Tink's performance in The New York Times

[Greg Parker]

Frazier needs to give an explanation as to why his sister lied about which hospital he was at once he left TSBD. What possible motive did Linnie MAE Randle have in sending authorities on a wild goose chase, especially when by all accounts it was she who inserted herself into the events quite early on.

Much like the question of where and how Witt learned about the "effective" umbrella protests in Arizona, the devil is in the details.

It matters not to me that he mentioned the limousine stopping. No one gave a damn. The key was getting Umbrella man solved. IMO

I agree 100%. Witt has nothing to do with being a witness. Why did the man not come forward in 1963 or 64? He was merely the means by which TUM could be dismissed.

Your question was answered in Witt's testimony. He wasn't sure he saw anything of interest, was embarrassed by his behavior, and hoped he'd never be identified.

You seem to be holding onto the idea he is not UM. It follows that he was somehow recruited to say he was. Is it a coincidnce he looks just like him? Was it just a bureaucratic oversight that he testified in a manner more suggesting of a conspiracy, than not?

Pat,

As I have already said, and as Lee far more succinctly and eloquently put it, "It matters not to me that he mentioned the limousine stopping. No one gave a damn. The key was getting Umbrella man solved. IMO" The only thing I'd add is that solved should have " " around it.

Read the executive session transcripts. The HSCA did not want to find anything "sinister" about the umbrella man. It simply wanted to give the appearance of having addressed the concerns of the critics.

Then do a little digging on his work history as I have. The odds that he was recruited for the role start to shorten dramatically.

There is nothing remotely suspicious about his background.

Pat, all that reveals is that you have not looked into it.

This reminds me of Thane Cesar's having worked for Lockheed. The number of people in this country with high-level clearances or military backgrounds is astronomical.

And this reminds me of Tink accepting Wit's story BECAUSE it was so unbelievable it had to be true... Just meaningless and imprecise prattle in lieu of actual research.

[Pat Speer]

Pat: There is nothing remotely suspicious about his background.

Pat, all that reveals is that you have not looked into it.

Pat: This reminds me of Thane Cesar's having worked for Lockheed. The number of people in this country with high-level clearances or military backgrounds is astronomical.

And this reminds me of Tink accepting Wit's story BECAUSE it was so unbelievable it had to be true... Just meaningless and imprecise prattle in lieu of actual research.

Please identify what is so darned suspicious about Witt's background. I looked at what was posted earlier, and what was in the HSCA's notes, and saw nothing at all unusual.

I am an average American. And yet

1) My father served in the Air Force during the Korean War, and later worked as an executive in an oil company run by a Texan with mob connections, whose best friend was Robert Maheu. My dad believed he'd been kept under Secret Service surveillance in 1967, when LBJ stayed at the Century Plaza Hotel.

2) By the early 1970's my parents were divorced, and my mom's new boyfriend moved in. His best friend was the actor Leo Gordon. Many years later, while conducting research on the JFK assassination, I realized that Leo Gordon was involved in the theft of Howard Hughes' personal papers, which in turn led to the CIA's admission the Glomar Explorer was a CIA front. I believe my mom's boyfriend was also involved in the theft of these papers, and have a vague recollection of him showing me something that he claimed had belonged to Hughes.

3) In 1980 my mom remarried. My Step-father was a WWII vet, who was later employed in the skunk works at Lockheed. He built stealth fighters and had a high-level clearance. Towards the end of his life my sister interviewed him for posterity. On this tape he claimed to have helped rob an armory in the late 50's, and to have helped deliver the arms to Castro personally. He was a very conservative man and he found this very embarrassing.

4) My first girlfriend's dad also worked for Lockheed, and not only had a high-level clearance, but was one of the inventors of stealth technology. I had dinner with this man every Sunday night for 3 years. On many of these occasions his best friend also came to dinner. He was an executive for Lockheed.

5) My best friend's mom worked for the CIA as a secretary during the Bay of Pigs invasion, and STILL feels uncomfortable talking about her experience.

6) My other best friend joined the Marines after high school, and has risen steadily in the ranks to where he is now a Col. in Special Forces responsible for training many of the SF troops in Irag and Afghanistan.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Pat Speer

[Evan Burton]

For those who want access to some of the best studies

of the evidence related to the moon landings, go to

assassinationscience.com and you will find links to

New Work on Moon Photographs

Russians letting the cat out of the bag

Moon Movie

Top Ten Reasons Man Did Not go to the Moon

Did Stanley Kubrick fake the Moon Landings?

NASA erased moon footage

Metapedia entry on "Moon Hoax"

Wagging the Moondoggie

Personally, I can't imagine how anyone could read

"Wagging the Moondoggie" and not figure this out,

which includes David S. Lifton. Study the evidence!

This was all addressed in this thread, and those links were all found wanting. Jim forgets that and trots out the same list again.

[Evan Burton]

Gus Grissom knew the lander was a lemon and even hung one on his desk. We all know what happened to him.

No, he hung one on the Command Module (not Lunar Module, or "lander") simulator. As he himself said, he was frustrated that the various changes that were occuring in the spacecraft were not being replicated in the simulator; it was still set as an "older version" of the CM. He didn't see much point in training in a simulator that did not replicate the configuration or responses of the actual spacecraft.

Werner von Braun led an expedition to the Antarctic to gather moon rocks, which had been disgorged from the surface of the moon by the impact of small asteroids and were captured by Earth's gravitational attraction, so the astronauts "returning from the moon" could substantiate their visit by producing genuine "moon rocks"!

No, any geologist (or perhaps more rightly selenologist) would be able to tell the difference. The meteorites collected in the Antarctic showed distinctive evidence of having gone through the atmosphere, whereas the Apollo samples were all pristine and still showed the 'zap pits' caused by cosmic rays. Still, don't take my word for it: listen to someone who is trained in the field:

How Do We Know it is a Rock from the Moon?

Jim, before trying to argue authoritatively on a position, you should check your facts so you actually do know what you are talking about and can then champion them with confidence.

[Thomas Graves]

You gotta be kidding me! You're joking, right?

About what, Tommy?

What you done told me about in you last post, you know, something about some highly-respected "Researcher" starting a brand new time-and-energy-wasting thread on this here Forum? You were kidding, right?

--Tommy

I was talking about two different researchers and I never mentioned anything about "highly respected."

Lee,

Points taken. I should have said "a not-very-highly-respected but nevertheless high profile researcher". And that it's an unbelievable ("You're joking, right?") shame that anyone would start a time-consuming new thread that serves as a soapbox for him or her to verbalize a lot of malarkey and encourage others to do the same.,,

--Tommy

Edited December 4, 2011 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

Pat: There is nothing remotely suspicious about his background.

Pat, all that reveals is that you have not looked into it.

Pat: This reminds me of Thane Cesar's having worked for Lockheed. The number of people in this country with high-level clearances or military backgrounds is astronomical.

And this reminds me of Tink accepting Wit's story BECAUSE it was so unbelievable it had to be true... Just meaningless and imprecise prattle in lieu of actual research.

Please identify what is so darned suspicious about Witt's background. I looked at what was posted earlier, and what was in the HSCA's notes, and saw nothing at all unusual.

I am an average American. And yet

1) My father served in the Air Force during the Korean War, and later worked as an executive in an oil company run by a Texan with mob connections, whose best friend was Robert Maheu. My dad believed he'd been kept under Secret Service surveillance in 1967, when LBJ stayed at the Century Plaza Hotel.

2) By the early 1970's my parents were divorced, and my mom's new boyfriend moved in. His best friend was the actor Leo Gordon. Many years later, while conducting research on the JFK assassination, I realized that Leo Gordon was involved in the theft of Howard Hughes' personal papers, which in turn led to the CIA's admission the Glomar Explorer was a CIA front. I believe my mom's boyfriend was also involved in the theft of these papers, and have a vague recollection of him showing me something that he claimed had belonged to Hughes.

3) In 1980 my mom remarried. My Step-father was a WWII vet, who was later employed in the skunk works at Lockheed. He built stealth fighters and had a high-level clearance. Towards the end of his life my sister interviewed him for posterity. On this tape he claimed to have helped rob an armory in the late 50's, and to have helped deliver the arms to Castro personally. He was a very conservative man and he found this very embarrassing.

4) My first girlfriend's dad also worked for Lockheed, and not only had a high-level clearance, but was one of the inventors of stealth technology. I had dinner with this man every Sunday night for 3 years. On many of these occasions his best friend also came to dinner. He was an executive for Lockheed.

5) My best friend's mom worked for the CIA as a secretary during the Bay of Pigs invasion, and STILL feels uncomfortable talking about her experience.

6) My other best friend joined the Marines after high school, and has risen steadily in the ranks to where he is now a Col. in Special Forces responsible for training many of the SF troops in Irag and Afghanistan.

I don't know how "average" this can possibly be. I don't recall any of these plot lines on Leave it Beaver or My Three Sons.

Was Lee Harvey Oswald also "average"? If so, then there surely was no reason to hide his intelligence connections.... after all, every man and his dog in the US had them...

You looked at what was posted earlier? That was just the surface. I dug deeper. You want me to post the results? Not a chance. If you're interested enough, you can do the digging yourself.

[David Lifton]

Has anyone learned anything new?

Yes

Great, Lee!

What have you learned?

--Tommy "The Lazy "Researcher" O'Pepper

That a certain high profile researcher, who it is claimed is searching for the truth, thinks it a better use of our time to look into yellow paint than it is trying to corroborate the story of the man who says he was pumping an umbrella up and down right next to the President when he was shot and who then disappeared for 15 years.

And much, much more...

Mr. Farley:

As if often the case, your understanding as to what is relevant, and what is not, seems thoroughly out of focus:

1) Steve Witt is not someone who “disappeared for fifteen years.” Nor is he sinister. At all. He was apparently not sought out by the FBI (as was the case with other pertinent witnesses, who appear in photos, and whose identities are not known). But Witt’s identity was certainly known by his dentist, which is how I heard about him—in the 1970s. And co-workers of his knew about his story, which is how reporter Earl Golz and Penn Jones found him. Some “disappearance”, eh?

Moreover, and as I pointed out, he happens to be an important car-stop witness, which of course doesn’t happen to register with you, because your mental apparatus is apparently tuned to a different frequency. In a proper investigation, which would also have focused on anomalies pertaining to the Zapruder film, Witt’s account would have been highly significant, and would have led to the questioning of other witnesses—and it would have been immediately apparent that most witnesses by limo (e.g., the Newmans, both of whom I interviewed, in person, and at length, in 1971), insisted that the car stopped momentarily.

POSTSCRIPT TO THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH: When I say "insisted," I mean that literally. In my in-person taped interview with Bill Newman (and his wife) at their home, in November, 1971, they didn't just say (in passing) that the car stopped; but when challenged (by me) pointing out to them that the Zapruder film at the U.S. National Archives (remember, this is four years before Groden was on Geraldo Rivera) showed no such stop, which I emphasized, Newman said that he didn't care what some film showed, there was no question in his mind but that it stopped, because he was right there, and saw it happen. His wife agreed. NOW CONTINUING WITH THE POST, as originally written. . .

Let me spell this out, so that even you can perhaps understand it: in a proper investigation, the multiple reports that the President’s limo stopped during the shooting would have been just as important (and potentially sensational) as the reports that President Kennedy suffered an entrance wound in the throat.

Both indicate conspiracy, but for different reasons. And the car-stop evidence immediately implicates the driver of the President’s limo. Furthermore, any Secret Service agent present either in the President’s car, or on the followup car would know whether the car stopped, and had Witt and others been called to testify, the focus could have easily shifted to the Zapruder film, and various issues of authenticity.

Yet you come along in 2011 and purport to instruct us as to what is relevant and (a) invest Witt with a sinister significance he does not have; and (b ) ignore what is crucially important that he is saying about the car stop.

If you’re going to start erecting a "conspiracy theory” about who was (and was not) called, then I would suggest that its far more plausible that certain high level folk perhaps knew very well that the President Kennedy's limo stopped momentarily during the shooting (and that the Z film had been altered to conceal all that), and that perhaps that is why critical certain witnesses (e.g., the Newman’s and Witt, and perhaps others) were not called to testify (and, in Witt's case, never even interviewed at all!). That “pattern” of why certain witnesses were not "found" or were not called is much easier to propose (and even defend) rather than to erect a conspiracy hypothesis centered around Witt, his supposed “disappearance” and his umbrella.

On a scale of "one to ten", what do you think is more important (and would have been more important, as a news story): that the President's car momentarily stopped, DURING the shooting, or that a man standing at curbside had an an umbrella, and was perhaps moving it up and down?

2) On a high quality copy of the Zapruder film—a digitized version of the frames made from a 35 mm copy made directly from the original-—these yellow segments are very noticeable. In other words, it is obvious that there are bright yellow segments—which appear to be fresh paint—on the curb, to the left of the JFK limo. The reproductions that have been produced so far in connection with any discussion on this forum do not do justice to the bright nature of the markings. Such markings are obviously not for any “loading zone”—that is ludicrous, and would be similar to someone arguing that Witt had an umbrella because it was “only raining on him.” And if you think these bright yellow markings are innocent, based on some hearsay from a taxi driver twenty years ago, then I’ve got some high quality swampland in Florida you perhaps may wish to purchase.

3) I think you should stick to your specialty, which seems to be dreaming up a conspiracy, where Mary Bledsoe is concerned—you know, that she wasn’t on the bus (at the point where Oswald boarded), that she didn’t see Oswald, that she wasn’t Oswald’s landlady, that a "second Oswald" ran into his rooming house, etc etc.

You offer this conspiracy hypothesis despite the fact that, as I demonstrated months ago (and as you apparently did not realize), Mary Bledsoe was interviewed 3 times by five different FBI agents in the 10 days following the assassination, the first time being the day after the assassination. So the notion that she was making all this up is highly implausible (to put it mildly).

It continues to amaze me that anyone who professes to be serious about studying this case can so consistently focus on the irrelevant, for which there is no evidence, and ignore what is important.

Remember what I said about the Stanford Law professor, and which I think perhaps applies to here: “Great trial lawyers have an instinct for the jugular; others has an instinct for the capillaries.”

Welcome to the land of the capillaries.

DSL

12/4/11; 3 AM PST

Los Angeles, California

Edited December 4, 2011 by David Lifton

[Greg Parker]

Has anyone learned anything new?

Yes

Great, Lee!

What have you learned?

--Tommy "The Lazy "Researcher" O'Pepper

That a certain high profile researcher, who it is claimed is searching for the truth, thinks it a better use of our time to look into yellow paint than it is trying to corroborate the story of the man who says he was pumping an umbrella up and down right next to the President when he was shot and who then disappeared for 15 years.

And much, much more...

Mr. Farley:

As if often the case, your understanding as to what is relevant, and what is not, seems thoroughly out of focus:

1) Steve Witt is not someone who "disappeared for fifteen years."

"The Umbrella Man remained anonymous until the committee distributed the pictures and issued a public appeal for information about him last July. Witt, a Dallas warehouse manager, saw the pictures and news stories and realized to his chagrin that he was the umbrella Man. 'Having no particular interest in the assassination case, I drifted along all these years without coming across any of these theories'." Daily Union, Sep 26, 1978

We know the above isn't quite true... he didn't give himself up... and despite what you say... he claims he never knew about any controversy, so therefore could not have discussed it with anyone prior to the coming of his "chagrin". What can be taken as true though is that he "remained anonymous" for 15 years - surely synonymous with "disappearing for 15 years".

Nor is he sinister. At all. He was apparently not sought out by the FBI (as was the case with other pertinent witnesses, who appear in photos, and whose identities are not known). But Witt's identity was certainly known by his dentist, which is how I heard about him

through third party hearsay - of which we only have your word since you continue to neglect to name names.

—in the 1970s. And co-workers of his knew about his story, which is how reporter Earl Golz and Penn Jones found him. Some "disappearance", eh?

Again - name the co workers.

Moreover, and as I pointed out, he happens to be an important car-stop witness, which of course doesn't happen to register with you, because your mental apparatus is apparently tuned to a different frequency. In a proper investigation,

You'd be the LAST person allowed within a 100 mile radius of a proper investigation.

which would also have focused on anomalies pertaining to the Zapruder film, Witt's account would have been highly significant, and would have led to the questioning of other witnesses—and it would have been immediately apparent that most witnesses by limo (e.g., the Newmans, both of whom I interviewed, in person, and at length, in 1971), insisted that the car stopped momentarily.

Let me spell this out, so that even you can perhaps understand it: in a proper investigation, the multiple reports that the President's limo stopped during the shooting would have been just as important (and potentially sensational) as the reports that President Kennedy suffered an entrance wound in the throat.

Let me spell this out: The HSCA had NO INTEREST in anything Witt had to say about the car or anything else. The SOLE purpose of his being there was to show the HSCA was "serious" about addressing the concerns of critics regarding TUM - without finding anything sinister. There are any number of ways Witt could have come by the information he gave about the car. NO ONE AT THAT TIME CARED ABOUT ANY STOP. I have looked at several contemporaneous stories on Witt's testimony without finding any mention of it.

Both indicate conspiracy, but for different reasons. And the car-stop evidence immediately implicates the driver of the President's limo. Furthermore, any Secret Service agent present either in the President's car, or on the followup car would know whether the car stopped, and had Witt and others been called to testify, the focus could have easily shifted to the Zapruder film, and various issues of authenticity.

Yet you come along in 2011 and purport to instruct us as to what is relevant and (a) invest Witt with a sinister significance he does not have; and (b ) ignore what is crucially important that he is saying about the car stop.

If you're going to start erecting a "conspiracy theory" about who was (and was not) called, then I would suggest that its far more plausible that certain high level folk perhaps knew very well that the President Kennedy's limo stopped momentarily during the shooting (and that the Z film had been altered to conceal all that), and that perhaps that is why critical certain witnesses (e.g., the Newman's and Witt, and perhaps others) were not called to testify (and, in Witt's case, never even interviewed at all!). That "pattern" of why certain witnesses were not "found" or were not called is much easier to propose (and even defend) rather than to erect a conspiracy hypothesis centered around Witt, his supposed "disappearance" and his umbrella.

On a scale of "one to ten", what do you think is more important (and would have been more important, as a news story): that the President's car momentarily stopped, DURING the shooting, or that a man standing at curbside had an an umbrella, an was perhaps moving it up and down?

2) On a high quality copy of the Zapruder film—a digitized version of the frames made from a 35 mm copy made directly from the original-—these yellow segments are very noticeable. In other words, it is obvious that there are bright yellow segments—which appear to be fresh paint—on the curb, to the left of the JFK limo. The reproductions that have been produced so far in connection with any discussion on this forum do not do justice to the bright nature of the markings. Such markings are obviously not for any "loading zone"—that is ludicrous,

David, do try and get some things straight. Lee did not suggest it was a loading zone. That was me. I based it on the rather misleading description of the markers as "yellow stripes" (the international standard for loading zone markings) and uncertainty about the location. Jerry Dealey has since provided information about the nature of the markings, and I have pointed out that a survey map shows 8 of them. They are completely and utterly a non issue.

and would be similar to someone arguing that Witt had an umbrella because it was "only raining on him." And if you think these bright yellow markings are innocent, based on some hearsay from a taxi driver twenty years ago, then I've got some high quality swampland in Florida you perhaps will wish to purchase.

See above. You want to take issue with Jerry's information, do so. But don't prattle about hearsay evidence while using it yourself (what was the name of the person who knew the dentist again? What was the name of the dentist? What was the name of the person who phoned Jones?

3) I think you should stick to your specialty, which seems to be dreaming up a conspiracy, where Mary Bledsoe is concerned—you know, that she wasn't on the bus, didn't see Oswald, that she wasn't Oswald's landlady, that a "second Oswald" ran into his rooming house, etc etc.

It continues to amaze me that anyone who professes to be serious about studying this case can so consistently focus on the irrelevant, for which there is no evidence, and ignore what is important.

Remember what I said about the Stanford Law professor, and which I think perhaps applies to here: "Great trial lawyers have an instinct for the jugular; others has an instinct for the capillaries."

Welcome to the land of the capillaries.

You got there following the yellow brick road no doubt...

DSL

12/4/11; 3 AM PST

Los Angeles, California

Edited December 4, 2011 by Greg Parker

[David Lifton]

[snip]

((Quoting Lee Farley, in a sarcastic reference to me. . . )):

That a certain high profile researcher, who it is claimed is searching for the truth, thinks it a better use of our time to look into yellow paint than it is trying to corroborate the story of the man who says he was pumping an umbrella up and down right next to the President when he was shot and who then disappeared for 15 years.

And much, much more...

((Quoting Greg Parker [in burgundy] responding to my commentary about Witt and his statement about the car stop. . . )):

[snip]

. . .which would also have focused on anomalies pertaining to the Zapruder film, Witt's account would have been highly significant, and would have led to the questioning of other witnesses—and it would have been immediately apparent that most witnesses by limo (e.g., the Newmans, both of whom I interviewed, in person, and at length, in 1971), insisted that the car stopped momentarily.

Let me spell this out, so that even you can perhaps understand it: in a proper investigation, the multiple reports that the President's limo stopped during the shooting would have been just as important (and potentially sensational) as the reports that President Kennedy suffered an entrance wound in the throat.

Let me spell this out: The HSCA had NO INTEREST in anything Witt had to say about the car or anything else. The SOLE purpose of his being there was to show the HSCA was "serious" about addressing the concerns of critics regarding TUM - without finding anything sinister. There are any number of ways Witt could have come by the information he gave about the car. NO ONE AT THAT TIME CARED ABOUT ANY STOP. I have looked at several contemporaneous stories on Witt's testimony without finding any mention of it.

[snip]

DSL

12/4/11; 3 AM PST

Los Angeles, California

Greg Parker,

I’m afraid you’re reasoning in a thoroughly circular fashion.

Steve Witt testified truthfully, as far as I’m concerned. Now you think he did not. So, to cast his testimony in doubt, you ascribe bad intention to the HSCA and its staff.

You write: “The SOLE purpose of his being there was to show the HSCA was "serious" about addressing the concerns of critics regarding TUM - without finding anything sinister.”

But suppose there was in fact nothing sinister about Witt and his umbrella? Then what are you left with? The answer: Nada. All you have, really, is your own belief that the HSCA and its staff was dishonest and somehow presented a lying witness. Apparently, you simply cannot get your arms around the idea that Steve Witt is exactly who he says he was.

Consider the opposite, just hypothetically: Suppose Witt had said:

QUOTING WITT (hypothetically):

“Now, I have given you my explanation for the umbrella, and how the umbrella represented the symbol of Prime Minister Chamberlain, etc., and I do hope the committee accepts my testimony. As corroboration, you can call my wife (or other family member) who had been well aware of my embarrassment over this, ever since this episode occurred some fifteen years ago.

“However, I do have one concern.

“When I was there, with the umbrella, I noticed the President’s car stopped suddenly, during the shooting. I was surprised by this. Because after all, shots were being fired, so why would the driver stop the car?

“I hope the Committee does look into this.”

END QUOTE

The fact is: Witt did not make such an explicit statement, but he certainly DID say the car stopped. There’s no question about that. So. . what is your response to that?

Quoting what you wrote, you again go back to psychology: “There are any number of ways Witt could have come by the information he gave about the car. NO ONE AT THAT TIME CARED ABOUT ANY STOP.”

Now please do explain: Just what do you mean, when you say: “No one at that time cared about any stop.”

Just who is “No one at that time. . .?

I certainly “cared about” the stop. I realized the car stop witnesses were in conflict with the film by 1969—that’s 42 years ago. Further, I went to Dallas in November, 1971 (that’s 40 years ago) with a TC-800 reel-to-reel tape recorder and interviewed five witnesses about it—four of them with a tape recorder: Mary Moorman, John Chism, Mr and Mrs. Newman, and Jack Franzen. Furthermore, I made no secret of my concerns—and I believe that another researcher called it to the attention of the Committee.

So what do you mean: no one “cared” about it. . . you base that on the fact that its not in some news stories? Apparently so. You write: “I have looked at several contemporaneous stories on Witt's testimony without finding any mention of it.”

Sorry, but that doesn’t pass my “so what?” test.

Let me tell you something about the HSCA, and its investigation, and I made two formal addresses to the committee, and had at least 10 telephone contacts and meetings with them. True, the Committee didn’t “care” about the car stop. But its worse than that. Nor did they “care” about the falsification of the autopsy via the alteration of wounds on the body.. They looked at “conspiracy” through the lens of the “second assassin.” Really, it was that elementary, that puerile. The notion that there was fraud in the evidence was something they could not—and would not (and did not)—comprehend. I know that personally from my experience in talking to no less than 5 members of the staff, and then having a one hour plus phone call with General Counsel Robert Blakey in October, 1978. (See Chapter 24 of Best Evidence)

They paid lip service to “looking for” a conspiracy, in that area, but wouldn’t really do what was necessary to pursue it.

Its not that they couldn’t “handle” it; they truly couldn’t conceive of it. When I pleaded with them to focus on Greer and Kellerman, do you know what they did? A staffer called up Greer, at home, and had a brief conversation with him. He assured them that no one had tampered with the body. Can you believe that?

Do you think Blakey would have investigated the Mafia that way? (“Hi, I’m Robert Blakey. . Glad I got you at home sir. . I’d just like to ask you a question: Were you or your confreres by any chance involved in the murder of President Kennedy? . .. you weren’t? Oh, thank you so much sir. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me.”)

That’s what they did with William Greer, the driver of the limo –when questioning him about the chain of possession of JFK’s body.

But now let’s turn to Witt’s testimony about the car stop, and its implications, and how the HSCA handled it. The Witt testimony is an excellent example. Here was a witness who volunteered critical evidence which implied that the Zapruder film was falsified, and it sailed right by.

And now, over three decades later, there are people on this forum who think of themselves as “serious” researchers—people who spend hours thinking about this case, and posting on this and that, who won’t deal with the same issue! They prattle on that they’re not concerned with Z film alteration, or that the area of the actual shooting may have been marked with two (not eight) yellow stripes. . . that’s all innocent they say (!). What counts (to them) is the movement of the umbrella, or whether Witt is some sort of imposter, or whether he talked to a Cuban; or the notion that Mary Bledsoe was not on the bus (at the point where Oswald boarded), that she was a xxxx; that she wasn’t even Oswald’s landlady! etc etc. This is their idea of “conspiracy.”

Here’s the bottom line: The government did not find the truth in this case because of fraud in the evidence. That’s why the normal investigatory functions of the government did not perform properly.

If you want to know why the Kennedy case is going nowhere fast, as the half century mark approaches, it’s the failure to distinguish what is significant, from what is largely irrelevant.

DSL

12/4/11; 5:25 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

Edited December 4, 2011 by David Lifton

[Michael Hogan]

Here’s the bottom line: The government did not find the truth in this case because of fraud in the evidence. That’s why the normal investigatory functions of the government did not perform properly.

"The Committee's investigation was not adequate enough or honest enough to produce any firm conclusions about the nature of the conspiracy to kill President Kennedy." (Gaeton Fonzi)

[Guest Tom Scully]

(quote name='David Lifton' date='04 December 2011 - 01:33 PM' timestamp='1323005602' post='240068') http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18412&view=findpost&p=240068

...Its not that they couldn’t “handle” it; they truly couldn’t conceive of it. When I pleaded with them to focus on Greer and Kellerman, do you know what they did? A staffer called up Greer, at home, and had a brief conversation with him. He assured them that no one had tampered with the body. Can you believe that?

Do you think Blakey woiuld have investigated the Mafia that way? (“Hi, I’m Robert Blakey. . Glad I got you at home sir. . I’d just like to ask you a question: Were you or your conferes by any chance involved in the murder of President Kennedy? . .. you weren’t? Oh, thank you so much sir. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me.”)

That’s what they did with William Greer, the driver of the limo –when questioning him about the chain of possession of JFK’s body. ....

(/quote)

David,

When I read your reference to "Blakey would have investigated the Mafia that way", I nearly broke out into hysterical laughter!

I suppose it matters little that Howard Willens, age 32 at the time he was appointed as one of three assistant counsels on the WC just below the level of J. Lee Rankin, happened to be the son of Joseph R. Willens, who happened to move in 1958, into the home directly next to the residence of Tony Accardo, or that Joseph's father was Pincus (Morris) Braver-Wilensky of Chicago, who we also know nothing about.:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15205&pid=237868&st=0entry237868

If any of this was considered relevant by even a few in the assassination research community, wouldn't the info above be more widely known?

Since Earl Warren and Albert Jenner were certainly close to people whose names were included in FBI files related to investigations of members of the Chicago Syndicate, and Jack Ruby was from Chicago, and the WC was a small group with Warren, Willens, and Jenner all "serving" on the WC in influential positions, how many other key WC people with Chicago mob ties would be a quantity sufficient to attract more interest from researchers?

Albert E. Jenner, Jr. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_E._Jenner,_Jr.#Controversy

Earl Warren http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Earl_Warren&oldid=432596658#Controversy

(Linked Controversy Section was later removed from Warren bio.)

(quote)www.aarclibrary.org/publib/.../HSCA_Vol11_WC_3F2_Willens.pdf

.PDF Page 5 - (page 315)

JFK Exhibit No. 66

Warren Commission Organizational Chart

.PDF Page 7 - (page 317)

...Mr. BLAKEY. The basic division of the work of the Warren Commission

in the five substantive areas, and subsequently a sixth, I take

it, was as a result of a memorandum that you wrote. Is that correct?

Mr. WILLENS. One of the assignments I undertook in my first few

weeks with the Commission was to make a recommendation to Mr.

Rankin as to how the work of the Commission might be organized. I

did write a memorandum in either late December or early January

that proposed an organization very close to that reflected on this chart.

That was reviewed by Mr. Rankin and presented subsequently to the

Commission and did serve, with some amendment, as the organization

through which the Commission staff performed its duties.

Mr. BLAKEY. I wonder if you could share with us at this time your

rationale in dividing the basic work of the Commission into five areas

as designated on this chart.

Mr. WiLLExs. I keep thinking of six areas, as is reflected on the

chart. I believe the rationale is readily stated . In order to begin and

undertake a project of this dimension, there has to be some arbitrary

allocation of responsibilities. There is no way to do it that eliminates

overlap or possible confusion but this was an effort to try to organize

the work in such a way that assignments would be reasonably clear,

overlaps could be readily identified and coordination would be accomplished

among the various members of the staff.

It did seem to me and others who reviewed this chart that the

various areas here did lend themselves to separate treatment, at least

at the outset, when our principal task was to marshal the investigative

materials that were made available to the Commission, try to identify

those areas that needed additional investigation and to outline those

questions that had to be addressed by the staff and the members of

the Commission....(/quote)

(quote)http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=willens+%22Despite+all+the+loose+ends+spotlighted+by+Hubert%22&btnG=

The Ruby Cover-Up

books.google.com Seth Kantor - 1992 - 450 pages

...Despite all the loose ends spotlighted by Hubert and Griffin, "these Cuban pursuits represented some kind of bottomless pit and our overall investigation had to be wrapped up," Willens said.1 Other staff lawyers agreed with Willens.

Therefore, the Warren Commission never explored the possible links of Ruby's Cuban activities in 1959 with his FBI contacts that year and with Ruby's totally unexplained use of a safety deposit box at the time of his Cuban and FBI interests....

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=kantor+ruby+%22among+the+working-level+lawyers%22&btnG=#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&tbo=1&tbm=bks&source=hp&q=kantor+%22*the+Ruby+detail.+Had+Ruby+acted+alone%3F+Did+Ruby%22&pbx=1&oq=kantor+%22*the+Ruby+detail.+Had+Ruby+acted+alone%3F+Did+Ruby%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=538l538l23l1573l1l1l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=38a0ddfd1ebc19a6&biw=811&bih=496

The Ruby Cover-Up

books.google.com Seth Kantor - 1992

...Oswald's Death . . .the Ruby detail. Had Ruby acted alone? Did Ruby have any connections leading to Oswald? Originally there were to be five areas of investigation, in descending importance.

The Ruby detail was considered the fifth and least significant. Hubert and Griffin were introduced to each other and deposited there. 6. Presidential Protection....

involving sensitive precautions taken and not taken by the Secret Service, FBI and Dallas police in advance of the President's trip to Dallas.

The Commission decided this category was essential and added it on. Rankin was placed in charge of it. Samuel A. Stern, 35, a Washington lawyer who had clerked for Chief Justice Warren eight years earlier, was the day- today counsel on the job.

The management would have had to reinforce the fifth floor walls of the building at 200 Maryland Avenue if these attorneys had elected to hang all their framed credentials as learned men on the walls. Yet despite that cumulation of certified intelligence, they often isolated themselves from each other. Some were pompous and didn't feel the need to hear what others on the staff were thinking. Some were too caught up with their own investigative projects to communicate with others.

There were conflicts and overlaps and jealousies and grievances and most of it was because there was no simple line of contact among the men on the fifth floor.

One of the contributing factors to the Commission's overall failures was its lack of communication from top to bottom and from side to side.

Rankin kept the up and down flow of information in the hourglass— between Commission members and staff— tightly controlled and limited through his office. It was all very formal and private. As a result the fifth floor took on an antiseptic atmosphere, with no system for a free exchange of facts among the working-level lawyers. For instance, "We never had any significant dialogue, any structured dialogue among the staff members on the question of conspiracy," says one of those lawyers who still is distraught because of that critical failure.

"There never were any series of hypotheses set up that we were

all supposed to check into. In fact, we never

really had a structured system of meeting and exchanging information so that various theories could be checked out.....

(/quote)

Bill,

Is a quote from Virginia Warren's daughter as reliable as something a ghost writer put in Hilton's "auto" biography?

How could even ten percent of these mob related "coincidences" even happen to such a small group of people as Earl Warren, Tom Clark, Howard Willens, and Albert Jenner, Jr. if even one of them was committed in any way to avoiding even the appearance of impropriety? Joke front men for a sham commission hard at work fabricating a cover up. Was Sam Stern blind? He was right in the middle of all of it, including knowing DeMohrenschildt's, "Mr. Green".

I can envision Katzenbach asking Willens...."Howard, your parents still live next door to Tony Accardo, right?"

Willens: "Yes, Nick, they still do."

Katzenbach: "Okay, kid, I'm sending you over to the WC to act as DOJ liason, and try to persuade Lee Rankin to let you design the organizational structure and the priorities of the WC investigation, and report back to me, regularly!"

(quote)http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/06/local/me-virginia-warren-daly6

Virginia Warren Daly dies at 80; popular socialite in New York and Washington

OBITUARIES

March 06, 2009

...Daly, who was rarely quoted in the news media, enjoyed traveling the world with hotel magnate Conrad "Connie" Hilton, her daughter said.

...................................................

aarc-fbi552-11_0002_0125

Lee,

If you're gonna quote an interview with Stern, I think it is fitting to put his and other WC "baggage" on display, side by side with what you indicate is Stern's undermining of the WC and its "findings". IMO, Stern's 1978 interview was mostly about blowing more smoke into the prying eyes of CTs.

Consider that Stern was a clerk in Earl Warren's office in the same year Henry Crown's son John, was clerking for Tom C. Clerk, even though Clark is alleged to have told Drew Pearson in 1946, this about Henry Crown:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16673&st=60&p=207332entry207332

"...Some of the rulers of the underworld had become supposedly respected businessmen and politicians whose names were household words in Chicago. Some of them, it was stated, had reformed. Yet they still controlled the mob...."

Important because Earl Warren stated that the two men who vouched for Albert Jenner were Tom Clark and Dean Acheson.

Stern in all likelihood was aware that John Crown was a member of Albert Jenner's law firm

at the time he and his WC associates were singing songs about Jenner. If Stern was the shining light the CIA described him as being at the Mary Ferrell link below, he had to be aware when he was Warren's clerk in 1956 that Warren and his wife were close with mobbed up Crown partner, Conrad Hilton, and that Warren's daughter Virginia was a fixture on Hilton's arm.

When Stern was giving the 1978 interview you posted, he had to be aware that in the year follwing the publishing of the WC report, Earl Warren chose the son of organized crime principal, Paul Ziffren as Warren's law clerk.

The CIA combined its "investigations" of Stern with Howard Willens, described as number 3 in the U.S. DOJ, with a troubling past including an arrest in 1947 on the charge of breaking street lights. Willens's father, Joseph is of concern to the CIA because of his 1930 arrest on a minor charge, a 1940's accusation of mortgage fraud, and his travels to South America, the Soviet Union and several Soviet bloc countries.

Some how the CIA did not include in it s report, the fact that Willens's father purchased the residence next door to Tony Accardo's in 1958. :

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=110307&relPageId=3

Howard Willens designed the organizational structure of the WC and of its investigative priorities, minimizing the need to fully investigate Jack Ruby's Cuban connections:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15205&pid=237868&st=0entry237868

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18349&pid=237930&st=0entry237930

Samuel Stern is Anaconda Copper's counsel just 4 months before the coup in Chile that resulted in the death of the elected leader, Allende, and ushered in the 17 years long reign of terror of Gen. Pinochet.: .....(/quote)

(/quote)

http://www.google.com/search?q=warren+plane+hilton&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a#q=warren+plane+hilton&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=e4s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&tbm=nws&prmd=imvnsb&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=m8vRTvqvIcS9tgfL0IW5DQ&ved=0CBMQpwUoCg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=2facffac0e408c2c&biw=1280&bih=783

AIRLINER TURNS BACK; Hilton Party on Plane Included Mrs....

‎

- New York Times - Nov 29, 1958

The purpose of Mr. Hilton'sl !flight to Berlin was to open the newest Hilton hotel, the Berlin!Hilton. The plane s passengers included Mrs. Earl Warren, ...

Warren Tops Speakers for Bar Meeting

‎

‎

Pay-Per-View - Los Angeles Times - Dec 8, 1956

OFF TO MEXICO-Conrad Hilton, hotel magnate; Mrs. CD Clemente. center, ... of Chief Justice Warren, and Columnist Heddo Hopper wove as they board plane for ...(/quote)

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=751672

ADMIN FOLDER-W8: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, LEE HARVEY OSWALD VOLUME X pg 123

Found in: FBI - HSCA Administrative Folders

type of charges he intended to press (77-72922) ALBERT E JENNER JR. Assistant to Rankin Jenner,.born 1907 Chicago Illinois is a lawyer We have not investigated him however files show he was a member of

RIF#: 124-10369-10006 (11/09/64) FBI#: 62-117290-ADMIN FOLDER-W8

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do;jsessionid=D3C687690C24B48F4B188D7063C1D623?docId=10111&relPageId=124

...Subsequent to Jenner's appointment to the staff of the president's commission, Jenner was ill and confined and confined to a hospital. Our Chicago SAC personally a report on our investigation of the assassination and at that time Mr. Jenner seemed most appreciative and indicated he was serving the Commission at the direct request of the Chief Justice Earl Warren. He expressed his very high regard for the Director and the FBI, indicating he became acquainted firsthand with the reports of the Bureau when serving on a Loyalty Committee in Washington years ago. He said that he had always noticed that our reports were completely impartial and factual...

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=donald+gibson+%22warren+said+he+had+checked+on+Jenner%27s+references*%22&btnG=#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&tbo=1&tbm=bks&source=hp&q=donald+gibson+%22Jenner+with+a+number+of+people+and+they+all+recommended+him.+Two+of+Jenner%27s+references+were+mentioned+by*%22+clark&pbx=1&oq=donald+gibson+%22Jenner+with+a+number+of+people+and+they+all+recommended+him.+Two+of+Jenner%27s+references+were+mentioned+by*%22+clark&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=19218l19218l2l20755l1l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=11ddc481b2828c55&biw=840&bih=433

The Kennedy assassination cover-up - Page 96

books.google.com Donald Gibson - 2000 - 306 pages - Google eBook - Preview

... and national groups working on legal issues.21 Warren said that he had checked on Jenner with a number of people and they all recommended him. Two of Jenner's references were mentioned by name. Tom Clark, former Attorney General of

The problem McAdams and the man at wikipedia who created McAdam's bio article there and "guards" the wikipedia article on LHO, is that there are just too many coincidences they don't permit to see the light of day.

How did thugs, both officers at General Dynamics, Crown and Hoy, obtain and retain the most expensive government contract ever awarded in the history of the world, the TFX fighter jet contract?

In addition info to my other posts on this thread, there is more related info here.L

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17731&pid=235601&st=30entry235601

(quote)http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/581391292.html?dids=581391292:581391292&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Feb+25%2C+1963&author=&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=Excpect+Big+Vote+Tomorrow&pqatl=google

Excpect Big Vote Tomorrow

WEATHER IS KEY; NEW DATA IN FIO RITO CASE Seek Typewriter, Quiz Hotel Official 2 New Leads Found by FioRito Probers

SANDY SMITH

Feb 25, 1963

Sheriff Richard B. Ogilvie disclosed two new developments last night in his investigation into the eligibility of Michael L. FioRito, 51, an attorney, to be the Democratic candidate for alderman in the

1st ward. 1. A search was pushed for a typewriter which was used in certifying that FioRito was a permanent resident of the Con- rad Hilton hotel, in the ward. 2.

The sheriff di s co vered police records which showed that FioRito won dismissal of drunken driving charges in October against Robert Leo White, 42, of 1484 Winnemac av., assistant manager of the hotel.

Ogilvie said that the records showed White was arrested in north Lake shore drive by Policeman Frank Schneider at 3:50 am on Oct. 4 and re- fused to take a sobriety test. He was charged with drunken driving.

White told sheriff's police last night that the charges against him were dismissed when he appeared in Traffic court Oct. 29.

Ho said that a friend, whom he refused to identify, suggested he retain FioRito as his lawyer.

The 1st ward Democratic organization revealed FioRito as its write-in candidate Thurs- day night.

Previously two other nominees, Ald. Johri D'Arco and State Senator Anthony J. De - Tolve, were forced out of that race, reportedly by the crime syndicate. The interrogation of White by sheriff's police interrupted the search in the hotel for

the type- writer with pica style letters and a worn ribbon. If the type- writer can be found, Ogilvie said,

it might reveal "signifi- cant evidence to challenge Fio- Rito's eligibility to run for office."

The elegibility of FioRito aE a candidate is based on the vot- ing residence he claims to established in the 1st ward hote on Jan. 26. According to the sheritt, the typewriter was used to add the names of FioRito and his wife, Margaret, to the Jan. 28 affi- davit in which a Conrad Hilton executive had listed 57 perma- nent residents of the hotel. The affidavit was questioned in a report to the sheriff by Robert C. Goldblatt, a type- writer identification expert. The affidavit was filed with the Chi- on page 4, col. 41 by FioRito Probers cago board of election commis- sioners on Jan. 28 by Thoma $ J. McNamara, the hotel man- ager. Goldblatt told the sheriff the typewriter with the worn rib- bon was used to list the Fio Ritos on the affidavit as the 58th and 59th permanent resi- dents of the hotel. The names of 57 other residents were writ- ten on the affidavit with an elite style typewriter, Goldblatt said. The sheriff's detectives ob- tained specimen writing from typewriters in hotel offices that were opened yesterday. The specimen, Ogilvie said,, would be compared by experts with the typing of the FioRito names on the questioned affidavit. The sheriff announced that three teams of detectives would continue the search for the typewriter today in the hotel and in the 1st ward democratic headquarters, 100 N. La Salle st., and the City hall offices of the election board. on Saturday,

Ogilvie charged that the election board was "ig- noring possible fraud" in the Conrad Hilton affidavit. It was reported yesterday that the shock waves from the political turmoil in the Ist ward had caused a shakeup in the hierarchy of the crime syndi- cate. The crime syndicate king, Sam [Moe] Giancana, 53, an ex- convict, reportedly dictated the "dumping" of D'Arco and De- Tolve as aldermanic nominees of the Ist ward Democratic organization. FouI' syndicate gambling chiefs in the Ist ward report- edly suffered a loss of under- world power in December when they were unable to persuade Giancana to sanction the candi - dacy of D'Arco. The four are Gus [slim] Alex and Frank [strongy] Ferrara, the overlords of gambling in the ward; Louie Briatta, a former city payroller who is D'Arco's brother-in-law; and Nick [Mousiel Garambrone, a mob enforcer in the Loop. (/quote)

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=1451973

NO TITLE pg 2

Found in: FBI - HSCA Subject File: Gus Alex

EXPENSES A D THAT HER JOB AS A CLERK AT THE CONRAD HILTON HOTEL IS ONLY A FRONT TO KEEP HER OCCUPIED DURING THE DAY ALEX ARMED AND DANGEROUS WITH SUICIDAL TENDENCIES .RECEIVED

7:12 AM MN ter If the

RIF#: 124-10209-10118 (02/13/62) FBI#: 92-3182-434

Displaying two of the seven pages.:

Highlights: (Richard Cain is also involved in the "investigation".)

It begins with mobsters talking about the first paragraph of the above article, related to White and the dismissed drunken driving charge.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=136523&relPageId=2

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6176/6191263194_9b48b0d708_b.jpg

Sid Korshak is instructed to contact Pat Hoy, General Dynamics V.P. to contact the Hilton and instruct employees there not to cooperate with the investigation.:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=136523&relPageId=7

In 2004, the suddenly talkative Robert S. McNamara married the widow of Ernest L. Byfield, Jr. Byfield had been Patrick Hoy's longtime boss and business partner.:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14538&view=findpost&p=169286

[Don Jeffries]

David,

I continue to be baffled by your willingness to accept the most dubious witnesses and claims which bolster the official story, while simultaneously believing that powerful forces tampered with the President's body and altered the film record. Again, I'm open to the body alteration theory, and can certainly believe that at least some of the films were tampered with.

I'm curious- exactly who do you think was involved in the conspiracy?

[Guest Robert Morrow]

David,

I continue to be baffled by your willingness to accept the most dubious witnesses and claims which bolster the official story...

Really, Don? Still?

You really don't it?

I think if you asked David Lifton WHO he thinks murdered John Kennedy, he would tell you very high level members of the US government or even a very high level *former* member of an US government agency did it. And Lifton certainly believes in a massive government cover up of the JFK assassination and that it was a coup d'etat.

Lifton does not agree with Lee Farley's theories on Oswald movements from 12:30 PM 11-22-63 until 1:50 PM. That is not the same thing as being a flack for the coup d'etat, something which David Lifton certainly is not.

[David Lifton]

David,

I continue to be baffled by your willingness to accept the most dubious witnesses and claims which bolster the official story, while simultaneously believing that powerful forces tampered with the President's body and altered the film record. Again, I'm open to the body alteration theory, and can certainly believe that at least some of the films were tampered with.

I'm curious- exactly who do you think was involved in the conspiracy?

The plot to remove President Kennedy from office was centered around a vicious scheme to murder him in Dealey Plaza, and then remove bullets from his body and alter wounds to create the false appearance that the President had been shot by Lee Harvey Oswald, an ex-Marine and returned defector who (by plan) was situated nearby in a building on Dealey Plaza.

The fact that Oswald, one of about 15 “ex-defectors” –in a nation of 140 million—happened to be located at Dealey Plaza, should be the tip-off that something most unusual was going on.

In connection with this scheme, plans were also made to control civilian imagery, as necessary.

This plot scheme could not have been implemented without the involvement of certain Secret Service agents, and they, in turn, could not have been involved without the involvement of higher level SS officials, so “up the ladder” it goes. None of this could have happened if there was not high level political antipathy to Kennedy and his policies, and local hatred of Kennedy which was exploited to permit some group to implement the basic plan.

IMO: Steve Witt and Mary Bledsoe had nothing to do with this crime.

The former is an eccentric who ended up in Dealey Plaza, waving his umbrella at the President, because this was his version of a “political” protest. It turns out that he happens to be (ironically) a strong car-stop witness. The latter was an Oswald landlady who happened to be on the bus Oswald boarded, when –somewhat miraculously—he managed to exit the TSBD alive, even though the original plan called for him to die in the building, and certainly never live to proclaim his innocence, much less explain who he really was. Because Bledsoe said some negative things about Oswald, she has been dragged over the coals by some who do not have a proper explanation for Oswald’s movements in the 15-30 minutes after Kennedy was shot.

The two key pieces of evidence in this case are the body of President Kennedy, and the critical imagery of the Zapruder film.

The group which removed President Kennedy from office and made his murder appear to be a quirk of fate did so by controlling the body after he was shot, and also controlling imagery, as necessary, of the event itself. Control in both these areas was planned in advance, and implemented--perhaps sloppily, but ultimately successfully.

Don, you expressed yourself candidly about why you were baffled. Let me employ the same language. To paraphrase: I continue to be baffled by the willingness of many people who fancy themselves “assassination researchers” yet who tend to be focused on the irrelevant--who fail to understand (much less come to grip with) what is truly important: the falsification of critical evidence which is at the heart of the official story, and which shaped the public perception of this event.

Understanding that there is "fraud in the evidence," and how that came about, is the key to this case.

As to Oswald: This case is not just about the injustice done to an individual; it is how that individual’s life (and his pretense at being a Marxist) was used to “sell” a false story to the American public and the world.

The fact that, very likely by accident, he lived long enough to proclaim his innocence does not change anything I have written above.

P.S.: Also in the "Are you kidding me?" department is anyone who tries to suggest that, in making these distinctions—between what is critical (and what is largely irrelevant)—I am somehow denying the existence of a high-level plot or am involved in a “cover-up” of JFK’s murder.

DSL

12/6/11 1 AM PST

Los Angeles, CA

Edited December 6, 2011 by David Lifton

[Guest Tom Scully]

Mmmmm.... delicious cherries, did you pick them? It is great to read that the old guard is still keeping the faith....earnest WC, FBI, and CIA officials, avoiding impropriety, or even the appearance of impropriety, and you can take that to the bank!

...Its not that they couldn’t “handle” it; they truly couldn’t conceive of it. When I pleaded with them to focus on Greer and Kellerman, do you know what they did? A staffer called up Greer, at home, and had a brief conversation with him. He assured them that no one had tampered with the body. Can you believe that?

Do you think Blakey woiuld have investigated the Mafia that way? (“Hi, I’m Robert Blakey. . Glad I got you at home sir. . I’d just like to ask you a question: Were you or your conferes by any chance involved in the murder of President Kennedy? . .. you weren’t? Oh, thank you so much sir. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me.”)

That’s what they did with William Greer, the driver of the limo –when questioning him about the chain of possession of JFK’s body. ....

David,

When I read your reference to "Blakey would have investigated the Mafia that way", I nearly broke out into hysterical laughter! ...

JFK: What we Know Now that we Didn't Know Then, Part 5

....Those implications, I might add, are substantial in their impact upon alternative theories of the assassination.

Lee said it was his face imposed on someone else's body--and he was right!

The mafia, for example, would not have been able to extend its reach into Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter X-rays under the control of medical officers of the US Navy, agents of the Secret Service, and the president’s personal physician....

Dr. Jim,

You're as big of a comedian as David Lifton!

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18412&view=findpost&p=240072

And...:..................

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=61488&relPageId=71

.It was also developed during the 1961 investigation that Joseph Robert Willens (Howard Willen's father) had, since 1958, resided next door to Tony Accardo, prominent Chicago hoodlum.

....Joseph Robert Willens admitted that Tony Accardo's residence is immediately south of his home in River Forest, Illinois,....and he hopes that the proximity of his residence with that of Accardo would not cause anyone to believe that he approves of Accardo or any of his associates.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=110307&relPageId=4

...instead, the CIA background report included this :

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=110307&relPageId=5

...Howard Willens...was arrested for breaking street lights on January 9, 1947...

+Ricca%2C&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a#q=Detectives+offer+as+evidence+of+Varelli%27s+stature+in+the+mob+the+fact+that+he+is+a+next+door+neighbor+of+Paul+[The+Waiter]+Ricca,&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=mgj&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&tbm=nws&prmd=imvns&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=0F3dTtKuCI3Btgeb-MS9BQ&ved=0CA4QpwUoBQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4f245506e279ec01&biw=1280&bih=781"]https://www.google.com....

Mob Home Swindle Bared

‎

Pay-Per-View - Chicago Tribune - Mar 12, 1966

....Detectives offer as evidence of Varelli's stature in the mob the fact that he is a next door neighbor of Paul [The Waiter] Ricca, elder statesman of the Chicago Mafia.