Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    It was intuitive, cynical. They're millennials. High tech solutions are obvious to them. I think it's because they grew up on The Matrix while the boomers and silent gen types grew up on James Bond. Agent Smith v Agent 007. 007 types can't take dissolving bullets seriously. But the autopsists took the scenario seriously, and so did the two FBI agents at the autopsy.
  3. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Did you ask them how they became aware of bullets that dissolve?
  4. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Would Len Osanic call for the hiring of Vincent Salandria?
  5. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    You're welcome, Michael. Hire Vincent Salandria!
  6. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    The kids can't dance to it.
  7. The Newly Declassified JFK Files

    Yes I think that is true about what the strategy is. McKenzie said that about MHCHAOS, I am not sure if that is correct. It may or may not be, as I do not have that book anymore. People forget how great Ramparts was. It was simply a quantum leap ahead of everything else except the LA Free Press. I did my best to make people understand its enormous stature when HInckle died. https://kennedysandking.com/articles/warren-hinckle-and-the-glory-that-was-ramparts
  8. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    I am not sure George since the strict rules of evidence did not apply here. BTW, the NAA came up twice. Once with Haag who was their only witness, and once with Spiegelman who was the defense witness. BTW, it got really heated between Pappas and Aguilar. I am pretty sure that Len Osanic will have a special hour on tho subject this week.
  9. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Bart, Of special interest on the topic of Loran Hall, please see the extended interview of Loran Hall by Jim Garrison in 1967. Regards, --Paul Trejo
  10. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Jim You are correct. Weiss-Aschkenasy should have testified. They used simple graphical methods (no computer, no oscillascope, no complicated statistics and no one critical of their work that I know about). They did use statistics to determine and eliminate background noise but it was simple statistics. However they piggy backed off of BBN's work, using microphone 4 as the starting point of their work. BBN said mic 4 correlated to the grassy knoll shot and W-A was hired to check the location and accuracy of mic 4. So BBN had to be there also.
  11. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    I once pointed out to a millennial friend of mine that her generation didn't appear all that interested in the Kennedy assassination. "That's because they make it so boring," she said, and the subject dropped. A couple weeks later she asked me what I'd been up to and I said --"Giving people hell about the central question of the JFK assassination." This was in the late summer of 2013. "What is the central question of the JFK assassination?" "You don't want to know--" "No, tell me.," she said, or words to that effect. JFK was shot in the back, there was no exit wound and no bullet found in the autopsy; he was shot in the throat, no exit, no bullet found in the autopsy. The central question is --what happened to the bullets that caused the back and throat wounds? She thought for a second, then said -- "But was it a real autopsy?" "A lot of problems with the autopsy, but that was the situation...Some people think the bullets were removed prior to the autopsy--" "Or it was some government shi* that dissolved!" she said with an air of triumph. About a year later I told this story to another millennial friend of mine and when I got to the line "or some government shi* that dissolved--" she said-- "That's what I was gonna say!" These kids are ahead of the JFKA Critical Community by a mile.
  12. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Jason, I received a new email from Harry Dean today about Guy Gabaldon -- which may be of interest. I have for years now, relied on Bill Simpich (2014) and him alone for my belief that David Morales was the Telephone Impersonator of Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico CIty on October 1, 1963. In my opinion, Simpich proved his case for the top secret CIA Mole Hunt, so I relied on his genius for further guidance. Yet I must admit -- if I'm required to prove the claim that David Morales was the Telephone Impersonator, I could not do it -- because Bill Simpich only suggests the possibility -- he doesn't confirm it as a fact. So -- here's Harry Dean's current thinking on the topic (and actually, Harry suggested something along this line to me a few months ago, and only reminded me of it today, because of your diligent work, Jason). (1) Guy Gabaldon knew a little bit of rudimentary Russian language. (2) Guy Gabaldon had made his intentions quite plain to Harry Dean, Loran Hall and Larry Howard -- that he himself, Gabaldon, would be in Mexico City during the final week of September, 1963, and he expected Loran Hall and Larry Howard to drive Lee Harvey Oswald to his DACA office in Mexico City. (3) Guy Gabaldon made it plain to Harry Dean that he himself, Gabaldon, would make final arrangements for Lee Harvey Oswald to be the Patsy for the JFK assassination. (4) Since the CIA reports that the Telephone Impersonator had very broken Russian, Guy Gabaldon is the more likely suspect, since he told Harry that he would be in Mexico City -- with this general intention. Of course, this also suggests that Guy Gabaldon had not only Radical Right contacts in Mexico City, but also some spies at the Russian Embassy (if not a secret rogue inside the CIA) because the Telephone Impersonator of Oswald knew about the KGB Agent Valery Kostikov. One could argue, furthermore, that a member of the Mexican Military -- a Radical Rightist -- could easily befriend a "movie star" like Guy Gabaldon, who was also a well-known Anti-Communist at the time -- and this Mexican Military Radical Rightist might also have Mexican spies inside the Russian Embassy. (By the way, a Radical Rightist in Mexico was eve more severe than a Radical Rightist in the USA, because in Mexico, being a Communist was already illegal -- e.g. already justifying the beating interrogation of Sylvia Duran). THEREFORE -- instead of seeking a connection between Guy Gabaldon and David Morales (which is not impossible, since they were both Latino Americans, and had common interests) it is more straightforward, to use Occam's Razor, and focus on Guy Gabaldon exclusively -- based on Harry Dean's ear-witness account of the events. Bill Simpich has no such ear-witness account to work with. Again -- according to Harry Dean -- he did not feel obligated to visit the FBI directly after the General Walker meeting in John Rousselot's office -- but it was this bizarre behavior of Guy Gabaldon that made Harry feel obligated to visit the FBI. So, there is Harry's latest, Jason. Guy Gabaldon was possibly (or likely) the Telephone Impersonator of Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City -- from the Cuban Consulate telephone, to the USSR Embassy, fishing for info about KGB assassin Kostikov, on October 1, 1963, over the most wire-tapped telephone on earth. Regards, --Paul Trejo
  13. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    I checked out the first two documents in the drop box. I was planning on dropping the 75 bucks for the livestream but a post the night before indicated it was going to be lame, so I saved. Called it! Of course -- three main rabbit holes -- the provenance of CE399, the acoustics, the NAA. Not a jury in the land is going to sit still for any of that. I've had discussions with millennials who had little prior interest in the case and they got it in about two minutes on just the basic facts.
  14. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Thanks for explaining that, Jim. To me it sounds like the trial was sort of like a debate framed as a trial. You make an excellent point about it being difficult to educate a jury in just two days. They've had a lifetime (on and off) hearing the prosecutor's side of the story.
  15. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Cliff I can't argue with you. You're right. Simplicity was the way to go. They felt the acoustics would help and once they made the decision to go with the acoustics they had to have someone there who could answer defense questions about cross talk, how the recorder functioned, the lag or delay time enherent in the recorder and rebut the critics. Don knows the ins and outs of this issue so he had to be there. In writing his book, "Hear No Evil", Don worked very closely with BBN and W-A.He undoubtedly learned quite a bit about the issue from the experts. You might say he went to school. That is why a scientist who is not a physics major knows so much about sound and it's properties.
  16. Sandy, Thanks, that answers my question. Very interesting. And this clarifies that Cabell probably fell into the operational interest category.
  17. Witten's report on Oswald in Mexico just released

    Rob, Yes, 201 files can be opened on people who are of operational interest to the CIA. It is only when the file is opened in the CI/SIG division that the person is a CIA employee who is under suspicion. What you wrote, about CI/SIG 201 files being used to create scapegoats, is indeed what I recall reading about. I didn't get the impression from what I read that this was actually done, only that it was somebody's idea.
  18. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    I can see that very few people here watched it. First, the NAA was discussed more than once. Second, there were very loose rules about admitting people as experts and also admitting certain testimony. One thing I did not understand was if these rules applied, why was the prosecution allowed to question an expert's qualifications? For instance, Aguilar testified as an expert witness, and Pappas ridiculed him for being an eye surgeon. Same with Don Thomas since he is not an acoustics scientist. I thought there were some people who should have been there are were not. Like Jeremy Gunn. He deposed all the autopsy doctors and Stringer. If it had been me I would have done all I could to get him there. And if you were going to use the acoustics, and I am not sure I would have, then why not try and get Weiss or Achenasky? But beyond that, in my opinion, Dawn was absolutely right. The defense tried to dump about 5 MB of information on the jury in two days. We tend to forget sometimes that people who do not live this case do not understand it anywhere near as well as we do. But secondly, in a two day setting--which is totally unreal for this case--you cannot educate them as to all those issues. Not even close. I thought the best witness for our side was Brian Edwards. He really benefited from his years in police work and was very calm and collected and confident on the stand.
  19. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Thanks Cliff. @13:xx he points out that the plotters wanted us to get bogged down in the minutia. That's where things stand. As an aside, disinformation like the Walker-did-It fabrication is backup plan to derail the solution to the problem, which is a counter coup.
  20. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Here's a little Gerald L.K. Smith to supplement your reading plan.... Basically, the same guys who killed Medgar Evers and all the other Civil Rights victims are the same guys who killed MLK, and in my view are the most likely guys who killed Kennedy. These are radical right wing southerners, of violent and crude disposition. These aren't east coast intellectuals. These are Gerald L.K. Smith disciples.
  21. Oswald mock trial drop box of CLE course materials

    Maybe I don't understand how the mock trial worked. (I didn't watch it.) How would the defense introduce statements made by Roger Craig, for example? Would they allow someone to read his account? If so, how could the prosecutor cross examine Craig? If in some way everything that could have been argued in a real 1964 trial could have been argued in the mock trial, I can't believe the prosecution wouldn't have had a slam dunk. Just think of all the chain-of-evidence problems the prosecution would have to overcome.
  22. The Newly Declassified JFK Files

    Wow, that's really interesting; I didn't know MHCHAOS began with Ramparts. Making RT register with FARA directly parallels what they did to the underground press in the 60s and early 70s, in that they just want to eradicate any alternate model, esp ones that deliver the truth. And those who weren't yet alive during the period of the underground press are so much easier to deceive with ersatz "left" media such as Rachel Maddow.
  23. Sandy and Michael, I should clarify that I have no doubt that the Oswald was a CIA asset of some sort; I am raising the question in a more general sense regarding anyone who has a 201 file. And Sandy, you are right about Angleton and his crew. Richard Bissell directed William Harvey to create ZR/RIFLE, part of which according to Harvey was to "create phony 201" files, in order to create scapegoats. Phony can also mean doctoring existing 201 files. Michael, this along with Egerter's testimony from the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), is covered in detail, for example, in JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 143-146, most of which you can see here (below). She is asked: " ... it seems that the purpose of CI/SIG was very limited and that limited purpose was [sic] being to investigate Agency employees who were for some reason under suspicion." To this she replies "That is correct." Douglas concludes that she was in this way tricked into admitting that Oswald was an employee (since the discussion was about 201s and not about Oswald, she fell into the trap). But my question concerns whether 201s may in fact be opened for reasons other than someone being "suspected one way or another.” https://books.google.com/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA146&lpg=PA146&dq=ann+Egerter+testimony+hsca+oswald&source=bl&ots=1jO79VtQDB&sig=pA3pTsg3Jlje3jENRBRiDy0jnd8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4iuHKg8zXAhWFRCYKHbLlDJcQ6AEIUjAI#v=onepage&q=ann Egerter testimony hsca oswald&f=false This is from Jim D's site, regarding Earle Cabell and his 201 file: https://kennedysandking.com/news-items/what-is-new-in-the-files
  24. A great list, and thanks for the scan of the article which is most revealing.
  25. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    I'm looking into this. I have a mini-CT brewing that Gabaldon lures Oswald to Mexico City in order to be "seen" by Alvarado accepting money at the Cuban Embassy to kill Kennedy. In my view the orchestration of Oswald in Mexico City is entirely inconsistent with anyone planning a Lone Nut explanation for Kennedy's death. Oswald was in Mexico City to help pin the assassination on the commies - but LBJ shuts down any talk of this asap. Morales just might fit in here as Alvarado's controller - but so could Gabaldon. Either way, Morales is operating rogue of the CIA, although obviously he is able to exploit his CIA position in whatever he's up to here, if he's even involved at all in MC Oswald.... J This is exactly what LBJ wanted to hear. Did LBJ order Alvarado's repudiation???
  1. Load more activity