Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Michael Clark

Phone lines, Crafard, and Senator at the Carousel

Recommended Posts

Just as a little side note (and not related to the topic of your thread - please feel free to ignore)

 

 

CE 1673 in volume 23 of the WC Hearings page 144.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1139#relPageId=176&tab=page

shows the building at 1312 Commerce was owned by H.H. Nichols and Clarice Nichols.

I wonder if Jack Ruby's girlfriend, Alice Nichols was related.

 

Steve Thomas

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

I wonder if Jack Ruby's girlfriend, Alice Nichols was related.

Please elaborate. I thought that Ruby's girlfriend (actually his wife) was a dog named Sheba.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telecommunications were necessarily a part of the Dallas coup de ta.

>> Really? How do you know that?  Sure sounds like a big supposition to me.

Jack Ruby's Carousell Lounge occupied the lot that is now the HQ of the major carrier of that region.

>> Uh, so what? I would think a "major carrier" in today's telecom industry would clear out the cobwebs with fiber optics from an old building instead of tapping into what's already there.

i am looking to research the history of that "lot", here, in this thread. 

Larry Crafard, a Carousel employee, according to his WC testimony, spent more than 4 hours talking to a girl who had called the Carousel Lounge, on the  night of November 22, inquiring about a job. According to his testimony, she was leaving Dallas, on a bus, first thing in the morning, for (as they say), parts unknown. Why would she be calling about a job at 11PM on 11-22-63?

>> Strippers and nightclub types are night creatures and work all hours of the day. So she's calling about a job, yet is leaving the next day.  That's a muddled message here.  And even if she was looking for a job and/or leaving, how is this related to the assassination?

Is the current telecom building a central telco interchange? Was the Carousel Lounge, back in '63, a hub; a jumble of telco lines?

>> Again, who cares? So now you're thinking that there was this grand scheme with operators at the ready deep in the bowels of the club, ready to receive Morse code that "Yes, he's dead.  His head was blown off."  And then these sinister and evil operators would make a direct call to...whom?

Even George Sawtell, on another thread, said he's got to take things into consideration and "make sure it sounds logical." Props to him. Does this grand telecom dream here sound logical? Plausible? Hardly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Telecommunications were necessarily a part of the Dallas coup de ta.

>> Really? How do you know that?  Sure sounds like a big supposition to me.

Jack Ruby's Carousell Lounge occupied the lot that is now the HQ of the major carrier of that region.

>> Uh, so what? I would think a "major carrier" in today's telecom industry would clear out the cobwebs with fiber optics from an old building instead of tapping into what's already there.

i am looking to research the history of that "lot", here, in this thread. 

Larry Crafard, a Carousel employee, according to his WC testimony, spent more than 4 hours talking to a girl who had called the Carousel Lounge, on the  night of November 22, inquiring about a job. According to his testimony, she was leaving Dallas, on a bus, first thing in the morning, for (as they say), parts unknown. Why would she be calling about a job at 11PM on 11-22-63?

>> Strippers and nightclub types are night creatures and work all hours of the day. So she's calling about a job, yet is leaving the next day.  That's a muddled message here.  And even if she was looking for a job and/or leaving, how is this related to the assassination?

Is the current telecom building a central telco interchange? Was the Carousel Lounge, back in '63, a hub; a jumble of telco lines?

>> Again, who cares? So now you're thinking that there was this grand scheme with operators at the ready deep in the bowels of the club, ready to receive Morse code that "Yes, he's dead.  His head was blown off."  And then these sinister and evil operators would make a direct call to...whom?

Even George Sawtell, on another thread, said he's got to take things into consideration and "make sure it sounds logical." Props to him. Does this grand telecom dream here sound logical? Plausible? Hardly.

Have you read Larry Crafard's testimony?

He didn't get a lot of sleep between noon on Friday through Saturday.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Just as a little side note (and not related to the topic of your thread - please feel free to ignore)

 

 

CE 1673 in volume 23 of the WC Hearings page 144.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1139#relPageId=176&tab=page

shows the building at 1312 Commerce was owned by H.H. Nichols and Clarice Nichols.

I wonder if Jack Ruby's girlfriend, Alice Nichols was related.

 

Steve Thomas

 

Thanks for the links Steve. Interesting stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

Telecommunications were necessarily a part of the Dallas coup de ta.

>> Really? How do you know that?  ......

 

Michael, Your posts reeks of a lack of curiousity, a lack of desire to question and seek answers, and an angry contempt for those that are curious and do question and seek answers. Such a combination is pitiful.

To be sure, Michael, the testimony of George Senator ad Larry Crafard are the most eye-raising portions of the WCR that I have read. Crafard's account is not believable to me. George Senator, on his first day of testimony, cannot account for himself from 11AM - 7PM on Saturday. On his second day of testimony, Senator says that he may have stopped in at a lounge for a little while.

Meanwhile, Larry Crafard begins hitchhiking to Michigan, with $7 in his pocket, after being up all night, on an anonymous phone call, and then riding around Dallas with Ruby and Senator in the wee hours of Saturday morning. Crafard's reason for quitting The Carousel, and leaving Dallas? He said Jack yelled at him for calling him about dog food.

It is the hours from the assassination to 7PM on Saturday that I find very interesting, with regard to the Carousel crew; and that anonymous, 4 hour phone call is screaming for an explanation. I won't find an answer, but I am curious.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've said ad nauseum on this forum, not everything is a conspiracy in this case. Being overly curious does NOT mean you're going to find something in someone's testimony. And things have to be logical in order for it to have happened.  Logic on this forum is one of the main things on here that seems to be lacking.

To understand what I mean, just go through the forum to some of its greatest hits - the Harvey and Lee caper; the Z film having painted in blobs and 67% of its frames removed. And now we're expected to believe, against all logic, that they had some super secret command center set up right in the basement of Ruby's nightclub, teams rushing in and out with papers in hand, reporting on every move, every counter move, and so on.  And we're also expected to believe that this command center, years later, is taken over by a telecom company because, why tear down this super secret communication center? Let's use it, yeah! I mean, really?

As one other poster said elsewhere, it has to sound logical and plausible.

But as another poster said elsewhere on this forum, "I think it happened [this way] because they could do it."

If you choose to believe that Oswald - as he himself said - was the patsy to take the fall, I think perhaps the most difficult thing to make happen was getting him into the building by getting him hired there one month before the murder. In my mind, that might have been tricky.  But they made it work.

But all of this other stuff like this super secret command center is truly and outrageously comedic. And once again, and as happens here many, many times, someone finds a little hole here or there in the testimony and then the entire thing is transposed onto another crazy theory and - PRESTO! - you have a super secret command center theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Like I've said ad nauseum on this forum, not everything is a conspiracy in this case. Being overly curious does NOT mean you're going to find something in someone's testimony. And things have to be logical in order for it to have happened.  Logic on this forum is one of the main things on here that seems to be lacking.

To understand what I mean, just go through the forum to some of its greatest hits - the Harvey and Lee caper; the Z film having painted in blobs and 67% of its frames removed. And now we're expected to believe, against all logic, that they had some super secret command center set up right in the basement of Ruby's nightclub, teams rushing in and out with papers in hand, reporting on every move, every counter move, and so on.  And we're also expected to believe that this command center, years later, is taken over by a telecom company because, why tear down this super secret communication center? Let's use it, yeah! I mean, really?

As one other poster said elsewhere, it has to sound logical and plausible.

But as another poster said elsewhere on this forum, "I think it happened [this way] because they could do it."

If you choose to believe that Oswald - as he himself said - was the patsy to take the fall, I think perhaps the most difficult thing to make happen was getting him into the building by getting him hired there one month before the murder. In my mind, that might have been tricky.  But they made it work.

But all of this other stuff like this super secret command center is truly and outrageously comedic. And once again, and as happens here many, many times, someone finds a little hole here or there in the testimony and then the entire thing is transposed onto another crazy theory and - PRESTO! - you have a super secret command center theory.

Lol. I'm not talking about a super secret command center. I am talking about a few wires, 2 per phone, being spliced onto the Carousel phone line. It's vary unglamorous. We're talking about 10 minutes of work in a manhole or at a splice point that was less-than-ideally placed, on a legacy cabling system that had morphed from the dawn of the public telephone network. The Carousel was central to that network.

I am talking about a speculative, hacked-together conference call with a disguised point of origin. 

And I take it that you have not read the testimony I asked you about. I generally get the feeling that you just read threads that you don't really care about and and just start raising a stink out of ignorance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I generally get the feeling that you just read threads that you don't really care about and and just start raising a stink out of ignorance. 

Uh, aren't you the one that said way back on EF that you really don't "care" one way or the other what the outcome of all of this is, that you're kinda/sorta just farting around here? I happen to "care" enough about this case that'd I like for it to have some conclusion some day. Like for example, if PM is ever proven to be Oswald. Or if this year's document release releases enough to show even more that it couldn't have happened the WC said it did.

But I also "care" enough when common sense is just thrown to the wayside here. I mean, two extra wires and down in a manhole cover to make a command center? With Smathers commanding and the extra guy holding the ladder?  As Jimmy Nichol said - "It's getting better....it's getting better all the time." LOL

beatles-pothole.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Walton said:

 I generally get the feeling that you just read threads that you don't really care about and and just start raising a stink out of ignorance. 

Uh, aren't you the one that said way back on EF that you really don't "care" one way or the other what the outcome of all of this is, that you're kinda/sorta just farting around here? I happen to "care" enough about this case that'd I like for it to have some conclusion some day. Like for example, if PM is ever proven to be Oswald. Or if this year's document release releases enough to show even more that it couldn't have happened the WC said it did.

But I also "care" enough when common sense is just thrown to the wayside here. I mean, two extra wires and down in a manhole cover to make a command center? With Smathers commanding and the extra guy holding the ladder?  As Jimmy Nichol said - "It's getting better....it's getting better all the time." LOL

beatles-pothole.gif

Good stuff Michael. I'd challenge you to quote me on farting around and not cariring but I do fear that there might be something in my past posts that might resemble such a statement. If so, I do not stand behind that sentiment.

But, to be sure, I am not talking about a command center. I am talking about a make-shift conference call to deal with a situation, and get stories straight. A read of Crafard's, Senator's, Ruby's, Olsen's and Olsen's (soon-to-be) wife raises questions and demands answers, even if speculative, to the reader.

Surely, Michael, you don't think that Jack Ruby played no part in the conspiracy?

 

Cheers,

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Michael,

 

I think the 1/2 part of 1312 1/2 Commerce meant that it was upstairs. The WC is full of stories about Ruby throwing people down the stairs.

 

You might be interested in these photos:

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/408701734911782916/

https://www.pinterest.com/perry_vermeulen/carousel-club/

 

It looks like the downstairs, or ground floor was a barbeque joint; the Real Pit Bar-B-Q

 

Steve Thomas

It's interesting. I don't find anything in the literature about this Bar-B-Q place. Who owned it. Did they ever give an interview about what they saw... the comings and goings...?

 

It's interesting.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

It's interesting. I don't find anything in the literature about this Bar-B-Q place. Who owned it. Did they ever give an interview about what they saw... the comings and goings...?

 

Wasn't Tippet moonlighting at the BBQ? Maybe I'm mixed up with something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Wasn't Tippet moonlighting at the BBQ? Maybe I'm mixed up with something else.

Chris,

 

You might be thinking of Austin's BBQ.

There is a slight connection between Ruby and Austin's though. Take a look at this site:

http://oakcliff.advocatemag.com/2011/01/barbecue-with-a-side-of-heart/

 

"Originally named the Bull Pen, the restaurant at 2321 W. Illinois opened in 1949. (It sat on the northeast corner of Hampton and Illinois,..."

"In 1957, when Oak Cliff voted itself “dry,” co-owner Bert Bowman sold out his half interest to his business partner, Austin Cook,..." 

"A man named Ralph Paul had purchased the restaurant Bowman opened after selling his share of the Bull Pen to Cook. Bowman’s wife stated she had known Paul since his 1951 move to Dallas and that at the time of the assassination, Paul was living in the lower level of the Bowman home. She reported that Paul was a close friend of Ruby’s and had expressed great concern for his friend after Oswald’s shooting. She also stated that Paul had brought Ruby by her home approximately four and a half years earlier, but that Ruby remained for only a short time.

 

Nothing came of the investigation."

 

Steve Thomas

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

×