David Josephs

SO DOES THIS MEAN HE WAS less OR more IMPORTANT THAN ALL THE REDACTED NAMES.... https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32363606.pdf

Hey there Steve... thought you might find this interesting related to "The HARVEY Story" T.B.C. ??? previous paragraph says "I was phasing into LPOVER cover assignment & out of KUDOVE" https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32272374.pdf

... and there were three and only three shots fired.... Carolyn Arnold puts Oswald on the 1st floor walking by the double doors leading to the stairs out front... FBI simply changed what she said... So the idea that a potential item of Fact which conflicted with the pre-determined outcome would be buried, or not even asked by the FBI is no real stretch. In an interview with the journalist Earl Golz in 1978, Carolyn Arnold claimed that “she saw Oswald in the 2nd–floor lunchroom as she was on her way out of the depository to watch the presidential motorcade …. She left the building at 12:25pm.” (Arnold had some reason to remember having gone into the lunchroom. She was pregnant at the time and had a craving for water. She also recalled, in 1978, that this was “about 12:15. It may have been slightly later.”) She was not the only witness who questioned the reliability of the FBI’s version of their statements. Arnold Rowland, for example, pointed out several errors to the Warren Commission and mentioned that the FBI agents “just didn’t seem interested at all” in evidence that contradicted the lone–gunman account (WCHE, vol.2, pp.182–185). Carolyn Walther, like Arnold Rowland, had seen another man standing near the gunman, and was similarly unimpressed with the FBI’s attitude to her evidence. She told Earl Golz that “I talked to them [FBI agents] and it seemed like they weren’t very interested. They were going to set out to prove me a xxxx and I had no intention of arguing with them and being harassed. … And if they didn’t want to believe it or had some reason not to, well, then, that was all right with me.” (Earl Golz, ‘Was Oswald in Window?,’ Dallas Morning News, 26 November 1978, p.13A.) The Warren Commission treated Carolyn Arnold as it treated many other awkward witnesses. She was not called to testify before the Commission. Neither of her statements was published in the Warren Commission’s Report or in its 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits. The Commission discounted her evidence and that of Eddie Piper, and concluded that “Charles Givens … was the last known employee to see Oswald inside the building prior to the assassination … at 11:45am” (WR, p.143). Carolyn Arnold’s five colleagues from the Texas School Book Depository who stood with her as the motorcade passed, and who could have commented on the reliability of her account, were also ignored. FWIW, Wesley was a suspect for a while (While Shelley was actually arrested and released) and went thru a strange variety of activities the rest of the 22nd... as well as being questioned for hours and asked to sign a confession, “I was interrogated and questioned for many, many hours,” Frazier said. “Interrogators would rotate.” Dallas police Capt. Will Fritz, who was in charge of the homicide department, came into the room with a typed statement. He handed Frazier a pen and demanded he sign it. It was a confession. Frazier refused. “This was ridiculous,” he said. “Captain Fritz got very red-faced, and he put up his hand to hit me and I put my arm up to block. I told him we’d have a hell of a fight and I would get some good licks in on him. Then he stormed out the door.” Were you aware that Linnie Mae's husband BILL RANDLE was interviewed and stated he was personally acquainted with Oswald - but nothing more was learned. Marvin Randle was in the hospital so Linnie Mae stayed with her mom and brother... Guess all I'm saying is that this case is Alice in Wonderland: Thru the Looking Glass where up is down and everything you'd expect to follow established rules... doesn't. Thanks for your kind words.... DJ

"If" statements provide access to interesting paths in some cases... but not when they contradict fact, then we aren't speculating anymore... for IF Marina took the photo THEN Oswald would have actually gotten the rifle... which did not happen. So I'd be wary of "IF" statements that takes a proven FACT and undermines it.... Case in point... When recounting her one and only time with a camera...she would have known that you look down into the camera AND that the image she was looking at and so perfectly captured would be upside down... Not only did she not recall how to correctly hold the camera she says nothing of the supreme difficulty it would be doing this for the first and only time in her life... Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures. I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know. Mr. McDONALD. Did Lee appear to be nervous at all when you took the photograph? Mrs. PORTER. No. He was just angry with me because I refused. I was making fun of him. Mr. McDONALD. Did you use a tripod at all? Mrs. PORTER. Did I use what? Mr. McDONALD. A tripod. In other words, was the camera attached to a stand? Mrs. PORTER. No. Mr. McDONALD. OK. You held it in your hands. Mrs. PORTER. Yes. Q. If I show you this camera which was Commission exhibit No. 750 and raise the top part so you can see there is a viewfinder and ask you just to look at the camera, would that refresh your recollection that that was the camera you allegedly took the photographs of Lee with? A. Well, I honestly do not remember if I look straight at the object or look down. Q. But seeing the camera today you still have no memory of what the camera looked like? A. No; I am sorry I am unprofessional about it. https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/001/1134/images/img_1134_550_200.jpg

I'm fairly convinced that Oswald was the man standing in the corner of the TSBD landing You see, what is strange about Lovelady is that in HUGHES we see him to the WEST of the opening and the stairs yet moments later Lovelady is much further over to the East with the faint outline of another person deeper in the corner. Wesley claims: Mr. FRAZIER - Well, see, I was standing, like I say, one step down from the top, and Mr. Shelley was standing, you know, back from the top step and over toward the side of the wall there. See, he was standing right over there, and then Billy was a couple of steps down from me over toward more the wall also. (in the image at bottom left Lovelady was down and to the left of Wesley - the tall man in the middle of the landing - Wesley is not in Altgens claiming he was back and in the dark) Mr. BALL - We have got a picture taken the day of the parade and it shows the President's car going by. Now, take a look at that picture. Can you see your picture any place there? Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't, because I was back up in this more or less black area here. Mr. BALL - I see. Mr. FRAZIER - Because Billy, like I say, is two or three steps down in front of me. Is Frazier referring to a later time when Lovelady is indeed a few steps below him... but that is well after the motorcade goes by

Hey there Jim... Pretty sure you can Google photographic manipulation and see many results created from layering glass plates with different pieces of the negative/positive on different sheets to create the final image.... https://www.colorexpertsbd.com/blog/darkroom-photo-manipulation-photoshop-walk-history With Dillard's negative, one need only have or create a negative of the image you wish to superimpose. It works exactly like Photoshop layers except it's done in the real world... https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=59&v=_2mQsUIc97E - Watch Konrad Eek work up a print using only darkroom techniques

I think I even found the image used to create the impression he is in the window Either a reversed image of his arrest photo or from a Dallas newspaper photo...

Hi Paul... On possibility here Paul is that Angelton was after things not related to Oswald at all... Mexico City Station was one of the most productive in the world for the CIA... At the time he would be right to be concerned over the CHICOM (Chinese Communists), the Czechs, the Yugoslavians, DFS, Cubans, Haitians, and on and on... FWIW James McCord was also both FBI and CIA and his backstop story was that he had worked for the CIA the entire time... whether that's just a cover or actually true I have yet to find out... As I continue to try to piece together what happened down there, I find that one option keeps popping up with pretty strong evidence... The entire existence of "OSWALD in Mexico" was a story orchestrated by David Phillips, Goodpasture and possible Hunt..with the FBI providing the bogus evidence... knowing full well that he was elsewhere doing work that could not be divulged... infiltration of Left Wing groups and reporting their intentions to the FBI. I believe the CIA is involved simply because so many of the players were from outside the US that they stretched their mandate to include domestic intelligence on those who may take the info to those who need it outside the US.... It was much more likely Oswald was an FBI asset and a CIA informant simply due to where he'd been and what he'd done. The conflict for me begins at Atsugi - a covert CIA location for U-2 spying and intelligence gathering... From what I can tell... he was in reality an aircraft mechanic, not a radar operator... gives Harvey and Lee another notch in the "Pro" column DJ

From the "ain't it strange" coincidence files..... On the same day Oswald starts at the TSBD... James McCord takes his CIA Oath

So then - if that is true isn't there a conflict with this report heading? If transcripts from JCS meetings were destroyed in 1974... how did they make hand-written notes FROM the transcripts in 1976?

FWIW.... https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nsa/DOCUMENT/940228.htm 28 February 1994 The attached document tells a horror story in the annals of government information and accountability. In August 1974, the Joint Chiefs of Staff destroyed all the minutes and transcripts of their meetings going back to 1947, and in 1978 essentially stopped keeping any such records. Only 30 pages of notes have survived, much to the dismay of military historians and scholars of the Cold War. (Needless to say, we have already filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the 30 pages.) The events of August 1974 provide interesting context for the JCS action. President Nixon was leaving office under the "smoking gun" of a Watergate tape. Congress had passed new pro-disclosure amendments to the Freedom of Information Act, which would go into effect later that fall over President Ford's veto. In the context of the end of the Cold War, the JCS action sets a terrible precedent for openness in government internationally -- an area in which the United States claims leadership and should set the highest possible standard. Instead, the JCS behavior is all too reminiscent of the stories we've heard over and over in the past two years of our cooperative work with Eastern European and Russian researchers: General Jaruzelski in Poland destroying several hundred transcripts of Politburo meetings and many other documents when Solidarity won the elections of 1989, Markus Wolf of the Stasi destroying thousands of intelligence files as soon as the Berlin Wall fell, etc. Bill Burr and Matt Shellenbarger of our staff made some phone calls and came up with the name of the apparent villain in this case -- then-Brigadier General Gerald E. Cooke, who served as Secretary of the JCS in August 1974. We haven't been able to track him further. The Joint Chiefs in August 1974 included as chairman, Gen. George Brown (USAF), and as members, Adm. James Holloway (USN), Gen. David Jones (USAF), Gen. Creighton Abrams (USA), and Gen. Robert Cushman Jr. (USMC). The fact that the JCS horror story has come to light does represent a glimmer of hope, however. Two years ago a staffer at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) noticed a footnote in an obscure naval history journal which suggested that the JCS minutes had been disposed of in the 1970's. NARA then initiated a series of letters to the JCS asking for an explanation, which led to the document at hand. Since only about three per cent of the U.S. government's records are ultimately preserved for posterity, decisions about the destruction or retention of records are extremely difficult. All too often, as in the JCS example and in the more recent example of the White House electronic mail, the bureaucratic self-interest of the agency involved carries the day, overriding the statutory obligation to preserve records of historical, legal, administrative or evidentiary significance. The bottom line is: Unless we reinvent the National Archives and Records Administration as an activist, visionary information watchdog, it will be relegated to the role of the nation's attic; and there, among the cobwebs, will roam the ghost of government accountability. Page 1

One of the things you may consider is the difference between the documents with BLOCK letters and script... and then compare the signatures. I believe you will find they group by that distinction... the signature on this first doc with BLOCK letters does not match either the script TSBD application Signature, another Oswald signature or even the copied signature "by Brian".... the ASC application has both block and script with a date very similar to the Seaport coupon with yet another signature yes, writing changes over time... but how often do people combine printing types as they write?

Meyer is named on Hunt’s .org chart as the leader which includes “French Conman” Permindx...Angleton.......Bloomfield....Nagy.....Shaw... CIA.....Meyer....Morales/Harvey and the hole just keeps going from there.... with European Royalty. Nagy is cleared by Meyer’s Org Div Nagy creates CMC and Shaw is CIA informant... Montreal and the Mafia are closely connected.... To be truthful, there are much better and detailed writings on these relationships... this was the first I ever saw with CIA Meyer with direct connection to the French Canadian side of things....

Sure thing Ron... first thing in the morning.

Sorry if this is repeating already published info from the last release.... I found the connection between Cord Meyer - Nagy - IOD and Hunt's claim that Meyer was directly involved with JFK too much to pass up a posting... Doesn't this strengthen those connections... and then bring in Clay Shaw... https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10181-10114.pdf

Hey there Steve... CIA was watching Szulc with great suspicions.. Sorry for not going thru the entire thread for this name.... Just thought it might be of interest since it is said that Szulc was the impetus for the Bay of Pigs planning... https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/jun/14/cia-szulc/ FWIW... DJ

Good point Tony.... any corroboration is flimsy at best.... Mr. Brennan is about as reliable as Truly and Shelley.... How can you see the man, see the rifle, describe the man and rifle yet not see the rifle shoot? Only Euins claims to have seen shots from that window... do the inmates at the Jail corroborate him? Mr. SPECTER. What did you see in the building?Mr. EUINS. I seen a bald spot on this man's head, trying to look out the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald spot. I could see his hand, you know the rifle laying across in his hand. And I could see his hand sticking out on the trigger part. And after he got through, he just pulled it back in the window.Mr. SPECTER. Did you see him pull it back in the window?Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir.

Let me throw this in and please tell me if it tracks.... Paul is making this point by claiming BAKER was outside talking to Brennan before he ran up the steps into the TSBD... (if that actually happened) It appears to me that Brennan speaks to an officer already standing there... I'd think he'd see BAKER running - no? Truly being specific that it was NOT a motorcycle cop, when BAKER would have parked right next to him... implies to me it was someone else.... Mr. BELIN - All right. Coming down to November 22, 1963, what was your occupation on that day? Mr. BAKER - I was assigned to ride a motorcycle. The next thing TRULY says after "7, 8, or 10 feet from me" TRULY: ....just moments later-I saw a young motorcycle policeman run up to the building, up the steps to the entrance of our building. He ran right by me. And he was pushing people out of the way. He pushed a number of people out of the way before he got to me. I saw him coming through, I believe. As he ran up the stairway--I mean up the steps, I was almost to the steps, I ran up and caught up with him. I believe I caught up with him inside the lobby of the building, or possibly the front steps These sure appear to be 2 different people.... Mr. BELIN. By the west side of the building, you mean towards the underpass or railroad tracks? Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. Mr. BELIN. After you saw that, what did you do? Mr. BRENNAN. I knew I had to get to someone quick to tell them where the man was. So I ran or I walked--there is a possibility I ran, because I have a habit of, when something has to be done in a hurry, I run. And there was one officer standing at the corner of the Texas Book Store on the street. It didn't seem to me he was going in any direction. He was standing still. Here I think is the Cop they were talking about..... directly across from Brennan. What bothers me is that he supposedly drives his bike past the TSBD Entrance only to park farther away? In 478 below not only is there no motorcycle but he is running into frame from the WEST and there is simply no motorcycle there... Mr. BELIN - And you stopped your motorcycle 10 feet to the east of that stoplight, is that correct?Mr. BAKER - That is correct, sir. Mr. BELIN - After you parked your motorcycle, did you notice anything that was going on in the area?Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. As I parked hereMr. BELIN - You are pointing on Exhibit 361 to the place that you have marked with "B." (DJ: The reversed image) Mr. BAKER - I had it in mind that the shots came from the top of this building here.Mr. BELIN - By this building, you are referring to what?Mr. BAKER - The Book Depository Building.Mr. BELIN - Go on.Representative BOGGS -You were parked right in front of the Building?Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; ran right straight to it. Mr. BAKER - And then I ran, kind of running walk, went all the way around. First I glanced over this side here, because the last thing I heard here on the radio was the chief saying, "Get some men up on that railroad track."Mr. BELIN - Did you hear that on your police radio?Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; that was the last thing I heard.Mr. BELIN - As you were getting off your motorcycle?Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.Mr. BELIN - All right.SENATOR COOPER - I didn't hear what he said he heard on the radio?Mr. BAKER - I heard Chief Curry, the chief of the police over there, say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.Mr. BELIN - By "everyone" do you include you, too?Mr. BAKER - No, Sir. I had it--I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here. No, Sir. I had it ------ What? He knew WHAT to ignore a direct order from the Chief of Police??

The problem with these images is much more involved than how he is standing... How do you reconcile the ghost image below looking "fine" from a perspective and alignment pov... but when you take the actual image and past it back in... not so much.?? How are both of these images possible - despite the obvious rotation conflict with the background?

It does appear that the first 160 pages or so are here... just to get started... https://books.google.com/books?id=QLdqgDsVio4C&pg=PA116&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://untpress.unt.edu/catalog/3143 Brandy, Our Man in Acapulco: The Life and Times of Colonel Frank M. Brandstetter Carlisle, Rodney P., Monetta, Dominic J. Hardcover Price: $29.95 Buy Hardcover ISBN-13: 9781574410693 Hardcover ISBN-10: 1574410695 Physical Description: 6 x 9 464 pp. 50 b&w photos Publication Date: December 1999 Annotation: Hotelier, corporate executive, and U. S. Army intelligence officer, Frank M. Brandstetter played an active role in some of the dramatic episodes of the twentieth century. Born in Transylvania in 1912, Brandy came to the U.S. at the age of sixteen and worked at immigrant factory jobs until he stumbled into the restaurant and hotel business. Throughout the Depression years, he slowly worked his way up through the ranks until his enlistment in the army in 1940. Whether foiling a mass breakout plot by German POWs in England during the Second World War, leading a small party on a dangerous mission behind German lines to deliver a surrender demand from General Matthew Ridgway to Field Marshall Walther Model, parachuting into battle on D-Day, or confronting an angry Cuban mob intent on destroying the Havana Hilton, Brandstetter evoked the highest commendations from witnesses and supervisors. Ridgway himself praised Brandstetter as a "man of unimpeachable integrity, and personal physical and moral courage to the highest degree." These qualities Brandstetter took to the business world, turning a few undeveloped casitas in Acapulco into Las Brisas, the top resort in the world in 1972. This is the story of a man of action, a great patriot who dedicated his life to the service of his country. About Author: RODNEY P. CARLISLE is professor of history at Rutgers University and a senior associate of History Associates, Inc. He is the author of several books of military and technological history. He and his wife live in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. DOMINIC J. MONETTA is the founder and President of Resource Alternatives, Inc., a Washington, D. C.-based firm. He holds degrees from Manhattan College, George Washington University and a doctorate from the University of Southern California. He and his wife live in Washington, D.C.

"short term" ? From my POV, this is, was and shall always be about the Bankers & Lawyers owning the majority of the wealth while doing everything in their power to insulate and keep it growing... The Council on Foreign Relations would be the place to look to see if anything "failed"... I find it extremely ethnocentric to believe JFK was anything more than a blip on the world wealth stage - at least since the days of Plato.... I'm sorry but IMO JFK's rhetoric about communism was to appease his critics... he wanted world peace... he wanted a world working together to better humanity... ... and the very rich/power do not like it when any power that may threaten their circumstances is given to the people.. unless it is them giving it as in the Bolshevik revolution... my $.02 "None Dare Call It Conspiracy".... "In the Bolshevik Revolution we see many of the same old faces that were responsible for; creating the Federal Reserve System, initiating the graduated income tax, setting up the tax-free foundations and pushing us into WWI. However, if you conclude that this is anything but coincidental, your name will be immediately expunged from the Social Register."