All Activity

JFK's killers had 3 objectives. 1. A plan to murder Kennedy 2. A plan to cover up their involvement and blame someone else. 3.The implementation of the policy changes that were the reason for the murder in the first place. Johnson was indispensable to the last two objectives. All parts of the plan had be be in place before the murder. The murder was too risky and the planners too vulnerable to go ahead without a clear plan to get what they wanted and escape reckoning. Like most such plans alterations had to be made on the fly, but the murder would not have happened without the killers having confidence they could execute each part of the plan. The killers' top priority was that Kennedy must not survive the ambush in Dealey Plaza. If he did they were toast. If you have been to the scene you know how small the murder area in DP is. How simple the shots from several points were for an experienced shooter. Still, near certainty of success required several shooters firing from different locations. But that contradicted the coverup plan they were going with that Kennedy was murdered by a single shooter from the 6th floor window That contradiction had to be resolved and as the new president Johnson was one key in that process. Unlike some other political coups the planners didn't get to choose who would replace Kennedy. The Constitution says it would be Johnson. As the new president he would be in charge of the crucial second and third elements of the plan. As such, he would literally have the success or failure of the whole project in his hands. For that reason alone, the others would need clear assurances from Johnson that he would do the part that he was uniquely suited to carry out. Johnson knew there were others besides himself who wanted to get rid of Kennedy. As a powerful Washington figure in his own right, he had choices. He could turn on the perps, do a real investigation, and become a hero that likely would ensure his reelection in '64. But he understood that way led to chaos for the country, (a coup by elements of the government!) that would probably leave the presidency he had lusted after for years in shambles. It was an easy decision to instead join the planners to help them get rid of Kennedy. But in joining he would insist on certain prerogatives. Early on in the process, e.g., he would insist that there was to be no attack on Cuba. That would surely have risked a war with the Soviets and his presidency would be likely to go up in smoke. There would be those who refused to accept that and would continue planting the links of Oswald to Cuba. But once he became president he quickly squelched them by making his preference officially known. What kind of assurances would the others need from Johnson? I suppose it could be argued that the others knew Johnson and his views well enough to proceed without getting clear assurances from him. That's implausible, to say the least. The murder was too important and the others too vulnerable for that to be enough. Moreover, we know enough about Johnson to conclude he would not sign on as some kind of junior partner. He knew he was crucial to the plan's success and he wanted it to succeed. He would be a major decision maker in the group in certain areas of the plan I discuss. What we know about what Johnson did that weekend, from soon after the murder that afternoon in fact, verifies his role. Top of the coverup agenda: Oswald must be murdered before he could talk to a lawyer. They knew he didn't do it; they could not prove he did in court. Just one example: after talking to him, a lawyer for Oswald would have immediately moved to prevent NBC from hiding the Darnell and Wegman films that could substantiate Oswald's alibi. What happened instead was that without a lawyer there began that afternoon a series of interviews to discern Oswald's alibi so they could immediately begin to destroy elements of it. Besides burying the content of the interviews themselves as much as possible. (they ultimately failed when Hosty kept his notes from the first interview and turned them over to NARA after he wrote a book in the 90s to try to capitalize on the renewed interest in the JFKA) Once Oswald was killed there would be no trial. But there would have to be an investigation. That weekend Johnson squelched an investigation by Waggoner Carr the Texas AG, and the talk in Congress of doing one as well. He would control a federal investigation and he had already worked out exactly what he wanted: a commission to gather information to frame Oswald led by figureheads of the highest regard to sign the report. The Warren Commission was established by Johnson with the 7 figureheads in place one week after the murder. Must be a modern record for such a thing in Washington. Richard Russell had not yet agreed to do it, he was resisting, so Johnson simply announced the names he had chosen, his included, and told him he was on the commission. Naming his likely co-conspirator, Allen Dulles, to the Commission to guide it and particularly to shield the CIA from scrutiny, was the crowning touch. In typical Johnson fashion, he later pathetically claimed appointing Dulles was Bobby's idea (I think that was after Bobby was murdered) to try to shield himself from scrutiny as the one who was pulling the strings; Most laughable of the Johnson misdirections is the phone call you've heard where Joe Alsop tries to convince Johnson to appoint a commission of prominent people to investigate the murder. Johnson plays along and that is one piece of information from that hectic weekend that survives today. Typical misdirection. Johnson knew there would be an investigation. He had already sifted through his long list of Washington denizens to decide who could be trusted to go along with the frame of Oswald But first, the body had to be (illegally) snatched from Dr Rose at the hospital and taken back to DC where the autopsy could be controlled. A real autopsy exploring the actual wounds would have destroyed the Oswald story. Roughly 2 hours passed between when Kennedy was shot and AF1 took off to fly back to DC. Kennedy was pronounced dead, and Johnson became president, a half hour after the shooting. Johnson spent most of another half hour at the hospital before boarding AF1. Despite people all around him on the plane imploring him the take off, (most of them didn't know what happened or how much danger they were in) Johnson spent another hour on the ground to wait for the body to be sent to the plane. His transparent excuse: he had to wait because wanted to be sworn in first, only local judge Sarah Hughes could do the job, and she had to be located and brought to the plane. He knew he already was president and the swearing in ceremony was window dressing for the public. At some point, in the hour and a half after the became president, Johnson ordered the body sent to the plane. When exactly? Jack Valenti was sitting next to Johnson on the plane awaiting takeoff and later recounted that he heard Johnson ordering the body to be transported to him. That's plausible. Or Johnson could have given the order to his security people before heading to the plane and what Valenti heard was Johnson confirming it, or asking what was taking so long. Either could be true; it probably doesn't matter which. Johnson also knew that the autopsy was jurisdictional to Dr. Rose. That didn't matter. He knew control of the body was crucial to the success of the coverup and it was his job to ensure a fake autopsy. That leaves, as the final piece, Johnson's assurance to the others that he would carry out at least some of the policies they wanted. Kennedy had publicly challenged them by rejecting a "Pax Americano enforced by American weapons of war". If Johnson agreed with Kennedy's foreign policies, a major reason for the murder would be lost. Johnson didn't agree, particularly with Kennedy's plan to withdraw from Vietnam. He later told McNamara that he had disagreed with Kennedy on Vietnam but kept his mouth shut. There would be no war with the Soviets, Johnson decreed, but they could have their war in Vietnam. Indeed a draft of NSAM 273 on Vietnam reflecting Johnson's views and reversing essential parts of Kennedy's NSAM 263 had already been prepared before Kennedy was murdered. Johnson signed the new policy four days after the murder, one day after Kennedy was buried. That clearly would be Washington record for a reversal of a major policy that had been painstakingly worked out by Kennedy over many months, were it not for the fact that subbing 273 was part of the premurder plan. This is more evidence of Johnson's hand in the plan before the murder.

Why would it be expected that Ivy League adventurers born with a silver spoon in their mouths would be competent at covert and paramilitary operations? I think Barnes was the only one that had any military experience in WW2.

He’s protecting our democracy. Do you want fascism or something? /sarc

Biden just signed the bill that would ban Tiktok

A Black Progressive Democrat scores big. How Rep. Summer Lee Cruised to Victory (theintercept.com)

Hilarious. Horne's history is one of taking inconsistencies in the record and spinning them into the wildest tale possible. I urge you to do the research. What did Tom Robinson tell the HSCA? That he recalled a small wound on Kennedy's temple. What did Tom Robinson tell the ARRB? That there were two or three tiny wounds on Kennedy's cheek. What did Doug Horne take from his statements? That there was a bullet hole high on the forehead above the right eye. What did James Jenkins say? That he recalled seeing a gray smear on the skull above the right ear. What did he come to claim later? That he saw a bullet hole above the right ear. What did Horne claim in JFK: What the Doctors saw Jenkins REALLY saw? A bullet hole high on the forehead above the right eye. What did Ed Reed say? He and Custer took the x-rays, developed them, brought them back to the morgue, sat down for twenty minutes, saw Humes start cutting on Kennedy to remove the brain, was asked to leave as his services were no longer required, and never returned to the autopsy. What did Horne take from his statements? That he came in to take the x-rays and sat down, saw Humes cutting on Kennedy to remove bones from the top of the head to phony up the x-rays, was asked to leave, and was asked to return after 20 minutes to take the phony x-rays. The statements of Robinson and Reed are the pillars of Horne's theory. And yet he grossly misrepresents their statements to conjure up this theory. Now, as you know, he has few if any supporters among the upper echelon of researchers within the "community." That doesn't mean he 's wrong. But it's saying something that he has spent dozens if not hundreds of hours with Mantik in which he undoubtedly pushed. a theory holding that the largest recovered bone fragment was removed by Humes at Bethesda, and that Mantik would never embrace this, telling you, a few years back that the fragment was missing at Parkland but the hole was covered by scalp, and telling his audience in 2021, that this is pretty much what Humes saw when he first saw Kennedy's head. Now, as a refresher, here is what Horne claims Humes saw, prior to his alteration of the body... Now I'm guessing you're siding with Horne. But Horne, in case you haven't noticed, is by far the most slanderous researcher of all. Virtually everyone interviewed by the ARRB, in Horne's eyes, was a coward or a liar. Heck, he claims Tom Robison, his star witness, was involved in the clandestine delivery of JFK's body at Parkland an hour and a half before its official arrival.

Roselli had already been before the HSCA. He had been recalled for further testimony. Is there anything in the testimony he did provide that would give a clue to his untimely demise? Assuming a 55 gallon drum weighing 30 pounds containing a 200 pound man so that the bloating of the body expands its volume to entirely fill the drum and displace all water results in a drum density of 31 lbs/cubic foot. This results in a net buoyant force of about 240 pounds in saltwater. For a 42 gallon drum weighing 25 pounds, the resulting drum density is 40 lbs/cubic foot. In that case, the buoyant force would be about 133 pounds. So it would depend on the weight of the chains as well as the drum size. The above results are an upper limit on the buoyant forces because 1) the body was dismembered and decomposing gases would escape the body and the barrel and 2) it would require the body having an initial volume of 24 gallons to expand by bloating to fill the barrel by a factor of at least 1.75. So it’s not impossible that the barrel could rise to the surface but more specific info on Roselli’s weight, the barrel used and the weight of chain ballast used would give a more precise estimate. The big question is how much of the decomposition gases would escape the dismembered body. The above was done without writing anything down on paper which is always error-prone but the numbers look reasonable.

Jackie Kennedy’s cartoons from the 1960 campaign show a cartoon of Lone Star “Texans” Lyndon Johnson and Sam Rayburn shaking hands with JFK. The big Texan LBJ is squeezing a tiny frail JFK’s hand to the point that it hurts: https://robertmorrowpoliticalresearchblog.blogspot.com/2024/01/jackie-kennedy-knew-all-about-lyndon.html Daily Beast article on Jackie’s 1960 campaign cartoons: https://www.thedailybeast.com/jackie-kennedys-jfk-cartoons-1 (7th cartoon down is Jackie’s cartoon of how LBJ and Sam Rayburn treated JFK at the 1960 Democratic convention. Notice how LBJ is crushing the hand of a noticeable smaller and diminished and pained John Kennedy.) That is a pretty good summary of how LBJ “strongarmed” his way onto the 1960 Democratic ticket. The JFK-LBJ ticket was seemingly an act of friendship but in reality an act of hostility and one of the parties was “forced” to go along with it. No wonder the JFK-LBJ relations were so rancid during JFK’s presidency. No wonder Robert Kennedy was out to utterly destroy Lyndon Johnson in the fall of 1963! (I wonder how LBJ would feel about that?)

One of my favorite stories about John Kennedy is told by famous author Lawrence Wright whose father in 1950 was a local banker in Ponca City, Oklahoma and he was also the head of the local Chamber of Commerce. Lawrence Wright's father was asked to arrange a speech for Congressman Kennedy and when he talked with JFK's advance people he was told that Cong. Kennedy required that services of a prostitute for his trip to Ponca City, OK. Even though JFK was not married in 1950, this is exactly how he behaved his entire adult life up until the moment of his death. The night before JFK's death, on 11-21-1963, he invited his friend Pam Am stewardess Layte Bowden Dopp (Florida State Univ. Homecoming Queen, 1956) up to his suite at the Hotel Texas and she did not go because she assumed Kennedy would make a sexual advance on her. JFK and Jackie were sleeping in different rooms. You can read this in Layte's memoirs Under the Radar in Camelot. Read the accounts of Evelyn Lincoln, Hy Raskin and Pierre Salinger and one can figure out how Lyndon Johnson was able to strong arm his way onto the 1960 Democratic presidential ticket: SEXUAL BLACKMAIL, threats to embarrass JFK in an election where JFK was already that his rampant womanizing would become a political issue. JFK wrote on a piece of paper that year "I got into the blondes" and he expected to be "hit with something" as the campaign progressed. LBJ and Sam Rayburn could have used any number of JFK's trysts to embarrass Kennedy, but I think the one they honed in on was the JFK-Pamela Turnure affair which Florence Kater had spread far and wide to the media that was not yet reporting on it. The wife of CIA William King Harvey, who hated JFK's guts, said that John Kennedy required the services of TWO PROSTITUTES when he traveled to Rome. There is a video of Mrs. William King Harvey saying this. What does this all add up to? John Kennedy was an 1) unhinged 2) hyper-promiscuous 3) compromised 4) reckless rampaging adulterer and it bit him in the fanny when he was shamefully forced to put Lyndon Johnson on the 1960 Democratic ticket as VP. LBJ forced/strongarmed his way onto the ticket because he knew the Kennedys, if elected, would immediately have him removed as Senate Democratic Majority Leader. JFK later said no one will ever know how LBJ got onto the ticket and that is a good thing: because the truth about is a humiliation of John Kennedy and it shows his weakness in crumbling to bully LBJ as well as his poor character. Putting LBJ on the ticket was a fatal mistake by JFK and it directly led to his assassination. Lawrence Wright: https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/1988/november/was-dallas-a-city-of-hate/ QUOTE Daddy had his own dark thoughts about Kennedy. As a younger man he had had political ambitions of his own. Like Kennedy, he was a war hero; like Kennedy, he hoped to trade his wartime glory for public office. Kennedy was a young congressman from Massachusetts when my father made arrangements for him to speak in Oklahoma, at the Ponca City Chamber of Commerce, which my father chaired. Clearly there were advantages in an alliance between my father and this young political star. My father was expected to supply whatever the congressman needed, and what he needed was an ample and varied supply of Oklahoma women-no, not dinner dates, my father was instructed, just sexual companions. It was the moment my father’s own political aspirations died. He saw then the secret appetites of the public man, and he understood how his own appetite for power might lead him to violate his vows to God. He did not even go to hear Kennedy speak. UNQUOTE [“Was Dallas A City of Hate?” Lawrence Wright, D Magazine, 11-01-1988] Lawrence Wright wrote that in 1988 and in 2013 in Dallas he told the exact same story at a symposium on the JFK assassination in Dallas. You can find it at the 21-minute mark here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB_J0j2RYdg

I don't buy Starbucks lattes. I have never bought anything at Starbucks. I'm just a poor old fart. $79.95? I guess I can keep on the way I am. The Starbucks customers can pay the fees.

So, what is this bargain price? I don't have money to throw around. How much do I need to pay in order to play?

According to one of the members of the Warren Commission, Sen. Russell, a majority--four out of the seven--of the Warren Commission privately disagreed with their own unanimous conclusion that Oswald acted alone, and would have found differently if it had been up to them. ("I have never believed that Oswald planned that altogether by himself ... I'm not completely satisfied in my own mind that he did plan and commit this act altogether on his own, without consultation with anyone else. And that's what a majority of the Commission wanted to find", Sen. Russell [https://archive.org/details/senator-richard-russell-and-the-great-american-murder-mystery.) That's like if there was a Supreme Court decision 9-0, which 5 of the Justices say they personally believed was unconstitutional and would have found differently if it had been up to them.

Richard, Bill may have inadvertently sent you a link that is still in "review" and has not been copied over to the public access file. The MF site is not free to run. Expenses include software, database licenses, hardware, network equipment, scanning all the docs, etc. Plus Rex's time. It's a bargain for sure!

Seriously. An MFF subscription is a must for anyone doing actual JFK research. The annual fee is indeed worth it many times over. It sounds like Richard needs a Pro membership to enable .pdf downloads through. That is a bit more expensive - coming out to the extravagant price of $79.95 per year. That’s less than $7 a month - literally the same as a single Starbucks latte. I’m not exactly swimming in dough either but c’mon guys. How much time does the average JFK nut spend studying the case? This isn’t exactly a casual hobby if you want to actually learn anything. Kinda funny side note though. I think the “designed by sadists” comment is ludicrous - from a pricing and web design perspective MFF is freaking phenomenal - but the actual monthly price of a pro membership comes out to $6.66.

'Republicans must step in!' Trump begs for help with legal troubles in frantic 2 a.m. rant by Travis Gettys April 24, 2024 Donald Trump begged Republicans to step in and help him wriggle out of his legal troubles in a middle-of-the-night rant Wednesday. “New York Justice is in shambles, and only the Appellate Courts can save it." “"A Republican doesn’t stand a chance," Trump raged in his overnight post. "This is not Justice." "This New York Cabal, run by Crooked Joe Biden’s White House, is a hit job on a Political Opponent the likes of which the USA has never seen before," Trump added. "For the Good of our Country, it must be stopped. The Crooked Joe Biden Witch Hunts have to be ended. REPUBLICANS IN WASHINGTON MUST TAKE ACTION!" Steve Thomas

https://mccrindle.com.au/article/topic/generation-alpha/generation-alpha-defined/ Understanding Generation Alpha There is a growing generation that few people have heard of. Within the next few years they will outnumber the Baby Boomers, and many of them will live to see the 22nd Century. We’re talking about Generation Alpha, the children of Generation Y, and often the younger siblings of Generation Z. Simply put, Generation Alpha are defined as those born from 2010-2024. More than 2.8 million are born globally every week. When they have all been born (2025) they will number almost 2 billion – the largest generation in the history of the world. Who are Generation Alpha? While they are the youngest generation, they have brand influence and purchasing power beyond their years. They shape the social media landscape, are the popular culture influencers, the emerging consumers and by the end of the 2020’s will be moving into adulthood, the workforce and household formation, ready or not. The most materially endowed generation ever Gen Alpha are the most materially endowed generation ever, the most technologically savvy generation ever and they will enjoy a longer life span than any previous generation. They will stay in education longer, start their earning years later and stay at home with their parents later than even their predecessors, Gen Z and Gen Y. The role of parents therefore will span a longer age range – with many of these Gen Alphas likely to be still living at home into their late 20’s. The great screen-age This newest generation are part of an unintentional global experiment where screens are placed in front of them from the youngest age as pacifiers, entertainers and educational aids. This great screen age in which we are all living has bigger impacts on the generation exposed to such screen saturation during their formative years. From shorter attention spans to the gamification of education, from increased digital literacy to impaired social formation, these times impact us all but transform those in their formative years. Generation Alpha began being born in 2010, the year the iPad was launched, Instagram was created, and App was the word of the year- and so from their earliest years, they have been screenagers. How will Generation Alpha learn? With the increase in screen and technology, there’s no doubt that Generation Alpha will feel this influence in their schooling. For many, their childhood likely involved doing things that were new experiences, like taking piano lessons, playing sports with friends or reading books. These experiences helped shape them because they were engaging and gave opportunities to learn. While this is likely to happen still, the way Gen Alpha learn involves technology and has become more advanced and accessible through devices such as smartphones and tablets. This is already a trend among their forerunners, Gen Z, with TikTok (42%) the third most engaged with platform by students to teach themselves new skills, coming in above parents (39%). More people than ever, especially the emerging generations have access to information about anything with the rise of the internet. Generation Alpha's economic footprint By 2029, when the oldest Generation Alphas enter into adulthood and the youngest Generation Alphas reach the age of five, their economic footprint will reach more than US$5.46 trillion. This means that organizations today should be thinking about the future consumer in Generation Alpha. Why did we name them Generation Alpha? Just over a decade ago, when I was researching my first book The ABC of XYZ: Understanding the Global Generations, it became apparent that a new generation was about to commence and there was no name for them. This was just after the Atlantic hurricane season of 2005, when there were so many storms that the normal alphabetic names had been used up and so for the first time, the Greek alphabet was used. Generational definitions are most useful when they span a set age range and so allow meaningful comparisons across generations. That is why the generations today each span 15 years with Generation Y (Millennials) born from 1980 to 1994; Generation Z from 1995 to 2009 and Generation Alpha from 2010 to 2024. And so it follows that Generation Beta will be born from 2025 to 2039. Steve Thomas

Given Pat's history of slandering both witnesses and researchers, and Doug Horne's history of carefully studying a situation and then providing an analysis that makes a great deal of sense... I think it would be wise for the reader to take Pat's paraphrase of Horne's analysis with a grain of salt and to reserve judgement till after reading Horne's actual analysis.

That sounds about right. Mr. Brown makes up a lot of things, like Tippit was killed at 1:17. Lone Nut supporters have to make up things because the evidence doesn't add up. They're left with "filling in the holes" with opinion, speculation, conjecture and what they call, "common sense". Their speculations and wild guesses only serve to raise more questions, questions they can't answer. For example, Mr. Brown puts Helen Markham on the corner witnessing a murder at 1:17, when she should be on her 1:15 bus. Mr. Brown suggests that Tippit was shot at or after 1:15 and killed instantly. If that's true, how did a doctor at Methodist Hospital know the exact minute he was killed ? Not even a coroner can tell you the exact minute a victim was killed. He can narrow it down to a timeframe, but he can't tell you the exact minute. There is corroborating evidence that Tippit was killed before 1:15. There's corrborating evidence that documents were altered by the FBI to show Tippit was pronounced dead at 1:25 instead of 1:15. Mr. Brown and his allies choose to ignore this evidence. Lone Nutters grab on to one piece of evidence and the hang onto it like their lives depended on it. They do it with the dictabelt. They do it with the "backyard photographs". They do it with the Tippit shells. They claim Oswald received the murder weapons, but can't tell us on what date he received them or who in the Post Office and REA Express office handed him those weapons. They can't tell us how Oswald allegedly ordered a 36" troop special and got a 40" short rifle in its stead. They can't tell us why the shells found at the Tippit murder scene don't match the bullets removed from his body. They can't tell us how Oswald purchased a postal money order and mailed it in an envelope that was post-marked at a time when his work sheets proved he was at work. They can't tell us why the only stamp on the money order is a stamp for deposit and why there are no stamps indicating that payment was made on that money order. They can't tell us why the "fillers' in the police lineups in no way resembled the descriptions of the witnesses to the Tippit murder. They can't tell us why Oswald was not allowed to see his family until Saturday. They can't tell us why Oswald was not allowed to use a phone until Saturday afternoon. They can't tell us why the back of head autopsy photo shows the scalp intact, when the autopsy report notes that there was a hole that extended into the "occipital region" where there was an "absence of scalp". ( 16 H 980 ) And there are plenty more. They can't explain the gaps in the chain of custody for much of the evidence. You'll notice, as I do, that 90% of what these Lone Nutters post is comments. They can speculate, but they can't provide the proof to back it up.

I know that's what Horne wants us to believe...but how do you remove a hole by cutting into it? As detailed in Jim D's last book Stone asked Horne this very question, and was given some rigamarole. The bone Horne claims was cut off the head contained no bullet hole, and was inches away from were they claim the bullet entered. So why was no hole in this location observed by those viewing the body at Parkland? Or Bethesda? Or shown on the photos? Or on the A-P x-ray? There was no bullet hole there. This whole hole thing got drummed up when Mantik took Robinson's recollection of a small wound on the cheek and started claiming he saw a bullet hole on the forehead. Robinson was asked about this by the ARRB and said it was two or three small wounds on the cheek.And yet here we are 25 years later with Mantik and Horne still claiming Robinson said he saw a hole on the forehead.

I don’t mind paying the nominal, reasonable, annual charge to the MFF to have full access to all the riches there, the go-to site above all others for documents and resources. And MFF does not restrict any content from free access reading online although if you use up your quota of free access at one day or time you may have to wait a few hours but you can still see it. (Compare that to the atrocious world of academic publishing where—I am not making this up—electronic downloads of scholarly published articles of 2-20 pages are typically now costing $30-$40 per download apiece. And the author who did the hard work of the research and writing it up does not get any of that, it all goes to the middleman, the toll-gate collector for profit, the academic publishing house. And approximately 100% of scholarly authors write in order to have readers able to read what they write, ie open access, would prefer readers were not prevented from accessing the published fruits of their research by these outrageous costs to access for any not conveniently located in proximity to and have privileges at one of the major university research libraries. Of course the academic publishers feel boxed in with no other way to recover their costs and make a profit than by toll-gate collecting off the research/creative work of the producers of these scholarly articles which (some of them anyway) advance the world’s knowledge.) By contrast, the Mary Ferrell Foundation nominal annual fee is a complete bargain, a no-brainer, worth it many times over.

I agree with Peter Dale Scott on that. The plotters' hoped that Johnson would decide to invade Cuba in retaliation for the assassination. (Or even a first nuclear strike against the Soviet Union, at a time when it was thought that America would prevail.) This is Phase 1. But if Johnson chose to reject the Cuban/Soviet evidence, the plotters wanted to make sure that the Johnson Administration could blame it on Oswald alone. The reason being so the investigation would focus on Oswald and not on identifying the real plotters (CIA elements). For that purpose, the plotters made arrangements in advance to alter photos and films as necessary and as possible, and to control the autopsy. All so that the evidence would indicate gunshots only from the rear. That explains how the medical and photographic coverup could be done as quickly as it was! (I used to believe that this was a part of the LBJ/FBI coverup, rather than part of the plotters' plan. But that idea made no sense because the LBJ administration couldn't possibly have acted so fast.)

Rafael Cruz did work along the motorcade route...for IBM, I think. After the assassination, he fled to Canada.

If you look at the JFK autopsy photo you can see a hole above the right ear, where an area of scalp has been pulled back from the head. This would be James Jenkins’ hole, which roughly corresponds to the WC exit (although without the blowout), which is where I place the AR-15 exit. It didn’t create a blowout because there was already a blowout at the back of the head from the first TSBD shot (forehead entry), and all the energy dissipated out through that, creating a “halo” of blood and brain tissue.

And you come across as a sensationalist. You're like a walking, talking National Enquirer, IMO. I think that Jim D. must have you on Ignore, given that he doesn't respond to your ridiculous charges.