Cliff Varnell Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) I think the Oswald Forum here is the proper venue for these questions... If Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing directly to do with the murder of JFK why is it assumed that his handlers had something directly to do with the assassination? Greg Parker has mentioned that Oswald leads to "the frame," as well as "plotters" and "players" in the murder. I ask which frame: Oswald the Red Agent, or Oswald the Lone Nut? And LHO leads to the top plotters of JFK's murder? Sloppy plotters... Yep. Okay, so I can take it that this is high degree speculation on your part, Greg? I'm curious to see what you've got. So I'll ask again -- if Oswald leads to "the frame," as you put it, which "frame"? Red Agent or Lone Nut? And what plotters and players you've got...I'm all ears. (I have no dog in the H&L fight, btw, other than it's a rabbit hole when it comes to JFK's murder.) Edited March 25, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) "Oswald is a study of the cover-up." I find that a most intriguing way to present the case. If he was, as many suspect, entirely innocent of killing Kennedy then his presence in the affair can only be as part of the cover-up. Most posit that the intelligence handlers used him to be the fall guy... but what if, they were caught off-guard by the assassination and once Oswald had been fingered by the locals, the intelligence community quickly washed their hands of him as quickly as possible to distance themselves from the undercover operation he had been involved in. That way, they lost an operative, but were able to maintain the secrecy over the operation. Had Oswald talked, they may have lost so very much more. But this does not mean they had to have been involved in the assassination. Many researchers talk about the compartmentalizing of intelligence operations. Perhaps it would be best if we began looking at the case in the same light: as individual segments not necessarily linked together beforehand. Just a thot. Terry, looks to me like there was a patsy chain, people set up to take the fall given unknown contingencies. Oswald's handlers could very well have been groomed as back-up patsies. In this scenario it was imperative for Oswald to be gunned down within an hour of JFK's murder. Connecting Oswald to alleged Soviet assassin-master Kostikov in Mexico City would have been the key part of the frame. Looks to me like the operation to kill Kennedy and the operation to kill the Red Patsy were conducted by different teams of people who only knew what they needed to know. Other than the time and place, Oswald's handlers didn't need to know anything about the JFK assassination, did they? Edited March 25, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I think the Oswald Forum here is the proper venue for these questions... If Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing directly to do with the murder of JFK why is it assumed that his handlers had something directly to do with the assassination? Greg Parker has mentioned that Oswald leads to "the frame," as well as "plotters" and "players" in the murder. I ask which frame: Oswald the Red Agent, or Oswald the Lone Nut? And LHO leads to the top plotters of JFK's murder? Sloppy plotters... Yep. Okay, so I can take it that this is a high degree speculation on your part, Greg? More like immaculate dot connecting. Some of the people involved in this had a high degree of knowledge of historical events and communist cases. I'm curious to see what you've got. More revealed in vol 2 - the full solution revealed in vol 3 So I'll ask again -- if Oswald leads to "the frame," as you put it, which "frame"? Red Agent or Lone Nut? Both And what plotters and players you've got...I'm all ears. If you can get Douglass, diEugenio or Newman to publicly lay out the details of any books they may be working on, I'd do the same. Deal? (I have no dog in the H&L fight, btw, other than it's a rabbit hole when it comes to JFK's murder.) Rabbit holes are where giant white rabbits live. Everyone interested in clearing the decks of all the dreck should have a dog in the H & L fight, the JVB fight, the Cinque fight and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) I think the Oswald Forum here is the proper venue for these questions... If Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing directly to do with the murder of JFK why is it assumed that his handlers had something directly to do with the assassination? Greg Parker has mentioned that Oswald leads to "the frame," as well as "plotters" and "players" in the murder. I ask which frame: Oswald the Red Agent, or Oswald the Lone Nut? And LHO leads to the top plotters of JFK's murder? Sloppy plotters... Yep. Okay, so I can take it that this is a high degree speculation on your part, Greg? More like immaculate dot connecting. Some of the people involved in this had a high degree of knowledge of historical events and communist cases. The dots I'm connecting lead to one guy who had supreme knowledge of historical events and communist cases. He bankrolled them. But the guy I'm connecting dots with sure as hell wasn't connected in any way to Lee Harvey Oswald. I'm curious to see what you've got. More revealed in vol 2 - the full solution revealed in vol 3 Three volumes, eh? I'll sum it up in five words -- Elite Drug Gang Rub Out. Or so my dots connect... So I'll ask again -- if Oswald leads to "the frame," as you put it, which "frame"? Red Agent or Lone Nut? Both. So Oswald's handlers set him up to be a Lone Nut? I don't buy it. Who first put the Oswald as Lone Nut frame in the public eye? Uber-blue-blood Jock Whitney who stopped the presses at his New York Herald Tribune the evening of 11/22 to write an editorial blasting the lone assassin. McGeorge Bundy admitted to a Newsweek journalist he called LBJ on AF1 the afternoon of 11/22 and said the lone assassin was in custody, no evidence of conspiracy. Averell Harriman allegedly told LBJ the USG's top Soviet experts to a man thought the Soviets were not involved in the assassination. But there was no meeting of top USG Soviet experts on 11/22. Jock Whitney -- Yale, Scroll & Key McGeorge Bundy -- Yale, Skull & Bones Averell Harriman -- Yale, Skull & Bones Not an Oswald in sight. And what plotters and players you've got...I'm all ears. If you can get Douglass, diEugenio or Newman to publicly lay out the details of any books they may be working on, I'd do the same. Deal? Who isn't working on a book? If you can get those guys to come on the Oswald Forum and claim that LHO connects to the guys who murdered Kennedy I'm gonna ask them to put up more than their rep to support. (I have no dog in the H&L fight, btw, other than it's a rabbit hole when it comes to JFK's murder.) Rabbit holes are where giant white rabbits live. Everyone interested in clearing the decks of all the dreck should have a dog in the H & L fight, the JVB fight, the Cinque fight and others. Fake debate over bollocks is a waste of time. Edited March 25, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Oswald tells us a lot about the frame and the plotters who framed him. Whether or not Oswald was being handled he was a hot potato for both the CIA and the FBI. They couldn't reveal their monitoring of Oswald or, if it was the case, their handing of him. Someone was really well-informed and smart to choose Oswald to frame. His framing guaranteed a cover-up. I dispute the notion Oswald was being handled by either the CIA or the FBI. Veciana's story lacks credibility IMO, and that's the only story indicating the CIA (DAP) was pulling his strings. The fact he crossed paths with Ferrie and Bannister, for example, is interesting, maybe more than interesting. That doesn't mean Bannister or Ferrie was pulling Oswald's strings. I admit there are questions here. There are certainly no apparent answers. Maybe Oswald, after all, was being handled by the CIA or the FBI. As I've argued before, an intelligence service does not sell out one of its agents, unless possibly the agent has gone bad. Agents are the lifeblood of an intelligence service. They're recruited carefully; trained carefully; and handled carefully by a case officer. And all of that -- the recruitment, the training, the handling: it's done behind closed doors, so to speak. So I don't buy that the CIA or the FBI framed Oswald. Someone framed him. Someone deeply knowledgable of the U.S. and its intelligence agencies. Someone who wanted to leave no fingerprints. Someone who wanted JFK dead for some practical reason. There are candidates. In the U.S., the most obvious candidates IMO are LBJ and McGeorge Bundy. But choosing candidates is way too easy in the JFK assassination case. Great and important diary, Cliff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I think the Oswald Forum here is the proper venue for these questions... If Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing directly to do with the murder of JFK why is it assumed that his handlers had something directly to do with the assassination? Greg Parker has mentioned that Oswald leads to "the frame," as well as "plotters" and "players" in the murder. I ask which frame: Oswald the Red Agent, or Oswald the Lone Nut? And LHO leads to the top plotters of JFK's murder? Sloppy plotters... Yep. Okay, so I can take it that this is a high degree speculation on your part, Greg? More like immaculate dot connecting. Some of the people involved in this had a high degree of knowledge of historical events and communist cases. The dots I'm connecting lead to one guy who had supreme knowledge of historical events and communist cases. On what basis did you choose your first dot, Cliff, if not via a connection with the patsy? Some hitherto unknown mathematical formula? Cosmic vibrations? A computer generated random selection? There are no shortages of people and groups with motive, and no end to the leaps it takes for those people to actually be involved. He bankrolled them. He bankrolled what? Historical events and communist cases? But the guy I'm connecting dots with sure as hell wasn't connected in any way to Lee Harvey Oswald. Then how was Oswald made the patsy? I'm curious to see what you've got. More revealed in vol 2 - the full solution revealed in vol 3 Three volumes, eh? I'll sum it up in five words -- Elite Drug Gang Rub Out. Or so my dots connect... Wrong dots. So I'll ask again -- if Oswald leads to "the frame," as you put it, which "frame"? Red Agent or Lone Nut? Both. So Oswald's handlers set him up to be a Lone Nut? Not initially. I don't buy it. Who first put the Oswald as Lone Nut frame in the public eye? Uber-blue-blood Jock Whitney who stopped the presses at his New York Herald Tribune the evening of 11/22 to write an editorial blasting the lone assassin. McGeorge Bundy admitted to a Newsweek journalist he called LBJ on AF1 the afternoon of 11/22 and said the lone assassin was in custody, no evidence of conspiracy. Averell Harriman allegedly told LBJ the USG's top Soviet experts to a man thought the Soviets were not involved in the assassination. But there was no meeting of top USG Soviet experts on 11/22. Jock Whitney -- Yale, Scroll & Key McGeorge Bundy -- Yale, Skull & Bones Averell Harriman -- Yale, Skull & Bones Not an Oswald in sight. http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/parker-1.html The problem is that the Cold War produced so much "theory" and "potential plotter" fodder that what you have is replicated a thousandfold by others. Only the names are different. And what plotters and players you've got...I'm all ears. If you can get Douglass, diEugenio or Newman to publicly lay out the details of any books they may be working on, I'd do the same. Deal? Who isn't working on a book? If you can get those guys to come on the Oswald Forum and claim that LHO connects to the guys who murdered Kennedy I'm gonna ask them to put up more than their rep to support. Like that matters one iota. (I have no dog in the H&L fight, btw, other than it's a rabbit hole when it comes to JFK's murder.) Rabbit holes are where giant white rabbits live. Everyone interested in clearing the decks of all the dreck should have a dog in the H & L fight, the JVB fight, the Cinque fight and others. Fake debate over bollocks is a waste of time. Letting them get away with this BS for 50+ years is actually dooming us to another 50+ years. Why do you think the excellent work done by Sean Murphy on PM has not taken off? Cinque's muddying of the waters is one reason. Every time PM is raised in some quarters, it is mistaken for part of Cinque's circus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) Oswald tells us a lot about the frame and the plotters who framed him. Jon, sure looks like two frames in play on 11/22. Ozzie the Loner vs. Ozzie the Red Assassin. I'm looking forward to Greg Parker explaining how a guy with a heavy-duty political background and all sorts of political connections is groomed as a LONER prior to the assassination. I mean, it's bad enough that the USG and the MSM and all the Lone Nutters expect us to buy that scenario. Whether or not Oswald was being handled he was a hot potato for both the CIA and the FBI. If he'd turned up a dead potato around 1:15cst 11/22 they would have been trumpeting his Red connections and the name Kostikov would have been a household name...or so I speculate. They couldn't reveal their monitoring of Oswald or, if it was the case, their handing of him. Someone was really well-informed and smart to choose Oswald to frame. His framing guaranteed a cover-up. I dispute the notion Oswald was being handled by either the CIA or the FBI. Veciana's story lacks credibility IMO, and that's the only story indicating the CIA (DAP) was pulling his strings. The fact he crossed paths with Ferrie and Bannister, for example, is interesting, maybe more than interesting. That doesn't mean Bannister or Ferrie was pulling Oswald's strings. I admit there are questions here. There are certainly no apparent answers. How was that guy in any way, shape or form a LONER? Maybe Oswald, after all, was being handled by the CIA or the FBI. As I've argued before, an intelligence service does not sell out one of its agents, unless possibly the agent has gone bad. Agents are the lifeblood of an intelligence service. They're recruited carefully; trained carefully; and handled carefully by a case officer. And all of that -- the recruitment, the training, the handling: it's done behind closed doors, so to speak. So I don't buy that the CIA or the FBI framed Oswald. Someone framed him. Someone deeply knowledgable of the U.S. and its intelligence agencies. Someone who wanted to leave no fingerprints. Someone who wanted JFK dead for some practical reason. There are candidates. In the U.S., the most obvious candidates IMO are LBJ and McGeorge Bundy. According to counter-insurgency expert Col William Corson JFK's aide Kenny O'Donnell accused Bundy of acting under the direction of Averell Harriman. Bundy -- Skull & Bones '40. Harriman -- Skull & Bones '13 But choosing candidates is way too easy in the JFK assassination case. Great and important diary, Cliff. Thank you, Jon. Edited March 25, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 26, 2015 Author Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) New comments in green... Okay, so I can take it that this is a high degree speculation on your part, Greg? More like immaculate dot connecting. Some of the people involved in this had a high degree of knowledge of historical events and communist cases. The dots I'm connecting lead to one guy who had supreme knowledge of historical events and communist cases. On what basis did you choose your first dot, Cliff, if not via a connection with the patsy? Dot #1 -- The clothing evidence. The bullet holes in JFK's clothes at 4" below the bottom of the collars were too low to have been associated with the throat wound. This indicates a "low" back wound of entrance with no corresponding exit and a throat wound of entrance with no corresponding exit. There were no bullets recovered from the throat or back during the autopsy. The central question of JFK's murder is: what happened to the bullets that caused the back and throat wounds? Some hitherto unknown mathematical formula? Dot #2: The doctors' speculation with the body in front of them. From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit:<quote>Some discussion did occur concerning the disintegration of the bullet. A general feeling existed that a soft-nosed bullet struck JFK. There was discussion concerning the back wound that the bullet could have been a "plastic" type or an "Ice" [sic] bullet, one which dissolves after contact.<quote off> From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit:<quote>The doctors also discussed a possible deflection of the bullet in the body caused by striking bone. Consideration was also given to a type of bullet which fragments completely....Following discussion among the doctors relating to the back injury, I left the autopsy room to call the FBI Laboratory and spoke with Agent Chuch [sic] Killion. I asked if he could furnish any information regarding a type of bullet that would almost completely fragmentize (sic). <quote off> Cosmic vibrations? Dot #3: The Church Committee testimonies of William Colby and Charles Senseney. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_1_Colby.pdf http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Senseney fingered a shadowy Staff Support Group, which was an under-cover CIA operation within US Army Special Operations Division, experimenting with high tech weaponry. The FBI had been briefed as to the existence of weapons which would leave no trace on x-ray or in the autopsy -- one answer to the question: What happened to the bullets that caused the back and throat wounds? A computer generated random selection? Dot #4: The President Has Been Shot. Charles Roberts, p. 141: <quote>I remember looking at (McGeorge) Bundy because I was wondering if he had any word of what had happened in the world while we were in transit, whether this assassination was part of a plot. And he told me later that what he reported to the president during that flight back was that the whole world was stunned, but there was no evidence of a conspiracy at all. <quote off> A journalist for Newsweek, Roberts was on AF1 on the flight back from Dallas. Dot #5: The Assassination Tapes, Max Holland, pg 57: <quote> At 6:55 p.m. Johnson has a ten minute meeting with Senator J. William Fulbright and diplomat W. Averell Harriman to discuss possible foreign involvement in the assassination, especially in light of the two-and-a-half-year sojourn of Lee Harvey Oswald [in Russia]...Harriman, a U.S. ambassador to Moscow during WWII, is an experienced interpreter of Soviet machinations and offers the president the unanimous view of the U.S. government's top Kremlinologists. None of them believe the Soviets have a hand in the assassination, despite the Oswald association. <quote off> Dot #6 The Secret History of the CIA, Joseph Trento, pgs 334-5: <quote> Who changed the coup into the murder of Diem, Nhu and a Catholic priest accompanying them? To this day, nothing has been found in government archives tying the killings to either John or Robert Kennedy. So how did the tools and talents developed by Bill Harvey for ZR/RIFLE and Operation MONGOOSE get exported to Vietnam? Kennedy immediately ordered (William R.) Corson to find out what had happened and who was responsible. The answer he came up with: “On instructions from Averell Harriman…. The orders that ended in the deaths of Diem and his brother originated with Harriman and were carried out by Henry Cabot Lodge’s own military assistant.” Having served as ambassador to Moscow and governor of New York, W. Averell Harriman was in the middle of a long public career. In 1960, President-elect Kennedy appointed him ambassador-at-large, to operate “with the full confidence of the president and an intimate knowledge of all aspects of United States policy.” By 1963, according to Corson, Harriman was running “Vietnam without consulting the president or the attorney general.” The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security team was loyal. As Corson put it, “Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor, was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president. He was especially worried about Michael Forrestal, a young man on the White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.” At the heart of the murders was the sudden and strange recall of Sagon Station Chief Jocko Richardson and his replacement by a no-name team barely known to history. The key member was a Special Operations Army officer, John Michael Dunn, who took his orders, not from the normal CIA hierarchy but from Harriman and Forrestal. According to Corson, “John Michael Dunn was known to be in touch with the coup plotters,” although Dunn’s role has never been made public. Corson believes that Richardson was removed so that Dunn, assigned to Ambassador Lodge for “special operations,” could act without hindrance. <quote off> Did Averell Harriman operate a private militia out of the US Army Special Operations Division? There are no shortages of people and groups with motive, and no end to the leaps it takes for those people to actually be involved. So? Are you factually disputing anything I cite? He bankrolled them. He bankrolled what? Historical events and communist cases? Averell Harriman? Bankrolled the Soviet oil and manganese industries, spearheaded the Lend-Lease program to aid the Soviets in their fight against the Harriman bankrolled Nazis. But the guy I'm connecting dots with sure as hell wasn't connected in any way to Lee Harvey Oswald. Then how was Oswald made the patsy? The machinations of intermediaries, some of whom may have themselves been groomed as potential patsies. I'm curious to see what you've got. More revealed in vol 2 - the full solution revealed in vol 3 Three volumes, eh? I'll sum it up in five words -- Elite Drug Gang Rub Out. Or so my dots connect... Wrong dots. Not according to Gary Underhill. Someone Would Have Talked, Larry Hancock, pg 496: <quote>Underhill's concern was that he had become aware of a "clique" within the CIA--a clique dealing with weapons and gun-running and making money. These individuals had Far Eastern connections, narcotics was mentioned, supposedly the clique was manipulating political intrigues to serve their own ends. Underhill believed that these individuals had been involved with JFK's murder; he felt that JFK had become aware of their dealings and was about to move against them in some fashion. He also believed that members of the clique knew that Underhill was aware of their dealings and that his own life could well be in jeopardy.<quote off> So I'll ask again -- if Oswald leads to "the frame," as you put it, which "frame"? Red Agent or Lone Nut? Both. So Oswald's handlers set him up to be a Lone Nut? Not initially. I don't buy it. Who first put the Oswald as Lone Nut frame in the public eye? Uber-blue-blood Jock Whitney who stopped the presses at his New York Herald Tribune the evening of 11/22 to write an editorial blasting the lone assassin. McGeorge Bundy admitted to a Newsweek journalist he called LBJ on AF1 the afternoon of 11/22 and said the lone assassin was in custody, no evidence of conspiracy. Averell Harriman allegedly told LBJ the USG's top Soviet experts to a man thought the Soviets were not involved in the assassination. But there was no meeting of top USG Soviet experts on 11/22. Jock Whitney -- Yale, Scroll & Key McGeorge Bundy -- Yale, Skull & Bones Averell Harriman -- Yale, Skull & Bones Not an Oswald in sight. http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/parker-1.html The problem is that the Cold War produced so much "theory" and "potential plotter" fodder that what you have is replicated a thousandfold by others. Only the names are different. What? It wasn't a thousand names who called AF1 and told LBJ the lone assassin was in custody, or told him less than 6 hours after the assassination that the Soviets weren't involved. If Harriman and Bundy weren't guilty of treason for their rush to judgement -- I don't know what to call it. And what plotters and players you've got...I'm all ears. If you can get Douglass, diEugenio or Newman to publicly lay out the details of any books they may be working on, I'd do the same. Deal? Who isn't working on a book? If you can get those guys to come on the Oswald Forum and claim that LHO connects to the guys who murdered Kennedy I'm gonna ask them to put up more than their rep to support. Like that matters one iota. (I have no dog in the H&L fight, btw, other than it's a rabbit hole when it comes to JFK's murder.) Rabbit holes are where giant white rabbits live. Everyone interested in clearing the decks of all the dreck should have a dog in the H & L fight, the JVB fight, the Cinque fight and others. Fake debate over bollocks is a waste of time. Letting them get away with this BS for 50+ years is actually dooming us to another 50+ years. Why do you think the excellent work done by Sean Murphy on PM has not taken off? Cinque's muddying of the waters is one reason. Every time PM is raised in some quarters, it is mistaken for part of Cinque's circus. I choose my own battles, thank you. Edited March 26, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Cliff, thanks for detailed response. My concern remains the same. There are dozens upon dozens of books which pick out quotes from various people to weave their theories around. Hunt's "confession" Alleged comments by LBJ at an alleged party The Marcello "confession" Alleged comments by JFK about ripping the CIA into a thousand pieces has spawned at least as many theories. What I have is a bit more tangible than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Martin Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Oswald tells us a lot about the frame and the plotters who framed him. Whether or not Oswald was being handled he was a hot potato for both the CIA and the FBI. They couldn't reveal their monitoring of Oswald or, if it was the case, their handing of him. Someone was really well-informed and smart to choose Oswald to frame. His framing guaranteed a cover-up. ..................................... Someone framed him. Someone deeply knowledgable of the U.S. and its intelligence agencies. Someone who wanted to leave no fingerprints. Someone who wanted JFK dead for some practical reason. There are candidates. In the U.S., the most obvious candidates IMO are LBJ and McGeorge Bundy. But choosing candidates is way too easy in the JFK assassination case. Anyone who was going to pull this operation off - killing Kennedy and framing Oswald in order to force the CIA & FBI to do the cover-up for you - had to get to assistance of the Secret Service. If the USSS did their job there would have been no killing that day. They had to get the co-operation of that agency to stand down. Or you could go one step simpler... involve a few less people in th conspiracy, a few less tongues to wag... why include any of the high-profile in your construction? All that is really required for the conspiracy is the USSS. They had the capability of slacking the protection when needed, they had files of all the "subversive" and potentially damgerous elements in the area. In the case of Oswald, they probably also had a "pass" from FBI or CIA that the man in question was not really a subversive but one of their own. Whoever planned the killing, anticipating the agencies to cover-up for them, had to know Oswald was one of their "plants". Who else would have access to this information? Bundy? LBJ? I think not. But, I could as easily be wrong, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Whack-a-mole time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Whack-a-mole time. Mark, You think Oswald was a "mole" who got whacked by mobbed-up Angleton? How about the idea that he was used as a "dangle" in Russia to catch Popov's mole? Or is it just that you like guacamole? --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Whack-a-mole time. Mark, You think Oswald was a "mole" who got whacked by mobbed-up Angleton? How about the idea that he was used as a "dangle" in Russia to catch Popov's mole? Or is it just that you like guacamole? --Tommy I was referring to some good folks posting here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Terry Martin, I believe the Secret Service is suspect in the killing of JFK. Recent revelations about the behavior of Secret Service officers lead me to believe certain SS officers always have thought themselves to be above the regulations governing their behavior. The behavior of the SS on 11-22-63 in Dallas has perplexed me. Negligence? Duplicity? Both? I don't know. Dealey Plaza was an ambush. The killing took place in an ambush zone. It had all the marks of a military ambush, carried out by skilled assassins. The Secret Service may have been duplicitous. Surely it was had. And like any bureaucracy, it would have wanted to cover up its shortcomings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) Terry Martin, I believe the Secret Service is suspect in the killing of JFK. Recent revelations about the behavior of Secret Service officers lead me to believe certain SS officers always have thought themselves to be above the regulations governing their behavior. The behavior of the SS on 11-22-63 in Dallas has perplexed me. Negligence? Duplicity? Both? I don't know. Dealey Plaza was an ambush. The killing took place in an ambush zone. It had all the marks of a military ambush, carried out by skilled assassins. The Secret Service may have been duplicitous. Surely it was had. And like any bureaucracy, it would have wanted to cover up its shortcomings. You should definitely get Vince Palamara's book then if you want to dig deeper into the SS. (I've had it since it was a group of free pdfs many, many moons ago) Something worth remembering Jon - when the trail of CE399, the magic bullet, was rechecked, they asked each person who handled the bullet to identify it since no one at the SS, DPD, Parkland Security or FBI thought it important enough to authenticate this evidence by marking it as they got it. but that did not happen. The first mark is that of the three FBI analysts - Frasier, Cunningham and Killion - after the bullet is provided them. Yet in every case until SS Chief Rowley hands a bullet to Elmer Todd to bring to Frazier CE399 was NOT IDENTIFIED AS THE BULLET HANDLED... CE399 only comes into existence when Secret Service Chief Rowley, working for Treasury Sec Clarence Dillon, hands a bullet to Todd. Rowley claims that the bullet he was handed by Agent Johnson was not CE399 - yet Todd, who the evidence says handed Frazier bullet C1 which becomes CE399, did get that same bullet from Rowley. Rowley also recieved a print of the Zfilm from Max Philips during the evening of Nov 22 a full day before it hits Dino at NPIC. Without the SS getting out of the way, offering the all clear "no threats in Dallas" ok, and stealing the body from Parkland, the cover-up does not occur. If Rose does the autopsy - the cover-up is over. Greer basically abandons the ambulance with the empty casket and runs to the morgue just before 7pm. It's another hour before the autopsy officially starts. The SS keeps the FBI out of the anti-room for over an hour. and by the way - both the SS and Immigration & Naturalization Service are under the Dept/Sec of the Treasury. just sayin. PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ss: I, Charles L. Killion, Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, do hereby state that I have reviewed the testimonies of Robert A. Frazier on March 31 and May 13, 1964, and testimonies of Cortlandt Cunningham on March 11 and April 1, 1964, ,before the President's Commission on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and I agree with the conclusions stated therein. I do hereby state that I conducted independent examinations of the items which were the subject of Mr. Cunningham's and Mr. Frazier's testimonies and that on the basis of these independent examinations, I reached the same conclusions reached by Mr. Frazier and Mr. Cunningham. Signed this 31st day of July 1964, at Washington, D.C . (S) Charles L. Killion, CHARLES L, KILLION Speaking of the SS, FBI, Bullets and a cover-up. This is during the autopsy... Where IS that other bullet that was lodged behind his ear? Edited March 26, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now