Jump to content
The Education Forum

Mark Stevens

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mark Stevens

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,421 profile views
  1. Paul, It is the handwritten portion of the document in David's post.
  2. I've been digging into this since I saw the document last night. I, unfortunately lost all of my JFK books years ago when a roof collapsed and destroyed those and other documents, pictures, etc. I believe the answer is in Newman's "Oswald and the CIA." My thoughts are that the person is male (obviously by the wording of the document) and is very likely a person in the Cuban government. I initially believed it to be Luis Alberu Soeto but I don't this is correct. Soeto was apparently already working with the the CIA in 1963, and the documents state the person was not recruited until 1964 I think this could rule out Soeto. I'm still not sold on that though. Document 104-10326-10011 states From (a very old) memory, I believe it was named as Soeto. Document 104-10331-10315 states: Does anyone know who "T/9" is? I'm fairly sure this person is a Cuban who doubled for the CIA, L/9 is Soeto, is T/9 a completely different cryptonym?
  3. Does anyone know if these can be downloaded in bulk like the last releases? I would hate to have to download 600+ individual files.
  4. Well the first withheld in full document I opened was on Harvey, just one page of testimony from Bissell. I personally had not previously seen this one, docid-32281870.
  5. Thanks Larrry, I believe document count could be a tricky thing and I'm not sure what exactly everyone is counting as a document. MFF states 3,751 withheld in full. 36,000 (ish) formerly redacted. The tricky part comes to defining how everyone is using "document/record." For example, the file I am currently looking at is a PDF of 142 pages, but it is one file. Of those 142 pages, there are many different records merged into the file. Is the one file counted as a document/record or each of the 142 pages? If it's the pages, we may never truly know unless someone takes on the daunting task of cataloging how many pages are in each PDF and then comparing that. If it is the file its self, then they are well short on promised releases. Based on the spreadsheet included, only 52 of the files released today (and not part of the July release) were previously withheld in full. Including July it is 477. This is a file count though, and each file could have multiple documents if that's how they are being counted (and I believe they are). I wouldn't expect 36,000 + files, but that many documents between the released files. I'm going to jump straight to those formerly withheld in full which were released tonight. * I saw your edit after I posted. That is closer to what I'm seeing in the bulk file.
  6. I was able to get the bulk files to extract and with the bulk file I also have an Excel file as a list. The bulk file had 6,702 files, but the spreadsheet has 6,685. Do you happen to know how many were released in July? After removing what I think are the July releases from the bulk file there are 5,783 files left. The files in my July release folder number 1,132, but I'm not sure if I moved any to other folders. I'm going to start going through them tonight. I'm sure many others are as well, but if there are any particular documents, subjects, etc.. someone would like posted please let me know.
  7. While I'm surely not as versed in these documents as you are, I know many of the files I viewed in the July release were previously released with redaction. I'm sure the same is true of this release. I have seen some say many documents were previously withheld in full, both on this release and the July release. I have a vast collection of documents but I couldn't begin to determine which are entirely new releases, and which are now released with no redaction unless I renamed all of my files to be consistent with the naming conventions of the NARA files. Many of mine are in this format, but most have been renamed for better categorization. I guess it's a good thing I "have some time off," I'll need it to wade through this crap they've released.
  8. I've managed to get a few of the files opened from the bulk download. So far, every file I've opened is one released in July. From the bulk file I'm having difficulty determining what is "new." I'll continue trying to repair the archive and if I can get the files extracted I'll put up a list of what was new in this release versus what is a duplicate release from July (if this isn't already available).
  9. I asked for the bulk files and I've downloaded 20 gb of files in 11 archives. The archive is corrupt though and I cannot open it. I'm going to delete the files I downloaded and try it all again. Not sure what corrupted or if it was my end or theirs. Anyone else do the bulk download? Were your files corrupt? *Update* Redownloaded all 11 files, corrupt. Anyone else experiencing this?
  10. Hey Jim, The training manager at my site was a teacher for 20 years. If you would like for me to ask her to review the records and provide her opinion / perspective I would be glad to ask. Just post here, or send me a pm with what you would like her to review.
  11. Hello Jim, It would appear to be true based on information regarding the photo in the WCR. I cannot find any information about the photo regarding when and where it was taken though and knowing that would be beneficial in establishing the true age and lineage of the photo. There are enough similarities between the blemishes on the photos and the subjects to believe the same photo was used for each one though. Commission Exhibits 2891/2892: http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/pdf/WH26_CE_2892.pdf Military ID's from page one: http://harveyandlee.net/JH PIX/LHO 2 ID cards.jpg http://harveyandlee.net/JH PIX/LHO ID card.jpg Hidell Selective Service Card: http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0153b.htm Something interesting I saw, and forgive me if it has been mentioned before but in the lower right corner of both the WCR photo and the ID photo there is a rounded blemish. On the Military ID photo the blemish is both partially obscured and "explained" by the stamp in the same position. On the WCR photo though there is no real explanation for the blemish, but it does further solidify that they are the same photo. The blemish is also visible on the Selective Service Card but how visible it is depends on the version of the card photo you view. This version of the Oswald photo is cropped just below the head and just a small sliver of the top of the blemish is visible.
  12. I had another reply, but I tried to erase a sentence, hit backspace, and it went back a page and I lost it all. Good times. I do not believe this is with John F. Kennedy Jr. It seems like this is an interview with Tony Brown. The main point which clearly indicates this fact is this question: "WRITE THE FIRST NEWS HEADLINE ABOUT YOUR ADMINISTRATION." "President Tony Brown Overthrows the Ruling-Class Conspiracy." I'm not sure why the Editor's note states "interview with John F. Kennedy Jr." It's possible he conducted the interview, but he is not the subject.
  13. I'm 32 and currently working towards completing my degree program in business systems analysis. I have been fascinated with JFK from a young age and as a boy had the opportunity to interview Nick McDonald regarding his life and Lee Harvey Oswald's arrest. I have followed the forum for some time and have learned a great bit from the information posted here as well as from the dedicated researchers who have been active here. I look forward to being a part of the community and hope that I can not only learn more about all the topics involved, but contribute to them as well.
  • Create New...