Jump to content
The Education Forum

Greg Wagner

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Greg Wagner

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

10,210 profile views
  1. Greg Wagner

    Tony Sforza

    Tony Sforza
  2. By my count, we have 9 witnesses who claim they saw a bullet hole in windshield: Frank Cormier, St Louis Dispatch Richard Dudman, St Louis Dispatch Stavis Ellis, DPD HR Freeman, DPD Dr Evalea Glanges Bill Greer, SS (told to Nick Prencipe, US Parks Police) Joe Paolella, SS Charles Taylor, Jr, SS George Whitaker, Ford
  3. Greg Wagner

    Where is the exit?

    Good question, Jim. I am far from a ballistics expert and the following is just my speculation, so take it for what it's worth. I believe the throat entry was likely a head shot that got diverted and fragmented as a result of passing through the windshield or the Stemmons sign. The fragment, having less mass than an intact bullet and reduced velocity due to the windshield or Stemmons sign impact, did not have the energy to traverse all the way through the neck. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t one of the guys who prepared Kennedy’s body for burial state that Kennedy’s cheek had small perforations that had to be sealed so the embalming fluid wouldn’t leak out? Perhaps those perforations were caused by smaller fragments from that same bullet. As this Secret Service report documents, there were bullet fragments found all over the interior of the limo. SS Report 11-22-63 Limo Inspection.pdf
  4. Greg Wagner

    I agree with Trump

    What it buys the establishment, neocon crowd is a bit of thinly veiled legitimacy for their unending campaign of killing people and gaining control of resources. Bringing NATO countries into their military attacks and occupations, in consequential or token form, allows the U.S. to present less like Darth Vader blowing up Alderaan and instead talk about taking such action as part of an international coalition of nations blah, blah, blah.... That's what we're paying for when we foot the bill for NATO - the illusion of credibility.
  5. Greg Wagner

    I agree with Trump

    Hi Steve. I agree. And it makes sense to me. The rivalries that emerged and the alliances that were formed after WWII have defined the world order for our entire lives. And just think about the massive capital investment, political structures and cultural impact of all that. It's no wonder the establishment is freaking out over Trump attempting to build a constructive relationship with Putin. Most of these people have spent their entire lives investing in those old structures. It's difficult for people to wrap their minds around a world that isn't defined by the traditional players carrying out the same old good guy and bad guy roles. One of the things I despise about Trump is he seems to be the very definition of a narcissistic, selfish capitalist with little or no regard for other people beyond what they can do for him. Oddly enough, I think it is those same traits that allow him to evaluate things without being encumbered by the dusty old chains of the past. He seems to have no qualms about taking a hard, cold, cost-benefit approach to things, jettisoning whatever doesn't produce value, and moving on. Talk about a double-edged sword. Now, if would only decide that it's time to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds...
  6. Greg Wagner

    I agree with Trump

    The list of reasons why I don't like Trump is long, but I have to agree with Jim here. The decades old paradigms that define the United States' relationships with Russia and NATO are out of step and out of time with today's reality. We can debate whether there was a better path forward after WWII, but at least these geopolitical alignments made some kind of sense in 1945. I'm not sure what purpose they serve today. Challenging the status quo, critically examining why we do things the way we do, taking things apart, looking at them from different angles and assessing them honestly has a lot of value. Doing that, cutting through the crap (the massive, entrenched establishment bs) and driving the change you think is right takes a lot of balls. It's the kind of thing politicians generally run and hide from. I want to reiterate that I generally can't stand this man. And people can debate whether Trump is charting the correct course. But I have to give the guy credit for making an honest assessment of these two massive pillars of American foreign policy and saying, "Look, these just don't make sense anymore." The other piece to this is it used to be the right who would gin up all this righteous indignation and "patriotic" fervor when anyone would dare question any part of the national security establishment. This came up time and time again in discussing agencies like the CIA and FBI and their activities around the JFK case. And it was people on the left who seemed to understand these agencies' nefarious history and found the idea of their complicity in the Kennedy assassination quite plausible. In the age of Trump, the left and right - and their respective media outlets - have switched places. The left (Is there even a real "left" in this country anymore?) is falling all over itself to cuddle, stroke and otherwise uphold the righteous honor and unwavering integrity of the intelligence agencies, while the right is screaming that they're crooked. I think that proves just how powerful the emotional ties are that people have to their politics and world view. I have no idea to what degree Russia tried to influence the election. Frankly, I'd be shocked if they did not make an effort. Our Government does not allow us to know their activities around such things, but does anyone seriously believe the U.S. doesn't do the same damn thing - and probably very effectively - all the time? With regard to Russian efforts, it comes down to whether or not you trust what our intel people are saying (I couldn't even type that without laughing). Their long, bloody, provable history of obfuscation, disinformation, lies, coups, assassinations, false flag ops and resistance to oversight gives them ZERO credibility. Even if they are telling the truth in this instance, so what? It would only be because it suits their current agenda. They think we are stupid. They will go to any lengths to conceal their true nature. They have done horrible, cruel things to human beings for decades and signed OUR names to it. And they've forced us to pay for it (At least the stuff they aren't financing through drug deals). So, trust what the intel community is telling us? Are you kidding me?
  7. Greg Wagner

    Howard Brennan Re-evaluated

    Does anyone have Brennan's 11-23-63 and 12-18-63 FBI statements? I have been able to locate the attached, but both seem to end in the middle of a sentence. They seem to be missing page 2. Thanks!
  8. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Micah... though not a definitive answer to your question, here's a related thread https://goo.gl/hVjXL4 I haven't been able to find much info on these two photos. The first image is from the December 1963 issue of POST https://goo.gl/FJ5hkN and the second one, taken from a higher floor, is one of a series taken from this location by Shel Hershorn https://goo.gl/yCgQtd What and who prompted these photos to be taken is certainly an interesting question.
  9. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Hi Linda. I am a member of that FB group, but I must have missed your Powell info. Thanks for sharing. As I've researched various individuals connected to this case over many years, you keep popping up. You've done great work on some of these guys. Nice job.
  10. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Good work, Vince. Thank you!
  11. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Hi Michael. I agree that presidential security in 1963 compared to today is apples and oranges. The striking differences between Kennedy's protection in Dallas and that three days earlier in Tampa, however, are easily provable. I don't want to regurgitate all the points Vince has laid out here, on his website, on YouTube and in his published works about this, but I don't see what is speculative about it. It is day and night. Though I totally disagree with much of the Hartmann/Waldron book, even they got that part right.
  12. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    I think it’s pretty hard to argue that Kennedy’s protection in Dallas was not compromised. In my opinion, the striking differences between Tampa on the 18th and Dallas on the 22nd are simply not explainable in any other way that makes sense. We can go back and forth all day about the absurd route down Elm Street, the motorcycles being reduced, agents on and off the car, the bubbletop, Rybka, rooftops, windows, overpasses, brake lights, Thomas Shipman, partying the night before, the dearth of local law enforcement and MI personnel supplementing the Secret Service, the complete and total lack of security at the exact point in the route where Kennedy is most exposed and all the rest. Probably not all of these glaring deficiencies are nefarious, but if anyone thinks they were ALL just a bunch of crazy coincidences, then we will have to agree to disagree. In my view, Vince and others have moved the ball far enough down the field that we are beyond endlessly debating all this. The real questions we should be asking about the Secret Service at this point are: 1. Were any members of the Secret Service witting participants in the assassination? If so, who? Boring, Roberts and Lawson are intriguing candidates, but who would have approached them? That would have been awfully dangerous. And why would they go along with it? 2. If there was no witting participation by members of the Secret Service and Kennedy's security was compromised by a more subtle and sophisticated effort, then who was handled by whom? Where was the connection between the plotters and the Dallas trip planners / Secret Service? This would have been at a high level, with orders rolling down hill from there. My opinion is that the perpetrators had one goal in Dallas and that was to kill Kennedy. Everything else was on the “not essential but nice to have” list. Getting the motorcade to come down Elm Street, chipping away at JFK’s protection any way they could think of and even executing the Oswald patsy angle were certainly elements of the operation. But none of them were show stoppers.
  13. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Just to add a bit more to the military intelligence presence in Dealey Plaza that day, I give you David Aubrey Sooy. Sooy was a career Naval officer and probably ONI. He was commander of the Naval Air Station in Dallas for a few years in the late 50's and when JFK was shot, Sooy was sitting in his car waiting for the motorcade to pass the TSBD. Sooy and his location/presence Dealey Plaza is a matter that has been discussed here before https://goo.gl/TVs7iM Sooy knew Frank Krystinik (Krystinik and Sooy below; thanks to James Richards). Prior to the assassination, Krystinik met Oswald through Michael Paine. Just another one of those amazing coincidences.
  14. Greg Wagner

    Building rooftops: imagine Dealey Plaza...

    Hi Jim. You mean James Powell? I doubt he knew what was about to happen. Somebody did, though. The interesting question is who put him in Dealey Plaza with a camera that day. Does anyone have a photo of James Powell? https://goo.gl/6e23Fd Along those lines and even more interesting is Stuart Reed. The guy worked as an executive for the Canal Zone Civilian Personnel Policy Coordinating Board in Panama. He ends up in Dallas on 11/22/63, takes photos in and around Dealey Plaza, including McWatters' bus around the time Oswald would have been on it, AND THEN happens to be at the Texas Theatre to photograph Oswald being arrested. He drops off his film to be developed in Dallas and on 11/26 he signs an authorization allowing the FBI to pick up his developed photos as he leaves for New Orleans to catch a boat back to Panama. Seems legit. <sarcasm.jpg> I think it's reasonable to consider that Reed may have been handled by the same person who put James Powell in Dealey Plaza. Any connections Reed may have had to Army Intelligence would be of great interest. https://goo.gl/NLk641 By the way, Winston Lawson was Army CIC from 1953-55. At least, those are the years his Army Intel service is documented. Lawson was at Fort Holabird at the same time Richard Case Nagell was there. Probably a coincidence, that whole thing. But Army Intelligence seems to pop up everywhere. Back to the topic at hand. The security in Tampa vs the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza only 3 days later is, in my opinion, the strongest evidence for an inside man or men around the Dallas trip/motorcade. Consider the Tampa trip security that Vince has documented. Now look at the windows, overpasses and rooftops throughout the Craven film in Dallas https://goo.gl/XnmgXL, along with the many other films and photos documenting such. There are people crawling all over the place and it was a much shorter drive in what was expected to be a potentially hostile environment. Had local law enforcement and MI units been fully utilized as on other trips, manpower would not have been an issue. Not to mention the route selection, Lawson managing the motorcycles at Love field and the Rybka incident. It really starts to add up, doesn't it? In my opinion, the professionals involved in the Dallas op were going to kill Kennedy with or without compromised protection. Contingencies were in place to get him in Dallas regardless of how the security ultimately unfolded. My guess is - and this is total speculation - there was a link somewhere high up the food chain between someone like Morales or Phillips and someone with enough juice to pull the right levers around the Texas trip planning. It could have been sold to them as Kennedy wanting to be more visible in Dallas to afford favorable photo opportunities or whatever. I'm not so sure about witting participation by members of the Secret Service, though. Opening the kimono and stating, "Hey, we are planning to kill JFK in Dallas and we want your help" would have been a significant risk. Jim and Vince, thanks for your many valuable, thought-provoking posts. Always a treat