Thomas Graves

_________________________________ Dearest Myra, How poignant. Not. With all due respect. who gives a "Flying f---?" "Let's all gather around the campfire now boys and girls and hold hands and sing a few rounds of 'Kumbaya My Lord, Kumbaya, Oh Lord, Kumbaya....'." What a joke. (Credit GPH. ) (Believe me, Ms. Bronstein, I've been there and done that. Stood around the campfire several times, and sang my guts out. Guess what, Ms. Bronstein. It didn't F------ work. So give it up. All we got was the usual Fascists, "Mr. Nice Guy," the usual Fascists, the Sex-Maniac, and the usual Fascist. Why would you even post such a sentimental, tear-jerking, "fuzzy-wuzzy" "philosophical" post on such a cynical, contrarian Web site as the "JFK Assassination Debate?" --Sincerely, One of "The Bad Guys?"

_________________________________ Myra, Good point. But TUM's umbrella can be seen turning in the direction of JFK's limo in the Z-film, as if TUM was "tracking" JFK (IMHO in case a second flechette shot was necessary). Why was TUM wildly pumping the umbrella up and down just a few moments earlier? Answer: Maybe he was both a signaler and a "shooter." --Thomas _________________________________ __________________________________ Johnny, When you say "as posted by the aussie," do you mean James Richards? --Thomas P.S. What are you doing playing around with toys at your age? __________________________________

___________________________________ Well, I guess that settles it. Sprague and Cutler were wrong in their analysis of Z frames 188, 189... ___________________________________

I just read the article "The Umbrella System: Prelude to an Assassination" by Richard E. Sprague and Robert Cutler: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.txt In the article they say that JFK was hit in the neck by TUM's flechette at Z-189. I was curious to find out how long of a shot that was, so I pulled up Don Roberdeau's map of Dealy Plaza http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DP.jpg and then by using Don's scale and my tape-measure, I calculated the distance from TUM to JFK at Z-189 to be around 70-75 feet. Since the umbrella weapon was designed to be aimed simply by looking down the "barrel" (or whatever it's called) towards the target, I'm wondering how likely it is that JFK was hit so accurately from this distance. Comments? --Thomas ______________________________________

______________________________ Jack, Nope. Sorry. --Thomas ______________________________

_______________________________ John, I agree. Looks like a small notepad in his left hand. --Thomas ______________________________

Paul, it is esteemated that between one quarter, one third of all adults will suffer from mental health problems at some point in their life. This is a worrying, and distressful time for the sufferer, and their loved ones's I find your purile attempt to belittle their suffering to make a childish point about JFK beneath contempt. please desist. ________________________________ Stephen, et al-- I think we should just ignore this tread so it will slowly slip into obscurity.... The guy sounds like a partially-intelligible lunatic...... --Thomas ________________________________

____________________________________ John, I don't want to sound like an apologist for Lt. Day or any of the other possible bad guys, but since you ask the question, I feel obligated to say that maybe it was a logical conclusion for him to think that the bag "may have been used to carry the weapon" simply because it was about the length of the broken-down rifle and didn't look as if it was made to carry anything else in the general vicinity? --Thomas ____________________________________

... (If you refuse to respond to my question immediately and in the affirmative, I will have no choice but to assume that you are guilty, as charged.) LOL. --Thomas P.S. Are you still kicking your ...? ___________________________________________________ (edited in the interest of decreasing confusion and paranoia)

___________________________________________ Dear Myra, Do you think William Plumlee willingly and knowingly participated in the conspiracy to assassinate JFK? (If I were you, I'd ask him if he was the SOB CIA contract pilot who made the Z313 head shot. (Or if he saw Joseph Milteer, Ted Shakley, David Morales, Santa Claus, Ed Lansdale, etc in DP that day. Oh!! I forgot! You already have!!!) Hey! I have an idea! Maybe "Tosh" is a member of this forum just to spread evil disinformation! Sincerely, Thomas [edited to correct typos in the interest of reducing confusion and, at the same time, dispense a healthy dose of overall comfort and security to those would in all probability feel an overwhelming sense of guilt, paranoia, persecution, insecurity, and/or shame and/or frustration, angst, and last-but-not-least, anger for not being able to understand and/or "deal with" the above post in an unedited/uncorrected form, gramatically, syntactically, and spelling-wisesidlly (sp?)] ___________________________________________

Really Tosh? Post number 22 in this very thread was a dupe from you. Maybe you just don't want to fall out of touch with me. If that's the case then it's no problem. I have some ideas on topics we can cover. Unless an open discussion is too overt for you and you'd rather be a thread xxxxx. After all your work history indicates a strong preference for covert ops. ____________________________________ Dear Myra, What makes you think Mr. Plumlee is suggesting you are dumb just because you made a duplicate post? (Nearly all of us do that from time to time.) Sincerely, Thomas ___________________________________

Have you tried doing this? Were you successful? I have added my website to the Wikipedia entry on the Assassination of JFK. It will be interesting to see how long it stays there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination _____________________________________________ John, So far I have only made minor corrections in grammar, syntax, spelling etc. I'm too lazy and too technically-challanged to make any big "corrections" or to submit any articles myself. The editors insist that you follow certain procedures and formats in making big corrections or in submitting an article in the first place. Unfortunately, I'm not very good at understanding and following these kinds of procedures, but I can say that whenever I click on the "discussion" tab on any controversial Wikipedia article or entry, I see that lots of people, including the editors, are participating on the "discussion page," trying to "improve" the entry (or keep it the same, for that matter). --Thomas _____________________________________________

Not to put words in someone else's mouth... But I interpret this in the following way: Mr. Plumlee's team was dejected because they had failed their mission to protect the president, a leader whom they favored. Had some members of Mr. Plumlee's team been actively involved *in* the assassination, those members might have shown excitement rather than dejection. Because they left dejected, Mr. Plumlee concluded that none of his team had participated as successful shooter(s). Does this phrasing ring true? Thanks Frank. That says what I meant and rings true. Why could'nt I have said it that way... Myra. Does that help? Sorry if I confused anyone, but Frank did sum it up for me in a way I can live with.. Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, yes yes yes. I see. I read it a totally different way. Thank you Frank and Tosh for helping me see the light. I hope you can understand now what I was perplexed about Tosh. Hm, I wonder if other people have read quote #1 and now think your passengers were bloodthirty. Your statement was really precise, so I believe I'm clear that the flights to Dallas and from Dallas (I know there were multiple stops en route) had some different passengers, right? And John Roselli was not on the return flight. So...speaking of Roselli, the traditional wisdom is that he was one of the assassins. Does it puzzle you at all that he was on the abort flight into Dallas then? I know you were on the South size of Dealey Plaza and more people were on the North side. But did you happen to see any of the below? -Joseph Milteer -Ted Shackley -David Morales -Gerald Patrick Hemming -Ed Lansdale -Lucien Conein -Alfredo Duran -Rip Robertson -John Adrian O'Hare -Orlando Bosch (seems like he would have been directly opposite you) -Ray Hargraves (ditto) Or maybe we can come at this a different way: was there anyone in the crowd who did *not* work for the company? I hope you don't mind all the questions. I'm just trying to piece things together as so many here are. If you can't answer some then I understand. Thanks. Myra Ref: http://www.google.com/search?q=familiar+fa...:en-US:official http://www.manuscriptservice.com/FFiDP-2/ ******************************************************************* "Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, yes yes yes. I see. I read it a totally different way. Thank you Frank and Tosh for helping me see the light. I hope you can understand now what I was perplexed about Tosh. Hm, I wonder if other people have read quote #1 and now think your passengers were bloodthirty. Your statement was really precise, so I believe I'm clear that the flights to Dallas and from Dallas (I know there were multiple stops en route) had some different passengers, right? And John Roselli was not on the return flight. So...speaking of Roselli, the traditional wisdom is that he was one of the assassins. Does it puzzle you at all that he was on the abort flight into Dallas then? I know you were on the South size of Dealey Plaza and more people were on the North side. But did you happen to see any of the below? -Joseph Milteer -Ted Shackley -David Morales -Gerald Patrick Hemming -Ed Lansdale -Lucien Conein -Alfredo Duran -Rip Robertson -John Adrian O'Hare -Orlando Bosch (seems like he would have been directly opposite you) -Ray Hargraves (ditto) Or maybe we can come at this a different way: was there anyone in the crowd who did *not* work for the company? I hope you don't mind all the questions. I'm just trying to piece things together as so many here are. If you can't answer some then I understand. Thanks. Myra" Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... Sounds like a lawyer badgering a witness, to me. __________________________________________ Terry, I agree. Or someone who is either unable or unwilling to understand... --Thomas __________________________________________

____________________________________ Is that Braden/Brading, to the right, behind the car, wearing the fancy dark-colored hat? --Thomas ____________________________________

_________________________________ Excellent insight, John. --Thomas _________________________________

It's a good question. [...] the photo apparently reminded Krulak and Prouty of a twisted hand that Lansdale presumably had [...] _____________________________ Apparently? Presumably? Good observations on Taylor's left hand, Ron. Keep up the good work... --Thomas P.S. Just an idea: Is there a biography or autobiography of Taylor in which any mention is made of a "twisted" or "injured" or "wounded" left hand/arm? _____________________________

_______________________________ Robin, Well, actually used to own a Rambler (station wagon), and that sure looks like one to me. Could be wrong, though... --Thomas _______________________________

I would just like to hear what Krulak has to say on the question of the strong resemblance to Taylor, which he didn't seem to see back when he was corresponding with Prouty (who didn't seem to see it either). The "limited hang-out" idea is just a wild guess on my part, and probably wrong. I don't know what the answer is. I simply find the fixation of Prouty and Krulak on Lansdale, to the complete exclusion of the similar or even stronger resemblance to Taylor, inexplicable, since Prouty and Krulak knew both men (only one of whom had wavy hair). ______________________________ Ron, So, it could all boil down to "the twisted left hand," couldn't it? It seems to me that a twisted left hand is much more unusual and hard to fake/hide than perceived "wavy hair," and therefore a much stronger way of identifying someone, especially from the back. (By the way, who's to say that Lansdale didn't put some "goop" in his hair that morning so he could make his hair look "wavy?") Does anyone out there know whether or not General Taylor had a twisted left hand? As I said, I will give the pictures to my father to show to General Krulak... I cannot promise, however, that my 83-year-old father will even remember or be willing to "interrogate" General Krulak, but we shall see... --Thomas ______________________________

____________________________ Robin, I don't know the answer to your question, but I think that the car that the cop is standing in front of just might be a Rambler (as in Rambler station wagon?) FWIW, Thomas

Thomas, Will your father have the chance to show Krulak the Taylor photos and get his comments on whether or not the person could have been Taylor and not Lansdale? A link to Krulak's letter was posted in another thread last year, and here's what I wrote at that time. ("That's my story and I'm sticking to it.") Ron ____________________________________________ Ron, I did print out the pictures of Gen. Taylor and Col. Lansdale which you posted on the Forum a couple of weeks ago, but since I haven't seen my father for a few weeks, I haven't had the opportunity to ask him to present the pictures to his buddy General Krulak and to ask the kind General whether or not [he he is willing to "fess up" (LOL) to the fact that] the "suit" walking past the "tramps" might really be General Maxwell Taylor. But what if General Krulak, after looking at your pictures, tells my father that the "suit" is still, in his opinion, Lansdale? Will you continue to say that it's a just a "limited hang-out" on the part of Krulak/Prouty to divert attention away from Gen. Taylor? Regardless, I will give the pictures to my father very soon and ask him to kindly "interrogate" 94-year-old General Krulak. No "water-boarding," however. LOL. --Thomas ____________________________________________

I highly edited my previous post and just want to keep the new, "improved" version on the "front page." See post #59. --Thomas ________________________________

________________________________ Hi James, I think that the very proximity of the "Lansdale-like figure" to the "tramps" tends to make all four of them look more suspicious than they would otherwise, and makes the "Lansdale figure" look particularly suspicious. Let's face it, it's highly unlikely that an innocent, reasonably-"aware" person would pass through such a potentially dangerous, very narrow "passageway" between the fence on the right and the tramps(?) and cops(?) on the left just a couple of hours after the President of the United States has been assassinated a few freakin' feet away. And here's something else to consider-- what about the potential stench of the "tramps"!? Would anyone in his right mind want to be anywhere near these characters? I think not. In some of the pictures, the old guy looks drunk and about ready to puke! I would't get anywhere near him-- It would be a real "bummer" (no pun intended) for him to wommit all over my Brooks Brothers suit! As I mentioned recently on another thread, my father is a close friend of Lieutenant General Victor "Brute" Krulak, USMC (Retired), who knew Col. Edward Lansdale quite well. My father, at my request, asked Gen. Krulak a few weeks ago whether or not the General had written the letter (see below) to Col. L. Fletcher Prouty regarding the positive ID-ing of the "suit" passing by the three "tramps" as being none other than Edward Lansdale. (I recommend that everyone read the letter; it was written in 1985 when Krulak was 72 or so.) A couple of days later my father told me that Krulak, now almost 94, "vaguely remembers" writing the letter to Prouty and that Gen. Krulak also told my father that "Prouty was a 'good guy' (sorry Ron Ecker) and that Lansdale was a 'bad guy.' Here is a link to the letter that Krulak wrote to Prouty and the link to Wikipedia's biography of Krulak: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/appD.html#39223 http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_H._Krulak] Cheers, --Thomas ________________________________

_______________________________________ Have a few pints "on" me. I really wish I could be there. [One of my distant relatives was admitted to Oxford to learn "the art of brewing" (LOL) in the 1600's. Probably explains my affinity for intellectual subjects and beer...] --Thomas _______________________________________

Indeed, Wim. Speaking of Rogers, did you ever hear the rumors that he was alive and living in Western Australia up until at least the mid 1990's? I was never able to get any details though. James Wim and James, John Liggett, the mystery mortician from Dallas in The Men Who Killed Kennedy, he also was alive, then dead, then alive once again................. ________________________________________ Wim, James and Shanet-- How scary it is for you to speak of these "undead" now that Halloween is almost upon us! --Thomas ________________________________________

Well said. _________________________________________ John, You can challenge and potentially change the information on any given Wikipedia page by simply registering as a Wikipedia member and then arguing your case (with appropriate documentation/citations) on the "discussion" page... [Of course, if one thinks that "the powers that be" at Wikipedia work for or are controlled by the CIA, etc., then, well, it's all for naught, isn't it?....] FWIW --Thomas __________________________________________