Michael Clark

Hmm, in an article today, Trump added Steve Bannon (Chief Strategist) to the NSC and removed the CJC and the DNI from same. Am I incorrect in directly relating the two events? How strange is it to have a Chief Strategist on the NSC and not the DNI and CJC, and how crazy is it that it is Steve Bannon? Do you think Trump wants Bannon around for such phone calls in the future, instead of Pence? Both the JCS and the DNI require confirmation. The Senior Counselor, and Chief Counselor do not require confirmation. and.... "From Wikipedia".... by Presidential Policy Directive 19 signed by Barack Obama in October 2012, the DNI was given overall responsibility for Intelligence Community whistleblowing and source protection. From Wikipedia: "The position appears to have roughly the same level of authority as the Chief of Staff position. The position's level of decision making authority within the hierarchy of the President's personal staff was reported by the New York Times: "The arrangement appeared aimed at ensuring that both (the Chief of Staff and Chief Strategist) would be required to sign off on many decisions jointly." --- I bet COS Priebus gets replaced tout de suite!

That is the first post in this thread. The link to the Spartacus bio does not work for me. I am posting a link to that bio that does work for me. http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKscottW.htm

Oswald was getting peppered with questions. I think his answer and the question are vague enough to discount it as not definitive as where he exactly was. Sure, he, sort of, had an opportunity to say that he was on the steps but he has larger fish to fry. The fact that this clip is one of few that survive can speak to the possibility that it's survival was selective.

Thanks Paul, I have taken a few liberties in recent days, with things I have claimed that are possible. I'll avoid that in the future. I read-up on Frazier's life after Dealy Plaza. I recall a fairly extensive military career, but I don't recall marriages or children. I'll have to look into that again. I don't find a young guy like that, befriending a coworker and neighbor odd. Offering a ride in that situation in 1963, with those living and working conditions, struggling, does not seem odd. And Oswald would have seemed to be an interesting fellow with his military and Russian experiences, and who knows what else he may have shared with Frazier. There definitely seems to be a lot of assertions of gayness, between New Orleans, The Carousel and now the TSBD. It's so odd. And none (?) of these notions are more than suggestions. On a possibly ancillary note, I closely read Ruby's first WC interview today, and I am in the middle of the later one. His warning of an apocalyptic doomsday, particularly for Jews, is striking. It's a damn shame that they did not get him to Washington to hear him out. It Is speculation, but it sounds like he would have implicated Walker, The JBS and the DPD. I find it bizarre that they just let him ramble on and skate areound questions about what he did between, say, midnight and dawn on the 23rd. It is precisely before he says that he picked up Senator that he got sketchy with his testimony. Officer Harry Olson drives to the garage at the Carousel, at midnight, with Kathy Kay. He sees Ruby there. A couple hours later Ruby sees Kathy Kay, fooling with officer Carlson, in a car. Sombody has their story wrong, and something is going on at the Carousel and the garage. I have not seen Ruby state that he went to a diner with Senator in the middle of the night. Perhaps I'll find it after the lie detector test. I have to see if Kathy Kay was interviewed by the WC.

I have read several Zapruder film threads and other related articles, blogs etc. I have not read all of this thread. In none of those threads do I recall seening an account of the processing of the Zapruder film that I did read elsewhere and I think it is interesting and it could be helpful. The original Zapruder film was a "double 8" reel of film. This means that, like a cassette tape, you run it (play or record it), flip-it, and you can then run (play or record) the other side. The account that I read is that the "B" side, if you will, had Zapruder family recordings on it. When the film was split, the family recordings were restored to viewable condition, as were the Dealy plaza recordings, and then they went off to wherever they went off to. It seems to me that the "B" side recording, the family films, could be, and could always have been, useful in determining what is presently missing from the film that we see. I don't know if this has been persued at all but I thought I should bring it up since I have not seen it discussed. Cheers, Mike

Posting this to get another of Jack White's Southland Hotel Cafe's identifications up front.

And here, BK does not Identify the cafe in which Ruby, Senator and Crafard met, in the pre dawn hours of 11-23-63, as the Southland Center Cafe, or any other cafe. He say it is in Deep Ellum. According to my maps, the Southland Center is not in Deep Ellum.

And here, Jack White is saying the cafe, assuming it was the pre-dawn visit by Jack Ruby, accompanied-by George Senator, on 11-23--63, is a different cafe than his identification of the cafe as the "Southland Hotel Cafe" (distinct from the Southland Center) that he (Jack White) says was a hotel behind the DPD station. Jack says that Captain Fritz lived there and that the cafe was a "copshop". ***Here, I will edit-in that (Jack's) quote.***

That is unfortunate, my only hope was that Trump is uncompromised, and not owned. ***edit--- Pehaps Howard Stern can save him.

Bill, Allistair, I get it. It's bad form to post like I did. Some members go into great detail with their observations. It is only when I don't go into detail that it doesn't feel right. It does feel good when you provide the documentation and stick with hypotheses that your documentation can support. It's just frustrating when you give the conspirators all the benefit of the doubt when they have the weight of all levels and quarters of the government helping them run.

To me, Baker looks more like he is running by than running to the steps. I just look at sandy's argument and make a decision as to how it looks to me; I try not to get too into it. As far as testimony goes, I don't want to call anyone a prevaricotor, but the WCR as a unit is a lie and there is too much solid info that there was tremendous fear, intimidation pressure and outright falsification, omission and deletion of accounts to just accept everyone's story at face value. There were enough people there, looking and pointing at the TSBD to influence Baker's actions. I cant discount the story of the 5th floor guys eating lunch who heard shots fired, the ceiling shake and dumping debris on them to not think that a gun was fired as a diversion, and part of the set-up, on the 6th floor. Prayer man looks like LHO to me, he looks like he is chatting with Frazier. I can't believe that Frazier was unaware of anyone standing in that position. LHO said he was on the steps at the time. Frazier going to the basement to eat lunch is bizarre. He is too close to Oswald to believe, without solid evidence, that he was not wrapped up in all of this somehow. No one would be able to put a gun in my car, and tell me it was curtain rods, without me knowing better or at least being suspicious. Perhaps Frazier was helping a conspirator from the basement, maybe dealing with guns, or providing communications from the phone distribution board in the basement. It just doesn't make sense that he went down there for lunch at that time. His body language doesn't jibe with how an innocent man would look or act at that time. I know other forum members are much more careful and detailed when presenting an argument, and that is good. I'm not presenting an argument. I'm just making observations that are not studied. Observations can be helpful in finding truths and eliminating non truths. Certainly you can't eliminate a point or possibility that has not been considered. Cheers, Mike

Thanks Paul. I've been re-reading Newman's presentation(s) today and find it difficult to feel like I get it. It's more the format than anything. I can see that what he is saying and what you are saying do not jibe with each other, but are using much of the same info. If you would be so kind as to link Simpich's work and any larger explanation of your work, it would be interesting to read them concurrently. I find that there is no better way to get an understanding of what something IS, than to get an understanding of what something IS NOT. A triangulation of related if if divergent theories will definitely fill them all out better than reading just one, or reading them in series, hoping I get to them all. Thanks again, and I hope you don't mind my tasking you with the link requests. I can and will search for them but I can't be sure to find exactly what you are referring to, or with regard to your own work, the most relevant or complete work as it relates to this discussion. Cheers, Mike

To be sure, my interest in the Southland Center comes from a couple things. The first is that my renewed interest in the assassination story was sparked by seeing Wynn Johnsons video. Regardless of the repercussions to the field of research into the assassination or lack thereof, I find it to be a charming, romantic story about kids, being kids, falling in love and being innocent. Meanwhile, unbeknownst to them, they are witnessing a historical event of gargantuan and draconian proportions. It's just an an amazing story. Then I had to look up who DAP was and whoosh, I got sucked down the rabbit hole. The last I delved into the assassination story was prior to the internet, and the amount of info readily available now is astonishing in comparison. Back in the day, I had a book, and a friend had a book and we swapped books at one point, and that was it. The second point of interest is that I read George Senator's testimony because he had local ties, Gloversville, NY. Then I though I was on to something with the whole Ruby, Crafard, Senator visit to the Southland Cafe. I was not aware until today that the Southland Center cafe had long since been identified as the place for the DAP/LHO/AV meeting. So now Wynne Johnsons story is far less interesting because it does not add anything new, whereas before I thought that it did. As to the photos above. It looks more like Bush than it does not. But he looks to be too young. I'm no photo analyst so I'll leave it at that.

Because this is kind of a pet subject of mine, and in the interest of keeping an old thread updated, I'll note a few things. George Senator, when asked where he, Ruby and Crafard stopped for coffee after taking pictures of billboards in the middle of the night, places the location of the Southland hotel cafe as "off Commerce st., just down from the Adolphus Hotel" (quote may not be exact) larry Crafard places it off commerce but does not name it. Jack White, on another thread, said he believed that the cafe they stopped at was another hotel, called The Southland, near the police station. He called it a "copshop" but wasn't sure. He reference the Mary Ferrelll website for that info, albeit nonspecifically. Cheers Michael

Interesting. I didn't know that, back in 2006, the Southland Canter was identified as the location for the meeting with LHO, DAP and Veciana. I had believed that Veciana only identified it as "an office building" and that Wynn Johnson was the first to identify the location.

I wish this attachment was still available. Does anyone have this attachment or know what it was?

Thanks for the clarification, Mr. James D.

The executive order reversal around the weekend of 11-22-63 has forever been a part of my understand of the explanation for the assassination. It never lapsed from my memory in the 25 years that I had paid no attention to the subject. I am surprised that it seems to be such an obscure subject today.

To be sure, I have figured-out that I am on a forum that includes great and accomplished writers, researchers, and people with storied backgrounds and experiences. I gravitated to this forum, exclusively, because I got sick of the nastiness of other forums and you-tube commentery. Hopefully I'll have a job again soon and won't be interjecting myself so frequently in a debate among the accomplished heavy-hitters that make this such a great place.

This is probably the presentation. http://www.jfklancer.com/backes/newman/newman_1.html i guess I have been wanting to see "John Newman's WWIII Virus Theory Explained" somewhere, but it is not out there, or presented as such. Cheers, Michael

I should just read the book. Here is a thread with some if not all the info. I'll have to read, or re-read this. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/7952-john-m-newman/

Larry, I will look for that transcription again. I, here, tried to elaborate but kept deleting my sentences because it is pointless for me to recall from memory something I read when I first delved into this whole thing a few months ago. Briefly, Algleton deliberately ("diabolically") inserted information into Oswald's file which would, at the time of the assassination, lead to two choices... WW3, or a cover up of a conspiracy, because of intelligence failures involved. I can't say that the LN scenario was specifically envisioned. Would you, please, direct me to some of the reading that you mention? I have been looking for a more accessible source for Newman's transcribed presentation; It includes all the "er"'s "ahh"'s "ahem"'s and directives to the overhead projector operator that make it a difficult read. I am surprised that I can't just Google "Newman's WWIII virus" and come up with a clean copy of the presentation, essay or blog. I hope my recollection here is not so far off as to render my recollection as purely "making stuff up". I have read it twice, and on several occasions looked for a better copy. Cheers, Michael

I'll just add here a reference to John Newmanns WW3 virus theory. It gets little mention on this forum and that surprises me. It is a plausible explanation as to why the SBT and LN theory was accepted so quickly. Indeed, it proposes that the LN theory was manufactured and planted months in advance such that it would bear fruit at the time of the assassination. I won't link the version I did find because it is a difficult to follow transcript of a presentation that Newman made years ago. I hope that someone has, finds and will share a better source for that theory. Cheers, Michael

Lance, I don't want to sound combative or argumentative, I respect your input and your intelligence. I am just following up on a few point because that is what we do here. "lu·na·tic fringe ˈˌlo͞onəˌtik ˈfrinj/ noun noun: lunatic fringe; plural noun: lunatic fringes an extreme or eccentric MINORITY within society or a group" CT'ers are not a minority. They have and always have been the Majority.

The follow the money logic is not conspiratorial logic. It is a simple excercise to develop leads. Few if any people say that everyone that benefited from the assassination are guilty unless it is just a notional based on the fact that we have a cover-up and the beneficiaries turn a blind eye. Indeed it is a fair charge that anyone with a responsibility to expose the truth that does not do so, is complicit in a Coup. The impossibility of the SBT, the urtter inadequacy of WC investigation, the fact that the WC stated up front that they reserved the right to alter and delete testimony, the fact that the FBI altered witness accounts and numerous other facts spell-out that there was a conspiracy. It's not a virus of weak minded people infecting their logic. It is the fact that we are being lied to about a seminal, nay, terminal event in US history. Of course the LN/WC/SBT theory nicely "flows from point A to B to C with the minimum of speculation..". That's the point. It was pre-packaged for mass consumption. LBJ didn't believe the SBT, neither did Hoover, Boggs, Richard Russell, Conally and the vast majority of the American people. The LBJ tapes are a great source because you can hear these men, in their own voice saying that it's impossible. So CT'ers have the principals in the cover-up, the beneficiaries and possibly even the players saying it just ain't so. There is no flawed logic necissarily in the thinking of CT'ers. Cheers, Michael