John Dolva

In one way I'm getting more confused but on the whole the gathering of information about who Oswald was is painting an interesting picture. Here are some impressions possibly indicative of a naiive Oswald. I've recorded the two radio radio interviews that Lee gave in New Oeleans after his arrest there and am listening to them in a hope of furthering an understanding of who Oswald was. It seems to me that if one can understand Lee and then contrasting that to the official versions presented then the difference could give insights to the conspiracy. In the first interview Lee is introduced as the first person to come to prominence in New Orleans as a supporter of Cuba. He complains about the Times-Picuane News paper as being the only one available in New Orleans and states that it is strongly anti Castro and systematically deliberately unobjective and anti-democratic. He also, in very few sentences, describes the backers of the anti Castro forces in New Orleans, naming the United Fruit co and oil interests, as thieves, liars , 'dogs', and later 'rats'. He also identifies the federal government as being responsible for the difficulties of 'the Cuban problem' (as he calls it) His analysis of the situation seems more sophisticated than one might think if only exposed to the commonly available information. He comes across as being alert and to the point, he displays a sense of humour, he speaks precisely and while hedging on issues such as membership he doesn't come across as an outright xxxx. At this point I would speculate that had the Kennedy affair not occurred Lee could have become a significant figure in the 'Cuba problem' debate. So far the picture I am getting is that of an intelligent man from a cultured middle-upper class family (albeit fallen on hard times). He seems to be a 'work in progress', somewhat naiive, but probably less so than many of his peers. He appears to be taking on forces that he expects to feel the same way about democracy and objectivity as he does. If he stayed like this he seems an unlikely assassin. If he is the assassin, then something about him changed, or is not revealed here. He seems to make a mistake here when outlining his background by not mentioning at all his time in Soviet Union but makes emphatic statements on life in the Soviet Union. This includes a statement that there is definitely no black market in food in the Soviet Union but there is a market for western clothing and other hard to get goods. This apparently balanced statement seems to confuse the issue as he has an opportunity here to say differently. (Further, I have come across a report, or I read it in a copy of a writing of his that one reason he didn't like living in the Soviet union was because there was no evening entertainment like bowling ball courts. Not exactly the sort of thing a socialist would list as an issue.) Interestingly he calls the CIA defunct, then qualifies by saying the leadership is defunct and then qualifies this further saying Allen Dulles is defunct. However he interestingly in talking about Eisenhower and his policies uses the word 'we' in describing official government positions. In the second radio interview he is put much more on the defensive. In this interview the interviewer has received a bit more information about Lee. He is also confronted here in person by Ed Buffer (?) of the 'Information Council of the Americas', and Carlos Bringuer (?) a Cuban refugee who confronted Oswald on the day of his arrest. Lee is now confronted with his travel to the Soviet Union and makes no attempt to hide it. Interestingly he also states his aim as being to have the Federal Government normalise relations with Cuba. It would seem that at the time of the assassination he would be exposed to the sentiment that that was 'in the air'. He qualifies the problem as not being Kennedy but federal agencies. It seems a bit strange to suggets that he at his time was planning to kill Kennedy. On the whole, he directly confronts anti Castro elements as being in league with thieves and covert ops. He differentiates between Kennedy and government agencies. He understands differences in leftist ideology. He is also clearly isolated in the interviews as being THE opposition in New Orleans to New Orleans anti-Castro forces. He fails in being open about his time in the Soviet Union. Basically vulnerable but as far as I can see, no sign of intending to kill. Genuine, or a carefully crafted persona? My impression is that if he was an op. he was manipulated in ways he couldn't at this point understand. ................................................ John, as a complete aside, just a thought that perhaps needs checking? Because by the sounds of it the information of this pamphlet conversion was given by this friend, with chinese whispers in mind, is it at all possible that it was a pamphlet on Rosa Luxembourg? IF so then it makes more sense. However as that is purely speculation on my part I don't mean to seed any false trails here, but would like a confirmation to the contrary. ................................................

At different stages of the bullets flight it behaves differently. Tumble, yaw and attack depends on a number of factors. The various topics on exterior ballistics go into these in a lot of detail. Of interest here I think, is where along the bullets path one looks. Early one tends to find the bullet erratic until it settles. The trajectory is also dependent on the twist of the barrel. A clockwise twist will tend to give the trajectory an arc to the right. Also the orientation of the bullet while yawing will tend to be with a nose lift. As the bullet travels it slows AND drops into denser air. So it slows faster and the drop increases and the cone of air following begins to taper. the following illustrates some of this.

I first started to look at the assassination of JFK earlier this year. My growing interest in computer graphics and an interst in art in general, and particularly traditional 3D like sculpture, and an interest in social issues, had cirquitously led me to a group of sites depicting images from the assassination of Kennedy. Last year I had travelled across Australia and photographed some panoramic sequences. I was engaged in trying to balance and align about 15 images of the whale grounds in South Australia where one can view a sweep from east to west at the eastern end of the Great Australian Bight. Trying to balance colors, hues, luminance etc and to align all the photos helped me develop techniques that I have used on this forum re. the various collages and composites. As a consequence of all this I had particularly become aware of the value in using software to discern differences in luminance where the eye would tend to group gradients into one color. White is not necessarily white. Black is not necessarily black. At the ends of the grayscale spectrum there are about 20 odd grades that are distinctly different, but percieved by the eye as the same. Thinking about this and also realising that air is a medium just as much as water, or blood or bone, helped me to understand some curious light qualities I came across when viewing some old black and white photographs from the first world war showing the instant of a bomb exploding. I realised that perhaps the air was being compressed at the periphery of the explosion and therefore becoming denser, thus causing the light that passed through this denser air to behave differently to the surrounding media. Armed with this realisation I turned to images of the head shot. Initially a frame from the Nix film. My intention was to see if it was possible to percieve the trajectory of the bullet by comparing luminance around the head, arguing that the air that the bullet had passed through must have been compressed in a particular way and maybe the light having passed through it on its way to the camera could be percieved as something different from the surrounding air. Naturally I turned my attention to the side facing the TSBD. Nope, nothing there. To my GREAT surprise there was just such a trail, but it for it to make sense it came from behind Nix. What the...??? OK, fair enuff.. what if? forcing myself to turn around I found...a brick wall. There were virtually no images readily available of that side. Likewise virtually no information about it. However, taking brickwalls as something that a good sledgehammer can deal with, I persisted and lo... there was Ol' Harry, perched in his window of the Post Office, unnoticed then and unnoticed today. OK, back to the theorised bullet trail. IF such a thing is to be found then what would it look like? This is the primary purpose of this particular topic. So, Thinking aloud here. The bullet displaces air in front of it. This air compresses and displaces air in front of it. Excess air moves to all sides. Right behind the bullet a vaccuum is created. Air rushes in to fill. The air displaced to the side continues to move aside. The tunnel of turbulence following the bullet doesn't expand but blends into the surrounding air. So, a three dimensional cone of air as a lens to diffract light with a thin core of turbulence and an outer layer of highly compressed air. Over time, the bullet passes through air at a decreasing velocity and into denser air. So the cone will taper over time. At some point behind the bullet the cone trail will have entirely blended into the surrounding air. It is also subject to gross air movement like wind and current and eddies. (my attempt at looking at the wind conditions in Dealey Plaza was primarily aimed at seeing how these conditions were at that time.) A hot day without cloud causes air to rise near the surface of the ground. In a windless day there is also a growing, albeit probably minimal, fact of coreolis influence hence a consideration in a North-South as opposed to a East-West or West-East or South-North trajectory. At the moment a major difficulty I'm having is to construct a comprehensive model of this theorised 'air lens' over say a 50 foot distance. Following behind this initial cone is also a sphere of expanding soundwaves. The densest portion of these is what I probably initially percieved in the wwI photograph. Then, having constructed said model I have difficulty seeing clearly how light falling on it should behave. The light would come from surfaces like grass as well as from the sun through the atmosphere. How it behaves depending on its relative orientation is important. Upon the cavitation and subsequent eruption of Kennedys head, a fine mist surrounded him. Light from the green grass passing through a red mist would behave in particular ways. The mist could also be of different colors. The eruption out of the top of the head could contain less blood and more brain matter than from beside the ear as there is a major vessel at the ear. Red light passing through a glass lens before striking the film focuses at a different plane to green light. So cameras to some extent will always have an element of blur in them. Do the medium on the film react at different speeds to different wavelengths of light? I don't know. So to successfully envision a model and explain how it would behave during this split second moment can go a way to explaining a bullet trail (that I do think I may have identified) that with a proper understanding may be identified. ............................................................ Here is a suggestion based on a sideways photo of a bullet and the trail it leaves.

Hi Harry, it seems they have a bit of a headstart. I think Kennedy was into building alternative structures to counter this rising 'control'. He had an emphasis as well on education? No doubt you have considered what to do about it. I think your speaking out here is progressive. Have you developed thoughts on 'where to go from here'?

what do I think makes something art? (I will choose to take it you mean visual art) I'm not someone with any degrees in this, but my family in one way or another traditionally has been into art and I have discussed it and thought about it over many years. I think: an attempt by a human to take something in their mind body phenomena and put it outside of self. I knew someone once who had a studio full (and I mean FULL) of paintings of a black cross on a white background. Plus a number of same in various stages. To him they were all different. I never heard of him since (this was about 24 years ago) I also know a contemporary artist who regularly paints large numbers of different paintings and sells well. I know from speaking with him that he basically considers them 'blank checks'. It funds the stuff he doesn't show or sell. So on the one hand a gallery may be full of 'blank checks', and on the other, an unknown studio full of Art. I don't know exactly how to put it but I think genuine attempts at what is unique expression, for its own sake. This may or may not at some time be judged by viewers as being good or bad. Or even ever viewed by anyone else except the artist. ____________________________________ I'd argue that perhaps some of so called non representational art is in fact representational. Just not photorealistic. I.E. not moments frozen in time but perhaps in fact a truer representation of percieved reality than that. Have you tried to go up close to someone, for example in lovemaking, put your face right up against some one with bridge of nose touching, now with eyes wide open note carefully what you see when you slowly twist your head. This vision cannot be captured by a photograph. But it bears remarkable similarities to some of Picassos 'non-representational' work.

Stephen. This is just a test to see if it is possible to use 3d models as aids in ID here. I took the image of the guy and wrapped it on a head and turned in a more upright look. The more upright it becomes the more distorted, but I'd be interested if it makes any bells ring?

Jack, makes sense. The way he elongates his head by tucking his chin in, and possibly pins ears back by tape (or muscle control?) could be a deliberately practiced act.

Jim, I'd like to ask you a range of different questions on your post. Obviously by the time Hosty is answering Fords questions some time has passed. Possibly he is referring to reports that might be available? Fords question about the use of Trotskyite is probably one that aims to find out the reference to Trotsky. Hosty replying that : "Yes" she used the word Trotskyite, does reveal the fact that if she used the word Trotskyite, then she is not favourably disposed to Trotskyism, or she is ignorant of the use of the word. You might have to ask a member of the SWP on this, but as far as I know in this case -ite makes -ist an insult. Which makes me wonder what is the word that Oswald himself used? To combine it with Communist as well is very strange. I don't know any leftist who does that. "I am a Trotskyite Communist" sounds more like a filtered summary of what Oswald may have said. "Independent Marxist" makes a whole lot more sense. This particular paragraph of Hosty's answer to Ford seems surprisingly objective, as it SHOULD be from a presumably educated FBI agent. ____________________________________________ Trotskyist goals? : To position itself as the vanguard in any future revolution. Trotsky was a very bright intellectual and a very able leader. As the links provided by Chris show, he organised and led the Red Army in its successful defeat of the Whites. He was recognised by Lenin as the most able person to counter the destabilising influence of Stalin. Lenins last testament : "Comrade Stalin, having become Secretary-General, has unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution. Comrade Trotsky, on the other hand, as his struggles against the C.C. on the question of the People's Commissariat for Communications has already proved, is distinguished not only by outstanding ability. He is personally perhaps the most capable man in the present C.C., but he has displayed excessive self-assurance and shown excessive preoccupation with the purely administrative side of the work. ....................... Stalin is too rude and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest the comrades think about a way of removing Staling from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite, and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. But I think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split, and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky, it is not a detail, or it is a detail which can assume decisive importance." And as history has shown, it did. Following Stalins successful Putch, Trotsky in exile formed the only credible alternative and was eventually assassinated by order of Stalin. As Lenin pointed out in his last testament, Trotskys fault seemed to be that he was too trusting of procedure, this gave Stalin, the grand intriguer, an edge. The reason I delved into that is to argue that Trotskyists, at least the SWP as member of the 4th international, doesn't see itself as having a goal of destabilising. Rather it would see these governments as inherently unstable. Their role then is to be seen as the viable alternative. This is subtly but significantly different I think. I think that the Soviets at this point (1963) had begun the turn away from Stalin. I think Kennedy's Unifying approach of peace and reconciliation would have been seen by the SWP as a force that highlighted or amplified the contradictions inherent in the system of which they saw themselves as the vanguard opposition alternative. In other words Kennedy was himself the destabilising force. There was no need to kill him. So where is Oswald in all this. After having re-read some of his interviews and listening to recordings of both of his radio interviews. PLUS pondered on the fist salute he gave while hand cuffed, I'm not sure at all. More please.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why the heck would a church maintain such a data base? Further, why would the FBI approach them for use of a data base already available on the web? Because the base on the web is not all there is? To access a database that is not on the web ie. the redacted bits? Can't help seeing similarities here with the SISS and Senator Eastlands database.

James, it's possibly not as simple as that. As can be seen he is tilting his head forward in the second pic. Here they are resized and reoriented as per shoulder position. The profile is from watergate years. When tilted in a similar manner the ear would appear longer when viewed from the front. As far as its shape one would need a number of more different orientation images to make sure. edit:: as well in the lower pair I put the hair style of the upper left on the lower right.

From an old 'Pure Speculation' post :: "Thirty members of the Dallas Bonehead Club flew to several Mexican cities in two planes last week as guests of D. Harold Byrd*. Standing in the back row, left to right, are Myron Everts, D. Harold Byrd and Dr. Gordon Maddox. Standing, front row, left to right, are M. M. Gardner, Neal Lyons, G. W. Wagner, E. J. Koenig, Dr. C. V. White, J. Howard Payne, Capt. C. W. B. Long and L. M. Napier. Seated in the front is H. L. (Duke) DuLany." - February 1, 1948, Dallas Daily Times Herald Tom, I've been looking for tieins for the above bunch of Dallasites for some time. You offer one avenue here. I wonder if you have come across any of the other names?

Greg, quite correct. He also stated in his interviews at the DPD that " . . . I never had a card to the Communist party. . . . I am a Marxist, but not a Leninist-Marxist. . . ." Which kind of confuses the issue a bit. In the radio interviews (2) he seems to recognise the distinction between stalinism and socialism when he talks of the various systems around. He also recognises a distinction in having marxist type policies within a capitalist world. He talks of the freedoms implicit in the US constitution and how they should be applied in recognising cubas rights of self determination. I think he put himself in real danger when he identifies New Orleans business interests as allied with criminals. An interesting question that I now realise I have taken too lightly. I'll mull over it for a while. More input invaluable. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pat, It Worked. I had no idea that this is where it was hiding. Thank you. look's good. I'll take time to read, have downloaded. I had deleted attachment, David, as I needed space. i have also now looked again at it and see it's not very clear what I was trying to show so I'll redo and post.

Tom, Tim, you are referring to the more speculative aspects. I know there are different testimonies here. Tim, can you outline why you mention the time in washington? ________________________________________________________________ I have tried to keep this topic simple and will now summarise and condense with one little speculative addition. The similarity and possible significance of the combined Totenkopf rune ring insignia and the motorcade route along the roads of dealey Plaza is startling. It would be even more so if one could confirm that this is something that Gen Walker was aware of. The progression from 12.30 11/22 to 1 2 3 0 11 22 33 00 to date time executioner as KKK is simple and direct. _________________________________________________________________ The similarity of odins cross or the sun cross or the celtic scross or its KKK manifestation and the sight of a scope is probably spurious but interesting. there is another significant sign. within white supremacy there is an emblem that also has an old Nazi tie. The fist salute. For a white prisoner this is a sign to the rest of the prison population that 'I am a white supremacist', when I drop the soap, keep off. This is clouded by the fact that it is also used as defiance by freedom fighters, however, here is a guy, as far as he knew, on his way to prison. Why put himself in danger by saying with this act 'I am a leftist'? Opportunist or Right winger or Left winger? edit:: to finish off here is a pictogram summary. (the picture of bull connor warning negroes to go away is to counterpoint Kennedy's intentions.)

Communist/Socialist/Marxist/Trotskyist/Leninist Perhaps it's a bit bewildering making sense of these terms but as they are labels used in the context it's important to explore their meaning. They are words used by many different groupings on the political spectrum. Communist to a communist can mean different to that used by a JBS member for example, and then there is the proper definition which may be subtly but importantly different again. Oswald said "I am not a Communist, I am a Marxist." Communism is a social structure that has never existed. The proper name for the Soviet Union is Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. Socialist, not communist. Through a period of struggle with capitalism a socialist forms workers groupings called soviets. These are connected to other soviets. Nationally they take a republican model. Globally they unite. USSR CCCP At some point capitalism is defeated globally. Socialism then sets about the transformation towards Communism. A very brief history of the internationals Marx started what is called the first international. He had trouble with swiss guilds and the second international came into being. this second international disintegrated into what now forms the back bone of the modern Labor parties of the west. Lenin and Leon Trotsky's Bolsheviks (majority) as opposed to the Mencheviks (minority) formed the third international after the 1917 revolution. Following the revolution came a counter revolution, on the one hand, the capitalist supported white army and on the other the Trotsky led reds. The reds won, Lenin died, famine came. Stalin. Massive across the board purges of the old Bolcheviks of whom Trotsky as the formulator of 'the permanent revolution' theory as the transition towards communism became central. Stalin went the opposite way. 'socialism in one country'. The fourth international founded by the exiled and later assassinated Trotsky. The word Trotsky became synonymous with traitor in the third international. This is the Russia that Oswald went to. Very unwise to call one self a Trotskyist (no Trotskyist calls him/herself trotskyITE, its an insult used by opponents or those who dont realise that context). If one is a well read marxist then one would call oneself a socialist. Lenin and others, notably Trotsky developed the practical aspects of marxism so to call oneself a Marxist Leninist is correct. There is argument that Lenin and Trotsky were far closer than Lenin and Stalin. so its not unreasonable to associate a Marxist Leninist with Trotskyism. Just unwise to go to the USSR as a Trotskyist. When the shine had gone off Uncle Joe the stalinists in the west started to suffer from their inner contradictions. By the time of 1963 in Dallas, for Oswald to say he is not a Communist but a Marxist Leninist but not a Trotskyist smacks of opportunism, not principled dedication as one might expect to find from someone presenting himself as he tried to do. However also to call himself a Marxist and not a Communist is correct in the sense that a socialist works towards communism as a marxist and it would be presumptuous to take the title of communist. This label perhaps has been forced on the socialist by the opponents in the west seeking to demonise socialism. This is perhaps a 'purist' interpretation that's a result of involvement with the Socialist Workers Party, but as this was one of the organisations that Oswald was connected to it might be relevant to see things from such a perspective. (Personally there are things about Oswald that would make me say "Naah that guys no marxist, what game's he playing?") This guy seemed to drift untouched from one end of the spectrum to the other. Why?? Because he was insignificant? because he was controlled, the meat in a sandwich, a patsy? because he was a brilliant actor? Not quite as simple as it might seem. The words he and others used to describe him are open to interpretation. the different interpretation gives different meaning to events.

Twenty minutes past midnight 12th June, Evers opened the left-front door of his car and stepped out on the driveway, wearing a white shirt, carrying paperwork and sweatshirts that read JIM CROW MUST GO. Byron De La Beckwith found Evers in the telescopic sight on his rifle and got Evers right in his cross hairs. The lit carport gave him a perfect view. For a crack shot like Beckwith, it was easy pickings. Beckwith, a member of the Ku Klux Klan, stood trial twice in Mississippi in the 1960's , in which both cases resulted in hung juries. Beckwith toured the South riding in parades waving to crowds holding signs saying, "We Love you De La" and spoke at Klan rallies, telling crowds, "Killing that n was the best thing I ever did in my life." After Medgars death, an interesting shift in vocabulary signaled an important change in perception. His murder was not referred to as a “lynching,” but a “political assassination,” a recognition that violence against blacks had become something that had to be taken much more seriously and that it had deep political implications. The Speech by Kennedy the evening of the 11th Good evening, my fellow citizens: This afternoon, following a series of threats and defiant statements, the presence of Alabama National Guardsmen was required on the University of Alabama to carry out the final and unequivocal order of the United States District Court of the Northern District of Alabama. That order called for the admission of two clearly qualified young Alabama residents who happened to have been born Negro. That they were admitted peacefully on the campus is due in good measure to the conduct of the students of the University of Alabama, who met their responsibilities in a constructive way. I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. And when Americans are sent to Viet-Nam or West Berlin, we do not ask for whites only. It ought to be possible, therefore, for American students of any color to attend any public institution they select without having to be backed up by troops. It ought to be possible for American consumers of any color to receive equal service in places of public accommodation, such as hotels and restaurants and theaters and retail stores, without being forced to resort to demonstrations in the street, and it ought to be possible for American citizens of any color to register and to vote in a free election without interference or fear of reprisal. It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. But this is not the case. The Negro baby born in America today, regardless of the section of the Nation in which he is born, has about one-half as much chance of completing a high school as a white baby born in the same place on the same day, one-third as much chance of completing college, one-third as much chance of becoming a professional man, twice as much chance of becoming unemployed, about one-seventh as much chance of earning $10,000 a year, a life expectancy which is 7 years shorter, and the prospects of earning only half as much. This is not a sectional issue. Difficulties over segregation and discrimination exist in every city, in every State of the Union, producing in many cities a rising tide of discontent that threatens the public safety. Nor is this a partisan issue. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics. This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone. It is better to settle these matters in the courts than on the streets, and new laws are needed at every level, but law alone cannot make men see right. We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution. The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. If an American, because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay? One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free. We preach freedom around the world, and we mean it, and we cherish our freedom here at home, but are we to say to the world, and much more importantly, to each other that this is a land of the free except for the Negroes; that we have no second-class citizens except Negroes; that we have no class or cast system, no ghettoes, no master race except with respect to Negroes? Now the time has come for this Nation to fulfill its promise. The events in Birmingham and elsewhere have so increased the cries for equality that no city or State or legislative body can prudently choose to ignore them. The fires of frustration and discord are burning in every city, North and South, where legal remedies are not at hand. Redress is sought in the streets, in demonstrations, parades, and protests which create tensions and threaten violence and threaten lives. We face, therefore, a moral crisis as a country and as a people. It cannot be met by repressive police action. It cannot be left to increased demonstrations in the streets. It cannot be quieted by token moves or talk. It is a time to act in the Congress, in your State and local legislative body and, above all, in all of our daily lives. It is not enough to pin the blame on others, to say this is a problem of one section of the country or another, or deplore the fact that we face. A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all. Those who do nothing are inviting shame as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right as well as reality. Next week I shall ask the Congress of the United States to act, to make a commitment it has not fully made in this century to the proposition that race has no place in American life or law. The Federal judiciary has upheld that proposition in a series of forthright cases. The executive branch has adopted that proposition in the conduct of its affairs, including the employment of Federal personnel, the use of Federal facilities, and the sale of federally financed housing. But there are other necessary measures which only the Congress can provide, and they must be provided at this session. The old code of equity law under which we live commands for every wrong a remedy, but in too many communities, in too many parts of the country, wrongs are inflicted on Negro citizens and there are no remedies at law. Unless the Congress acts, their only remedy is in the street. I am, therefore, asking the Congress to enact legislation giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public - hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments. This seems to me to be an elementary right. Its denial is an arbitrary indignity that no American in 1963 should have to endure, but many do. I have recently met with scores of business leaders urging them to take voluntary action to end this discrimination and I have been encouraged by their response, and in the last 2 weeks over 75 cities have seen progress made in desegregating these kinds of facilities. But many are unwilling to act alone, and for this reason, nationwide legislation is needed if we are to move this problem from the streets to the courts. I am also asking Congress to authorize the Federal Government to participate more fully in lawsuits designed to end segregation in public education. We have succeeded in persuading many districts to desegregate voluntarily. Dozens have admitted Negroes without violence. Today a Negro is attending a State-supported institution in every one of our 50 States, but the pace is very slow. Too many Negro children entering segregated grade schools at the time of the Supreme Court's decision 9 years ago will enter segregated high schools this fall, having suffered a loss which can never be restored. The lack of an adequate education denies the Negro a chance to get a decent job. The orderly implementation of the Supreme Court decision, therefore, cannot be left solely to those who may not have the economic resources to carry the legal action or who may be subject to harassment. Other features will be also requested, including greater protection for the right to vote. But legislation, I repeat, cannot solve this problem alone. It must be solved in the homes of every American in every community across our country. In this respect, I want to pay tribute to those citizens North and South who have been working in their communities to make life better for all. They are acting not out of a sense of legal duty but out of a sense of human decency. Like our soldiers and sailors in all parts of the world they are meeting freedom's challenge on the firing line, and I salute them for their honor and their courage. My fellow Americans, this is a problem which faces us all - in every city of the North as well as the South. Today there are Negroes unemployed, two or three times as many compared to whites, inadequate in education, moving into the large cities, unable to find work, young people particularly out of work without hope, denied equal rights, denied the opportunity to eat at a restaurant or lunch counter or go to a movie theater, denied the right to a decent education, denied almost today the right to attend a State university even though qualified. It seems to me that these are matters which concern us all, not merely Presidents or Congressmen or Governors, but every citizen of the United States. This is one country. It has become one country because all of us and all the people who came here had an equal chance to develop their talents. We cannot say to 10 percent of the population that you can't have that right; that your children can't have the chance to develop whatever talents they have; that the only way that they are going to get their rights is to go into the streets and demonstrate. I think we owe them and we owe ourselves a better country than that. Therefore, I am asking for your help in making it easier for us to move ahead and to provide the kind of equality of treatment which we would want ourselves; to give a chance for every child to be educated to the limit of his talents. As I have said before, not every child has an equal talent or an equal ability or an equal motivation, but they should have the equal right to develop their talent and their ability and their motivation, to make something of themselves. We have a right to expect that the Negro community will be responsible, will uphold the law, but they have a right to expect that the law will be fair, that the Constitution will be color blind, as justice Harlan said at the turn of the century. This is what we are talking about and this is a matter which concerns this country and what it stands for, and in meeting it I ask the support of all our citizens. Thank you very much. ________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________ Meanwhile, in Alabama, Police Commissioner Bull Connor was electioneering from the back of an armoured vehicle. Connor unleashed dogs and ordered the Birmingham Fire Dept. to turn high powered water hoses on the Black people who were marching for their Civil Rights. " Break up this demonstration now! I'll demonstrate your Black asses all the way to the jailhouse! You Niggers get on home now and get off my streets before I make you sorry you ever came here!" ________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________ The black people probably already were unhappy. Medgar said once that he wasn't interested in being loved by white people as much as wanting to get through the day without being hit.

For whatever reason, the url is not working. Enter keyword: "Race Riot", with the additional words: Tulsa, OK and one will hear about a little known event in American history. Tom <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "According to black journalist and editor Ida B. Wells, who launched a fierce anti-lynching campaign in the 1890s, the lynching of successful black people was a means of subordinating potential black economic competitors. She also argued that consensual sex between black men and white women, while forbidden, was widespread. Thus lynching was also a means of imposing order on white women's sexuality. With lynching as a violent backdrop in the South, Jim Crow as the law of the land, and the poverty of the sharecropper system, blacks had no recourse. This triage of repression ensured blacks would remain impoverished, endangered, and without rights or hope. Whites could accuse at will and rarely was a white punished for a crime committed against a black. Even for those whites who were opposed to lynching, there was not much they could do. If there was an investigation, white citizens closed ranks to protect their own and rarely were mob leaders identified." When a young boy and his mother were hung off a bridge in Oklahoma, they were dead. However, photographs were taken with a large number of well dressed white citizens attending. These photographs were turned into postcards and these postcards were sent through the postal system. The lynched were dead. Their death was a statement dissemminated throughout, handled and delivered, viewed and passed around. This is what happens to Negroes who step out of line. The confidence of immunity to prosecution held by the murderers was quite astonishing. It persisted through the Civil Rights war of the 60's. When it's understood that Governors could make public statements that amounted to 'the only good n is a dead n' and get re-elected one gets a feel for the circumstances that Kennedy was dealing with in 1963. It wasn't just communists and castroists and mobsters who misbehaved. It was UnI and elected representatives. In refusing to acknowledge this 'collective guilt' it is perpetuated. How many black people feel a need to ask themselves where they were?

Would we know the truth if we saw it? I do tend to assume that other peoples minds function in similar ways to mine. Often of course that is only an approximation. Objectivity is a desirable state, and for me, an ideal to strive for, a recognition that it's not always there. I would hope that as a community there is a recognition that we have a responsibility to truth that dominates any personal differences. Complicating things is the fact of consciousness existing on multiple layers reacting to input in ways predetermined by prior experience. Where these prior experiences are loaded with strong emotional content it becomes harder to see past them and remain equanimous. As herd animals we tend to ally ourself to concepts and hence judge truth according to already existing criteria. Where these criteria are subtly false one may be less likely to divest oneself of the criteria than to reject some truth as the 'fear' of being outside of the tyrrany of conformism may override objectivity. I suspect that some 'groupings' rely on such standover tactics to control the directions of investigations. If one chooses to cast ones lot in with such 'groupings' truth may suffer. So, the I in the 'we' has many filters through which truth needs to travel. I doubt that all are always comfortable with the consequences of such truth should it actually reach full consciousness. However, as a whole, I think it is possible. It probably will be interesting to look back on all these isues and how various 'mentalities' choose to deal with them. Perhaps an essay in Early Global History 101 : the 21'st century: 'Looking at the various primitive electronic media forums that sprung up during the latter part of the 20'th century to deal with what then was an issue : "who killed the Kennedy's" (see early north american deiities) how did...

The guy in the corner (GIC?) seems to first start major move in frame 191 which I think I've read some pinpointing the first shot? he has completed the move maybe 5-6 frames later and seems to roughly hold this pose for the rest of the time visible.

Lee , is 2000 main the Dealey Plaza DPD address? if so is it known if Haake worked on the 5th floor jail section? On the 11/22 12.30?

i dont quite know where to put this so I'll tag in on here for now, If it diverges too much from intended topic, sorry http://home.att.net/~m.standridge/decklogs.htm "Allen Dulles was then trying to arrange a negotiated peace with the Axis, behind FDR's back, according to John Loftus and Mark Aarons. (The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People NY: St. Martin's, 1994. 150-173.) He used couriers to do so. The Japanese planes could have maneuvered in such a way to ensure the courier in question on that date, had an opportunity to take off. Lest we think Dulles wouldn't cover up such an activity, we learn from Charles Higham in American Swastika(New York: Doubleday, 1985. 78), that one Martin James Monti was allowed to go over to the other side in a US military aircraft in Italy in 1943, broadcast fascist propaganda, then not only avoid prosecution for treason after the war, but was also promoted in the military--through the intervention of OSS bigwig and later CIA head Allen Dulles--who was Prescott Bush's attorney and business partner at Standard Oil (which company was found guilty of treason during the War in a 1947 trial)--and also business partner there with James Forrestal, then-Secretary of the Navy and later Secretary of Defense. In July 1944, about a month later, US Marine Tom Devine, who was then stationed on Saipan, an island not far from Guam, saw Forrestal on Saipan. He had personally flow in an aircraft from a nearby island (possibly Guam--an island large enough, according to a report by the Japanese military on Guam operations published in 1960, to hide a military aircraft, especially one with folding wings such as the Avenger had). Devine says he then saw Forrestal destroy or burn the aircraft and records that a US submarine that month recorded burning, sinking wreckage off Saipan that month, at a time when no shipping had been sunk. (Devine, Thomas. Eyewitness: The Amelia Earhart Incident. Frederick, CO: Renaissance. 1980. 37-57; 87 Note to page 80; page 188 Note 27: "Nancy Bressler, Curator of Public Affair at Princeton University's Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library, Princeton, NJ...[said]: 'I am not able to locate any documents which either support or contradict Mr. Forresetal's presence on Saipan in the summer of 1944.'") What plane was Forrestal destroying? Could it have been George Bush's Avenger, which had landed on Guam during a "window" that was known to exist between the first US air raids on Guam at 8 a.m, on June 19 and the late afternoon raids by US planes on that island--raids that were called off temporarily at around 8:30 and didn't resume until after 4 p.m.? During that time, US planes were largely tied up fighting off Japanese planes attacking the US fleet . (Hoyt, Edwin P. To the Marianas: War in the Central Pacific, 1944. NY: Avon, 1980. 149-51.) During that same time when the Japanese planes performed their odd "orbit" (which forever after earned that battle--the Battle of the Philippines Sea--the nickname "Marianas Turkey shoot" by American military personnel who participated), George Bush's Avenger took off. It was precisely during that "window" that both the Japanese orbit and the opening to Guam occurred. US Navy fliers, including Bush and his crew, had learned that the Japanese didn't fire on lone US aircraft, for fear of drawing down US naval gunfire. (Crowl Additionally, to act as Axis couriers for the Vatican, which we now know was working with Dulles in his couriers-to-the-Axis project, were some suspicious Roman Catholic priests which the Japanese had placed on Guam after November 1942, when they'd removed the original priests. According to George Tweed, a US Navy seaman who remained on Guam as a guerilla fighter after it fell to the Japanese in December 1941, these priests engaged in a number of pro-Axis activities; and one's brother was a big-name banker on the island who readily collaborated with Japan during the War. (Tweed, George Ray. Robinson Crusoe, USN: The Adventures of George R. Tweed, RM1 on Japanese-held Guam Guam: 1994 Pacific Research Institute. 275.) Perhaps these priests served to supplement the Vatican courier network we now know Dulles had created in Japanese-occupied Manchuria during 1944 and '45. He used a Roman Catholic priest, Bishop Cikota, to operate that courier network, which included Vatican intelligence personnel. One group of Vatican intelligence personnel is the Knights of Malta. (Loftus and Aarons, 150-173.) The vice-president of the Standard Oil company during World War II was Richard J. Larkin. He was a Knight of Malta (so knighted by the Pope in 1928). (Higham, Charles. Trading With the Enemy: The Nazi-American Money Plot, 1937-1949. NY: Delacorte, 1983. 21.) Larkin engaged heavily in illegal banking activities with the Axis in Vichy France bank branches. (Higham, Trading, "The Chase Nazi Account", 20-31.) In addition, Standard sold tons of aviation fuel to the Axis during the War. Nelson Rockefeller was recorded doing so by Jewish intelligence over the telephone in April 1943, and blackmailed. Loftus, John and Mark Aarons. The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People. New York: St. Martin's, 1994. 160-173.) Similarly, the 1942 Truman Committee in Congress found 1941 cables from Standard promising to continue trade with Japan whether or not American came into the war. Documents were also located after the war pledging Standard to continue selling oil to Axis agents in German occupied Romania and Hungary throughout the war. (Higham, Trading, "The Secrets of Standard Oil", 32-62.) In May, 1944, while George Bush flew his first mission in the Pacific, his father, on the Boards of Directors of several Standard Oil affiliates, went along with the sale of oil to Fascist Spain, after Standard oil and other oil companies pressured FDR to allow them to do so. This, even though FDR had learned that the oil to Spain went to Germany. (Higham, Trading60-1. In October and November, 1942, Prescott Bush, George Bush's father, was indicted for being a "front man" for Nazi loans in the US. (Tarpley and Chaitkin, Unauthorized Biography, "Born in A Bank".) By 1944, both Forrestal and Dulles were under surveillance by FDR because he'd learned of their schemes to negotiate with the Axis and "aid and abet" them via selling them oil. (Loftus and Aarons, 151-173). Against this backdrop, these suspicious-looking records as to George Bush's activities must be re-examined. As people have asked about other dates, such as October 19, 1980 (the "October surprise"), November 22, 1963 (an FBI memo from J. Edgar Hoover to "CIA agent George Bush" of November 23, 1963), (Tarpley and Chaitkin, Unauthorized Biography "Rubbers Goes To Washington") and the summer of 1968 (when the Saigon regime began to balk on LBJ's proposed peace agreement at the Paris peace talks), (Boller, Paul. Presidential Campaigns. NY: Oxford UP, 1985. "Mrs. Chennault," 331-2) so perhaps we should also ask about these World War II events: Where was George? "

at these sites are some interesting info on various collaboration units from many countries including the US and to white russians (in this cased listed under soviet union link. I don't know idf any of the individuals named are relevant but it's interesting to note that of those listed one came from louisiana and another from st louis. also the french free korps has detailed info on it, unfortunately in french(Vichy Legion des Volontaires Francais against bolshevism). Given french influence in the soputh this may also prove a fruitful area. Again I've noticed how these foreign legions were primarily involved in the anti communist operations of germany. In the british freicorps for example, the fact that one volunteer was a jew seemed to be OK for the SS. this group may have info as it concerns foreign involvement in construction of rail etc as noted to be Bush connected interests: Organisation Todt (OT) was a Nazi construction and engineering group during the years of the Third Reich, which enslaved over 1.5 million men and boys from countries occupied by Nazi Germany. Organized by Fritz Todt, the Reichsminister für Rüstung- und Kriegsproduktion, it was attached to the military and was active during WWII. The main role of the group was to build communications links and defensive structures. Almost all large scale WWII German military structures were built by the group, including armaments factories and concentration camps. "US volunteers in the Waffen-SS There were some US citizens who were members of the Waffen-SS, but no unit made up of American volunteers were ever raised (despite some claims about an "American Free Corps" or "George Washington Brigade"). According to figures from the SS five US citizens served in the Waffen-SS in May 1940, but after that date no numbers are available. Second Lieutenant Martin James Monti (born 1910 in St Louis of an Italian-Swiss father and German mother) went awol Oct 1944, travelled from Karachi to Naples (through Cairo and Tripoli) where to stole a F-4 or F-5 photographic reconnaissance aircraft (photo recon version of the P-38) and flew to Milan. There he surrendered, or rather defected, to the Germans and worked as a propaganda broadcaster (as Martin Wiethaupt) before entering the Waffen-SS as a SS-Untersturmführer in SS-Standarte Kurt Eggers. At the end of the war he went south to Italy where surrendered to US forces (still wearing his SS uniform) claiming that he had been given the uniform by partisans. He was charged with desertion and sentenced to 15 years hard labour. This sentence was soon commuted and Monti rejoined the US Air Corps, but in 1948 he was discharged and picked up by the FBI. He was now charged with treason and sentenced to 25 years the following year. He was paroled in 1960. Peter Delaney (aka Pierre de la Ney du Vair), a Louisiana born SS-Haupsturmführer in SS-Standarte Kurt Eggers who is believed to have served in Légion des Volontaires Français (LVF). He met Monti and probably arranged for him to enter the Waffen-SS. Delaney was killed in 1945. At least eight American volunteers are known to have been killed during their service. No real attempt by the US authorities to investigate the matter and trace the volunteers was made after the war, as opposed to for example the efforts by the British." http://www.feldgrau.com/gb.html http://www.axishistory.com/

Something I came across some time ago when looking at KLIF radio station (where Ruby was a bit involved , sandwiches, lining up interviews etc. ) KLIF were somewhat pioneers and one thing they were doing was integrating portable reporting, they were also trying out radio vans etc. Perhaps this is one of theirs? Others were into it too. An indicator of transmission strength etc could be that they found ways of jamming rivals. I can't remember much detail but came across it by searching for KLIF and came across a fansite with a detailed 50's 60's history. (links to soundbites as well, like day of assassination transmissions.) this is prob a good start http://www.knus99.com/amlist.html

A favourite way of disposing of unwanted civil rights activists was to sabotage their cars. While in Greenwood, Mississippi (home of Senator Eastland, relative of the KKK sniper who murdered Medgar Evers at a later date(this murderer also claimed a Greenwood alibi)) John R. Salter describes one event he went through with Medgar: ( http://www.hunterbear.org/medgar_w.htm ) "I can recall one occasion that Medgar conceded fear -- at least as he recounted the experience to me. He had gotten a new Oldsmobile, but up in the northern part of the state it had broken down. The only place he could get it fixed was at the garage owned by the county president of the Citizens' Council -- so the car was towed there. Apparently, the garage was, in the purest sense of the term, a cracker nest. The owner and his men recognized Medgar's name immediately, but began to work on the car. He didn't want tostay in the garage for the day that it would take to fix it, but on the other hand he was afraid to leave for fear they'd somehow sabotage the car. He wound up staying the whole day, right by his car while the mechanics worked on it. Many people came by to look at him, but he stuck it out until the car was fixed; then left just before sundown. But he was cool: I recall leaving Greenwood with him one night at midnight -- and we left at 90 mph -- with Medgar casually talking about a rumor he'd heard to the effect that a segregationist killer outfit in Leflore Co. had installed infra-red lights on the cars, which could allow them to see the highway, but which couldn't be spotted by whoever they were following. By the time he finished discussing this, we were going about 100 mph! But he was driving easily and well and his talk was calm in tone, if not in content." Through Medgars care the drive this time was uneventful, but they knew to take care and to drive fast to throw off any pursuit. Apart from other threats of violence by the KKK, the police liked to hit John Salters head with clubs. "Bad beatings at Jackson: June 13, 1963 -- two days after Medgar Evers was shot and killed. It helps a lot to have, as I have since the hatch, a thick skull and a thick hide. When a horde of police charged, I stood my ground -- facing them. I was clubbed several times, into bloody unconsciousness; then taken to the Fairgrounds Stockade Concentration Camp; finally to a hospital; then to jail. [see the Mississippi section, listed on the inside Index.] We were in the hard-core South, deeply involved in the Movement, from 1961 well into 1967. -- Hunter Gray [John R. Salter, Jr.]"

I appreciate the opportunity given to continue posting on these important topics. Lee is currently undertaking a fine study on the possible shooters, It may seem my insistence on civil rights is opposed to his. However, I don't see it that way. 'Lumpen' elemaents can be got everywhere. While I don't think that the prime strategists were black, it certainly would be in their interest to line up black patsies or even motivate elements in that community to participate. As far as the unknown witnessess go, I wonder if anyone has noticed how many of the people who lined Dealey Plaza were black? Compare this to the number who weren't called as witnesses. Those who ran off, those who are 'unknown'. How many African-Americans are currently involved in researching the assassination? as an aside I find that searching the internet is more productive if I use the words coloured' or 'coloured boy' rather than Black or African-American. F.L. Blunt (possibly the only tiein to a witnessing of a post office shooter) seems to be one of the disappeared. A search reveals a black family Blunt with four dauchters. there is no mention of Fay Leon Blunt beyond his marriage to an Ethel Lee Cook and them having left Mississippi in the late 20's to live for some time in Chicago before apparently moving to Texas. They then appear to have separated and at the time of the assassination Fay was in Dallas and for some reason involved with the 11/22 occupants of the fifth floor of the dallas police department building, where one of those occupants saw reason to report a shooter at the post office. This was subsequently hushed up to the extent that no records exist in the DPD relesaed documents. However a redacted set of documents revealing a FBI investigation into this after the WC (even though Blunt had reported it shortly after the assassination and the actual witness had reported it instantly.) there was a very brief investiagation over the phone at the time that was immediately stymied by Harry Holmes (FBI informant) in the post office. However again not pursued. The DPD and the FBI knew immediately but did nothing? Who was Fay Leon Blunt? just another 'coloured boy'?