Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Wim Dankbaar

Who had advance knowledge?

Recommended Posts

A theoretical consideration about foreknowledge.

Isn't it possible that some people involved in the complex 11/22/63 "op" -- including Oswald -- may not have known that JFK would be assassinated?

If tasks were compartmentalized and some of the "pawns" were informed about the big picture only on a "need to know" basis, perhaps they were simply performing certain limited tasks (e.g., Ruth Paine helping Oswald get his job at the TSBD) without knowing that the POTUS was going to be murdered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W,  I agree with you. Operating on a NTK (need to know) basis is quite common in large organizations such as the US Military, CIA, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on the same page with W. and Chuck on compartmentalization.

That's why I don't think it's safe to assume that the personnel involved in the framing of Oswald and his subsequent murder had anything to do with the assassination of Kennedy -- two separate operations coordinated at the highest levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I'm on the same page with W. and Chuck on compartmentalization.

That's why I don't think it's safe to assume that the personnel involved in the framing of Oswald and his subsequent murder had anything to do with the assassination of Kennedy -- two separate operations coordinated at the highest levels.

Not to nitpick, but because I think it is important; I'll offer "stove-piping" as an alternate characterization to compartmentalization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Not to nitpick, but because I think it is important; I'll offer "stove-piping" as an alternate characterization to compartmentalization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stovepiping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 7:46 PM, Cory Santos said:

Well since we are adding names without PROOF, I will add Captain Kangaroo, the Great Pumpkin- a little John Lear humor, and Oscar the Grouch.

They all had advance knowledge of the JFK assassination.

This is why we need proof. 

Some names, sure, there is some proof.  Milteer is a huge example although to be fair, he never mentioned Dallas as far as I recall so, technically, his name should not be on the list.  Correct me if he mentioned Dallas specifically.

  Others listed, just speculation without proof.

Some, their own story without verification.

Many people can say they knew before, what is needed is proof they knew before other than their own statements... many times decades after.

 

 

Hello Cory,

what do you think of this story?

--> https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/who-albert-osborne-how-find-691238

"Grimsby-born soldier turned Soviet Union Spy Albert Osborne has long been touted as one of the prime suspects in the John F Kennedy assassination plot.

Some experts believe he worked as a "handler" for killer Lee Harvey Oswald - and the pair were seen talking together on a bus in the hours leading up to JFK's death in Dallas on November 23, 1963. [This of course is incorrect: They were seen in late September 1963 on a bus to Mexico.]

And documents unearthed in the 1970s show the FBI had Osborne marked as a major suspect in its massive investigation.

Today, as thousands more secret documents - known as the JFK Files - were released to the public , it emerged that a anonymous caller tipped off the Cambridge News that something big was about to happen - 25 minutes before JFK was shot.

And it is thought that caller was in fact Osborne, and that he was calling from Grimsby, where he was staying with his sister."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 7:20 PM, Mathias Baumann said:

Hello Cory,

what do you think of this story?

--> https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/who-albert-osborne-how-find-691238

"Grimsby-born soldier turned Soviet Union Spy Albert Osborne has long been touted as one of the prime suspects in the John F Kennedy assassination plot.

Some experts believe he worked as a "handler" for killer Lee Harvey Oswald - and the pair were seen talking together on a bus in the hours leading up to JFK's death in Dallas on November 23, 1963. [This of course is incorrect: They were seen in late September 1963 on a bus to Mexico.]

And documents unearthed in the 1970s show the FBI had Osborne marked as a major suspect in its massive investigation.

Today, as thousands more secret documents - known as the JFK Files - were released to the public , it emerged that a anonymous caller tipped off the Cambridge News that something big was about to happen - 25 minutes before JFK was shot.

And it is thought that caller was in fact Osborne, and that he was calling from Grimsby, where he was staying with his sister."

 

Thank you for the interesting article.

The anonymous caller story has its weak points and strong points.  

As a trial attorney, I would question, why say something big was going to happen?  Why not just spell it out?

That would be the proof.  As to the call, there are conflicting accounts on it however.  Remember, the FBI receives tips throughout the day.  Back then, they were written down regardless of whether they were relevant or not.  See the George H.W. Bush call to the FBI on 11/22/63 as an example.  Of course, he knew his call would be written down.  Was that the true purpose of the call or did he really think his information was relevant?  Who knows.  The press never actually investigated it.  The w.c.?  LOL.  It was an embarrassment to this country.

Back to your question, the article really needs better citations.  "Some suggest" is not authority.  One thing I always note is for example that David Ferrie denied knowing Oswald yet, Frontline came across a photo of him with Oswald.  Clearly they knew each other.  

This is proof that answers questions.

The writer of this article should provide more references as opposed to "Some suggest".  He fails to accurately cite in an academic or legal way to any government documents (one is shown and noted) but take for example his comment about records "unearthed in the 70s".  What documents specifically is he talking about.  This renders this report interesting but not academic nor legal.  I always look forward to well written and documented stories on this subject, but, again, citing the anonymous call-which has been disputed (I am not saying it is unverified or not relevant, just that it is disputed that it happened) is not enough for me to accept it as proof.

I hope that answers your question and thank you for the question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 5:33 AM, Cory Santos said:

Thank you for the interesting article.

The anonymous caller story has its weak points and strong points.  

As a trial attorney, I would question, why say something big was going to happen?  Why not just spell it out?

That would be the proof.  As to the call, there are conflicting accounts on it however.  Remember, the FBI receives tips throughout the day.  Back then, they were written down regardless of whether they were relevant or not.  See the George H.W. Bush call to the FBI on 11/22/63 as an example.  Of course, he knew his call would be written down.  Was that the true purpose of the call or did he really think his information was relevant?  Who knows.  The press never actually investigated it.  The w.c.?  LOL.  It was an embarrassment to this country.

Back to your question, the article really needs better citations.  "Some suggest" is not authority.  One thing I always note is for example that David Ferrie denied knowing Oswald yet, Frontline came across a photo of him with Oswald.  Clearly they knew each other.  

This is proof that answers questions.

The writer of this article should provide more references as opposed to "Some suggest".  He fails to accurately cite in an academic or legal way to any government documents (one is shown and noted) but take for example his comment about records "unearthed in the 70s".  What documents specifically is he talking about.  This renders this report interesting but not academic nor legal.  I always look forward to well written and documented stories on this subject, but, again, citing the anonymous call-which has been disputed (I am not saying it is unverified or not relevant, just that it is disputed that it happened) is not enough for me to accept it as proof.

I hope that answers your question and thank you for the question.

 

Thank you for your answer. I think Osborne is an interesting figure in any case, phone call or not. When he traveled to Mexico on the bus with Oswald he was using a fake passport.

http://www.ronaldecker.com/osborne.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×