down by 3. Bases are loaded. 2 outs. Next at bat: Mickey Mantle [Roger Maris next, following Mickey] Mickey's at the plate batting left handed instead of his usual right, signaling sportscasters & fans alike that Mickey's 'going for the fence'. Sandy Koufax has been replaced by Mr. 'LHO did it', David Von Pein, who has unexpectedly been brought to the mound from the bullpen. David's looking to strike Mickey out & put the Series to bed. The suspense is thick. Those in the stands are munching on hot dogs, peanuts & cracker jacks. Others not present have their ears glued to small transistor radios.... (smiles) Restfully & Sincerely, Brad Milch Edited February 17, 2017 by Brad Milch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Cliff - so, your evidence is Larry Hancock's SWHT (2010). I have discussed Larry's ideas with him on this Forum, and we disagree on some basics. According to me, Larry's CIA-did-it CT is still filled with guesswork. Says Paul Trejo, the guy who hilariously and ridiculously believes his "Walker did it and told Oswald to do it" backed with facts galore theory. Sigh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 On 2/15/2017 at 11:54 PM, Kirk Gallaway said: You've whet my appetite Cliff. Could you give me a thumbnail sketch of it? Thanks for your interest, Kirk. I'll start a new thread in a day or three -- It's A Murder Case, After All Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 Don't forget the ice bullet and the flechette Cliff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted February 18, 2017 Author Share Posted February 18, 2017 With a shallow back wound, couldn't a bullet just sort of squeeze out naturally? It would most likely fall within the tucked-in shirt if it happened before the clothing was removed, but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: Don't forget the ice bullet and the flechette Cliff. You dismiss the only investigative lead in the entire case when the FBI's Sibert called the FBI lab to inquire as to the existence of rounds which wouldn't show up in x-ray or the autopsy. That was a legitimate investigative action. The only legitimate official investigative action in the entire case. You wouldn't know that, Jim, because you're more of a student of the Oswald murder case than JFK's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Milch Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 James DiEugenio said: Don't forget the ice bullet and the flechette Cliff. Or the alleged Robert & Marina Oswald sleaze that appeared in the 'Ruth Pain was a CIA operative' thread a few months back. I'm not sure if either Cliff or Paul was responsible for it or not. For those that missed it, Robert Oswald was alleged to have been docking his ship at Marina's port of entry (lol). Ralph Cinque has picked up on it & demanding a DNA test between LHO's brother Robert & LHO's 2 daughters on his blog. Seriously...I kid you not. Sleaze catches attention. BM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now