Jump to content
The Education Forum
Ron Bulman

Two Oswalds in the Texas Theater

Recommended Posts

Now I must give credit where it is due:

Lance included in his post a link to the 1964 interview with Johnny Brewer.

Listen very carefully to Brewer describe his own actions as he watched "this man" walk up the sidewalk to the Texas Theater.

Beginning at the 1:25 mark this is a verbatim transcript of what Brewer said:

"When he went out the lobby toward the theater, I walked up the sidewalk and watched him go in, the uh,  I f(audible click) walked up to the theater and asked Miss Postal there, the cashier if she had sold a ticket to this man wearing a brown sports shirt (and his?) description . . ."

This video from 1964 fits exactly with what I argued earlier - after stepping out onto the sidewalk and watching the man, Brewer then actually walked back to Hardy's and talked to someone (the IBM men!), just as he admitted in his 1996 interview.

Only after this conversation with the mystery men did Brewer then head up to the Texas Theater to urge Julia Postal to call the cops.

How do I know?

Listen to the audible click precisely at the 1:32 mark - Brewer started to say something BUT THE SOUND EDITORS DELETED THE REST OF HIS SENTENCE! The splice is obvious (and crude!)

Note too that just before this crucial moment, the video interview of Johnny Brewer switches from Brewer himself in Hardy's Shoes - where we can watch him make his statements - to a video of the Texas Theater as the camera approaches the box office. We can hear Brewer's (spliced and edited) narrative, but we don't see him saying what he said. Why not? Because an edited video shot of Johnny Brewer talking would have made it obvious that a splice had been made - that material had been omitted - and that would have raised eyebrows.

Brewer's fumbled rendition of his conversation with Julia Postal also fits with my conviction, explained at length in earlier posts, that Brewer had been given a description of the man he was to seek out as a suspicious person at the Texas Theater. That description almost certainly originated with whomever Brewer spoke back at Hardy's. 

The second video - below - Lance posted also supports my claim - the editors (YET AGAIN!) chose to delete any Johnny Brewer statement about what happened after he stepped out onto the sidewalk to watch "this man" head toward the Texas Theater. The narrator - NOT BREWER! - then picks up the story for us. (See this link below. They cut the rest of Brewer's statement at the 2:03 mark. (Why? To hide whatever he would have said next, namely his return to the shoe store and his conversation with the mysterious men!)

https://youtu.be/xo-wHtJPdQM

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Gentlemen,

Combined with the Vincent Bugliosi interrogation of Brewer in the 1986 "trial" of LHO, we now have three filmed examples of cuts/splice/legal interruptions to Johnny Brewer's statement  - ALL AT THE EXACT SAME MOMENT: THAT INSTANT WHEN BREWER IS BEGINNING TO DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED AFTER HE STEPPED OUT ONTO THE SIDEWALK AND WATCHED "THE MAN" ENTER THE TEXAS THEATER!

This is no coincidence.

This is not "bad luck."

This is not irrelevant.

This is not trivial.

 

No, there is only one reason why three different versions of the Johnny Brewer story all stop/splice/interrupt at the crucial moment. It's because Brewer's statement about returning to Hardy's was too explosive to be revealed - he talked to someone there, almost certainly the "IBM men" and they were a direct link to conspirators.

Edited by Paul Jolliffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

...there is only one reason why three different versions of the Johnny Brewer story all stop/splice/interrupt at the crucial moment. It's because Brewer's statement about returning to Hardy's was too explosive to be revealed - he talked to someone there, almost certainly the "IBM men" and they were a direct link to conspirators.

It's just incredible how anyone could actually put forth the above claptrap, even though there isn't a shred of solid evidence to back up such a claim about the "IBM men" being "a direct link to conspirators".

Anyone promoting such sheer speculation should be ashamed to post at this forum (or any forum).

Whatever happened to the idea of providing some actual EVIDENCE before jumping to a conclusion?

I hope this forum isn't starting to adopt the Ralph Cinque Method Of Assassination Investigation (which is basically a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants approach where virtually any crackpot [and impossible] conspiracy theory is slapped up against the wall and expected to be taken seriously).

Related Discussion....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2019/04/Johnny Brewer And The Shooting Of J.D. Tippit

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From The Dallas Morning News, June 28, 1960

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS GET HIGH-SPEED IBM SYSTEM

Texas Instruments accepted Monday, June 27, a $1,600,000 data processing system that thinks in millionths of seconds - the first such system to be delivered either to private industry or the military.

Read the full story here.

http://photographyblog.dallasnewsblogs.com/files/2013/06/ibm.pdf

 

image.png.f2208f863ba93d993e62535b66aa7e29.png

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Anyone promoting such sheer speculation should be ashamed to post at this forum (or any forum).

This from a man who wants us all to believe the Warren Commission Report!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

This from a man who wants us all to believe the Warren Commission Report!

The Warren Commission Report is based on a whole lot of PROVABLE FACTS pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt in two 1963 murders.

It would be the height of folly to compare the wild conspiracy-tinged speculation about the "IBM men" to the massive amount of actual evidence presented by the Warren Commission.

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


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

From The Dallas Morning News, June 28, 1960

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS GET HIGH-SPEED IBM SYSTEM

Texas Instruments accepted Monday, June 27, a $1,600,000 data processing system that thinks in millionths of seconds - the first such system to be delivered either to private industry or the military.

Read the full story here.

http://photographyblog.dallasnewsblogs.com/files/2013/06/ibm.pdf

 

image.png.f2208f863ba93d993e62535b66aa7e29.png

 

Steve Thomas

Thanks once again Steve.  Of note to me is Texas Instruments ACCEPTS the first ever, in today's dollars about a billion and a quarter, data processing system.  Accepts from who?  The government?  IBM ?  If so who paid for it, the government?  "the first such system to be delivered either to private industry or the MILITARY."  In Dallas.  Three years before the assassination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

It's just incredible how anyone could actually put forth the above claptrap, even though there isn't a shred of solid evidence to back up such a claim about the "IBM men" being "a direct link to conspirators".

Anyone promoting such sheer speculation should be ashamed to post at this forum (or any forum).

Whatever happened to the idea of providing some actual EVIDENCE before jumping to a conclusion?

I hope this forum isn't starting to adopt the Ralph Cinque Method Of Assassination Investigation (which is basically a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants approach where virtually any crackpot [and impossible] conspiracy theory is slapped up against the wall and expected to be taken seriously).

Related Discussion....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2019/04/Johnny Brewer And The Shooting Of J.D. Tippit

 

It really isn't that complicated, David. I bet you could understand it if you tried:

Johnny Brewer went to the Texas Theater only after he had talked with two mystery men - men he claimed in 1996 were "IBM". 

Further, every interviewer (including three - THREE -  different filmed versions!) omitted the key details that Brewer returned to Hardy's Shoes and then had a conversation with the mystery men. These omissions  hid both Brewer's conversation with and the presence of the "IBM" men. 

Also, Brewer strongly implied that these men URGED him to follow the man to the theater:  "So they stayed there and all the time I'm thinking to myself what am I doing here?" 

Not only that, Brewer all but told us that these men were the ones who pushed Brewer to call the cops "I still had no reason to have somebody call the police. I'm not sure what the hell I'm doing here to start with."

 

Whoever those men were, the authorities went to great lengths to hide their very existence. But ol' Johnny let it slip back in 1996 just how key those men were to the "official narrative." 

Without those men, Johnny Brewer doesn't go to the Texas Theater, nor does he tell Julia Postal to call the cops. And without the Johnny Brewer story, then those mystery phone calls to the DPD with the false story of a man entering the Texas Theater with a shotgun or a rifle get scrutinized and debunked. And then, the lid comes off the conspiracy to murder the president of the United States.

That's why Johnny Brewer was interviewed in such a careful manner multiple times over the years, and why the filmed versions were edited. 

So you see David, it really is not that hard to follow this. It all makes sense, it all fits the known facts, and it perfectly explains why Johnny Brewer was not interviewed by the Dallas Police until December 6, 1963. It wasn't until then that the DPD realized that the cover story of why they went to the Texas Theater was needed.

 

Edited by Paul Jolliffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

The Warren Commission Report is based on a whole lot of PROVABLE FACTS pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt in two 1963 murders.

It would be the height of folly to compare the wild conspiracy-tinged speculation about the "IBM men" to the massive amount of actual evidence presented by the Warren Commission.

Oh fer cryin’ out loud!  How long will you pretend the so-called “investigation” by the WC and the FBI wasn’t exposed decades ago for the massive cover-up that it was?

To see a three minute video showing how the FBI altered statements by three critical Dealey Plaza witnesses....

CLICK HERE

Here’s an example, again, of how the Warren Commission altered sworn testimony that exposed games the FBI was playing with “Oswald’s possessions.”

 
Cadigan_Altered.jpg

The FBI falsified so much testimony that it even had a process in place for routinely doing so, including over the objections of Warren Commission attorneys.  

Dingle.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/16/2019 at 9:19 AM, Jim Hargrove said:

Oh fer cryin’ out loud!  How long will you pretend the so-called “investigation” by the WC and the FBI wasn’t exposed decades ago for the massive cover-up that it was?

To see a three minute video showing how the FBI altered statements by three critical Dealey Plaza witnesses....

CLICK HERE

Here’s an example, again, of how the Warren Commission altered sworn testimony that exposed games the FBI was playing with “Oswald’s possessions.”

 
Cadigan_Altered.jpg

The FBI falsified so much testimony that it even had a process in place for routinely doing so, including over the objections of Warren Commission attorneys.  

Dingle.gif

Jim,

I find it striking that the key FBI official here is #3 man Alan Belmont. Don Gibson pointed Belmont out as the most important FBI official to foster the cover-up, even more important than J. Edgar Hoover.

In this memo, Belmont explained the procedures for "correcting" FBI testimony in the transcripts and how to "be sure the attorney understands the changes made and actually accepts the changes . . ." 

"Be sure the attorney understands" was FBI-ese for "coerce the attorney into suborning perjury", a felony. 

Alan Belmont.

What a piece of ****

In his book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover-up", Don Gibson's arguments were persuasive about Belmont. I highly recommend Gibson's book to all readers here. 

https://www.amazon.com/Kennedy-Assassination-Cover-up-Donald-Gibson/dp/1615779639

Edited by Paul Jolliffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Paul.  I agree that Belmont's treachery is becoming increasingly clear.  I'll try to study it more closely.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belmont's memo on the evening of Nov. 22, 1963, about

a bullet lodged behind the president's ear (not entered into

evidence) is the smoking gun that destroys the Warren Report by itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

Belmont's memo on the evening of Nov. 22, 1963, about

a bullet lodged behind the president's ear (not entered into

evidence) is the smoking gun that destroys the Warren Report by itself.

Agreed Professor, although, I think several other key points also destroy the credibility of the report.  I find Jim's above notes on the IBM incident very interesting as well.  I do not give the Burrough's selling popcorn to LHO much weight however.  I am interested in this IBM story.

 

Edited by Cory Santos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/17/2019 at 1:59 PM, Cory Santos said:

Agreed Professor, although, I think several other key points also destroy the credibility of the report.  I find Jim's above notes on the IBM incident very interesting as well.  I do not give the Burrough's selling popcorn to LHO much weight however.  I am interested in this IBM story.

 

The popcorn, the IBM guys in the shoe store (that's almost funny, IBM guys just hanging out in a shoe store, for months, but I can't remember their names, if it wasn't for the seriousness of the subject), And the Belmont Bullet all interrelate to there being Two Oswald's in the Texas Theater.  For starters, Belmont's Bullet is one too many for counselor Specter to handle.  His case falls apart. 

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2019 at 1:44 PM, Lance Payette said:

You’re simply JFK assassination hobbyists who for some odd reason seem to derive pleasure from this sort of mental masturbation.

In my opinion, conspiracy theorists are working together and sharing knowledge in a continuing search for truth in an official history sullied by systematic deception. The lone nutters are debating a case that they believe was firmly closed at 1:51 PM Dallas time, November 22, 1963.

To me, it's crystal clear which side is the one engaged in pointless self-gratification.

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

×
×
  • Create New...