Thomas Graves

Yes, Morales certainly wouldn't have wanted his face to be "captured" on camera in New Orleans on August 9, 1963 or in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. Regardless, would Lansdale and Morales have made a good team in organizing or implementing the assassination? --Tommy

Please watch it again, Bill, starting at 3:50. At 3:55 Neck Scratcher walks up and stands right behind the guy you're talking about. The guy you're talking about is also wearing a grey suit and he's wearing glasses and has a bald spot and you can see a few seconds later, after the camera position is changed, that he's holding a bunch of stuff in his hands.. Both of the men in grey suits can be seen simultaneously at 3:55-3:56 and you can see the bald spot on the guy in front of Neck Scratcher. I think the guy who is scratching his neck and standing behind the guy with the bald spot is David Sanchez Morales. --Tommy bumped one last time for Bill Simpich

Please watch it again, Bill, starting at 3:50. At 3:55 Neck Scratcher walks up and stands right behind the guy you're talking about. The guy you're talking about is also wearing a grey suit and he's wearing glasses and has a bald spot and you can see a few seconds later, after the camera position is changed, that he's holding a bunch of stuff in his hands.. Both of them are in the same frame at 5:55-3:56 and you can see the bald spot on the guy in front. I think the guy who is scratching his neck is Morales. --Tommy

Dear Members and Honored Lurkers, I recently stumbled upon the following August 21, 1959, CIA document which talks about a meeting between J.C. King (Galbond), David Atlee Phillips (Choaden), and someone by the name of "Charron" in J.C. King's office. It describes the discussion they had regarding what would be the best strategy for Phillips to use if he were to be interrogated by the Cuban authorities about his associations and activities in Cuba. The meeting took place shortly before he (and David Sanchez Morales?) did have to leave Cuba. https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=36237&relPageId=2 Charron's full pseudonym was "Lawrence R. Charron." I think "Charron" might have been "Frank Bender / Gerry Droller". A May 13, 1964, CIA document sent from Santiago, Chile, to the CIA Director at Headquarters, says that "Charron" didn't know anything about the issue at hand (something to do with the CIA's boat "Tejana II") because he had already left his position at CIA headquarters and gone to his new CIA post in Santiago, Chile, when the event or incident had occurred. It's interesting to note that one of the people who were privy to this document was James Jesus Angleton ("C/CI") https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=35267&relPageId=2 It's also interesting to note that former CIA officer Joseph B. Smith wrote in his book Portrait of a Cold Warrior that "Gerry Droller" had already become, by 1963 or 1964, branch chief of the countries comprising the CIA's "southern cone" (Uruguay, Paraguay, Argentina, and Chile). Could "Lawrence R. Charron" be the mysterious "Frank Bender / Gerry Droller" ( G. Drecher) ? FWIW, most of the CIA documents that mention "Charron" at the Mary Ferrell Foundation website also mention "Choaden" (David Atlee Phillips), so it looks like those two "went back a ways"... --Tommy Bumped in a probably vain attempt to attract the attention of a "heavyweight" like Larry Hancock, Bill Simpich, or... Question: Would it have been logical for W.C. King to include Bender / Droller in the August 21,1959, brainstorming session regarding what Phillips should so if he were to be interrogated by the Cuban authorities? bumped

Great punchline, Mark. Kinda took my breath away... But seriously, Marlon, what do you think of my idea that Bender / Droller was "Charron"? -- Question: Would it have been logical for W.C. King to include Bender / Droller in the August 21,1959, brainstorming session which dealt with what Phillips should do if he were to be interrogated by the Cuban authorities? And a new question: Could it have been Bender / Droller who, in mid-1960, sicced David Attlee Phillips on Antonio Veciana in Cuba, through Veciana's friend / Bender's contact, Rufo Lopez-Fresquet? http://www.jfk-online.com/daphscavec.html (see footnotes 122, 144, and 162) https://books.google.com/books?id=aCw19CUXpqkC&pg=PA396&lpg=PA396&dq=jon+anderson+che+guevara+%22frank+bender%22&source=bl&ots=JT-Mer9_sN&sig=-8mPZnnuzx8stWFtCASGYoSF1KM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=2VgKVYP2CsLYggSRrIEw&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=jon%20anderson%20che%20guevara%20%22frank%20bender%22&f=false Thanks, --Tommy Bumped for Bill Simpich or a comparable heavyweight. bumped

Dear Mr. Jeffries, The conversation was in Spanish. --Tommy

Paul B., David Sanchez Morales? Could this be Morales? (The tall, dark-complected guy in the light grey suit with his back to the camera on the right.) This guy reminds me of the tall, athletic, dark-complected, grey suit-wearing who is watching Oswald in New Orleans and scratching, scratching, scratching the back of his neck in the James "Jim" Doyle film. You can see the neck scratcher (Morales?) starting at 3:56 of this video. --Tommy

Pat, According to Mr. Tidd, the FBI said that Connally and Kennedy were hit by separate shots, and that the WC disagreed with the FBI on this. On what, if anything, did the FBI base its belief? Just wondering: What's the chance that a bullet from a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano could penetrate and exit a human head like that and still have enough momentum to cause the injury which Tague sustained? --Tommy

That he shot JFK with a silenced rifle from the TSBD steps? Sorry, I couldn't help it. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Tidd, When you say, "Someone might have witnessed it," I guess you're saying that someone might have noticed that there were two Oswalds running around who looked a lot alike, one of whom was a real Odd Duck and had married Marina, and that their histories had been merged several years earlier by the government. Do you think the person who noticed it was just a good observer and happened to notice it, or was he more likely a government "insider" who had helped to merge their histories? --Tommy

Dear Mr. Tidd, Is there anything else besides the shot that hit Connally that they (the Warren Commission) wrote up differently than the FBI report? My whole point was that they (the Warren Commission) might have had to modify the shot that hit Connally solely because they (the Warren Commission) had to explain the injury to Tague. Maybe I'm wrong or it's just too simplistic. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Tidd, Questions: Since Oswald wasn't set up in advance to be the patsy, how does H&L fit in with the frame job which you say went into effect after the assassination? Why is H&L important for us to accept in order to make sense out of the assassination? --Tommy

Dear Mr. Tidd, Why do you suppose they did that? Did Tague's injury have anything to do with it? How did the FBI deal with Tague's injury, and when? I don't know the answers to these questions and I'm too lazy to look them up right now. I guess the WC felt it had to make some modifications. What else did they disagree with the FBI about? --Tommy

Their charge was to rubber stamp the FBI's "investigation." --Tommy

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3966/dppluschartsupdated1111.gif The traditional Sixth Floor Sniper's Window was in the SE corner of the building and was facing SSE

Maybe he was just feeling really horny that day. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Tidd, Going from memory here, but I believe Julia Postal burst into tears when she was asked several years later whether or not she had sold a ticket to Oswald. The implication being that Oswald hadn't sneaked into the theater after all. Maybe a more diligent member than I am will chime in on this and provide us with us with the source of that information. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Mady, Please answer the questions I asked you a long time ago, first. After all, I did ask you first. If you can't answer them, I understand. No disrespect intended. --Tommy

Larry, Devil's Advocate: Unless, of course, they wanted to get a better view of JFK to see whether or not he'd been hit. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Jon G. Tidd, I think that's an excellent question, Jon. Fast-forwarding here to a recent exchange we had on the difference between being set up and being framed, couldn't the setting up of Oswald as the patsy have involved his being framed, after the fact, by the manipulation and distribution of his legend? And couldn't that have led seamlessly to the cover up? --Tommy Bumped in a probably-futile attempt to keep from being banished. LOL(?) PS -- Dear Mr. Tidd, I guess the bad guys were just really really fortunate to have a pissed off, dishonorably-discharged undesirably-discharged ex-Marine (it's actually true that all Marines are, by definition, good marksmen), prone-to-violence, itinerant, minimum wage earning, Marxist, former "defector" to Russia, married-to-a-Russian, "Kostikov-connected", pro-Castro demonstrator already working in the TSBD for a few weeks when JFK's motorcade drove by -- you know, to frame for the assassination, after the fact. Talk about serendipity. They must have been beside themselves with joy for the great good luck they'd fallen into. I mean, Oswald was so easy to finger (because he was an Odd Duck) and to frame (because he was an Odd Duck with a "legend") and worked out so much better than, say, Jack Dougherty or Billy Lovelady or Joe Molina would have, didn't he. But was he set up, in advance, as the patsy? Heavens no. It was all just ... just ..... coincidental. --Tommy edited and bumped bumped for Mr. Jon G. Tidd (who is presently "lurking")

Okay, Mark. In the spirit of trying to divert all of the other H and L stuff on this forum to this thread, I'll throw my two cents in to help get it rolling. Here we go: I personally believe that the H and L theory, as expressed on this forum by David Josephs is, for lack of a better term, "a bunch of distracting garbage" Thank you very much, --Tommy I agree Tommy. It's this sort of bizarre theory that the research community should distance itself from. Now Vanessa. Behave yourself. LOL --Tommy

Dear Mr.Tidd, That's an excellent question. Fast-forwarding here to a recent exchange we had on the difference between being set up and being framed, couldn't the setting up of Oswald as the patsy have involved his being framed, after the fact, by the manipulation and distribution of his legend? And couldn't that have led seamlessly to the cover up? --Tommy Bumped in a probably-futile attempt to keep from being banished. LOL(?) PS -- Dear Mr. Tidd, I guess the bad guys were just really really fortunate to have a pissed off, dishonorably-discharged undesirably-discharged ex-Marine (it's actually true that all Marines are, by definition, good marksmen), prone-to-violence, itinerant, minimum wage earning, Marxist, former "defector" to Russia, married-to-a-Russian, "Kostikov-connected", pro-Castro demonstrator already working in the TSBD for a few weeks when JFK's motorcade drove by -- you know, to frame for the assassination, after the fact. Talk about serendipity. They must have been beside themselves with joy for the great good luck they'd fallen into. I mean, Oswald was so easy to finger (because he was an Odd Duck) and to frame (because he was an Odd Duck with a "legend") and worked out so much better than, say, Jack Dougherty or Billy Lovelady or Joe Molina would have, didn't he. But was he set up, in advance, as the patsy? Heavens no. It was all just ... just ..... coincidental. --Tommy edited and bumped

I think that's a great idea, Tommy. Let's make this one look like Tidd's thread so maybe they'll divert this one the way we want them to. Kinda like James Jesus Angleton would do with his orchids... Here goes: Dear Mr. Jon G. Tidd, I think that's an excellent question, Jon. Fast-forwarding here to a recent exchange we had on the difference between being set up and being framed, couldn't the setting up of Oswald as the patsy have involved his being framed, after the fact, by the manipulation and distribution of his legend? And couldn't that have led seamlessly to the cover up? --Tommy Bumped in a probably-futile attempt to keep from being banished. LOL(?) PS -- Dear Mr. Jon G. Tidd, I guess the bad guys were just really really fortunate to have a pissed off, dishonorably-discharged undesirably-discharged ex-Marine (it's true that all Marines are, by definition, good marksmen), prone-to-violence, itinerant, minimum-wage-earning, Marxist, former "defector" to Russia, married to a Russian, "Kostikov-connected", pro-Castro demonstrator who was already working in the TSBD for a few weeks when JFK's motorcade drove by -- you know, to frame for the assassination, after the fact. Talk about serendipity. They must have been beside themselves with joy for the great good luck they'd fallen into. I mean, Oswald was so easy to finger (because he was an Odd Duck) and frame (because he was an Odd Duck with a "legend") and worked out so much better than, say, Jack Dougherty or Billy Lovelady or Joe Molina would have, didn't he. But was he set up, in advance, to be the patsy? Heavens no. It was all just ... just ..... coincidental. LOL bumped to get , uhhh... "back on track" (snicker, snicker) bumped yet again

Mark, Shhh! That's what I'm counting on. FYI, I'm playing James Jesus Angleton here. Deception, deception, deception. --Tommy

Okay, Mark. In the spirit of trying to divert all of the other H and L stuff on this forum to this thread, I'll throw my two cents in to help get it rolling. Here we go: I personally believe that the H and L theory, as expressed on this forum by David Josephs is, for lack of a better term, a bunch of garbage. Thank you very much, --Tommy