Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Rich Pope

I don't think LBJ did it, I know he did!

Recommended Posts

Guest Rich Pope
Posted (edited)

Anyone who claims Jack Ruby wasn't connected to Carlos Marcello is a fool.  Anyone who doesn't understand how powerful Carlos Marcello was is naive.  Anyone who doesn't think LBJ was part of the conspiracy to murder JFK is laughable.  The proof is in the pudding.  We know who did it, we know why it was done.  The most important thing is WHY is it still being covered-up.

Edited by Rich Pope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any credible evidence to back up the claims you make everyday? All your theories are pushed by Roger Stone, John Davis, Barr McClellan etc. People who’s work has been discredited years ago or questionable at best.      You constantly post this crap and when asked for evidence you ignore the request. Why not just post your evidence so everyone can take a look at it?

  To me and a few others it seems like you just Google “JFK conspiracy”, find a theory and state that as fact. There’s never any evidence to back it up, ever. Just like the WATS system claims you’ve been making. How do you expect to be taken as credible without actually being able to prove a word you say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, John Kozlowski said:

Do you have any credible evidence to back up the claims you make everyday? All your theories are pushed by Roger Stone, John Davis, Barr McClellan etc. People who’s work has been discredited years ago or questionable at best.      You constantly post this crap and when asked for evidence you ignore the request. Why not just post your evidence so everyone can take a look at it?

  To me and a few others it seems like you just Google “JFK conspiracy”, find a theory and state that as fact. There’s never any evidence to back it up, ever. Just like the WATS system claims you’ve been making. How do you expect to be taken as credible without actually being able to prove a word you say?

It seems his theories are beginning to contradict each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one says Marcello wasn't powerful, but was he powerful enough to get into the autopsy room at Bethesda?

To me, logic suggests that it is similar a one-way street. Going one direction, the flow is fairly smooth and largely without incident. Going in the other direction, someone would face numerous difficulties because of the inherent design. If the CIA goes to the Mafia for help in committing an illegal activity and it is successful, it is a win for the CIA since they achieved their objective without getting their hands dirty. If it is unsuccessful, the Mafia bears the blame and shoulders the responsibility and the CIA has plausible deniability for the entire affair. Conversely, if the Mafia were planning a crime such as killing someone, especially someone outside the underworld, and more especially a high-ranking US government official, I have great difficulty imagining that their first step would be to alert the authorities and ask for their assistance.

Or is the argument that the CIA got wind of the Mafia's plan against JFK and sort of "piggybacked" their way to Dealey Plaza? Even in that event, there had to be some government official that made the decision to let the Mafia plot continue and through inaction and security reduction, get JFK killed. I think that theory has been advanced somewhere before. It doesn't seem plausible to me based upon other facts, but I could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Marcello was not that powerful, period.

The reason Blakey and Billings made him out to be so is they needed to do that in order to construct their antidote to the CIA concept.

How do I know this?  Not from some cheapjack book by John Davis.  But from talking to John Volz.  Volz was the late federal prosecutor who was assigned to the Marcello case.  He told me that  Marcello was not even the leading mobster in the area.  That was Joe Carolla.  Now if he knew that, then how could Blakey and Billings not know it?

Therefore, the idea that somehow a guy who is not even a regional capo would be able to do what people like Davis and Waldron say he did, is a fairy tale.  Further, the other part of the construct that Blakey and Billings tried to create, that there was still a connection between the Murrett family and Marcello's gang in 1963, is also false.  That was shown by an interview the HSCA did with the wife of the Oswald uncle which Blakey and Billings did not include in the HSCA volumes.

The more documents that were declassified by the ARRB, the more this idea was exposed.  BTW, Jeremy Gunn actually sent me the stuff that Volz secured on Marcello. Does Rich Pope even know who Gunn was? Has he ever read a declassified ARRB file?  Sure does not look it.  He likes the books by Roger Stone and John Davis too much.

Further, the three pieces of evidence that people like Roger Stone used to incriminate Johnson have also been discredited.  That would be the whole LBJ ducked early bit, which was shown by Bob Groden in Absolute Proof to be wrong; the Mac Wallace fingerprint which was disproven in Mellen's book Faustian Bargains, and Madeleine Brown, who switched fathers for her kid later on.  There is not much of value in John Curington's book, H. L. Hunt Motive and Opportunity, but he insists that Hunt was not at the Murchison ranch the night before.  But he also adds that, Judy Baker style, she tried to convince Hunt that he was.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Darrell Curtis said:

It seems his theories are beginning to contradict each other.

Like I said he just throws every wacky theory he finds at the wall and sees what sticks. You’d figure he would’ve learned after being banned the 1st time.

   I just hope people new to the forum who come here and see his claims of being CIA and having insider info don’t take him seriously. To me it lumps him in with the serious researchers and hurts their credibility. That’s just my opinion but I wish @James R Gordon and @Kathy Beckett would make him attempt to show some sort of evidence if he’s going to make these claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Marcello was not that powerful, period.

The reason Blakey and Billings made him out to be so is they needed to do that in order to construct their antidote to the CIA concept.

How do I know this?  Not from some cheapjack book by John Davis.  But from talking to John Volz.  Volz was the late federal prosecutor who was assigned to the Marcello case.  He told me that  Marcello was not even the leading mobster in the area.  That was Joe Carolla.  Now if he knew that, then how could Blakey and Billings not know it?

Therefore, the idea that somehow a guy who is not even a regional capo would be able to do what people like Davis and Waldron say he did, is a fairy tale.  Further, the other part of the construct that Blakey and Billings tried to create, that there was still a connection between the Murrett family and Marcello's gang in 1963, is also false.  That was shown by an interview the HSCA did with the wife of the Oswald uncle which Blakey and Billings did not include in the HSCA volumes.

The more documents that were declassified by the ARRB, the more this idea was exposed.  BTW, Jeremy Gunn actually sent me the stuff that Volz secured on Marcello. Does Rich Pope even know who Gunn was? Has he ever read a declassified ARRB file?  Sure does not look it.  He likes the books by Roger Stone and John Davis too much.

Further, the three pieces of evidence that people like Roger Stone used to incriminate Johnson have also been discredited.  That would be the whole LBJ ducked early bit, which was shown by Bob Groden in Absolute Proof to be wrong; the Mac Wallace fingerprint which was disproven in Mellen's book Faustian Bargains, and Madeleine Brown, who switched fathers for her kid later on.  There is not much of value in John Curington's book, H. L. Hunt Motive and Opportunity, but he insists that Hunt was not at the Murchison ranch the night before.  But he also adds that, Judy Baker style, she tried to convince Hunt that he was.

Is this in reference to the Altgens photo of LBJ's limo, where Lady Bird and Senator Ralph Yarborough were sitting up and smiing while LBJ appears to be crouching down out of sight?

Didn't Yarborough report that LBJ was, in fact, crouching down in the limo as the entourage entered Dealey Plaza?

If true, it suggests that LBJ knew that JFK was going to get whacked in Dealey Plaza, while simultaneously worrying that the assassins might also whack him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Its not true.

Groden deals with this in his book Absolute Proof on page 272. 

Johnson was not crouching down at all.

Thanks for the info, Jim.  

I got my bad information from Phillip Nelson's book, LBJ-- Mastermind of the JFK Assassination.  Nelson describes the Altgens photo as definitive proof that LBJ was in the loop on the assassination plot.

I don't recall where I read about Ralph Yarborough's observations in the limo-- possibly in Nelson's tome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Thanks for the info, Jim.  

I got my bad information from Phillip Nelson's book, LBJ-- Mastermind of the JFK Assassination.  Nelson describes the Altgens photo as definitive proof that LBJ was in the loop on the assassination plot.

I don't recall where I read about Ralph Yarborough's observations in the limo-- possibly in Nelson's tome.

I've got his book, but no faith in it or LBJ did it.  Secret Service Agent Youngblood did not jump over the seat to protect LBJ, nor did LBJ duck from shots. But he may have leaned forward to hear what was coming over the SS radio. Per Yarbrough.

Maybe dot dot dash?

 https://parsleyspics.blogspot.com/2011/03/beethovens-5th-and-morse-code.html

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Senator Ralph Yarborough told me LBJ leaned over the space between

the driver's seat and the front passenger seat as Rufus Youngblood also leaned over

to listen to the agent's walkie-talkie while they were

going through the Triple Overpass. Yarborough said

LBJ and the agent were about six inches apart. Yarborough was sitting in the back seat with LBJ and Lady Bird.

I noted that since the Altgens photo shows LBJ

ducking earlier on Elm Street, Yarborough evidently was off a bit on the timing of the leaning over. And Yarborough

said the LBJ/Youngblood story about the agent

jumping over into the back seat was false. More details are in my book INTO THE NIGHTMARE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2019 at 12:58 PM, John Kozlowski said:

Like I said he just throws every wacky theory he finds at the wall and sees what sticks. You’d figure he would’ve learned after being banned the 1st time.

   I just hope people new to the forum who come here and see his claims of being CIA and having insider info don’t take him seriously. To me it lumps him in with the serious researchers and hurts their credibility. That’s just my opinion but I wish @James R Gordon and @Kathy Beckett would make him attempt to show some sort of evidence if he’s going to make these claims.

Yet nothing he finds and throws, sticks. He gets cornered every time, shown up and made to look foolish.

I've been lurking here regularly since 2004 or 2005, and hadn't noticed his presence before. Wonder how I missed that? It would be good if he were cornered on the matter of evidence. But it seems that if he was held accountable for that, then the lone nut people here would, in fairness, need to be held accountable for their pot stirring, avoiding answering questions regarding evidence, etc. 

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  

×
×
  • Create New...