Pat Speer

I thank you, Chris, for your participation in this thread, and your insertion of actual information. I had mentioned earlier that I was under the impression Zapruder held onto a first day copy of the film, and that this remained in the possession of his family. I was subsequently told my impression was incorrect. But I now see that you believe he held onto a copy after selling the original to Life. Do we know what happened to that copy? Is it still in the hands of his family? Or is it, perhaps, at the Sixth Floor Museum?

Reagan was destroyed by Mondale in 84 but won anyways. Joe lost his train of thought a few times and it was embarrassing to watch. But Trump had no plans or anything of substance, and lied and lied and lied. IF this was an actual debate as opposed to a TV show, Biden would have won handily. He had plans, He had ideas. He tried to listen to the moderators. Trump just ranted, and ignored the moderators. Content... Biden 7. Trump 1. Performance. Biden 2 Trump 7.

Well, we can agree on something. I think you are correct in that no one planted a blanket fiber in the bag. They didn't find enough fibers to make a conclusion. And the few fibers they did find could have come from contamination. But the rest of Gil's post I pretty much agree with. IF Oswald had made the bag, and realized the only way to get the rifle into work would be to take it apart, he would have found a way to make the bag larger, IMO. As a Marine he would have known that taking a rifle apart and putting it back together would have seriously affected its accuracy. That it takes a few shots to "settle in" And then, of course, there's also the problem of how he put it together...assuming he did. No small screwdriver was found in the sniper's nest or on his person. None was reported missing from the Paine house. Well, this led the FBI to claim he'd put it together with a dime. Now Griggs found this extremely difficult and uncomfortable. So it would seem unlikely, at best.

FWIW, I sat with Moorman at a conference and she explained to me that the confusion stemmed from her stepping into the street to take a photo of a motorcycle officer. She insists her famous photo is authentic and that she took this from the side of the road. When this all heated up some time back Tink Thompson demonstrated that the photo only made sense if she was on the grass, exactly where she is shown to be in the Z-film. This particular "proof" of forgery is dead and buried, IMO.

In Chapter 16b I run through the wound ballistics of M/C ammo and cite dozens of early reports and articles which have largely been overlooked by everyone...from the WC on down. The bottom line. A bullet traveling on the trajectory proposed by the WC and HSCA etc does not explode the head The explosion of JFK's skull is thereby the smoking gun, strangely enough. Here is a cadaver fired upon at a closer range than JFK was supposedly fired upon, on a similar trajectory, (although from front to back instead of back to front.) The skull remained intact. This should have been the expected result.

My point was not that the remaining documents are nothing-burgers, but that the vast majority of the public will come to believe they are nothing burgers. The Northwoods documents came out what? 30 years ago? And yet how many TV shows or history textbooks even mention them? Now, in the long run, this stuff is important and may change the perception of what went on. But the likelihood of a "smoking gun" that will excite the public in the immediate future is next to nothing, IMO.

Straight up question, Jim. Do you honestly believe there is anything in the remaining records that will be a game-changer? I suspect a lot of hoopla will be made if the records get released, and that the historians will then be brought in to say it's all a nothing-burger, and that the public will then lose interest, permanently. Like with the dog that caught the car, it will be like...uhhh...what now?

I think it was earlier in this thread, but am not sure. But I recently cited the Greer-did-it theory as something we should all agree is without foundation. Well, you guessed it. Within 24 hours I received an email from someone telling me I am wrong, and that it's clear Greer shot Kennedy when one studies the Zapruder film--and then linked to some video using blurry copies of the film to argue Greer shot Kennedy. The film has become a Rorschach test. Some look at it and say "Oh my! The skull damage isn't where I expected it to be damaged. So it's gotta be fake! That proves conspiracy!" While others look at it and say "Oh my, his head goes back and to the left. That roves a shot from the front. That proves conspiracy!" And still others look at it and say "Hey! The top of the head explodes--as one would expect for a shot fired from behind! And the head goes forward and explodes backwards--as one would expect for a shot fired from behind! This suggests no conspiracy!" Now, here's the bottom line. The last two are flat-out wrong. The Jet Effect explanation for the President's movements is a hoax. The claim the temporary cavity of an M/C bullet will explode the top of the head into the sky is a hoax. The film shows the President first go forward and then spring back. The film shows the top and right side of the head explode--which indicates an impact at this location and thus two head shots. So we have a divergence in the woods. The film does not show an explosion from the back of the head so those expecting to see such an explosion think it's been faked. This necessitates all sorts of conjecture involving faked evidence. That's a winding path through the woods. Or one can accept the film as real and realize that it proves there were two headshots and thus a conspiracy. That's a more direct route through the woods. I guess it all comes down to how much one likes the woods.

No one with any power actually wants anything to be released...ever. Some know that as long as stuff isn't released they can claim the unreleased stuff shows their favorite bad guy was involved. And some know that as long as stuff isn't released they can claim the unreleased stuff shows their own favorite bad guy was involved. No one wins by actually releasing anything...unless by some odd chance the files actually reveal something beyond that x was an informant for y etc. I think Gerry is correct in that the only files likely to show anything truly damaging--the Joannides files--are not even included in the collection, and will likely never be realized under any circumstances.

If Trump said it, then we know it's not true.

My understanding was that the CIA sometimes engaged bilingual LAPD officers for missions in Mexico. And that two of the LAPD detectives who worked on the Sirhan case had worked for the CIA on occasion. But you're making it sound like two CIA officers were brought in (by the CIA?) to run the LAPD's investigation. If this is true, it's news to me.

The short shelf life was a reference to the last 50 years. People continue to believe the CIA is a rogue agency running amuck the way they did in the fifties and sixties but it just isn't true, IMO. I don't believe it's accurate to describe LAPD detectives as "CIA men."

Well, I don't actually have an opinion as to who did it. I certainly think it's possible certain CIA operatives, including perhaps someone like Allen Dulles, was involved. My point is that with people like Maheu, working for people like Hughes and Trujillo, the possibility it was a private op should not be discounted. And this still holds true today. Should a VIP be exterminated in a very public fashion, most everyone on this forum would be looking at the CIA or Russian intelligence as the probable culprit. When, to me, the possibility someone like Elon Musk had hired an agency such as Blackwater (or whatever they call themselves now) or someone like Putin had hired the Wagner group, to do the deed, would be just as likely, if not more likely. The top men at the CIA take orders from pols, and have a short shelf life. The private security business is far more lucrative than any government job, and the best and most efficient of these companies can get away with a lot more than a government agency, IMO.

Exactly. He was working for everyone doing anything...so there's no saying who was really calling the shots. On the Castro hits, I pieced it together and concluded he was ultimately working with the mob to kill Castro but letting the CIA think it was their idea...to cover his butt...and get a get-out-of-jail free card...which he rapidly cashed in.

FWIW, I took an interest in Maheu when I first fell down the rabbit hole. When I realized my dad's boss was one of his buddies I took a further interest. At one point John Simkin asked me if I had any questions for Maheu as he knew someone who was gonna interview him and wanted some hardball questions. So I put together some hardball questions. But the interview never came to pass. I met Lisa Pease at a 2008 RFK conference and was delighted to find someone who shared their suspicions of this guy. I still find him of interest. While some obsess on the fear of the CIA and the deep state, etc, I think someone like Maheu is far more frightening. A gun for hire at the beck and call of the richest men in the world and the intelligence agencies, who prides himself on accomplishing what his clients want accomplished. Who is ultimately accountable to no one... I mean, I read everything one could read on the CIA/Mob hits, and it remains clear as mud who hired who to do what. And I think that was by design. RAMA's design.