Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Josephs

Members Who Can Delete Locked Attachments
  • Posts

    6,150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    By the Beach
  • Interests
    History and restoring our 100 year old summer home

Recent Profile Visitors

25,937 profile views

David Josephs's Achievements

Mentor

Mentor (12/14)

  • Dedicated
  • Conversation Starter
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

  1. The film in the archives is in 7 pieces from 6 splices. The film in the archives does NOT have 0183 stamped on any part of it. The film in the archives adds up to more than 45 feet of film from a Side B with 30 feet of actual film The film discussed in the WCR was 33 seconds long. Where is the rest of the "unaltered original" after being spliced and reattached 6 times if this is the in-camera original? Why does Max Philipps refer to "4" total copies in his letter to Rowley, below? Yet Zapruder was in possession of the "original" and "the BEST copy". 2 films Sorrels was given 2 copies... (1 goes to FBI) that's now 4 total films. "The third print is forwarded". 5 total films... and I believe explains the missing 0184 seen by Dino, from which the real boards were made and lost to history. Can any member here can tell us where the film which arrived on Rowley's desk in the hours after midnight, went? We all know it was in DC and seen that night... but then as I see it, that's the end of that film's trail. Wasn't it SS agents who brought the "films" to NPIC that weekend? Bill Smith?
  2. Not trying to steal Mr. Willis' thunder, but I've been talking about this very thing for many years. What always got me was his own admission of his 37 year knowledge of every corner in Dallas... Neches was not some random mistake. And there is no Neches & Beckley, of course. Thanks for bringing it up again Don... Mr. WHALEY. You name an intersection in the city of Dallas and I will tell you what is on all four corners. Mr. BALL. Did you stop and let your passenger out on this run on the north or south side of the intersection? Mr. WHALEY. On the north side, sir. Mr. BALL. North side? Mr. WHALEY. Yes. Mr. BALL. That would be-- Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner. Mr. BALL. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley? Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley.
  3. FWIW, Dean was the Sgt who basically cleared the darkened parking area of police/reserves allowing Ruby to walk unbothered up to his spot near Croy only a minute or so before they brought Oswald to him. And then supported/promoted the "he came down the ramp" story. I wouldn't doubt he was lying and that Alyea was correct. Just to remember tho, many cops looked the same during this time, they hired a "type".
  4. I thru that out there a while back right around when others were thinking the same thoughts. If that's provably Shelley, that's one long nail for the coffin. Would you agree there's a big different between "working for" and "useable asset". CIA assets produce reports which are then summarized in reports higher up the chain. Have you any indication/sources for your opinion that TRULY was ever considered or used as an asset; even moreso to support his working for them? As to LHO "working for" the CIA as opposed to being an asset... that too - for me at least - would require a bit more corroboration.
  5. She was also never shown the application she supposedly worked on, with our man Oswald's photos.
  6. Vague Leslie? as well as her sister... Or the Shooting range on the 28th, in Dallas.? Mr. LIEBELER. Well, do you have any doubts in your mind after looking at these pictures (links below) that the man that was in your apartment was the same man as Lee Harvey Oswald? Mrs. ODIO. I don't have any doubts. Mr. LIEBELER. Did your sister see the men? Mrs. ODIO. She saw the three of them. Mr. LIEBELER. Have you discussed this with her since that time? Mrs. ODIO. I just had to discuss it because it was bothering me. I just had to know. Mr. LIEBELER. Did she think it was Oswald? Mrs. ODIO. Well, her reaction to it when Oswald came on television, she almost passed out on me, just like I did the day at work when I learned about the assassination of the President. Her reaction was so obvious that it was him, I mean. And my reaction, we remember Oswald the day he came to my house because he had not shaved and he had a kind of a very, I don't know how to express it, but some little hairs like if you haven't shaved, but it is not a thick moustache, but some kind of shadow. That is something I noticed. And he was wearing--the other ones were wearing white dirty shirts, but he was wearing a long sleeved shirt. Mr. LIEBELER. What kind of shirt was it, a white shirt? Mrs. ODIO. No; it was either green or blue, and he had it rolled up to here. Mr. LIEBELER. Almost to his elbows? Mrs. ODIO. No; less than that, just the ends of the sleeves. Mr. LIEBELER. Did he have a tie? Mrs. ODIO. No tie. Mr. LIEBELER. Was it a sport shirt, or working shirt? Mrs. ODIO. He had it open. I don't know if he had a collar or not, but it was open. And the other one had a white undershirt. One of them was very hairy. Where was I? I just want to remember everything. Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned when your sister saw Oswald's picture on television that she almost passed out. Did she recognize him, do you know, as the man that had been in the apartment? Mrs. ODIO. She said, "Sylvia, you know that man?" And I said, "Yes," and she said, "I know him." "He was the one that came to our door, and it couldn't be so, could it?" Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell Father McKann that the name Oswald was never used in your presence by any of these men? Mrs. ODIO. Never was used except to introduce me, and the time when they left. They did not refer to him as Oswald. Mr. LIEBELER. But they did in fact, introduce him as Leon Oswald? Mrs. ODIO. And I shook hands with him. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you pass out as soon as you had heard that the President had been shot? Mrs. ODIO. No; when I started thinking about it. Mr. LIEBELER. Had you heard that Oswald was involved in it before you passed out? Mrs. ODIO. Can I say something off the record? Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. (Witness talks off the record.) Mr. LIEBELER. At this point let's go back on the record. You indicated that you thought perhaps the three men who had come to your apartment had something to do with the assassination? Mrs. ODIO. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a photograph that has been marked as Bringuier Exhibit No. 1, and ask you if you can identify anybody in that photograph? Mrs. ODIO. That is Oswald. Mr. LIEBELER With the X? Mrs. ODIO. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize anybody else in the picture? Mrs. ODIO. No. (B Exh #1 in the WCR is very dark... you can't make out that that may be William Shelley in the dark suit.) Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any doubt that that man with the green line over his head in Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B Was the man who was in your apartment? Mrs. ODIO. Well, if it is not, it is his twin. Mr. LIEBELER. Now, I show you a photograph that has been marked Garner Exhibit No. I https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1137#relPageId=24 and ask you if you recognize that man. Mrs. ODIO. That is Oswald. Mr. LIEBELER. Is that the man who was in your apartment? Mrs. ODIO. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Are you sure? Mrs. ODIO. He doesn't have the little thing, the little moustache that he had that day. He looks shaved there, and he did not look shaved that day. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think this man in Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-C is Lee Harvey Oswald? Mrs. ODIO. Yes; I think that is him. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you think that is the man that was in your apartment? Mrs. ODIO. Well, let me say something. I think this man was the one that was in my apartment. I am not too sure of that picture. He didn't look like this. He was smiling that day. He was more smiling than in this picture.
  7. @Benjamin Cole This is testimony from one of the Aussie women supposedly having talked to Oswald on a bus. Her travel itinerary makes it impossible for her to have seen Oswald.. and by definition with Bowen, he said there were no englich speaking people on the buses he was on... The McFarland's were English, as well. Line 18 was for Mrs McFarland. This kind of notation was for the traveling companion.. suggesting that Bowen too was traveling with someone. Mr. BALL. And they showed you pictures of Oswald, didn't they; Lee Harvey Oswald? Miss MUMFORD. No. Mr. BALL. You didn't ever see a picture of Oswald? Miss MUMFORD. No.
  8. I realize my work on MX is quite long and spread over 5 chapters... The manager, maids, and related service people at the hotel in which the FBI placed him via their asset OCHOA are reported upon, some of which I discuss, and we find the same inconclusive results including the 1 small brown zippered travel bag. The story of the "taxi" comes to mind. And that the FBI/CIA reports having him checking out the night before all this supposedly occurs. FWIW
  9. I'm not understanding the reluctance to accept the KGB/Russian members/participants/undercover-staff simply parroted the lies presented by the CIA and WCR to the world for any one of a number of reasons including the the I elude to below. Do either of you think the Russians did not have their own cameras on their own buildings? If he was there in the manner presented, (like at the window pulling the trigger), the attempt to find evidence of the "truth" would not be so difficult in an honest investigation. None of that is involved in this case. None of it. Are you of the opinion that the KGB was not aware of the machinations in setting up and performing the assassination itself, or the French, Germans, English intel services for that matter...??? - and that it would be in their best interest to do what they said they did in the released document related to MX given to Clinton? @Benjamin Cole What possible advantage or purpose is served by the KGB telling the truth and insisting they confirm he was NOT there in the face of the WCR, CIA, FBI, and HSCA/Lopez report? As I see it, none. By simply agreeing to whatever the "story" was - the likelihood of exposure of investigation into anything would be curtailed. If he was there at any point in time... how is it we don't have tapes/transcripts/reports of these key Russians mentioning him or even referencing someone who could be him, in any of the CIA surveillance? "Oswald, notwithstanding the holiday schedule,... spoke to a Consul" CIA says he's not there... when they could have FBI said he wasn't there, when they could have. Instead, while knowing he wasn't there - again, in the manner of which we are aware - these reports with a supporting report could have easily done so. But it doesn't.
  10. As a reminder, we discussed the one document from Clinton from Russia that says they are to reaffirm what the press had been asserting... and that afterwards he no longer contacted the Soviet embassy Ben, if he actually contacted them/him, this occurs not only on Friday the 27th, but Saturday the 28th, and Tuesday the 1st of October. "no longer contacted..." Does that change anything about the strength of their validity? MEXICO TO THE SOVIET AMBASSADOR 665. I agree with you that you should visit the MFA of Mexico (the minister or his deputy) and say, referring to reports in the press, that Oswald requested the consular division of the Soviet embassy in Mexico for a visa to enter the USSR, that the procedure for obtaining entry visas was explained to him at the consular division, and that afterwards he no longer contacted the Soviet embassy
  11. Or, unbelievable as it may seem, he lied to stay on the right side of history.
  12. No Ben, he did not. Simply read that specific transcript again Ben. The person on the Russian side of call is the one who introduces KOSTIKOV into the conversation. The Oswald character responds "Yes" to a different question than related to Kostikov. Also interesting is the huge number of "cc's" for that memo mentioning Kostikov; one of which going to I&NS and an asset of HOSTY's... Jeff Woosley.... this dissemination of info in this manner, I see, as part of the project related to what Simpich is talking about. The Marked HENRY card and where it that info flows. Below is an image of LEONOV (Ivanov is actually crossed out). I don't believe at all that he was used by or mistaken by anyone in US intelligence and was always known for who he was.
  13. @Benjamin Cole From Sept 27th until the YMCA on Oct 3rd/4th, and understanding that Oswald was not in Mexico as described by the investigation, we don't really know where he was, exactly. As there is no evidence other than the obvious that places him in/around Dallas during that week. If he was flown in and out of Mexico to have a meeting at the Luna Hotel about 20 mins south of the Embassies area; And is only in MX for a day or at most overnight for this meeting and actually does attend the Rave party... and is returned to Dallas by the 1st... there is no evidence in the bogus MX journey/stay in MX - or any evidence from Dallas that precludes this from occurring. The CiD notebook's suggestion of this meet and the substantiation from those in the Cobb/Davis extended circle, again, does not contradict the conclusions about the travel and call evidence I arrived at in my research, so I think it prudent to no longer discount the possibility... but not without this big concern: Why have the meeting at all, why in MX when these key players were all together in New Orleans not long before this time. What is so meaningful or significant of THIS meeting at THAT time... and what actions result from said meeting. If he's already being flown in.. wouldn't a photo of him have been important to help the incrimination? If you can create bogus calls and transcripts, why can't you put a photo of him in MX into the mix and solidify your position against him to back the phone calls? But that didn't happen. He wasn't PROVEN to be in MX at all... and the long redacted and suppressed LITAMIL/9 reports - when finally released and to my satisfaction - supported the notion he was not there.
  14. Oswald was - in my understanding - not personally involved with any of the evidence we have related to Mexico City. If indeed Oswald was in Mexico during that time, which I am not discounting anymore, he was elsewhere with none of the activities described in the entirety of the evidence related to Mexico City being real - based on what I know at this point in time of the documented evidence. During the course of the time when these tapes were supposed to have been created... Sept 27-Oct 3, those down there working on behalf of the CIA, in order to falsely accuse Oswald, had to know he never did any of the things that surfaced, they had stories to tell and maintain. If it turns out Oswald was at the Duran Party as a result of his doing something else down there, I'd be very surprised but again, not so egregious an act and one which adds the tiny bit of truth to a completely false situation... something that occurred repeatedly within false, incriminatory evidence so that a sliver of truth could be pointed to and not refuted. I'd ask you please to go back up to the top of this page and re-read my post. I explain myself, I thought, and asked very specific question which I would like to hear your responses to: So I have to ask Ben... what does LHO being an FBI or CIA asset mean to you? How does it change/enhance the conspiracy to implicate him? I mean it's one thing to just say he was a CIA asset... I'm asking "So what"? Looking carefully at 10/8 thru 11/22. What is the ripple effect and who is it most affecting? Why does the FBI produce a mountain of conflicting paper to hide the fact they knew he wasn't there? Why, when they learn one avenue of travel was not possible, they simply drop it for the next logical one? I mean you did read thru that report I posted... the result being "find another that DOES get him there on time". The "planting operation" I refer to is that portion of whatever was going on down there which necessitated the insertion of false intelligence regarding Oswald for whatever purposes it served to those who employed it - separate and distinct from the implications related to the assassination. The activities which are described by the study of CIA/FBI/DFS/and multitudes of different country's intelligence personnel in one of the most highly concentrated centers of spycraft in the world at the time, did not have very much to do with the assassination of JFK. The "implication of Oswald to relate to Cuba/Russia" was only a Phase 1 activity related to the assassination... but as I see it, this was not nearly the most important of the reasons Lee Henry Oswald was introduced into Mexico at that exact time. I believe one have to read deep into the work of Bill Simpich with the flavoring of Scott, Newman and so many others and then reread them with new and different eyes and perspectives before one can state with any confidence they have an understanding of what was happening. Mexico City, like Oswald himself, is an enigma... as I see it. I feel strongly what appears connected, is not. Which is why I find Mexico a much harder puzzle for which to find the right pieces to construct an accurate image.
×
×
  • Create New...