Thomas Graves

5 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

Calls for speculation.

Does it really matter?

Mark,

"Does it really matter?"

(Laughing out loud.)

Would the bad guys have taken the risk of letting Oswald be outside during the shooting, being captured on film, and having said film or photo surface later, after Baker and Truly had l-i-e-d their "you-know-whats" off?

--  TG

1 hour ago, Mark Knight said:

Charges can be upgraded or downgraded at almost any time. Sometimes it occurs DURING a trial, if someone decides to take a plea bargain. You already know that. The point is, no matter WHAT charge was filed against Oswald, since the President was involved, it's more than a 99% certainty that bond would be set so high, if a bond was set, to prevent Oswald from getting out of jail prior to a trial.

So whether Oswald was seen in ONE or A THOUSAND photos, as long as the rifle tied him to the murder, where he was when the shots were fired is of minute importance. 

As I said, this isn't rocket surgery. Once Ozzie was in police custody, as long as they had the rifle he's not going anywhere. You're now trying to separate the gnat feces from the Pepper here. It's not productive, and does nothing to unravel what happened on November 22, 1963....

...y'know...the reason most of us are here.

Mark,

What would "lying" Baker and Truly have done, after they'd given statements to the FBI, the Secret Service, and/or the Dallas Police Department (or even worse, if Oswald had lived and had gone to trial on a charge of Murder One), that they'd encountered Oswald in the second floor lunch room about a minute after the assassination, but then a photo or film surfaced showing Oswald on Houston Street, eating his "sammie" while the shots were being fired?

--  TG

20 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

You overlook one important detail: even charging LHO as an accessory to murder-- a murder which was only a STATE crime, not a FEDERAL offense in 1963-- Ozzie might have also faced a FEDERAL charge of TREASON. 

Being charged as an accessory, of course, would have required that some confederates of Oswald also be charged. Assuming there was a case for conspiracy, there were people in high places, in my opinion, who simply didn't want to "go there." So if "lone nut" couldn't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and there was a reluctance to charge any co-conspirators, there was one option left:

In the words of the Dixie Chicks, "Earl had to die." [Earl in this case being Ozzie.]

Mark,

Even if the bad guys and gals had closely monitored free-to-wander Oswald during the assassination, and therefore knew that he had "only" gone out and stood in the landing's shadows, how could they be sure that he hadn't still been "caught" there in some films and/or photographs, and therefore know with certainty whether to charge him with murder, or only as having been an accomplice to murder?

--  TG

25 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

Oswald's whereabouts during the shooting are immaterial. If they tie him to the rifle, he's an accessory to murder, and a "Commie plot" is "revealed" because of his connections to FPCC and his defection-but-not-really-a-defection.

It ain't rocket surgery or brain science to figure THAT out. If Brennan's ID sticks, Ozzie fries for murder. If it doesn't (and didn't), either he's at least an accessory, or he's marked to die before any trial is convened.

And we all know which one played out. Not only do dead men tell no tales but they apparently also don't get legal representation that can cross-examine the witnesses against them.

Mark,

At that Midnight Magistrate's Meeting (or whatever it was), should they have charged him with being "an accessory," instead?

Or gone ahead and charged him with murder, as they did, but with the proviso of being able to change it down the road to "Just A Dad-Gum Accessory," if necessary?

And if they eventually had to do that (make that change), what would your average rocket scientist have thought of ... THAT?

--  TG

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Tommy,

I don't think the plotters cared one way or another whether Oswald would be caught on film. After all, the plotters wanted the world to know that Oswald was involved with Russia and Cuba in a conspiracy to kill the president. So what if he is spotted in some films or photographs?

 

Sandy,

Was Oswald charged with helping to kill the president, or was he charged with killing the president?

How could he be convicted of the latter if a photo or a film surfaced in which he could be spotted, kneeling down and eating his sammich down on Elm Street, only partially hidden behind Gloria "Big Girl" Calvery's ... uhh ... "behind"?

(For example.)

--  TG

Was Bill "Boss Man" Shelley supposed to physically restrain Oswald on the TSBD's landing if Oswald tried to leave it?

Or something maybe a little more subtle, like offering "Lee" another coke-cola (sic) if he stayed right there in the harder-to-photograph-somebody-in shadows?

10 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Tommy, 

Do you think that, under the circumstances, LHO would have wanted to be out on Elm St.?

Michael,

Lots of people who worked in the TSBD were down on Elm Street, or lining Elm Street Extension or Houston Street, so if he'd wanted to, he could have been in one of those places, too.

How could the bad guys know he wouldn't want to be in one of those places when the motorcade passed by?

Situation?  What situation?

A )  "Well, I've got this reputation of having defected to the USSR and of being pro-Castro, so maybe I should just barely go outside the front door with my coke-cola and be as inconspicuous as possible in the shadows so the Secret Service won't recognize me and take be away."

B )  "Well, my CIA handler knows I only pretended to defect to the USSR and to be pro-Castro, so maybe I should just barely go outside the front door with my coke-cola and be as inconspicuous as possible so they won't suspect that I was 'on' to them all along if I just stay right here (where I hope and pray that by some miracle I WILL be 'caught' on film)."

C )  .....

--  TG

1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

Tommy, Who could have stopped him from coming down to watch the motorcade, or have a drink, or eat a sammich?

Michael,

How about watch the motorcade AND drink a coke-cola down on Elm Street, say close to where Peggy Burney and Gloria Calvery and John Templin and his new buddy, Ernest Brandt, were standing?

Do you think they would have let him do that?

--  TG

26 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Tommy, Are you trying to suggest that LHO could not have been involved with any plan where he was supposed to be on the 6th floor, at the time of the assassination, because he was not on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination? Or, are you trying to suggest that LHO was not out in front of the TSBD, at the time of the assassination, because he was involved in the plot, and could not have been anywhere but on the 6th floor, or the assassination would have been called-off? Tommy, do you think that the plotters would rely entirely on someone like LHO being in-place for the whole operation to proceed? Tommy, do you realize that your above post is asking the same question as the thread title?

Michael,

Do you think they would have allowed him outside during the alleged shooting of his one  carbine AND the actual shooting of scores of cameras?

--  TG

PS  Could not he have been innocent and inside the building during the shots?

Could not PM have been Sarah Stanton, and the sooner we realize that probability enable us to proceed with figuring out whether or not Shelly and Lovelady were "captured" walking down Elm Street Extension in Couch-Darnell, and when Marion Baker entered the TSBD front door, etc?

--  TG

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

  .....

The secondary purpose of the assassination was to implicate Cuba and Russia in the assassination, to create a pretext for war. Patsy Oswald was needed for this purpose because it was his alleged Mexico City trip that tied Russia and Cuba to the assassination. In this case it theoretically wasn't necessary for Oswald to be present during the shooting. 

  .....

Sandy,

Are you ready for some double negatives and a properly used *gerund with a personal pronoun or name* (which, by the way, I bet even your linguistically gifted wife doesn't use correctly, although that Russian-speaking Hungarian boy, "Harvey," somehow "had down cold")?

If, before the assassination, the bad guys knew that after the assassination they might be faced with *Oswald's having* been photographically captured outside the building during the shooting, how then could they proceed with confidence that they wouldn't be eventually "found out," if you'll forgive the British English and the unintentional pun?

--  TG

15 hours ago, Paz Marverde said:

KGB is his obsession. He will repeat KGB, KGB, KGB all day long, no matter what the subject of the thread is

Paz,

You do realize, don't you that nowadays it's no longer the called "KGB," because back in the early 1990s, those nice people in the Kremlin, seein' as how the Cold War was over (lol) and in the interest of establishing warmer relations with the West (lol), decided to split the KGB up (lol) and renamed the old First Chief Directorate (specializing in foreign intelligence) the "SVR," and started calling the old Second Chief Directorate (specializing in internal intelligence) the "FSB".

Regardless, Paz, why do YOU think the bad guys (and gals) let Oswald kinda wander around outside the building while the shots were being fired?

Got any thoughts on that?

--  TG

On 4/6/2018 at 2:44 PM, Michael Clark said:

Tommy just went through this thread and edited 11 of his posts.

That's correct, Michael.

Do you find that suspicious and therefore important to point out to the other Forum members?

If you'll look again more closely, you'll realize that none of my edits had to do with altering or even re-phrasing facts I had asserted in the originals, but rather with eliminating the highly offending phrase "with all due respect," (did I miss any?) which, unfortunately, I was wont to use *before* I turned over a new leaf during our recent "Perfect Storm" here, and that I even cleverly indicated that that was what I was doing by putting, in some of them at least, the notation    "[ deleted ]"   in the exact place where the offending phrase had been.

Nice catch, Michael.

And nice "cover job," too, by the way.

Not to worry, though.

I'll just "bump" my post which you, in effect, "covered" a few minutes ago, as soon as the EF-mandatory 24 hours have passed ...

--  TG

On 2/25/2018 at 8:30 AM, Thomas Graves said:

Question:  Why does the so-called Mitrokhin Archive say that Mark Lane was paid by the KGB to debunk the Warren Commission Report?

Three Possible Answers:

1)  Because it's true, and goes to show that back in the 1960s, progressive minded humanists in the Kremlin were seriously interested in seeing that Oswald be exonerated, the Far Right and the CIA be implicated, and that "justice be done" in the good ol' U.S.A.

2)  Because The Mitrokhin Archive was a vicious and elaborate CIA fabrication created in order to cast aspersions on Left-leaning JFK Assassination researchers.

3)   Because TMA was a clever KGB/FSB strategic deception operation, full of minor revelations and gross misinformation calculated to sow confusion and dissention among JFK, MLK, and RFK Assassination researchers.

From John Simkin's Spartacus Blog, "The KGB and Martin Luther King":

"[The Mitrokhin Archive says that the] KGB also arranged for Mark Lane to receive $1,500 to help his research. However, the document makes it clear that Lane was not told the source of the money. The same person arranged for Lane to receive $500 to help pay for a trip in Europe in 1964. KGB agent, Genrikh Borovik, was also assigned to help Lane with his research for Rush to Judgement(1965)."

 

I say the answer to the question posed is number 3). 

What say you?

 

Edited and bumped

--  TG

PS  A little background:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrokhin_Archive

11 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

The photo is remarkable in that it contains at least three lookalikes. Harrelson (tall tramp), Hunt (old tramp), and Oswald in the doorway. I might as well add Lansdale (the man on the left whose face is blocked from view).

The nice-looking fellow with a name tag following the tramps looks like he ought to be somebody too. 

Did the conspirators actually wear name tags that day? They might as well have. Would it matter?

 

 

So, Ron.

Do you think the people you mentioned are just coincidental "lookalikes," or chillin' co-conspirators pretending to be hangin' out but in reality monitorin' the situation and makin' sure everything "goes down" as planned?

Do you remember back in the day when researchers and serious students like us claimed to have spotted Jack Ruby along the motorcade route, Boris Pash leaving Parkland with LBJ, and George Herbert Walker Bush hangin' out with the boys, above, too?  

And McCord monitoring the crowd near and on the Grassy Knoll after the hit!

And wasn't Billy Sol Estes or maybe Malcolm "Mac" Wallace, in the "mix" there, too?

And Gerry Patrick Hemming walkin' down Houston!  (Actually, I wouldn't be surprised.)

And Pakse Base Man, climbin' up that pole to get a better view!

And .... 

But to tell you the truth, I've occasionally wondered about this guy, too, and it kinda bugs me that he looks too thin to be Lovelady.

WHO IS THIS GUY, DARN IT?

Serious question now: I know that a different group of three tramps was allegedly found in a boxcar when the authorities stopped the train they were a-ridin' about a quarter or meebe a half-mile away, and they had to walk with the arrestin' policemen all the way to the jail, but for the life of me I can't remember when your photo, above, was taken. 

1:30?

Something like that, right?

And Oswald was brought in around 2:30, right? 

(I'm goin' from memory here, Ron.)

--  TG

Edit:  I guess I was at least 30 minutes off in my estimate on Oswald's arrival at the police station.  The reason I was wondering about it in the first place was because I remembered seeing the clip (and frames from the clip) showing Oswald being marched past a sitting Lovelady in the Dealey Plaza Police Department.

"I personally reviewed most of the footage on a 16 mm movieola. One such film strip showed Oswald, after his arrest, being marched off the elevator on the third floor of the Dallas Police Department building, and towards Fritz’ office. As a cameraman followed this small procession, who should be seated there, with the clock showing about “2:03” pm, but Billy Lovelady!"

-- David Lifton, on his thread "Why Was Lovelady At The Dallas Police Department Prior To 2 PM?"

Is that "coke-cola"- drinkin' "Inspector of Police" J. Herbert Sawyer he's talking with, or someone else?

--  TG

Edit:  Oops, I guess so, because Andrej thinks so, too.

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

She...ep you over there?  bump that mitrokian fellah?  Nahh Thomas, why not stay right here and sort it all out?  

Nah, Ron. 

I'll probably point out some things and/or reiterate some things to James (and Dawn and Don) on it (the Mitrokhin thread) tomorrow, and hope that James replies. 

Because I really do enjoy debating him.

But while you're here, would you care to express your opinion as to why, if Oswald was "Prayer Man," the bad guys let him kinda wander around like that while the shooting was going on?

Thanks,

--  TG

On 4/5/2018 at 8:10 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Tommy,

Not only do I know that Baker was headed to the corner -- because that is where the films show his footsteps to be headed -- but Andrej's model shows that a colossal collision would have taken place had Baker run up the stairway instead.

 

Sandy,

In my humble opinion Andrej's model is seriously flawed. For example, his PM can't be positioned correctly because if you look at his bird's eye view model, you see that although Andrej does correctly have PM's right hand in direct sunlight, the plane of dark-meeting-light in Weigman is over towards the railing (and actually splits Lovelady almost in two), about a foot more [Edit: in the direction of the center handrail] than Andrej has it [i.e., the dark-meets-light plane] in his model, which plane is observable there by looking at the building's shadow on the landing that Frazier is standing fully on, and PM is kinda standing on [Edit: , with one foot on the landing, and the other foot on the top step].

Regardless, as I wrote above, Chris Davidson says Baker reached the curb in front of the TSBD about 29 seconds after the final shot.  I said above that I thought Baker entered the front door about 6 seconds after that (i.e., about 35 seconds after the final shot).  Don't you think 6 seconds is enough time for Baker to "put on the brakes" and make his way up the steps to the front door, whether or not Pauline Sanders was the ... gasp ... only witness (iirc) to say that she actually saw him enter the TSBD, Sandy? Or something like that?

Okay, how about 40 seconds?

https://www.google.com/search?q=Wiegman+Prayer+Man+JFK&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjooJ-ElaHaAhWPulMKHQGRAYsQ_AUICigB&biw=2282&bih=1176#imgrc=oCWWT_ZciFlJbM:

--  TG

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I can tell you right now it is not Sarah Stanton.

 

And that is all I am going to say.  Period.  Adios.

James,

Thanks, but how do you know that?

Can you back up your belief with verifiable evidence, circumstantial or otherwise?

Didn't you say about a month ago on this forum that you think PM might not be Oswald?

Question:  If neither Oswald nor Stanton, who then?

A stranger from the street?

--  TG

50 minutes ago, Kathy Beckett said:

Michael, It appears that Mr. Larsen and Mr. Graves are in disagreement as to what Baker did.  Thomas was trying to be a smart aleck in his  question to Mr. Larsen.

 

Kathy,

Actually, I was just trying to be witty and humorous and thereby deaden the pain a bit for Sandy Larsen as I try to elicit from him a totally implausible reply from as to where in the world he thinks Marion Baker could have been running like a madman to in Couch-Darnell. 

Sandy Larsen, my old comrade in arms. (We did, after all, find Gloria Calvery watching the motorcade in the Z-film and ...  gasp ... talking with Billy Lovelady (probably) on the steps in Couch-Darnell about 25 seconds after the final shot, you know.)

--  TG

PS  I wonder if Michel has any ideas on this?

How long after the assassination do YOU think Baker entered the front door of the TSBD, Michael? (That is, of course, IF you believe he entered the front door.)

Chris Davidson has Baker at the TSBD curb in 29 seconds, so after pushing his way up the steps past Calvery and Woman In White (Karan Hicks?, Carol Reed?), I figure 35 seconds, tops.

What say you?

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is not why you started the thread.

Because the answer to that is that it did not matter, did it?

So your underlying idea, which is the basis for every single thread you start, that somehow it could not really be the Deep State behind all this, it simply ridiculous on its face, to everyone but you.

Because only an investigation that was rigged from the start would overlook something that important in the first place.

But you have to completely ignored that fact to promote your Russian translator did it non starter.

Well, James,

I guess you've really "caught me out" this time, haven't you.

As you know, I don't believe that "Prayer Man" was 5' 9.5" Oswald (or any other man) at all, but rather, a shorter-than- 5' 9.5" (and "heavyset," according to Frazier's Garrison Trial testimony) TSBD employee by the name of ... gasp ... Sarah Stanton.

Regardless, while I was tooling around the Forum at an UNGODLY hour this morning, I came upon an excellent old post by Lance Payette on an interminably long thread (the title of which escapes me now) in which he observed that the bad guys wouldn't have allowed Oswald to "kinda wander around" (my words, James) like that and be captured on film during the shooting.  And (yes, I know, Michael) then Lance posited the theory that unwitting LHO wasn't included in the plot per se, but that he was used, almost by happenstance (because he WAS *there* and he HAD defected to the USSR, you know), in the coverup, and that it was probably just a local D.P.D. deal, ... and ... well ... James, I was sort of wondering what YOU and the legions of people who THINK like you THOUGHT about that sort of thing.

James?

--  TG

6 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

To address your question...

If Oswald was part of the plot-- knowingly or unknowingly-- I'm of the opinion that Oswald was not a man who was easy to micromanage. In my opinion, his movements had to seem as though they were of his own volition...at least in his own mind, In my opinion, he would only follow directions if he was in 100% in agreement with the plot. If he wasn't part of the plot, his movements were not controlled by anyone (but himself).

Seems like a simple concept to me.

Mark,

Reasonable and well-spoken.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

--  TG

3 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

1.

There's the thread for the Mitrokhin discussion.

2. I'm surprised you asked about moving the off-topic discussion to a thread where it would be on-topic. To my way of thinking, that's a no- brained.

3. I made no reference to your question in the title of the thread.

And 4. You've certainly proved my point about your posts being about you remaining the center of attention, rather than seriously discussing the JFK assassination. (In case you forgot, that's why most of the rest of us are here...the discussion of the JFK assassination [so you don't have to ask what the forum is about]).

Mark,

Thanks for the "plug," but my intention in starting THIS thread was to try to elicit some theories as to why and how the bad guys let Oswald "kinda wander around" outside the building like that, and be captured on film doing so.

Thoughts?

--  TG

4 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Silliness, conjecture, ridicule, and making no assertions or sense, are you?

Michael,

I'm not trying to derail my own thread, now, but have you taken a good hard look at the two different ways Andrej has Prayer Man standing, with one foot on the top step, and the other foot on the landing, in his models?

Shall you and I continue this conversation on another of my threads, "Some Questions For Andrej About Prayer Man," or some such thing?

In an attempt to get THIS thread "back on track," do you have any thoughts, Michael, as to why the bad guys allowed Oswald to be photographed outside the building like that during the motorcade?

Thank you,

--  TG

13 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

I suggest you NOT hijack this thread, even if you started the thread, and instead take it to the thread that pertains to the topic. I should be surprised you asked, but I'm not. As long as you remain center stage, you apparently don't care about the actual discussion around you. 

Mark,

Sorry, but which thread is that? 

Could you please post a "link" to it here?

(I do hope that it's not one of those closed ones.)

Thank you,

--  TG

PS  You're surprised that I asked what, Mark?  The question that's incorporated in the title of this thread??

On 4/5/2018 at 4:19 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Why do you do this all the time TG?

You come out with a deliberate provocation.  Someone calls you on it and then you back away from it.

You said, and anyone can see it,

So, it didn't matter to them that Oswald was kinda wandering around outside during the motorcade? 

He was not even close to wandering around outside by any definition of the phrase.  If PM is Oswald he is only visible for a few seconds and in the shade.

But now that you are called on that, you retreat and say, "Oh, they had him on a short leash."

My reply is the same as above, why did no one ever bring this extremely important subject up for literally decades.  The point being, that like the hole in the rear of Kennedy's skull, it is a real giveaway as to what happened. But did the WC deal with it?  The HSCA only dealt with it to dispose of it.

That is the way these cases work, but apparently you do not know that do you?

James,

It does seem to me that you ARE overreacting just a tad bit, here.

You didn't REALLY think I meant it literally when I said "wandering around" (EDIT: actually "KINDA wandering around," -- what happened to my "kinda," James?), now did you?  You know, like a dog that has somehow just gotten out of the back yard?

Other members, even ... gasp ... "the CIA did it, and we live in a Deep-Deep State!" members have been known to use a bit of descriptive hyperbole here from time-to-time, haven't they?  James?

So, what's wrong with old TG doing it occasionally, too, James?

Does my use of the phrase "EDIT: KINDA wandering around" here really make that much difference, anyway?  I mean, when you think about it, James?

Do you think Oswald (if he really WAS "Prayer Man") went out there on the landing all on his own, and could even have walked around the building looking for the "roach coach" food truck if he'd wanted to, or do you think he had to ask permission from the bad guys to sneak out there and stand, implausibly, with one foot on the top step and the other on the landing, you know, so he wouldn't "look too tall" compared to Frazier later on?

--  TG

PS  Off subject now, but you chided me on my Mitrokhin thread a couple of weeks ago by saying, in so many words, that Alger Hiss wasn't spying for the Soviets, and that I was very ignorant to say that he was.  I then informed you that our very own patron, John Simkin, begs to differ with you on Hiss's loyalties, but I never heard back from you on that, did I.

Would you care to respond to that here, or shall I bump my aforementioned Mitrokhin thread?  You know, so we can really "get into" it, James?

EDIT:  Never mind, James, rather than risk derailing my own thread, I'll just "bump" the Mitrokhin thread, and maybe I'll [EDIT: SEE] you over there? 

James?

57 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Can TG pinpoint where Oswald was "wandering around outside during the motorcade"?

James,

You mean they actually had him on some kind of leash out there, you know, with one foot on the top step, and either the toe of his other one balanced on the landing, or with his left leg splayed way back and his knee bent awkwardly so he could get that dang foot flat-like on that darned landing, as PM is portrayed in both of them there ways in Andrej's models?

--  TG