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
Paul Trejo

Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Paul, I did not see it.

Can you provide the exact quote Ruby allegedly made?  Or show where in the testimony it is?

Cory,

Sure.  Here's the exact quote.  It's in the Warren Commission Hearings, Volume 5, p. 198.   I'll quote it:

MR. RUBY. There is an organization here, Chief Justice Warren, if it takes my life at this moment to say it. and Bill Decker said be a man and say it, there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization-take it for what it is worth, Chief Justice Warren.  Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in jeopardy with their lives.  Don’t register with you, does it?

CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN. No; I don’t understand that.

MR. RUBY. Would you rather I just delete what I said and just pretend that nothing is going on?

CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN. I would not indeed. I am only interested in what you want to tell this Commission. That is all I am interested in.

MR. RUBY. Well, I said my life, I won’t be living long now.

Perhaps the main issue with this quotation may be that our eyes have seen it so often, but our imaginations are grabbed by the CIA-did-it CT so emotionally that we overlook it.  I think it fits perfectly with the available evidence we have about the Radical Right in Dallas.

Best regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Why lie about cabinets that dont exist?

How does that do anything?

What evidence do you have that the guy lied other than the alleged lack of a document confirming the existence of the cabinets? 

Cory,

The following is my opinion.

It was a LIE in the sense that it was an incorrect and improper description of real items found.

The real items found were five or six metal filing carrying cases, full of high-school letters and college studies in the Russian language, as well as Russian Folk Song 45' records.   Evidently, also, Lee Harvey Oswald had one of his FPCC fliers somewhere in the garage, and this also became part of the Dallas Police Inventory.

Buddy Walthers jumped to a wild conclusion -- he saw Russian -- and he thought Communist.  Once in his mind, it came out of his mouth in a boast.  Somebody could argue it was "innocent" boasting, like all boys do, but in the context of the JFK assassination, I find nothing innocent in it.

First and foremost, Buddy Walthers was deliberately accusing Ruth Paine of being: (1) an American Communist during the Cold War; and (2) an accomplice of Lee Harvey Oswald in the assassination of JFK.

To this very day (more than a half-century later) people intoxicated by the CIA-did-it CT are still repeating this baloney from Buddy Walthers, and demanding a "search" for these alleged "six or seven metal filing cabinets" that have allegedly gone missing -- and demanding that Ruth and Michael Paine stand trial again!

This is not a joke.  It was also far from innocent for Buddy Walthers to make that accusation.   In my CT, it means that Buddy Walthers DELIBERATELY LIED.

In my CT, it also means that Buddy Walthers was probably part of the Dallas Right Wing conspiracy to kill JFK and blame the COMMUNISTS.  He showed his hand by blaming the Communists loud and clear on the very first day.

Remember, please, that Buddy Walthers claimed to be the man who first ordered Dallas Deputies and Police officers to storm the TSBD while he was at Dealey Plaza (there with James Tague).  Tague had blood running down his cheek, and he and Walthers were looking for bullet fragments. 

Walthers claims that when he traced the trajectory of the bullet that hit James Tague, he realized that the TSBD was "the only place the shots could have come from."  So he ordered anybody in ear shot to run into the TSBD.

Buddy Walthers himself rushed to respond to a police report that JD Tippit had been shot in Oak Cliff, so he was among the first to go down there, and he was in the Texas Theater as part of Lee Harvey Oswald's arresting party.   Then, right after that, Buddy Walthers rushed to Ruth Paine's house to find dirt on Oswald.

       (1) Dealey Plaza; (2) Texas Theater; (3) Ruth Paine's garage; and (4) snap judgment that the Communists killed JFK, and that Ruth Paine was an accomplice!

What's amazing to me is that this Right Wing accusation against Ruth Paine still obtains currency among the Left Wing in the CIA-did-it CT.   Amazing to me.

Best regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0269b.htm

See the last paragraph of Walthers 11/22 63 report.  "stacks of handbills concerning "Cuba for Freedom"...Also found was a Set of metal file cabinets containing records that appeared to be names and activities of Cuban sympathizers."  I'd never caught that last little tidbit of the paragraph myself "turned over to Fritz/DPD - And Secret Service Officers.  Quite interesting.

"seven metal boxes which contained pamphlets and literature from abroad."  comes from Sherriff's Deputy Oxfords report on 11/23/63.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oxford1.htm 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

 

I have read it.  Many times actually.

I found it rather odd.  The questions lacked proper direction.

Certainly any good trial attorney would have asked much more detailed questions and NEVER would have let follow up questions not be asked.

But, he was clearly a difficult person to depose.

Please tell me though, you said he named the organization and man who "curated" the assassination.

Please tell me you are not referring to this:

Months back had I been given a chance--I take that back. Sometime back a police officer of the Dallas Police Department wanted to know how I got into the building. And I don't know whether I requested a lie detector test or not, but my attorney wasn't available.
When you are a defendant in the case, you say "speak to your attorney," you know. But that was a different time. It was after the trial, whenever it happened.
At this moment, Lee Harvey Oswald isn't guilty of committing the crime of assassinating President Kennedy. Jack Ruby is.

 

If the above is not what you meant, to save time, please be exact, who are you referring to?

Hi Cory,

*** Paul Trejo answered for me; Ruby names not the CIA, not Dulles, not the Rockefellers, not the mafia, not the talentless Cubans nominally fighting against Castro -  Ruby points Gerald Ford and Earl Warren towards the John Birch Society and General Edwin Walker.

.

***...and of course the questions asked to Ruby lacked proper direction. 

The agenda was not the truth, the agenda was to explain both the assassination and the assassin of the presidential assassin on a Lone Nut narrative.   Earl Warren knew very well what Ruby was talking about with Ruby's references to General Walker and the John Birch Society because the JBS had since the mid-1950s prosecuted a campaign of impeachment against none other than .... Earl Warren.   Yet Chief Justice Warren stammers and acts bewildered in a not particularly persuasive bit of judicial acting.

.

***With that said, it is 100% clear to me that the direct testimony of General Walker by Warren Commission attorney Liebeler is pursued by a lawyer who knew he had a guilty man on the witness stand for perhaps the first and last time in the JFK case.  

Liebeler makes a very obvious, noble, and no-holds-barred effort to save for posterity the guilt of the guilty party in the pages of the Warren Commission Evidence, despite the Commission's official explanation that a Lone Nut non-conspiracy explains Kennedy's murder.   In point of fact, Liebeler elicits the impossibility of Walker knowing Oswald shot Walker on 10 April 63 -before the discovery of Oswald's mea culpa letter from Ruth Paine's - which undeniably forces the conclusion that Walker is either controlling or in a league with those who control Oswald as early as the Spring of 1963.  

.

***I say again - General Walker knows Oswald shot at him in April of 1963 - Liebeler brilliantly spells this out in direct Warren Commission testimony that the only way Walker can have this knowledge is because Walker is in some way in conspiracy with Oswald or Oswald's controllers.   THIS IS THE ONLY PROVEN CONSPIRACY WITH OSWALD IN WARREN COMMISSION EVIDENCE.

regards

 

Jason

all snippets below taken from General Edwin Walker's direct Examination to Warren Comission Attorney Wesley Liebeler

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/walker_e.htm

In criminal science, evidence of a criminal mind is called Mens Rea, which means a criminal state of mind.  The number one allowable form of evidence in common law jurisdications indicating a criminal state of mind -or Mens Rea- is deception.  Only those who believe they are guilty choose to lie.  These are the lies of General Walker:

 

1. What follows is perjury, it is a lie; Walker knew no later than late April of 1963 that Oswald was the shooter of the 10April63 attack on Walker's Turtle Creek House.  

Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_28_47_PM.png

2. There is also is a second lie - Walker made a direct statement that Oswald had shot at him to the German newspaper Deutsch National-Zeitung. 

Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_28_47_PM.png

3. This is a laughable piece of perjury that would fail in any truth-oriented prosecution.  The newspaper article quoted General Walker directly:

Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_28_03_PM.png

4. Warren Commission Liebeler is weaving the perjured testimony of Walker so that later readers can convict Walker.  Liebeler already knows the answer to this question before he asks it as he has the phone records and testimony from the Germans proving Walker made the call and Walker said that Oswald shot at him in April of 1963:


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_27_42_PM.png

5. General Walker showed up at a meeting of none other than Carlos Bringuier(!)'s Cuban student organization (DRE) nominally opposed to Castro and contributed $5.   Since Carlos Bringuier saw and spoke with Oswald several times it's only correct to ask if Walker met Oswald prior to the assassination:


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_27_16_PM.png

6. This is where Warren Commission attorney Liebeler lays out the prosecution's case, which is that the authors of the JFK assassination are associated with the Minutemen, John Birch Society, and other right-wing factions:


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_26_32_PM.png

 

7. From April of 1963 until the day he died General Walker maintained there was indeed a conspiracy to kill Kennedy:


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_26_03_PM.png
Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_25_32_PM.png

8. Perjury.  Gen. Walker told several people as early as Aprili 1963 that none other than Lee Harvey Oswald, commie conspirator, had shot at Walker at his house on Turtle Creek.


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_23_31_PM.png

9. Elsewhere General Walker says that he was told on the night of April 10, 1963 by the Dallas Police Department that his attacker was Lee Harvey Oswald:


Screen_Shot_2017_11_10_at_7_22_23_PM.png

 

The guilty parties who curated the assassination of president John F Kennedy are identified by attorney Wesley Liebeler in Warren Commission testimony from General Edwin Walker.

Edited by Jason Ward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0269b.htm

See the last paragraph of Walthers 11/22 63 report.  "stacks of handbills concerning "Cuba for Freedom"...Also found was a Set of metal file cabinets containing records that appeared to be names and activities of Cuban sympathizers."  I'd never caught that last little tidbit of the paragraph myself "turned over to Fritz/DPD - And Secret Service Officers.  Quite interesting.

"seven metal boxes which contained pamphlets and literature from abroad."  comes from Sherriff's Deputy Oxfords report on 11/23/63.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oxford1.htm 

I forgot to mention Walthers Warren Omission deposition on 7/23/64 in Dallas.  "a big pasteboard barrel and it had a lot of these little leaflets in it, "Freedom for Cuba"... we found some little metal file cabinets... would carry an 8 X 10 folder... there were six or seven..."

https://www.jfk-assassination.com/warren/wch/vol7/page548.php

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I forgot to mention Walthers Warren Omission deposition on 7/23/64 in Dallas.  "a big pasteboard barrel and it had a lot of these little leaflets in it, "Freedom for Cuba"... we found some little metal file cabinets... would carry an 8 X 10 folder... there were six or seven..."

https://www.jfk-assassination.com/warren/wch/vol7/page548.php

Then there was this.   Dallas Police Officer Richard Stovall searched inside the house, as opposed to the garage.  If you read page 190 here of his testimony we find "three brown metal boxes 12 X 4 " containing phonograph records.  They came out of Ruth Paines bedroom per his testimony.  Not the garage where Walthers found 6-7 small metal file cabinets containing information on "Cuban Sympathizers".  Bottom of page, last paragraph, again.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/stovall.htm

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jason - your excerpts from Walker's questioning by Liebeler and your interpretations are in a way interesting. But you seem to have no trouble at all asserting things without proof, while at the same time demanding proof from others here when they make claims. One thing in particular struck me - your assertion that Walker told several people in April of 1963 that Oswald had been his shooter. Using your own methods of proof, can you show any records from before the assassination to back up that claim? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruby said a lot of things.  There is a film clip on YTV where a reporter on the street asked him something like (paraphrasing here) "who did it (murder JFK)" and his reply was something like:

"If Stevenson had been VP at the time, this would have never happened" or something like that. In other words, LBJ did it.

The point though is *someone* got him to kill Oswald.  All of the hooey about him doing it for Jackie is pure BS. Oswald was most probably supposed to die in the theater when he was arrested when he flipped out with the pistol.  When that didn't happen, there was panic and rather than try to make it look like a "it just so happened" death for Oswald (in other words, "crazed assassin pulls pistol and is gunned down by heroic cops") they said - what the xxxx just get someone in there and silence him.  Which is what happened. Amazingly it happened on live TV for all the world to see. The funny thing, too, about the LHO murder is it's almost as if they didn't give a xxxx any more about making it look like a normal act.  In other words, get the deed done and then we'll come up with an excuse for it ("he did it for Jackie") later, which is why that excuse is so lame when you really think about it.

But as for Ruby's affiliations and related to this thread, I find it very hard to believe that Paul's T's love theme (sorry Paul, you're a nice guy but a little too obssessed with this radical right thing) that the radical right did the job on JFK and LHO.  Bill Simpich's State Secret is the key - you can see the machinations taking place.  LHO was a low level mark for the intel community and upon leaving Russia, at the time they didn't quite know what else to do with him.

When the signal was given for Dallas, it was simple matter of building up the "crazed communist" narrative, moving him around like a chess piece, until 11/22.  I find it very hard to believe that the right could have had this much imagination and initiative to pull something like this off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Ruby said a lot of things.  There is a film clip on YTV where a reporter on the street asked him something like (paraphrasing here) "who did it (murder JFK)" and his reply was something like:

"If Stevenson had been VP at the time, this would have never happened" or something like that. In other words, LBJ did it.

The point though is *someone* got him to kill Oswald.  All of the hooey about him doing it for Jackie is pure BS. Oswald was most probably supposed to die in the theater when he was arrested when he flipped out with the pistol.  When that didn't happen, there was panic and rather than try to make it look like a "it just so happened" death for Oswald (in other words, "crazed assassin pulls pistol and is gunned down by heroic cops") they said - what the xxxx just get someone in there and silence him.  Which is what happened. Amazingly it happened on live TV for all the world to see. The funny thing, too, about the LHO murder is it's almost as if they didn't give a xxxx any more about making it look like a normal act.  In other words, get the deed done and then we'll come up with an excuse for it ("he did it for Jackie") later, which is why that excuse is so lame when you really think about it.

But as for Ruby's affiliations and related to this thread, I find it very hard to believe that Paul's T's love theme (sorry Paul, you're a nice guy but a little too obssessed with this radical right thing) that the radical right did the job on JFK and LHO.  Bill Simpich's State Secret is the key - you can see the machinations taking place.  LHO was a low level mark for the intel community and upon leaving Russia, at the time they didn't quite know what else to do with him.

When the signal was given for Dallas, it was simple matter of building up the "crazed communist" narrative, moving him around like a chess piece, until 11/22.  I find it very hard to believe that the right could have had this much imagination and initiative to pull something like this off.

No doubt Michael - your last paragraph hits the nail on the head. They could have comprised much of the ground crew, but not the sophisticated set up. Nor could they have guaranteed the coverup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

 

.....

When the signal was given for Dallas, it was simple matter of building up the "crazed communist" narrative, moving him around like a chess piece, until 11/22.  I find it very hard to believe that the right could have had this much imagination and initiative to pull something like this off.

 

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

No doubt Michael - your last paragraph hits the nail on the head. They could have comprised much of the ground crew, but not the sophisticated set up. Nor could they have guaranteed the coverup. 

Imagination and initiative, yes.. I DO see Jason Trejo's and Paul Ward's Radical Right (which does not include the YAF, E. H. Hunt, William Buckley Jr., nor the NE Establishment) as having both of those "qualities".

Yet, regarding the "the sophisticated set up" and the guaranteed coverup that Paul Brancato mentions, I don't see the Ward-Trejo nonsense coming-off without the YAF, E. Howard Hunt, NE Establishment factor.

Many factors were winding up to create great inertia for the assassination. IMO. It took a straw to break the balance. IMO, that straw was the ONI and it's concern about the future status of Guantanamo, after the YAF, the NE Establishment and their prospects for war, were already on-board, to make the decision to break the back of Camelot.

 

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


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

 

Imagination and initiative, yes.. I DO see Jason Trejo's and Paul Ward's Radical Right (which does not include the YAF, E. H. Hunt, William Buckley Jr., nor the NE Establishment) as having both of those "qualities".

Yet, regarding the "the sophisticated set up" and the guaranteed coverup that Paul Brancato mentions, I don't see the Ward-Trejo nonsense coming-off without the YAF, E. Howard Hunt, NE Establishment factor.

Many factors were winding up to create great inertia for the assassination. IMO. It took a straw to break the balance. IMO, that straw was the ONI and it's concern about the future status of Guantanamo, after the YAF, the NE Establishment and their prospects for war, were already on-board, to make the decision to break the back of Camelot.

 

Mostly agree, except your straw. Why do you say that? In my opinion it was the 'traitorous' acts of attempts to communicate privately with Cuban and Russian leaders in an effort to defuse third world conflict and the Cold War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Mostly agree, except your straw. Why do you say that? In my opinion it was the 'traitorous' acts of attempts to communicate privately with Cuban and Russian leaders in an effort to defuse third world conflict and the Cold War.

Paul, the short answer is ...." Because that is what happened". 54 years later we still own Guantanamo, without paying our $4085 rent fee, or re-negotiating it. We don't have to re-nogeotiate with a government that we deem antagonistic, how convenient.

Part of the long-answer is here on the second page:

 

And here:

 

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

 In my opinion it was the 'traitorous' acts of attempts to communicate privately with Cuban and Russian leaders in an effort to defuse third world conflict and the Cold War.

To be sure, Paul, we are in agreement here as well, with, perhaps the exception of the Guantanamo detail.

I don't think that JFK could have imagined that 54 years later, we would still be in an antagonistic relationship with Cuba. I don't believe that JFK could have imagined that, by the end of a prospective second term, we would be in an antogonistic relationship with Cuba. I believe he would have seen anything but a satisfactory regime change as an unimaginable failure. Guantanamo would have had to have been renegotiated or vacated for that to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Ruby said a lot of things.  There is a film clip on YTV where a reporter on the street asked him something like (paraphrasing here) "who did it (murder JFK)" and his reply was something like:

"If Stevenson had been VP at the time, this would have never happened" or something like that. In other words, LBJ did it.

The point though is *someone* got him to kill Oswald.  All of the hooey about him doing it for Jackie is pure BS. Oswald was most probably supposed to die in the theater when he was arrested when he flipped out with the pistol.  When that didn't happen, there was panic and rather than try to make it look like a "it just so happened" death for Oswald (in other words, "crazed assassin pulls pistol and is gunned down by heroic cops") they said - what the xxxx just get someone in there and silence him.  Which is what happened. Amazingly it happened on live TV for all the world to see. The funny thing, too, about the LHO murder is it's almost as if they didn't give a xxxx any more about making it look like a normal act.  In other words, get the deed done and then we'll come up with an excuse for it ("he did it for Jackie") later, which is why that excuse is so lame when you really think about it.

But as for Ruby's affiliations and related to this thread, I find it very hard to believe that Paul's T's love theme (sorry Paul, you're a nice guy but a little too obssessed with this radical right thing) that the radical right did the job on JFK and LHO.  Bill Simpich's State Secret is the key - you can see the machinations taking place.  LHO was a low level mark for the intel community and upon leaving Russia, at the time they didn't quite know what else to do with him.

When the signal was given for Dallas, it was simple matter of building up the "crazed communist" narrative, moving him around like a chess piece, until 11/22.  I find it very hard to believe that the right could have had this much imagination and initiative to pull something like this off.

Michael,

I agree with you on several points.  

(1) That *someone* got Ruby to kill Oswald. 

(2) That Ruby admitted in a separate interview that Ruby's lawyer told Ruby to tell the press that he did it for Jackie.

(3) That Oswald was supposed to die in the streets (or the theater).

(4) Seth Kantor also agrees -- the Dallas cops pressured Jack Ruby to kill the COP-KILLER, Lee Harvey Oswald.

(5) The Dallas Police stopped caring that this was on Live TV, because they were in one hell of a pickle by now.

(6) Bill Simpich's book, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) is indeed the key -- Bill Simpich demonstrates with his CIA Mole Hunt discovery that the CIA had NO CLUE about who Impersonated Oswald over Mexico City's most wire-tapped telephone!

I do disagree, of course, with your suggestion that the Dallas Radical Right COULD NOT HAVE killed both JFK and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Of COURSE they could!  

I think you grossly underestimate the Radical Right.  Have you read anything by, for example, Professor Revilo P. Oliver -- one of the regular writers for the John Birch Society?  He was the final person to testify before the Warren Commission.  He was an excellent fibber. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

I agree with you on several points.  

(1) That *someone* got Ruby to kill Oswald. Paul Trejo agrees with a brilliant deduction.

(2) That Ruby admitted in a separate interview that Ruby's lawyer told Ruby to tell the press that he did it for Jackie. Paul is "agreeing" with Michael Walton, about something that Michael did not say happened. Michael never mentioned lawyers. 

(3) That Oswald was supposed to die in the streets (or the theater). We are all so relieved that Paul Trejo agrees with us on this point.

(4) Seth Kantor also agrees -- the Dallas cops pressured Jack Ruby to kill the COP-KILLER, Lee Harvey Oswald. I don't think that Michael  mentioned anything about this point, on your list of agreements with Michael. Perhaps Paul Trejo would care to share a quote regarding this; if it's relavent; since, you know, it has no place on your list of agreements with Michael Walton.

(5) The Dallas Police stopped caring that this was on Live TV, because they were in one hell of a pickle by now. Brilliant, Paul, thanks for agreeing.

(6) Bill Simpich's State Secret (2014) is indeed the key -- Bill Simpich demonstrates with his CIA Mole Hunt discovery that the CIA had NO CLUE about who Impersonated Oswald over Mexico City's most wire-tapped telephone!

Paul, the last time you chimed in on this, you said it was the most wiretapped phone in the world. What's wrong? Not feeling it tonight?

I do disagree, of course, on your suggestion that the Dallas Radical Right COULD NOT HAVE killed both JFK and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Of COURSE they could!  Of course, Paul Trejo.

I think you grossly underestimate the Radical Right.  Have you read anything by, for example, Professor Revilo P. Oliver -- one of the regular writers for the John Birch Society?  He was the final person to testify for the Warren Commission.  He's an excellent fibber

I'll take your word on that, Paul Trejo

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Red and bold are my responses.

Edited by Michael Clark

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

×