All Activity

I think the open section in the window https://youtu.be/CpFPJ-hjVZ8?si=Y8u2S2MHC4qY6PhR Above is just an example from youtube (I have nothing to do with comments on/in it)

Houston Chronicle April 26, 2024 ALL HELD IN AUSTIN PROTEST RELEASED All of the demonstrators arrested Wednesday at a pro-Palestinian protest on the University of Texas at Austin campus have had their [misdemeanor criminal trespass] charges dropped, officials and lawyers said. That included a cameraman with FOX 7 Austin who was arrested after appearing to have tripped and fallen onto a group of state troopers.

Christian, can you orient us as to what we're looking at? Thank you.

Very early on there was evidence pointing to Oswald as the perp. There was also evidence pointing to Cuba and Russia (as well as Oswald) as the perps. Johnson didn't want anything to do with the conspiracy angle that would lead to international consequences... like war. After all, Hoover said that the evidence for the conspiracy was far from solid. So Johnson did the easy thing and chose to accept the lone gunman evidence. Later he would discover that the lone gunman solution wasn't so great after all... because it wasn't correct. Which meant that the FBI and WC had to lie there heads off to make it all work out.

There is this page from 1976, HSCA, about their chats with the Tarasoffs. Tarasoff says elsewhere in this document that he was never asked about the Oswald conversations again. The clear sense is, without it being explicit, that the Mexico City office DID know the identity of the 1st caller before the assassination. Presumably this would mean that they knew in early October that Oswald had been at the Cuban consulate. But the transcripts we have don't quite match up to the memories of the Tarasoffs.

Oops, I should have read more carefully. You do see the problem. Well, then, my prior post is for other people reading the thread.

Do we know what is the first CIA document which states/realizes that Oswald had been to cuban consulate and CIA hq realize "Oh crap, Oswald was at the cuban consulate too in Mexico City"? The above document i linked to above gives no appearance of surprise that Oswald had been to the cuban consulate too, and that he had actually made a phonecall from there to the soviet embassy on the Saturday. On the Friday, after Oswald had come back from the soviet embassy to the cuban embassy, Silvia Duran phoned the soviet embassy to discuss the guy she had just sent over to them. This would appear to set up quiet a history of this guy Oswald going back and forth from the cuban to the soviet embassy for the telephone surveillance crew.

JD: Roger: in your last sentence, the first part is accurate. Alsop did have a very strong part in convincing LBJ to form the Warren Commission, and that is clearly documented by Donald GIbson in his milestone essay in the book The Assassinations. RO: I, and others, have listened to a tape of the Alsop phone call secretly recorded by Johnson. There's no need for its existence to be "documented" by Gibson or anyone else. I'm going to assume you accept the idea that the purpose of the WC, as shown by what it did, was not to uncover the truth of what happened but to conceal it. To cover up the role of the killers and blame someone else. Once Oswald was murdered, eliminating a trial, there was going to have to be an official investigation of the murder. When did this simple idea get turned into a vehicle for covering up the murder framing Oswald? And by whom? Was that Alsop's purpose in suggesting the idea to Johnson? Was he part of the coverup? No? Was does it mean to you that within one week after the murder Johnson announced the WC and named 6 figureheads and Allen Dulles to run it? And that the WC was staffed by lawyers--and no investigators worthy of the name--to selectively sift through the evidence, and lie about things when necessary, to build a blatantly false case against Oswald? Doesn't that indicate the idea for an investigation had already been turned into that nefarious a vehicle? Have you read Salandria's indictment of this process in his false mystery speech in '98? The WC was Johnson's creation. Who was responsible for turning it into a vehicle to frame Oswald, if not him?, That's the important question, not whose idea the WC was in the first place. Though I don't believe it for a minute I could almost accept that the WC was not originally Johnson's idea. That he was some kind of empty vessel that had to be convinced by Alsop. Almost. But It's clear to me that just as the murder required a coverup plan to be in place before the shots were fired, essential parts of that coverup were the murder of Oswald before he could talk to a lawyer and the creation of an official investigation to hide what happened and blame Oswald. The planners must have considered what that investigation would be before themurder. The existence of the Alsop call proves nothing. We know about it because Johnson wanted us to know. He wanted you to believe creating the commission that framed Oswald was someone else's idea. Similarly, we don't know about some of the other things Johnson said and did that weekend. Or anything about what Dulles was doing at the CIA hideout in Virginia. JD: The last part is in all likliehood not true. I think that after the fact LBJ realized what a joke it was to put Dulles on that Commission and he felt the need to blame someone he despised. RO: It's certainly false, but not for the reason you offer. Appointing Dulles was not a joke. It was necessary to conceal the CIA from scrutiny and keep the investigators focused on their job. Dulles was the only commissioner without a full time job. Claiming the appointment was Bobby's idea was one of the last pathetic ploys of an old man to try to protect his reputation and throw off anyone sniffing around his culpability. Btw, I have developed some of the points here more fully in the the thread I started, Why LBJ was an essential participant in the plan the murder Kennedy. I sense you may disagree with at least some of it. If so, I would appreciate reading your comments.

Okay, but that doesn't tell us anything relevant to the topic of this thread. Because it is dated after the assassination. On October 9, the clandestine telephone intercept teams reported that Lee Oswald had visited the Russian Embassy at the end of September. But they didn't say a word about him visiting the Cuban Consulate. The question is, why? The answer is because the person talking on the phone only used the name Oswald in one call. And that was a a call to the Soviet Embassy. In the call, "Oswald" said that he had been to the Soviet Embassy earlier. That's how the telephone intercept team knew that Oswald had been to the Soviet Embassy. But there was no way of knowing he had also been to the Cuban Consulate.

Douglas Feinglass is Boris Tarasoff, and the present tense is used as if Tarasoff had just recently been asked.

I still haven't seen a single image you've posted. You should consider using this free image hosting website. I've been using it for years with no problem: https://imgbb.com/

The below Nov 23rd 1963 document says the person doing the transcribing knew that the person who phoned the soviet embassy on Oct 1st speaking broken russian was the same person who had phoned the soviet embassy on Sept 28th from the cuban embassy speaking broken russian. Therefore the transcriptionist knew Oswald had been to the cuban embassy. Now, when the transcriptionist knew this is not clear. Did they know this at the time they made the transcription or is this something they figured out on Nov 23rd when listening back to the audio tape (an audio tape that was supposed to have been destroyed)? LINK: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=44666#relPageId=4

You are telling me nothing I do not know. Judge the credibility of Jim Marrs and Sen. Ralph Yarborough however you wish.

Zionism's Expired Shelf-Life: Why Naomi Klein is right that it has become Pharaoh (juancole.com)

Makes sense to me. Use the mole to send disinformation.

Aaron Sorkin on January 6 Movie Focused on Facebook (mediaite.com)

Simple question - if Angleton suspected someone of being a Soviet mole, would he necessarily expose him? Wouldn’t it have been more clever of Angleton to leave him in place?

How did the smell of gunfire reach the street against the direction of a 20 mile per hour wind when no one on the north side of Elm St. smelled it? Why isn’t Gordon Arnold visible in the Willis photo that displays the figure of what has been labelled “Black Dog Man”? Why didn’t Lee Bowers describe the men he saw behind the fence as wearing a police uniform and a construction helmet as proclaimed in the Badgeman theory? How did no one notice the assassin in a police uniform emerge from behind the fence, already broken down in tears, encounter Gordon Arnold on the ground, kick him, demand he remove the film from his camera and then retreat behind the fence? Wouldn’t this conspicuous act defeat the purpose of being disguised as a policeman, especially when he should have been focused on discretely escaping? What Yarborough most likely saw was others on the north side of Elm falling to the ground and it was twisted into the account presented in TMWKK.

I think Oswald was working for the Soviets, and that's why the plotters were cool with setting him up and murdering him. He was just a dirty Red.

Spying for the Soviets? That's odd. I think he was spying ON the Soviets when he was living there. I think Oswald was working for the CIA. And that's how the plotters were able to get him working in the right building at the right time to perform his unwitting duty as patsy.

I think so, too. I don't think Oswald was sent to the Soviet Union as part of a mole hunt, even if some very respectable researches disagree. I think Oswald was spying for the Soviets before he went to the Soviet Union.

I think that all this mole stuff regarding Oswald is manufactured.

There was an investigation involving Boris Tarasoff identifying that caller with an earlier caller, but I don't know when the Mexico City station knew that the callers had been identified as the same person. I don't know whether that was before or after the assassination. But even if that had been known before the assassination, it seems to me that the big news would be that this US citizen had been talking to the Soviets, and maybe that would be all that would be reported to Langley. Anybody talking to the Soviets could be involved with the Cubans, too, and I think any CIA analyst would understand that. I don't have my head around all of the issues raised by Simpich. I might not be smart enough to understand it all. But this seems to me to be a manufactured problem. It does not seem clear at all that Oswald's Cuban interests were being hidden in CIA communications.

It is the word of Ralph Yarborough relayed through Jim Marrs.

You are right. The name Lee Oswald was mentioned in just one telephone call. So the embassy/consulate surveillance crews were aware of only what was said in that one call. And what he said was that he had been to the Soviet Embassy earlier and had spoken to someone there. The person making that call did not say a thing about the Cuban Consulate. Therefore, the only thing the telephone surveillance crews knew was that "Oswald" had been to the Soviet Embassy.