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
Sign in to follow this  
James DiEugenio

Tracking Oswald: Part 7

Recommended Posts

He believes:

1)  There was a conspiracy to enact the assassination

2)  Oswald did not act alone

3)  There was a conspiracy to cover up the conspiracy

4)  Hoover was a main coordinator of the cover up.

All good for him to come around to.

Now, then he places the blame at Russia and Cuba and innocently says Hoover was trying to prevent world war III.

Lets examine that, how does it make sense that he was concerned with WWIII?  If so, where was he when we almost went to war in Cuba over the missles, Vietnam, most importantly, the Bay of Pigs.  It is strange that he would try to make Hoover a hero for covering up the assassination as if he did, he was committing treason, obstruction of justice,  perjury along with other crimes.  So I tend to disagree with Mr. Baer.

Now, what other scenarios does he ignore? 

Oswald's close connections with the FBI, Hosty, the memos dating back to 1960 regarding Oswald and/or his double wandering around the country.

He ignores LBJ's close relationship with Hoover.

He uses my tagline of "coincidences" more than once. 

In total, while I am sure he was a great asset to our intelligence community and therefore, our country, I tend to find this show lacking in overall consideration of other explanations of what I call "strange coincidences".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He also states that based on several documents in the episode, he has in effect solved the mystery.  For example, one document is based on an "unnamed source".  This source claims LHO's alleged travel buddy was a double agent for Castro.

Ok, when this happens with a witness, what I ask about is the other documents with claims by unnamed sources.  Why are they not given any credibility?  That is, Ruby saying there would be fireworks before the assassination, mentions of other bullets found in JFK's head, a bullet found in the limo, a never before seen Surgeon General's report on a bullet from the front, sightings of Oswald in Washington DC, for that matter, what about sightings of Oswald in the company of Ruby?  Why are those documents disregarded but this one document is deemed credible?

It makes no sense.  CT researchers do this too and it drives me nuts.  If you disregard one witness but give credibility to another, you have to have reasons.  Otherwise you are intellectually being dishonest to the evidence.  As for the show, perhaps he feels these Mexico City leads are essential.  That is why he is pursuing this angle.  Fine, lets see if he can prove it.  But, he should be mentioning the many other documents. 

One thought for Paul, if the radical right in Dallas did this alone, without help, please explain how Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, and Mexico City fit into it.  I am curious about that.

Not withstanding this, the list of Cubans declassified is very interesting.  But proving LHO was associated with CIA individuals, while this would be significant, it still does not prove they were in on it. 

So someone answer me this, as I presented to a good friend of mine who is retired Secret Service,

if LHO did this, alone,

WHY DO THE DECLASSIFIED RECORDS NOT PROVE HE ACTED ALONE?

Clearly the w.c. was defective, and, truly, now that even LHO did it types are coming around to that, it casts doubt on prior investigations of serious historical events.

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  

×