Jump to content
The Education Forum

Pat Speer

Moderators
  • Content Count

    5,904
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About Pat Speer

  • Rank
    Moderator

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

61,536 profile views
  1. A timeline is helpful. 1. Veciana told Fonzi about Bishop, but said he did not know his real name. Some of those interviewed thereafter remembered there being a Bishop, but no one could ID him. 2. It all exploded, however, when Sen. Schweicker recognized an artist rendering of Bishop as Phillips. 3. Phillips was then asked about Veciana, and is reported to have lied about not knowing him. 4. At that time, however, Veciana refused to ID Bishop as Phillips. 5. Fonzi late wrote a book in which he explained why he believed Bishop was Phillips. He presents Veciana's statements about meetings with Bishop, and shows how they match up with Phillips' travels. Phillips was a covert CIA operator. There's no way Veciana could have invented a character who just so happened to travel the world like Phillips. On his own, anyhow. Either Bishop was Phillips or someone had fed Veciana information to make it look like Bishop was Phillips. 6. Fonzi dies. 7. I share a shuttle with Marie Fonzi on the way back to the airport from the 2013 Wecht Conference. I explain to her that it's too bad her husband never got Veciana to state, for the record, that, yessiree, Bishop really was Phillips. She tells me that Veciana is still alive and that maybe she'll contact him. 8. The next Fall, sure enough, Veciana puts out a statement saying Bishop was Phillips. 9. Marie Fonzi makes an appearance at the 2014 Bethesda Conference. She fills in the blanks. She'd contacted a mutual friend of Fonzi's and Veciana's, and asked him to contact Veciana and ask him to put out a statement. The Fonzi family then met the Veciana family. According to Marie ( a delightful woman who gave me a children's book to give to my son), Veciana's son, a history teacher as I recall, is a major player here, as he is the one who convinced his father to come forward and put out the statement. 10. There is a meet and greet at the conference. Veciana and his son are there. I speak briefly to Veciana. His son interprets. I spend more time talking to his son. He comes across as 100% sincere. 11. Veciana makes his appearance at the conference. Sure enough, he says Bishop was Phillips. Judge Burt Griffin, sitting next to me, turns to me and says "He's LYING!" After Veciana is finished, I spend some time talking to Griffin and ask him why he's so sure. He said Veciana had lived in the U.S. for more than 50 years and was speaking at the conference through a translator. To Griffin, this was a sign Veciana didn't really care about America, and that he was just trying to smear its reputation. This struck me as odd, moreover. Veciana had angered many of those in attendance at the conference by defending the CIA and explaining WHY he thought Kennedy was killed--because he was soft on communism. Veciana said that at the time he was sympathetic to those behind the assassination but that over time he'd come to realize Kennedy was a great man and that his murder was a terrible tragedy. In that there was no upside in Veciana admitting these things, I considered him quite credible. At least about Bishop being Phillips. As to his seeing Oswald in Phillips' company, on that I believe he could be lying, or maybe just mistaken. 12. John Newman studies Veciana's book and realizes that some of it seems designed to cover holes in earlier versions of his story. He then looks at the recently-released records and realizes that Veciana was more closely affiliated with Mil. Int. than the CIA. He then develops a belief Mil. Int. was using Veciana in an op to cloud the waters, and make the CIA look responsible for Kennedy's death. Although I tell him about talking to Marie Fonzi, and how she turned around and talked to Veciana and his family, and how this led to his declaration Bishop was Phillips, he nevertheless seems inclined to believe Veciana's declaration Bishop was Phillips and subsequent book were part of an ongoing op. From my perspective, this makes little sense. If Veciana's 2014 appearance was designed to make the CIA look bad, why did he spend so much of his appearance chastising the audience for being naive, and explaining that the CIA was and is a necessary tool in fighting the evils of the world? My conclusion (so far). Bishop was Phillips. Phillips kept his contacts with Veciana off the record. Veciana may or may not have seen Oswald with Bishop. I suspect not. Veciana's motivation in telling his story to Fonzi is unclear. His motivation in confirming Bishop was Phillips, and in writing his book, however, is probably related to the dynamics within his own family, and not to any ongoing association with Mil. Int.
  2. Thanks, Steve. That actually makes some sense. Presumably, the DPD was asked by Wade to see if they could place Ruby at the depository. If they could, it would suggest he knew Oswald and would cut into his claim his killing Oswald was a spontaneous act of madness, as opposed to a pre-meditated act of murder.
  3. Thanks, Steve. I quoted those reports in a previous post. My question is as to why the Homicide and Robbery people started up interviewing TSBD employees in February, only to stop a few days later. And why some, but not all, of their reports were published by the Warren Commission. I've gotta believe there's a document somewhere in which the WC asked the DPD for help, and explained why this came to pass. I think Jim Leavelle discussed this in an interview somewhere. If anyone remembers where this was I would be grateful.
  4. If you'd read what I posted, Bart, you'd see that McCully corrected her statement about where she was at the time of the shots when speaking to the DPD, not FBI, and that, furthermore, that correction never made it to the WC (at least as far as I can tell). It follows, then, that there was no mass conspiracy to hide her true location at the time of the shooting, or whatever you're implying. Her friend, Davis, moreover, was already on the record saying they were on the front steps when McCully let on that they were on the fourth floor. As far as the FBI pressuring her, sure, that rings true. Presumably someone noticed that Davis and McCully had made contradictory statements, and wanted it straightened out. So she did. AFTER she'd already clarified things for the DPD... (If anyone can post the document in which the WC asked the DPD to interview McCully in February it would be appreciated. It seems apparent that the WC was having problems with the FBI at the time, and decided to go around them by asking the DPD to conduct some interviews on their behalf. It is suspicious, moreover, that some of these interviews ended up getting published in the commission's volumes, but not all of them, and that at least two of the missing interviews, Vickie Adams and Otis Williams, were with witnesses whose statements and/or subsequent statements suggested Oswald did not come down the back stairs.) Victoria Adams (11-24-63 FBI report, CD5 p.39) “as the car…was passing, she heard three loud reports which she first thought to be fire crackers…and she believed the sound came from toward the right of the building…After the third shot she observed the car containing President Kennedy to speed up and rush away. She had not been able to fully observe the President at the exact moment he was shot, inasmuch as her view was partially obstructed. She and her friend then ran immediately to the back of the building to where the stairs are located and ran down the stairs. No one else was observed on the stairs at this time, and she is sure that this would be the only means of escape from the building from the sixth floor.” (2-17-64 statement to the Dallas Police Department, box 3 folder 19 file 3 of the Dallas JFK Archive) "When the President got in front of us I heard someone call him and he turned. That is when I heard the first shot. I thought it was a firecracker. Then the second shot I saw the Secret Service man run to the back of the President's car. After the third shot I went out the back door. I said, 'I think someone has been shot.' The elevator was not running and there was no one on the stairs. I went down to the first floor. I saw Mr. Shelly and another employee named Bill. The freight elevator had not moved, and I still did not see anyone on the stairs. I ran out the back door of the depository and around to the front. I started down toward the railroad tracks when an officer stopped me and turned me back." (3-23-64 statement to the FBI, 22H632) “I recall that at about 12:30 PM, just after the car carrying President Kennedy had passed on the street below, I heard three loud reports which I first thought were firecrackers…After the third shot I observed the car carrying President Kennedy speed away.” (4-7-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 6H386-393) “I watched the motorcade... proceed around the corner on Elm, and apparently somebody in the crowd called to the late President, because he and his wife both turned abruptly and faced the building… from our vantage point we were able to see what the President’s wife was wearing, the roses in the car…Then we heard—then we were obstructed from the view…A tree. And we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a second shot, and then a third shot. It sounded like a firecracker or a cannon at a football game, it seemed as if it came from the right below rather than from the left above. Possibly because of the report. And after the third shot, following that, the third shot, I went to the back of the building down the back stairs, and encountered Bill Shelley and Bill Lovelady on the first floor on the way out to the Houston Street dock.”(When asked if she'd walked or ran to the back stairs) "I was running. We were running." (When asked if she saw anyone from when the shots were fired until she reached the ground floor) "Outside of our office employees; no." (2-2-02 interview with Barry Ernest recounted in The Girl On The Stairs, published 2011) "As they rounded the corner, they turned toward our building, waving and smiling. The car continued moving slowly and a tree obstructed my view. That is when I heard what I thought was a firecracker go off. As the car came back into view I saw that something was wrong and watched as Mrs. Kennedy appeared to be trying to climb out of the car." Otis Williams (11-24-63 FBI report, CD5 p.64) “at the time the Presidential procession passed the Texas School Book Depository Building, Williams was on the front steps of the building. The Presidential car had just passed the building a few seconds and was out of sight over the embankment when Williams heard three loud blasts. He thought these blasts came from the location of the court house. He did not look up and immediately went back into the building into his office on the second floor. A few minutes later, Detectives came into the building and he went with a Detective to check the second floor of the building.” (2-18-64 report of the Dallas Police Department, box folder 19 file 20 of the Dallas JFK Archive) "He heard three shots that sounded like they were coming from the west side of the Texas School Book Depository. The president's car had gotten out of Mr. Williams' view when he heard the shots. Mr. Williams then came back into the building, and went to his office on the second floor. He then went to the fourth floor after hearing that the President had been shot. He used the stairway to go to the fourth floor, but stated that he did not see anyone on the stairway." (3-19-64 statement to the FBI, 22H683) “On November 22, 1963, at the time the Presidential motorcade passed the Texas School Book Depository, I was standing on the top step against the railing on the east side of the steps in front of the building. I do not recall who was standing at either side of me, but I do know that Mrs. Robert E. Saunders, also an employee of the Texas School Book Depository, viewed the motorcade. Just after the presidential car passed the building and went out of sight over the Elm Street embankment I heard three loud blasts. I thought these blasts or shots came from the direction of the viaduct which crosses Elm Street. I did not then know that President Kennedy had been shot. I remained momentarily on the steps and then returned inside the building.” (No More Silence p.116-120, published 1998) “when the motorcade came around the corner and then made that bend to get to the underpass, I had a clear view as it passed by of the President and all in the car, and then it went behind a little wall going toward the underpass. Probably five or ten seconds later is when I first thought I heard the shots. The first one I assumed someone threw a firecracker… It was about five or ten seconds before he was hit when he went out of my sight. I definitely heard three shots. Fact is, as soon as the third shot happened, and everybody commenced milling around, I thought it came from the underpass. I entered the building immediately, climbed up the stairs back where the warehouse elevator was which led to the sixth floor and went up to the fourth floor, which was the first one I could see from to see the underpass. After I got up there and saw that nothing was going on on the underpass, I turned around and came back down to the office and called my wife. Soon, while we were talking, people came in, officers rushed in, and I had to get off the phone... I could have gone down the steps while Oswald came down, but he came down on the elevator. Anyway, I walked down the steps but didn't see him or anything.”
  5. Davis and McCully weren't in the building at the time of the shooting...at least not according to them. I believe them. I mean, if they were gonna fib about such a thing because they were afraid of the authorities it stands to reason they'd also lie about where they thought the shots had come from. But they didn't. They both said they thought the shots had come from west of their position, i..e someplace other than the sniper's nest. Mrs. Avery Davis (11-23-63 interview with FBI agent Nat Pinkston recounted in an 11-29-63 memo found in the Dallas FBI files at the Weisberg Archives) "On 11/22/63 she was standing on the front steps of the building when the president passed and she then heard three explosions. She did not realize they were shots and did not see anyone with a gun and immediately returned to the building and to the elevator to her fourth floor offices. She does not recall ever having seen Oswald before." (11-23-63 interview recounted in 12-10-63 FBI report, CD7 p.23) “she was standing on the front steps of the building when the president passed and she then heard three explosions. She did not realize they were shots.” (2-18-64 report of the Dallas Police Department, box 3, folder 19, file 6 of Dallas JFK Archive) "She saw the motorcade pass her location. From her location she heard the three shots but thought they came from the railroad to the west." (3-20-64 statement to the FBI, 22H642) “I am a caucasian female born April 13 (1916?)...At about 12:15 P.M. on November 22, 1963, I left the depository building and took up a position on one of the lower steps of the building entrance to view the Presidential motorcade as it passed on Elm Street. I recall that Judy McCully...was standing by me, I believe, on my left...A moment after the car in which President John F. Kennedy was riding passed, I heard three explosions. At first I did not realize these explosions were gun shots…I did not know from which direction the shots had come but thought they were from the direction of the viaduct which crosses Elm Street west from where I was standing.” Judy McCully (11-24-63 FBI report, CD5 p. 432) "On November 22, 1963, McCully was watching the Presidential Procession from the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building and just after the Presidential Car had passed the building, she heard a noise, which she thought to be a shooting. She did not know from which direction the shot was fired. At that time, she did not observe any suspicious activity on the part of anyone in the Texas School Book Depository Building, or among the persons in front of this building. McCully stated she is not acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald and does not recall ever having seen him in the Texas School Book Depository Building." (2-18-64 report of the Dallas Police Department, box 3 folder 19 file 13 of the Dallas JFK Archive) "Miss McCully stated that on November 22, 1963, she and Mrs. Avery Davis were standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository at 12:30 PM, and were watching the Presidential parade. She saw the President's car go by, and as the car proceeded down toward the triple underpass, she heard three shots. The shots sounded like they came from the right side of the building in the arcade... (3-20-64 statement to the FBI, 22H663) “I am a white female, born on August 13, 1943...On November 22, 1963...I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository Building with Mrs. Charles Davis, also an employee of Scott-Foresman, to watch the motorcade bearing President John F. Kennedy pass by the building. As the motorcade passed, I heard some shots fired, but did not know the direction from which they came...Miss McCully advised that when she was previously interviewed by FBI agents on November 24, 1963, she recalls telling them she was standing on the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository watching the Presidential motorcade pass by the building; however, she stated she wished to clarify this point by stating she was actually standing on the steps of the main entrance to the building and immediately following the shooting returned to the fourth floor."
  6. From re-reading what I've previously written on this issue, I realize that Hosty returned to his desk after the shooting (but before he'd interviewed Oswald) and found a memo regarding Oswald's writing the embassy...and that after confronting Oswald on this he went back to his office only to discover that the memo was missing and that he was in trouble for mentioning it to Oswald. I suspect, then, that he turned to Ruth Paine for help and asked her to copy the letter and give the FBI cover for their mail-opening operation. From chapter 1 at patspeer.com: In 1996, James Hosty, the FBI agent tasked with keeping tabs on Oswald in Dallas, published Assignment: Oswald, his take on the assassination of President Kennedy. There, he acknowledged that, as soon as he heard of Oswald's arrest, around 2:15 on November 22nd, he rushed to take a look at Oswald's file, and found a one-page communique summarizing an 11-9-63 letter from Oswald to the Soviet Embassy in Washington D.C. This letter began: "Dear Sirs. This is to inform you of recent events since my meetings with Comrade Kostin in the Embassy of the Soviet Union, Mexico City, Mexico." Oswald then complained about an FBI Agent "Hasty", who he claimed was harassing his wife. (Note: while I have not been able to find a copy of this communique, or even an acknowledgement it still exists, an 11-23-63 FBI memo from Roy Jevons to Ivan Conrad reports that this typed-up letter had been intercepted and copied by the FBI's Washington Field Office on the 18th, and that the FBI had since ID'ed the signature on the letter as Oswald's signature.) In any event, after reading this communique, Agent Hosty rushed over to Dallas Police headquarters, to observe and assist Capt. Will Fritz in his interrogation of Oswald. After Hosty introduced himself, Oswald became quite upset. You see, the "Hasty" in the letter--the agent Oswald believed was harassing his wife--was actually Agent Hosty. No blood was shed. After Oswald calmed down, so it goes, he apologized to Hosty, not only for getting so upset, but for leaving an unsigned note at Hosty's office on the 12th. This note, according to Hosty, had said "If you want to talk to me, you should talk to me to my face. Stop harassing my wife, and stop trying to ask her about me. You have no right to harass her." (Note: none of the reports of those in attendance at this interview made any reference to Oswald's discussion of this note. In fact, word of this note did not leak out for more than a decade, and only then because the former FBI secretary who took the note from Oswald told a reporter for the Dallas-Times Herald that the note had said Oswald was gonna blow up the FBI's Dallas office if Hosty wouldn't leave his wife alone.) And from there things only got stranger for Hosty. At one point in the interrogation, he thought about the communique he'd just read and an earlier communique from the CIA in which Oswald's trip to Mexico was discussed, and asked Capt. Fritz to ask Oswald if he'd been to Mexico City. According to everyone present, Oswald denied having visited Mexico City. They then adjourned so that Oswald could be placed in a line-up. When Hosty returned to his office, however, he found that he was the one in trouble. Not only were his superiors upset he'd brought up Mexico City during Oswald's interrogation, but they had found the unsigned note from Oswald in his desk! While Hosty was originally told the secretary who'd received the note from Oswald had recognized him on TV, and had told Hosty's superiors about the note, Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge Kyle Clark later told Hosty a different story, one Hosty came to believe. In this story, Assistant FBI Director William Sullivan--the man tasked with investigating the significance of Oswald's contact with the Soviets--called up the Dallas office while Hosty was with Oswald and told them to make sure Hosty didn't see the communique regarding Oswald's letter to the Soviet Embassy. (Presumably, Sullivan was afraid Hosty would ask Oswald about the letter, or, at the very least, give some other sign that the letter had been intercepted--such as asking Oswald why he'd complained about Hosty to the Soviets--and thereby compromise the security of the FBI's letter-opening operation in Washington. Note that this not only explains Sullivan's call about the communique, but the subsequent concern of Hosty's superiors over Hosty's asking Oswald about Mexico...) In any event, in Clark's version of the story (the one Hosty came to believe), Hosty's superiors came across the note from Oswald while digging through his desk looking for his copy of the communiques discussing Oswald's trip to Mexico. They then discussed what to do with this note, but made no final decision other than to move it to Special Agent-in-Charge J. Gordon Shanklin's "Do Not File" drawer.
  7. The Hosty notes are not notes per se, but are a first draft of a report. His actual notes were published in his book, and have long been available on the Lancer site. This draft is important but not for the reason most believe. He mentions in this draft that he confronted Oswald about contacting the Soviet Embassy. He wasn't supposed to ask Oswald about this because the only way he could have known about this at the time was if he'd been told the FBI had been reading the embassy's mail--which was a closely guarded secret. This put the FBI in deep. Well, lo and behold, the very next day Mrs. Paine presents Hosty with a copy she'd supposedly made of Oswald's letter to the embassy. This got Hosty off the hook. The commission would then proceed to pretend the FBI found out about Oswald's letter through Mrs. Paine, and the Soviets themselves. If I recall, it would be decades before anyone realized Hosty knew about Oswald's letter BEFORE the assassination. So...the timing of all this makes Mrs. Paine's withholding of the letter from the DPD, and then handing it over to Hosty, INCREDIBLY suspicious. She was almost certainly working as an informant, IMO. I suspect Hosty asked her to pretend she'd copied Oswald's letter, and she did as he requested. And it also draws a spotlight back on Hosty's report on the initial interrogation of Oswald. There was no report. Instead, there was a joint report written on this interrogation--supposedly by Bookhout and Hosty, even though Bookhout also submitted a separate report, as I recall. Well, this indicates Hosty's report was thrown in the circular filing cabinet, or, more likely, shredded, and that a bogus HQ-generated Bookhout/Hosty report was submitted instead.
  8. This finger-pointing at the CIA to draw attention from the military goes back to 1964. From patspeer.com, Chapter 1b: On February 12, 1964, the cinema classic Seven Days in May was released to the public. The film, a cautionary tale directed by John Frankenheimer, depicted an attempted military coup within the United States. The film's creation was encouraged by President Kennedy, who'd told a number of his friends that he thought such a coup was a real possibility should the president lose the support of the Pentagon. The initial response to the film reflects that elements of the media and government, even months after the assassination, still believed that their primary responsibility was to assure a worried public that everything was OK. As reported in David Talbot's Brothers, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner publicly questioned whether the film should even have been made, as "The world is on too short a fuse," and the film could damage "the American image abroad." Across town, the Examiner's larger rival the L.A. Times shared this concern but instead took the time to assure its readers that nothing like this could happen in America. Meanwhile, congressmen called for the film to be clearly labeled fiction before it could be shown overseas.The film certainly had an impact. A 2-14 memo from Secret Service Inspector Thomas Kelley to his boss James Rowley discussed proposed legislation making the investigation of a presidential assassination a federal offense, and the sole jurisdiction of the FBI. This, in Kelley's mind, would be a bad thing, and could lead to a "Seven Days in May situation" in which a "venal Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation could in the future bring about or allow the assassination of the President who he either felt was a poor President or a President unacceptable to him..." Kelley then proceeded to point out that the FBI has an appropriation for protection of the President, normally the responsibility of the Secret Service, "in case of an emergency" and that the Secret Service should similarly retain the capacity to investigate assassinations. (As Kelley had just conducted the Secret Service's investigation of the assassination, it can probably be assumed from this that he was not particularly impressed with the FBI's investigation, and that he had doubts about Director Hoover's determination to get to the bottom of the matter.)Meanwhile, across the country, Americans picked up the February 15, 1964 edition of The Saturday Evening Post. Inside was an article by the CIA-friendly columnist Stewart Alsop, not surprisingly defending the CIA against some recent charges that it was out of control and was conducting its own foreign policy. No doubt concerned about the effect these charges might have on the public, particularly when combined with the almost simultaneous release of Seven Days in May in the theaters, Alsop tried to cut off any speculation of CIA involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy. He actually went further than that, and made out that anyone questioning their involvement was a communist dupe. He complained about the recent treatment of the CIA in general, and then reported "a few highly respectable journals have even half-echoed The Communist Worker's charge that Lee Harvey Oswald, murderer of President Kennedy, went to the Soviet Union in 1959 as a CIA hireling." Alsop then shared even more certain knowledge that he could not possibly know, assuring his readers: "Lee Harvey Oswald never at any time had any connection whatever with CIA, although suspicions on that score are perhaps natural in view of the mystery surrounding Oswald's travels and his sources of income. The highest officials in the CIA are ready to so testify--and indignantly--before the Warren Commission investigating the murder. 'If anybody in the CIA had hired so obvious a psychotic,' says one of the greatest experts in the intelligence business, 'he should have been fired on the spot.'" One might rightly wonder if Alsop's "expert" wasn't Allen Dulles himself, seeking to cut off the questions he knew would not be answered by the Warren Commission. One might also wonder why the "highest officials in the CIA" would be so "indignant" about being asked such a reasonable question, by men who fully understood that they would lie with impunity.Two days later, on February 17, 1964, possibly at the prodding of the same CIA employees who'd probably prodded Alsop (this might have been Allen Dulles-let's be realistic), and possibly at the prodding of President Lyndon Johnson, with whom he was quite friendly and from whom he was hoping to receive a slot as Vice-President, Senator Thomas Dodd of Connecticut made a long speech defending the CIA. Dodd repeatedly, and cynically, quoted President Kennedy in support of the CIA. He concluded "I think it can be stated as a certainty that many countries that remain free today would not be free if it had not been for the CIA." The CIA's possible involvement in killing Kennedy was not among the litany of criticisms dismissed by Senator Dodd. Apparently, such talk was not to be acknowledged within the hallowed halls of the U.S. Senate. Within a few days, in its February 21, 1964 issue, Life Magazine published yet another article on Oswald, and once again convicted him in the public eye. The cover featured a photo of Oswald holding a rifle, with a pistol on his hip. The caption read "Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill President Kennedy and Officer Tippit." The cover story was entitled "The Evolution of an Assassin." This echoed a 12-20 Life article written with the help of the FBI's report. That article had been entitled "The Assassin: a Cold, Lone Man Who Resented All Authority." Real subtle.The media's investigation of Kennedy's assassination, if you could call it that, was by now pretty much over. They'd relied upon the FBI, and the FBI had misled them, for political purposes. A 2-24-64 FBI memo from F.J. Baumgartner to Deputy Director William Sullivan supports this point. It reports that Oswald's mother, Marguerite Oswald, and Mark Lane, a lawyer trying to present a public defense of Oswald, spoke at a public meeting in New York, sponsored by The National Guardian, a left-wing newspaper. It reports that "At this meeting it was implied that Oswald was not responsible for the assassination and the handling of the investigation by the Government was criticized." It then notes that a "reliable source"--clearly an undercover operative attending the meeting--spotted Alger Hiss, a one-time member of the State Department, accused of being a communist spy, and convicted of perjury relating to his involvement in the communist party--in attendance. Baumgartner then proposed that this be leaked to the press in order to discredit Lane and--by extension--those daring to imply that Oswald's guilt remained open to question. He even wrote the article he proposed and suggested it "be placed with a cooperative news media source at the Seat of Government." Although, as far as can be determined, this article never saw print, it seems clear that many sharing its bias, prevailed.Oswald had been convicted as the sole assassin by President Lyndon B. Johnson, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, the New York Times, Newsweek, T.V. Guide, and Life Magazine. The only witnesses called by the Commission up to this date had been members of his own family. If there had been conspirators still at large, they were now specks off in the distance.
  9. There really isn't much of a mystery about how the sixth floor shooter escaped. He took the elevator down as Baker and Truly were running up the stairs. Ball and Belin pretended this elevator was brought down by Dougherty. But that was a con job.
  10. From Vince's article: "At 12:45 p.m. CST, KRLD-TV, a CBS affiliate, reported that a Secret Service agent had been killed along with the President." The KRLD footage is now available on youtube. Eddie Barker mentions the death of an agent around 1:05 on the CBS feed. Barker specifies, however, that the agent shot was one traveling with the President, which we know didn't happen. He mentioned it a few minutes earlier on a video-taped segment taken before the bulk of the trade mart crowd knew about the shooting (which is also now available on youtube), and he says this segment was taped about a half hour after the shooting. So, yes, that puts the first report of a dead agent around 1:00. Before anyone could have known about the Tippit shooting. From someone nowhere near the President's limo, based on rumors he'd heard...AFTER some of the earliest reports had said the SS MAY HAVE returned fire. So, really, this appears to have come from the fact the last two shots were bang-bang. Some thought this meant more than one man was shooting, and somehow this got turned around into one of the SS agents being shot. Curious.
  11. There was so much bad info put out and then repeated by the press in the immediate aftermath of the shooting that I put little stock in the early claims an SS agent had been killed. It seems likely this was a miscommunication regarding the Tippit killing, that got repeated over and over. Of course, this theory can be easily disproved should anyone have mentioned a dead SS agent before Tippit was shot. As far as I can tell, however, the earliest mention of the dead agent was after Tippit was shot, and not before.
  12. Yes, there were technical problems with John Newman's presentation. For the last two years or so, Newman has been looking into Veciana's background, and has been surprised to discover that the paper trail re Veciana leads to military intelligence and not the CIA. He has taken from this that Veciana had no relationship with the CIA or Phillips--and that Veciana was convinced by military intelligence to say there was a relationship. I presume from this that he thinks Veciana was fed info about Phillips to point the HSCA in Phillips' direction, and thereby ensure the CIA would stay mum about the assassination. But I'm not entirely convinced--yet. Apparently, John believes there was no Bishop. I'm more inclined to believe there was a Bishop and that Phillips was Bishop--and even that Veciana knew Bishop--but that he never actually saw Bishop meet Oswald. P.S. John told me he was waiting to finish his deep dive before contacting Veciana.
  13. FWIW, David, I worked at an accounting firm for a brief time in high school. My recollection is that we--the employees of the accounting firm--typed up the W-2 forms...based on information provided by our clients. And I'm pretty sure we bought the forms from a stationery store. I distinctly remember screwing up and typing the wrong number in the cents column, and my boss telling me each form cost 25 cents or some such thing and it wasn't worth our time and money to re-type it so a 5 would be a 6, or vice-versa. My point is, then, that the forms came from a stationery company, and were not necessarily uniform in appearance. If you could find some old book or website detailing the legal standards for W-2 forms, then, that would go some distance towards convincing people Judyth's form is bogus. P.S. Flip-flops aka thongs were listed among the clothes taken into possession by the DPD. (26H587) It seems probable then that Judyth's claim about the flip-flops comes from reading the 26 volumes...
  14. The guy with the megaphone/bullhorn was Alex Jones.
×
×
  • Create New...