Gerry Simone

Thank you for posting this.

I wish the Plaintiffs and legal team well.  We need some positive results on this important matter. 

I only briefly browsed the Shout website but have bookmarked it.  Do they ship to Canada?*

*I haven't decided if I can attend the event in Quebec City but that would be great.  I can buy it there and maybe get it autographed by you. Incidentally, is there an EF post about that conference with the latest details?

On 5/30/2022 at 9:42 PM, Pat Speer said:

...

That's the way the deep state works, IMO. They don't need to have secret meetings. They just need to pursue their self-interest, and corruption and death follow.

 

I agree, except of course when powerful, economic entities need to collude in order to restrict competition or raise prices. 

Jefferson Morley's Deep States blog deals with powerful and influential intelligence agencies, so it's not just about big business.

(And yes, fascinating story about the record industry Pat.  I think it was the Eagles who talked about being "indentured servants").

I read the presentation slides (in PDF format) that was shared via the Kenned & King link, yesterday.  Excellent intro or refresher of the case. 

10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

What are you talking about.

Are you under the impression that the lightened circle, within the shadow area, around PM, is a camera flash?

Do you not understand that it was created by selecting that area and using lightening techniques in Photoshop.

Or, do you actually think the white object near the face is a camera flash?

Neither are a flash. See gif below.

Now, I did say at some point I thought the object near the face might be a camera or a mug or a ??? who knows.

 

 

 

Agreed. Thanks for your GIF.  It looks like that person is raising a coffee cup or mug to their mouth to take a sip.

12 hours ago, John Butler said:

Gerry,

I did think at one time PM was holding a coke.  But, the John Martin film changed that.  A PM figure on Elm Street is taking photos.  His camera flashes.   Then Chris Davidson showed that there was a camera flash with PM.

 

This connects the two.  No coke.  It is a camera.

This bit of evidence establishes one of the Oswald's innocence.  PM is Harvey Oswald the man shot at the Dallas Police Station.  There were two there.  Lee is a good candidate for Doorway Man in Altgens 6 altered into Billy Lovelady.  After the assassination he vanishes from history.  Almost all traces of Lee Oswald are removed from the media record.

I think Lee Oswald thought he might become the patsy if Harvey could establish an alibi.  So, that is why he is in the doorway of the TSBD at the time of the assassination on Elm.

This montage comparison is the best two photos I can find to compare Harvey and Lee.  Folks will swear these are the same person.  And, that's how they got away with the things that they did since they were children.

To me these are two different people:

 

Thanks for your reply.

I was joking about the Coke but I don't think that's a camera but more like a coffee mug or cup.

I don't rule out a Harvey and Lee (one real, one impostor), however, I believe that's Billy Lovelady by the edge of the doorway (you can faintly see the lines of the plaid shirt - if it's Lee wearing his speckled, reddish brown shirt that he wore that morning, it would appear more as a solid, dark colour from where Altgens is shooting).  There are other pics of Lovelady walking moments later with Shelley out front and the shirt matches what we see by the doorway.

19 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Ray's comment at that time was dead on.  Mine needs improvement.

I am certain that Prayer Man is a man and Oswald.  The Martin film, Couch/Darnell film, and Chris Davidson's gif showing PM with an expensive camera and camera flash, PM's red shirt in Martin (see Andrej Stancak), along with their general appearance, links PM to Oswald.  PM had a camera on Elm Street under the trees filming the p. limo as it went by at the time of the shooting.  Before Officer Baker ran into the building, PM moved to the steps of the TSBD and continued filming the motorcade.  He went into the recessed part of the landing taking cover and concealment due to the shooting.

 

   

I tend to think it resembles a man if not Oswald too.  Maybe the blurry quality of the image increases the person's girth. Is he holding a Coke (lol).  In any event, and further to my comment about what Frazier said at that Lancer Conference, I do believe that witnesses were intimidated or coerced to align with the prevailing scenario, if not ignored.  And if you were an African American, perhaps more troubling to be a witness in Oswald's favour (maybe those two who walked by the 1st floor lunchroom saw Oswald but only admitted to a vague recollection of seeing an employee having their lunch). There's the possibility that PM stepped out momentarily and went back inside, undetected by others.  However, after hearing shots, you'd think you'd stick around (unless that meant trouble for yourself or a plan was in place).

I don't recall if I commented on this thread earlier but I attended a Lancer conference in 2015 which invited Buell Frazier and his son to speak (supposedly, a book was in the works).  Frazier only mentioned that Oswald came around to the front from the east side of the building (presumably from the rear entrance) after the shooting. 

On 6/11/2018 at 4:47 PM, Andrej Stancak said:

Jim:

you may wish to check my analysis of the locations and body heights of Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Sanders: http://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com (January 31).

 

Excellent work Andrej.

On 12/18/2017 at 6:43 AM, David Butler said:

HSCA document on Oswald in Mexico - Previously released in part. Looking on the MFF site there were a few redactions on the previous one there so adding this one here in case it is of interest

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/180-10142-10302.pdf

Also this one which contains some of the same pages but is shorter

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/180-10142-10301.pdf

Report on Elena Garro de Paz - Again released previously but this one is less redacted although still has some redactions

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/180-10142-10304.pdf

Hello David,

I was doing some reading about Oscar Contreras, which led me to document 180-10142-10302.  In that document, his story begins on section D (page 52 of the report or page 56 of the PDF document), but seems to be incomplete, as the last sentence of the report's final page does not have an end "The following day, July 5, 1967, the Mexico City Station".  

Where does this report continue with the part about Oscar Contreras?

Thanks.

On 4/18/2017 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Graves said:

Ostensibly perhaps then I guess that kinda almost settles it.

Thanks for the "input".

It may seem trite to say Thomas, but here's a quote by Doug Horne.

"...No doubt they were given a ‘World War III’ cover story like LBJ used on everyone else in the coming weeks.”

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.ca/2012/03/what-happened-to-jfks-body-cover-up-on.html

Cheers (back to the Forum later - gotta get going cuz can't miss my beloved Maple Leafs vs. Washington Capitals).

6 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

No surprise there.

 

 

It should also come as no surprise, that a course of action didn't turn out as planned.  (see Murphy's law).

It was Johnson and Hoover that decided to pin it on Oswald alone not the treasonous cabal that planned the murder itself (not saying either of these men didn't have foreknowledge).

Would the extreme right, Cuban or Mafia assets have participated in any way shape or form in a conspiracy if it was revealed to them, before the fact, that the reality was that risking nuclear war with the USSR wasn't worth starting a major conflict with Cuba? I know it's shocking to you that people willing to murder a President could also mislead, lie and entice people to do assorted nefarious acts.

Killing Kennedy and the invasion of Cuba was a right wing wet dream. 1 out of 2 ain't bad.

 

We can speculate all day, but I believe that Oswald wasn't meant to survive his capture and that the combination of the "Raleigh Call" and "I'm a patsy" sealed his fate.

 

Recent history should educate you. lock her up. build a wall. drain the swamp. hold China's feet to the fire. NATO should pay. lies.

 

All valid points Chris but it's hard to make money in a world after global thermonuclear war (if there's a world left).

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

This good question gets to the core of it.

The only reason for the pre-autopsy autopsy was to support the LN theory.

There was no other reason.

So the only real question is WHEN the LN theory was first conceived.

The LBJ-did-it CTer has NO CHOICE but to insist that it HAD TO BE conceived WEEKS in advance.

Yet it makes no sense to me -- why would anyone PLAN a Lone Nut scenario?  There was no Necessity for it.

The ONLY reason to push willy-nilly for a Lone Nut theory is when one is FORCED to push for it.

Here's why: the Military brass at Bethesda would easily fall in line for a last minute, National Security issue from LBJ to push a Lone Nut theory.  But they would never approve of assassination of a President weeks in advance, and prepare a pre-autopsy autopsy.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Here's my take:

They tried it before in Chicago but it never got off ground (i.e., there was supposed to be another lone nut as you know).  The lone nut scenario and a pre-planned autopsy ensures that an investigation doesn't get out of hand and is contained or controlled.  I think the latter was very important to the plotters who many believe were not foreigners (I would hazard to say that that's the consensus of the research community).  Without the involvement of the Soviets or Cubans, the plotters' knew that their Communist conspiracy set-up wasn't going to be persuasive, so they needed to control the autopsy, which was done by select, key figures who exploited the chain of command at a military hospital, and nudged the WH in that direction. That was to avoid looking further into Oswald's past and possible connections.  They probably knew that the new and ambitious President from the south, wouldn't want to blame the assassination on a Soviet/Cuban conspiracy and start a WW because of the Oswald impostor shenanigan, for one thing. So LBJ didn't have to have foreknowledge or be a mastermind, but he may have been an unwitting accomplice to a cover-up of a domestic conspiracy.  In a way, the plotters left LBJ with no choice but to go with the flow or facilitate it.

Quote by Jim Garrison seems apropos here: "I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that Fascism will come to America in the name of National Security"

4 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Shirt color?

Bill Shelley was wearing a dark-colored, un-patterned suit over a white shirt that day.

That's him on the right.

--  Tommy

PS  If I understand your question correctly (always a risky assumption), yes there is.

In other words, the explanation you seek is very simple --- it wasn't Shelley who was walking down Elm Street "with" that other guy (who looks like Lovelady) in that dizzying Couch-Darnell GIF or in the blowups thereof.

But then again, I probably don't know what you're talking about.

LOL

Thank you again.

Sorry, I meant for Wesley Frazier.  On the landing of the TSBD, his shirt seems light colored but the inset photo and another of him inside the DPD station, it looks like a dark shirt. Any explanation for that?  (Did he change his shirt too?)

P.S.  I just noticed that your posted pic above is a frame capture from the CNN 60s series.  Man, you guys in this forum are good.  

On 4/16/2017 at 6:16 AM, Thomas Graves said:

Were JFK's wounds altered in order to prevent WW III?

Ostensibly perhaps, but more to prevent a fuller investigation and/or promote the lone gunman scenario.

41 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear Gerry,

To my knowledge, no one on this forum has ever claimed that Frazier was photographically "captured" walking down Elm Street Extension with another man about 30 seconds after the assassination.

It's obvious to me that you're confusing Frazier with the guy Bart Kamp says is "William Shelley" in the dizzying Couch-Darnell clip, walking with the guy Bart Kamp claims is "Lovelady" on his right in said dizzying clip. 

--  Tommy

My apologies.  You're right Tommy.  It's supposed to be William Shelley walking down the Elm St. extension.  Thank you.  However, is there an explanation for what appears to be a difference in the shirt color?

(P.S.  Looks like I'll have to study my DVD of the Assassination Films by Groden later too).

It's not like there was a letter FROM Kostikov (now THAT would be different).  

Oswald was made to look like an ambitious Commie wannabe and lapdog of Castro (he was made to look like he was trying to impress him but there's no evidence that he got any direction from him).

10 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Gerry,

I made a little presentation on the discovery that Lovelady was still standing on the TSBD steps after the shooting, and not walking down Elm Street Extension as was previously thought:

Did Billy Lovelady remain on the TSBD steps after Officer Baker's arrival?

The presentation has a useful animated gif that shows Lovelady's hairline as he turns his head.

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply and with your link.

Quote

5 )  My statement to you:  Sandy Larsen and I believe that the guy I'm talking about here (i.e., the guy whose face and bald forehead are glowing like crazy in the sunlight -- the guy standing in front of the woman who's wearing the black blouse and black headscarf) is Billy Nolan Lovelady, and that that woman he standing in front of (who's wearing the black blouse and the black headscarf) is one Gloria Jean Calvery (who, I should warn you, has been confused for another woman, Stella Jacob) for many, many years in the photographs and films that were taken of the motorcade, photographically confused, I say, with another TSBD employee as she (i.e., Gloria Jean Calvery) was standing, with some of her (also headscarf-wearing!) co-workers, down on the north side of Elm Street during the motorcade.

--  Tommy 

Tommy,

Thank you for spoon-feeding me all this info and the footage (Yes, I'm aware who PM is.  Newbie on this forum but not new to the JFK Assassination debate although not an expert on every aspect, if any).

I see every person you've meticulously described, including who you think might be BL.

I can't say for sure if that's BL but it could be him, even by what Sandy has posted below your post that I've quoted (thank you Sandy) with what may be his white undershirt exposed.

But I have a follow-up question.

If the red oblong circle supposedly is Frazier (in my earlier posted frame), why is there a difference in the shirt color between the Frazier standing on the landing in that Darnell still frame (not the inset photo) and the Frazier supposedly walking towards the knoll or parking lot on the Elm St. extension?  The former is light, the latter is dark (like the shirt worn by Frazier in the inset photo).  Maybe that's not Frazier on the Landing?  So maybe that's not BL either down below?

I think Frazier was wearing this dark shirt on that fateful day, as the pic below.

On 4/16/2017 at 11:42 PM, Ron Ecker said:

David,

I very much look forward to your book. Is there a publication date yet?

 

Me too.  

20 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

If the goal of the plot was to frame some random lone nut why did they frame someone who was anything but?

We have the benefit of hindsight, don't we?  People believed in their institutions and the "fake news" at the time.

Being a communist sympathizer didn't make one a popular or well-liked person.  They demonized Oswald.

On 4/16/2017 at 2:47 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

I like Ron Ecker's Plan B hypothesis so much that I thought I'd repeat it and expound on it a bit.
 

Ron Ecker's Plan B Hypothesis -- From the point of view of the plotters:

The plan is to create a pretext for war with the Russians. (Or an invasion of Cuba?). We will paint Oswald as a communist plotter and make him the fall guy.. We will do so with the Kostikov / "Comrade Kostin" subplot.

We will have multiple gunmen to ensure that Kennedy is killed.

Plan A is to have Oswald killed shortly after the assassination so he can't talk. The wounds in the body will reveal that there were multiple gunmen, and so the authorities will launch a full-scale investigation searching for these gunmen and any other plotters. But that's okay... due to the evidence that Oswald acted under communist control, the investigation will be nothing but a wild goose chase looking for communist agents and assassins.

The pretext for war is achieved if all goes well.

But if something should go wrong that might reveal the true source of the plot (the CIA et. al.), Plan B will be implemented. Plan B is designed to silence key people and to limit the investigation as much as possible. The best evidence for multiple shooters are the gunshot wounds. Therefore the body must be snatched and altered as best as possible to make it appear that the shots came from behind. That way the blame and the investigation will be limited to Oswald (and his communist conspirators).

End Hypothesis

When Oswald was taken alive, he was sure to spill his guts about his CIA activities. Thus Plan B was triggered. He (and Tippet) were silenced in accordance with the plan. And JFK's body was snatched and altered in accordance with the plan.

 

EDIT: I based the above on Ron's hypothesis. Some of it may not reflect his views.

 

I think the main objective was to kill Kennedy and not make it look like a conspiracy (frankly, I think the public wouldn't believe that a bunch of commie assassins killed JFK in Dallas but more the opposite, as in a domestic conspiracy). 

I think Operation Northwoods lost steam, and the interest in Cuba waned a bit, but the hatred by those who were affected by what had happened in Cuba was still there, and they weren't going to allow further changes in foreign policy, and perhaps also seek revenge.

On 4/16/2017 at 3:57 PM, Ron Ecker said:

Why do you say that? The Warren Commission conducted what everyone considered to be a "serious investigation," and on Oswald it concluded that "His commitment to Marxism and communism appears to have been another important factor in his motivation." More than 50 years later, that remains the official history of Lee Harvey Oswald. 

It may be obvious to us that his Communist credentials were fake, but so what?

 

If his Communist credentials were fake, the new President wasn't about to order an invasion of Cuba or otherwise retaliate against the Soviets.

On 4/16/2017 at 0:04 PM, Michael Walton said:

I don't understand some of you people......there is nothing but personal beliefs for seeing Lovelady in Darnell on the steps. You have no evidence to back your beliefs and prefer to eat the lemon called their WC testimonies. Think for a second about that!

I have to go with what my eyes are seeing, Bart.  You've done great work on PM but the GIF below, at the very beginning, looks like a bald-headed guy and the pattern of his shirt looks like Lovelady. This is by no means scientific, of course, as many other theories of the case are unscientific as well. But the bald guy is almost in the exact same spot as he was when he was up a little more and leaning over as seen in that other footage and as seen in Altgens.

Like I said, too, your "two guys down on the Annex" also look like Lovelady and the other guy (sorry I can't remember his name).

Again, look at the very first frame or two of the GIF below - there's like a moment of clarity in it and it really does look like Lovelady.  Is it?  Are your two Annex guys Lovelady?  It does leave a quandary in your otherwise well-done PM.You really, truly have to ask yourself - who is the bald guy up there on the steps in the GIF below?

Michael/Thomas,

I'm sorry that I don't know the sequence of these "lesser" films and photographs, so I'll have to study them in more detail before I can understand their order and timing, and where they might show some overlap.  

In any event, in the attached frame with BWF superimposed in the top right corner (presumably this is from Bart Kamp's site?), if that's Frazier standing high on the top step, wouldn't BNL not be far from him?

I don't know if that sort of answers your question (I understand about seeing him in two places at the same time if I understand correctly, but we need to 1st establish if that's him in the first place).  I do see the lady in black and the lady in white, and somebody is between them and PM.  Lovelady?  Is there any possibility that the sequence or order and timing of the films is slightly incorrect so that it gives the illusion of one person being in two places at the same time (if that's the nature of the problem)?

On 4/16/2017 at 9:48 AM, Bart Kamp said:

 

To me that looks like Billy Lovelady (from his plaid shirt and bald spot at the crown of his head - the FBI mug shots are him wearing a different shirt).