Proof CIA did not plan or execute the JFK assassination

[Mathias Baumann]

I think there's a at least one person who we can be reasonably sure of he was involved:

David Morales.

He had both the means and the motive. He hated Kennedy and he was an expert in assassination. He worked with the Mafia (Johnny Roselli). And - he admitted to a friend he was involved in the Kennedy assassination. Before he died he built his home into a fortress because he "knew too much".

So I suggest Morales should be the starting point of the investigation - we know he worked closely with David Attlee Philips. And Philips most certainly used Oswald for his operation against the Fairplay for Cuba Committee. So it's possible Morales learned of Oswald and his background and realized he could be useful. I think we should analyze his connections more closely - was he also involved with George Joannides? Did he regularly visit New Orleans? Is it possible he knew Guy Banister? Was Banister's organization part of Operation Mongoose as John Martin alleged? What was Morales' role in the Bay of Pigs invasion? Is it possible he was one of the two men buying trucks at the Bolton Ford dealership? What was his relationship to other groups and people thought to be involved? Gerry Patrick Hemming, Frank Sturgis, Howard Hunt, Mitch WerBell?

Edited June 12, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

Harold Dean Doyle, one of the tramps is a good starting place.  A Dallas newspaper reporter took a picture of Harold and John Gedney while they were paraded through Dealy Plaza. Harold died in 2008, he has professed his innocence back in a 1992 report. I do not believe a single word that comes out of his mouth. You can see the following photograph taken by a Dallas newspaper reported of him and the other two tramps. http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/pojfkwhiteslides01019.jpg There you can see the image of a rifle butt on Harold's left lapel. I believe he shot Gov. Connally in the back after John Gedney blew JFK's head off from inside the Pergola in the grassy knoll.  You can view a video that shows them on the Nix film -

Find out who these tramps known associates are, you will find out the truth.  My opinion, military hit by the Pentagon (CIA).

Edited July 18, 2017 by Keyvan Shahrdar

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

http://jfkassassinationfiles.com/hsca_180-10112-10156

This is the HSCA testimony of Marvin Wise, the police officer that escorted the Tramps to the sheriff's office in Dealey Plaza on the day of the assassination.  Officer Wise testified that he had cotton in his ears because he had an ear infection after a photograph of him appears to show something inside his ear, he also testified about his shoes; I believe that he was at the roof top of the records building(See Zapruder frame 195 below) providing cover for the assassins by shooting his rifle with cotton in his ears.  Let's see, he is pictured with his pants and shoes full of cravel and dirt, and he testified that he had cotton in his ears that day.  Hmmmmm! A shadow that I believe is him can be seen in the sprocket area of the Zapruder film on the roof top of the records building shooting.  Here is a picture of him, he is the officer in the back of the line. http://emuseum.jfk.org/media/view/Objects/3712/16876?t:state:flow=f46f123d-a3af-4559-a210-af7ddcdc628e

Is Marvin Wise still alive?  Anyone know? 

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Keyvan Shahrdar
Insert image of Rooftop Gunman.

[Mathias Baumann]

Quote

Harold Dean Doyle, one of the tramps is a good starting place.

Think about it, why would any of the assassins state their real names to the police?

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

9 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Think about it, why would any of the assassins state their real names to the police?

Criminals are not very smart.  You see it all the time, bank robbers use their real id's to steal money.  I believe these tramps and police officers were involved as assassins.  Harold Doyle was tracked down and he gave an interview back in 1992.  He professes that he did not do it, but the evidence shows otherwise.  No one is going to admit that they where hired to kill anyone, let alone the president of the USA.  Here he is stating "He had nothing to do with it." - I believe he is lying through his teeth. 

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by Keyvan Shahrdar

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Keyvan Shahrdar writes:

Quote

This is the HSCA testimony of Marvin Wise, the police officer that escorted the Tramps to the sheriff's office in Dealey Plaza on the day of the assassination. Officer Wise testified that he had cotton in his ears because he had an ear infection, he also testified about his shoes; he was at the roof top of the records building providing cover for the assassins by shooting his rifle with cotton in his ears. Let's see, he is pictured with his pants and shoes full of roof cravel, and with cotton in his ears.

Really? Here is everything Wise had to say about his shoes:
 

Quote

Wise stated that the odd looking shoes he was wearing were in fact low-cut galoshes or overshoes. He worked South Dallas, and very few streets were paved - most were sand and dirt. He wore them because it had rained in the morning and he kept them on.
 

There's nothing in his statement about having anything in his shoes, let alone gravel from the roof of the records building. Where did you get that from?

As for his location at the time of the assassination, he stated that he was several miles from Dealey Plaza, "at the far end of South Dallas", on his way to investigate a robbery, and that immediately after the assassination he was instructed to go to the book depository.

How did you manage to twist this into "he was at the roof top of the records building providing cover for the assassins"? Where in Wise's statement does he state that he was anywhere near the roof of the records building? He doesn't mention the records building at all, does he?

Quote

he is pictured with his pants and shoes full of roof cravel [sic]
 

Perhaps you could show us the picture of Officer Wise's pants and shoes full of roof gravel. It would be interesting to find out how the photographer managed to capture the insides of Officer Wise's pants and shoes. What did the photographer have to say about this strange choice of photographic subject? Was he in the habit of stuffing his camera inside policemen's clothing?

Quote

His shadow can be seen in the sprocket area of the Zapruder film on the roof top of the records building shooting.
 

Can it? Perhaps you could show us the frame or frames in question, and point out the distinguishing features of Officer Wise's outline and any movements which indicate that the figure was firing a gun.

Your claim, that Officer Wise was involved in the assassination, is utterly bonkers. So far, you have provided exactly zero evidence to support it. Even the 'Harvey and Lee' and 'Oswald did it' crowd can do better than that.

[Mathias Baumann]

Jeremy,

he gets those ideas from YouTube videos posted by a guy named Blevins, who colorizes BW photos of the assassination and then "discovers" all sorts of things, like smoke trails of the bullets fired at the motorcade. He knows the exact number of shots, the exact locations of all the assassins and exactly when the shots were fired. Oh, and by the way, he's done some incredible resarch on Bigfoot and the Tourin Shroud too. Here's his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/BlevinsBI

The guy's solving all the big "mysteries in history". And all that from his basement...

[Mathias Baumann]

Keyvan,

I don't think the conspirators would recruit regular criminals as assassins. The men who killed Kennedy were highly qualified professionals, most likely exile Cubans trained by the CIA.

[James DiEugenio]

 In retrospect, its incredible that this thread began with the musings of George Sawtelle on Tosh Plumlee.

And from there George went into the question of whether of not the CIA as a structure was involved.   Because the idea is something no credible person believes.  

Plumlee, Files, George must be a big fan of Bob Vernon's video.  Which he himself later disowned and denounced.  I wish Larry Hancock would print that declaration again.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

4 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

 

There's nothing in his statement about having anything in his shoes, let alone gravel from the roof of the records building. Where did you get that from? Keyvan>> A photograph can say a thousand words!  You can see a first source image of Wise with gravel on his pants and shoes and him carrying a rifle.  Here is the link from the Sixth Floor Museum showing him carrying a rifle - http://emuseum.jfk.org/media/view/Objects/3714/16877?t:state:flow=4f0cb352-e5a2-4062-bfa5-1bff973a52e9.  He is a link from the Sixth Floor Museum with cravel and sand on his pants and shoes. http://emuseum.jfk.org/media/view/Objects/3712/16876?t:state:flow=d33d2e32-2382-4711-a084-6df2142853f0

As for his location at the time of the assassination, he stated that he was several miles from Dealey Plaza, "at the far end of South Dallas", on his way to investigate a robbery, and that immediately after the assassination he was instructed to go to the book depository. Keyvan>> Yes, I am sorry,  you, me and everyone should believe every single word coming out of his mouth.  Have his statements been verified?  Have you verified them?  Are there any records verifying his statements?  He has his HSCA and FBI testimony, have they been verified?  If you have verified those statements he stated to the HSCA and the FBI, can you show them to me and everyone else reading this thread?  Why not have them verified before you take his words as gospel?  

How did you manage to twist this into "he was at the roof top of the records building providing cover for the assassins"? Where in Wise's statement does he state that he was anywhere near the roof of the records building? He doesn't mention the records building at all, does he? Keyvan>> I am sure an assassin would volunteer that information by the mere fact that he was asked about his shoes!  Let's see, roof gravel on pants and shoes, cotton on ears, rifle, an image of someone at the roof of the records building shooting.  Hmmmm, I have no idea how I, you, or anyone could come up with such a twisted conclusion!

Perhaps you could show us the picture of Officer Wise's pants and shoes full of roof gravel. It would be interesting to find out how the photographer managed to capture the insides of Officer Wise's pants and shoes. What did the photographer have to say about this strange choice of photographic subject? Was he in the habit of stuffing his camera inside policemen's clothing? Keyvan>> I guess a photograph from the Sixth Floor Museum of a police officer full of gravel and dust and with a Rifle is not good enough for you.

Can it? Perhaps you could show us the frame or frames in question, and point out the distinguishing features of Officer Wise's outline and any movements which indicate that the figure was firing a gun. Keyvan>>Perhaps you can show me distinguishing features of Oswald shooting at JFK.  Just cause there are none, does not mean he did not shoot.  So phantom people shot at JFK, The assassins have no distinguishing features therefore any suspects could not have shot at the President!

Your claim, that Officer Wise was involved in the assassination, is utterly bonkers. So far, you have provided exactly zero evidence to support it. Even the 'Harvey and Lee' and 'Oswald did it' crowd can do better than that. Keyvan>> There is evidence, he has sand and gravel in his pants and shoes.  There is a photograph.  He is also carrying a rifle.  There is a photograph.  He also has cotton in his ears by his own admission.  If that is not evidence, then I don't think you know what evidence is.  No one will admit that they were hired to kill anyone let alone the President of the USA.  If you were hired to kill someone, would you admit it?  I'll answer that for you, NO!, you would come up with a story of alternate facts to keep you arse out of Jail?

You are naive at best if you believe a single word that comes out anyone's mouth who had direct connections to the JFK assassination.

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by Keyvan Shahrdar

[George Sawtelle]

Jim

Anyone who believes that proving Oswald innocent is good enough, IMO, is not credible.

That is what you said in a recent interview and you left it at that.

You have given up or so it seems. I don't respect that attitude.

[Michael Clark]

...

Edited July 15, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Michael Clark]

26 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

Jim

Anyone who believes that proving Oswald innocent is good enough, IMO, is not credible.

That is what you said in a recent interview and you left it at that.

You have given up or so it seems. I don't respect that attitude.

George, Quoting Jim in the midst of questioning his credibility would be a demonstration of your integrity.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

1 hour ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Keyvan,

I don't think the conspirators would recruit regular criminals as assassins. The men who killed Kennedy were highly qualified professionals, most likely exile Cubans trained by the CIA.

We don't know who these people who I suspect are assassins (Tramps and Police officers) really are.  They have not been thoroughly investigated.  All I really know of Harold and John is that they were both in the Army and that they are both dead.  Who are their known associates?  As for Wise, all we know is he worked as a police officer for the DPD.  Does he have a military record?  Does he or did he have CIA/Mob connections?  Don't get me wrong, I want to exclude all these people as possible suspects from my list.  I need the proof to do so.

[Michael Clark]

On 5/2/2017 at 9:18 AM, George Sawtelle said:

I've not read much critique on the veracity of Tosh Plumlee's account of an abort team in Dealey Plaza the time and day of the assassination. I take that to mean most people familiar with Plumlee's account believe him.

That would be a mistake, IMO. Mr. Plumlee is a historical player and a witness to the events that are, at the same time, germaine and concurrent; and he himself is caught, physically, in the trajectory of the facts and implications of the assassination and all such events and operations of that time, and moment, even if you only believe a portion of what he has to say. It's simple enough to say that it runs afoul of the forum rules to call him a xxxx, but it is also impolite, impolitic, and would not encourage him to post here going forward. I do not doubt that Mr. Plumlee would entertain questions that rise above the normative.

He said the CIA had flown in a team to stop the assassination. He was the co-pilot who piloted the plane which carried the abort team. 

A quote from Mr. Plumlee would impart some confidence that we are on firm ground as we proceed. If he claimed that, it is likely on this forum and therefore you would be hard-pressed to say that digging-it-up would be an onerous chore.

If the CIA planned and executed the assassination they would have known who the snipers were and where they were located. Their agents and/or handlers would have been in radio contact with them. If the CIA wanted to stop the assassination, they only needed to contact the snipers and ask them to stand down before the snipers were in place.

And we quickly come to a quagmire. The first presumption carries not an iota of truth. For example, if the CIA paid the mob to do it, it is very likely they only knew that the check had been written. If some faction wished to abort at the last minute, there more than likely were a number of impediments and operators that would not stand in the way of a crime with such immense inertia. Any action to halt the assassination would become potential evidence that the assassination was planned and point the way to its perpetrators.  

Now it's possible a particular section of the CIA planned and executed the assassination without the knowledge of the director or supervisors of other CIA sections. If this is the case the assassination would not fall under the auspices of the CIA. The section responsible would be considered a rogue unit within the agency.

Heading into the last paragraph, keep in mind that we have nothing but mucked-up shoes to put the information therein into an kind of perspective. It is an If-then statement that simultaneously attempts to serve as a conclusion and a thesis, if you will, for this thread. We already parried the idea that the agency would necessarily know and directly control the assassins in real-time. The second sentence introduces the word auspices, with the implication being that this particular word, auspices, absolves the agency of guilt, or ownership of the "I-did-it" crown.

-------------------------

George, I have to point out that you have managed to say almost nothing, offered no "proof", such as quotes when you easily could have, and used a considerable number of words to do it all. It's not easy to do that.

 

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by Michael Clark