Was Lansdale in Dealey Plaza?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Taylor also had a ring.

Taylor also had a stooped right shoulder.

And Taylor also Had an Alibi.

There is ample evidence that Taylor was not in Dallas that day

[Greg Burnham]

I knew Fletcher Prouty very well. He did not say "things" in order to draw attention to himself. He did not "make things up" for the hell of it! Why would he? What possible motivation could he have had to do such a thing? General Victor Krulak had NO reason whatsoever to identify Lansdale in Dealey Plaza! NONE...unless it was true. My close friend, Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

The idiotic claim that "facial features" are the ONLY definitive determinant in photo-identification is absurd. I can recognize, from a distance, MANY people THAT I KNOW INTIMATELY--and from "behind" without a facial view. I would also gain a very marked advantage if I had the luxury of scrutinizing such in a STILL PHOTO! Both Prouty and Krulak were afforded such an opportunity.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

My close friend, Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

Let me tell you that your CLOSE FRIEND Gerry Hemming was NEVER KNOWN for his devotion to the TRUTH.

The idiotic claim that "facial features" are ONLY definitive determinant in photo-identification is absurd.

In your case that is true. Your fat ass is the giveaway.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

So we have 1) Prouty 2) Krulak who once had Lansdale fired and 3) Gerry Patrick Hemming ALL identifying Edward Lansdale in a photo taken of him on the sidewalk just 5 feet west of Texas School Book Depository. From other photos, based on Lansdale's rectangular head, it seems to me that it is Edward Lansdale at TSBD, probably supervising the murder of John Kennedy. I think that is a reasonable assumption to make.

In fact, when I show this photo to non-JFK assassination researchers, almost all of them say it seems to look like Edward Lansdale. Amazing!

[Greg Burnham]

My close friend, Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

Let me tell you that your CLOSE FRIEND Gerry Hemming was NEVER KNOWN for his devotion to the TRUTH.

The idiotic claim that "facial features" are ONLY definitive determinant in photo-identification is absurd.

In your case that is true. Your fat ass is the giveaway.

I beg your pardon? I'm 53 years old. This picture of me and my wife was taken in November of 2009 (8 months ago) in Puerta Vallarta. Do you really want to argue who has a fat ass?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

Nice photo of you and your lovely wife, God Bless her.

But it does not make Hemming A CREDIBLE PERSON. Sorry Old Sport.

[Greg Burnham]

Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

Nice photo of you and your lovely wife, God Bless her.

But it does not make Hemming A CREDIBLE PERSON. Sorry Old Sport.

But, it does make you a fat ass...

[J. Raymond Carroll]

But, it does make you a fat ass...

WRONG AGAIN, AND ANOTHER false assumption on your part. My ass, as it happens is proportionate to my very fine anatomy. But what do you know anyway.

The question under discussion is the identity of JFK's assassins. As your latest responses demonstrate, this is a subject you know little about, and care less.

So Begone Satan! You have nothing to contribute!

Edited August 1, 2010 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Ron Ecker]

There is ample evidence that Taylor was not in Dallas that day

All the evidence I know of consists of statements in books recounting the official story. IMO nothing in government official stories constitutes evidence. The official story here is contradicted by McNamara himself about when he first spoke to Taylor. (According to McNamara, neither Taylor nor anyone else in the Pentagon told him that JFK had been shot, and neither Taylor nor anyone else in the Pentagon subsequently told him that JFK was dead. The Secretary of Defense got all his information via phone calls from Robert Kennedy. Strange, isn't it, that McNamara was kept completely in the dark by his subordinates, including Krulak who by his own account was there in the building. As for a JCS meeting there with West Germans, we know that Curtis LeMay, for one, didn't see fit to attend.)

The man walking past the tramps could be Lansdale, Taylor, or someone else. It looks more like Taylor than Lansdale to me, so I still wonder why Prouty and Krulak who knew them both, would zero in so certainly on Lansdale, while wondering aloud what he would be doing there. I don't dismiss the possibility that they were protecting Maxwell Taylor. But that's all it is, a possibility.

I will add that long after the assassination, Taylor on two occasions became emotionally overcome when the subject arose in conversation. That doesn't sound to me like an Army general who knew and worked with JFK. It sounds like a man weighed down with guilt, having participated in JFK's murder. But again, it's only a possibility.

[Greg Wagner]

When I consider the identifying of Lansdale in the Tramps photo by Prouty and Krulak, I think about the people that I see regularly in my workplace. If I were provided such a photo (same angle, distance, quality, etc.) of one of those individuals, I don't think I'd have any trouble making a positive ID. Prouty and Krulak seem quite confident in their identification of Lansdale in that photo, so I think the two most likely possibilities are that it is in fact Lansdale or it's not Lansdale but they're trying to implicate him for some reason (to sell Prouty's books, to divert attention if it's actually Taylor, etc.). So I believe it is a question of their credibility and motivation and I do not know enough about Prouty or Krulak to venture an opinion on that. If they knew Lansdale as well as it seems they did, then I think the least likely scenario, which I think would be most unlikely, is that they just got the ID wrong.

Edited August 1, 2010 by Greg Wagner

[Ron Ecker]

I'm reminded of Jim Root's contention that McCloy was a conspirator who wrote a letter, for the record, to General Walker that had little to do with the actual content of the letter. The letter was meant to serve another purpose. It's possible that the same thing was done in the correspondence, for the record, between Prouty and Krulak. They could have been preemptively distracting attention from Taylor by fingering Lansdale (who was known to be in Texas or thereabouts on 11/22). We'll never know, of course. All these people are dead.

I don't doubt that Lansdale was in Dallas. But if Dallas was a military coup, it makes sense that Taylor would also want to be as close to the scene as possible to help call the shots (no pun intended). It is apparent from the fact that almost the entire Cabinet was manipulated onto a plane over the Pacific Ocean that day (with the other most important Cabinet member, McNamara, kept completely in the dark at his own work place) that the conspirators were fully prepared to implement an overt overthrow of the government if necessary. No phone calls from the front to DC first for advice.

There should be someone still alive who worked at the Pentagon on 11/22/63 and would know if Taylor was there. I tried to research the whereabouts of other members of the JCS besides Taylor and LeMay that day, and could come up with nothing. For example, Marine General Shoup's autobiography was no help at all. So I guess the notion that Taylor was photographed in Dealey Plaza must remain only an hypothesis.

[Greg Burnham]

So we have 1) Prouty 2) Krulak who once had Lansdale fired and 3) Gerry Patrick Hemming ALL identifying Edward Lansdale in a photo taken of him on the sidewalk just 5 feet west of Texas School Book Depository. From other photos, based on Lansdale's rectangular head, it seems to me that it is Edward Lansdale at TSBD, probably supervising the murder of John Kennedy. I think that is a reasonable assumption to make.

In fact, when I show this photo to non-JFK assassination researchers, almost all of them say it seems to look like Edward Lansdale. Amazing!

Just for clarity, I didn't say that Hemming identified Lansdale from the photo in Dealey Plaza. I said that Gerry did not originally believe that Krulak had identified Lansdale from the photograph. He was adamant that it wasn't true. I sent Gerry copies of Krulak's letter in which he (Krulak) says: "It's Lansdale...etc." Then, he conceded the point that Krulak had, in fact, made the identification. However, Gerry also respected Krulak immensely and in no way could Gerry imagine that Krulak would have made that claim if he wasn't absolutely positive.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Ron Ecker - the key point about Lansdale is that he was MORE CIA THAN MILITARY. Read Fletcher Prouty - you will learn Allen Dulles of CIA made a point of seeding CIA agents all through government - Lansdale would be a prime example. Ditto Jesse Ventura's experience in Minnesota. He got elected governor and the next thing he knew he was sitting downstairs in the state capital talking to a bunch of CIA guys who would not tell him who they were. The CIA seeds people in state governments all over the USA.

Another example would be Bill Clinton as governor of Arkansas. He was a CIA asset since 1968 as a college student informing on his anti-war buddies. Then as governor he writes letters to make sure his favorite Arkansas state trooper L.D. Brown got placed into the CIA.

See how it works now? I am sure there are a 1,000 more examples.

So Lansdale was probably doing the CIA's work in Dallas, not necessarily the military's. Having said that I think elements of US military were certainly involved in JFK assassination.

[Peter McGuire]

Gerry Patrick Hemming (no matter what you think of him) didn't want to believe that Krulak identified Lansdale either, but once he saw the proof, even HEMMING conceded the point.

Nice photo of you and your lovely wife, God Bless her.

But it does not make Hemming A CREDIBLE PERSON. Sorry Old Sport.

But, it does make you a fat ass...

Mr. Carroll:

Excuse me, but you are starting to represent an element here on the forum who argues points that really do not make or break this case.

Yet, you show your true colors doing so.

What, may I ask is your purpose in the "research community?"

Are you keeping it "pure" perhaps?

Just a question.

[Greg Burnham]

WRONG AGAIN, AND ANOTHER false assumption on your part. My ass, as it happens is proportionate to my very fine anatomy. But what do you know anyway. (?)

I know enough to place a question mark at the end of a question. I also didn't claim that you have a "fat ass" as you claimed about me. I said you ARE a "fat ass" as a result of your insulting, no count, disrespect for a very close (now deceased) friend of mine.

The question under discussion is the identity of JFK's assassins. As your latest responses demonstrate, this is a subject you know little about, and care less.

I started this thread so I think I know what it is about. It is about the possible presence of Ed Lansdale in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963. You don't even know me, how can you claim to judge the depth of my knowledge?

So Begone Satan! You have nothing to contribute!

Huh? Are you an exorcist in your spare time or something? Sheesh--