Jump to content
The Education Forum

Bill Simpich

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

10,956 profile views

Bill Simpich's Achievements

  1. The FBI found 10,000 pages in the three metal file boxes - and apparently kept no copies. They said they would turn it all over to the WC and let them decide - even of her diary. They provide a list based on "quick perusal". https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57758#relPageId=132&search="metal_boxes" To be scrupulously fair, Ruth argued that she did not give consent for them to remove her personal documents from her bedroom closet, and that many of the documents were personal and/or referred to marital discord of her parents. But Ruth told them to return only what was "pertinent" - apparently the FBI returned everything - but I want to see the proof of return. Looking for that. The FBI did have in their files - by whatever means - four letters from Ruth to Marina, one in May, two in July, one in August - we can assume those were in Marina's possession. I do believe the WC published these. On another date, I'll let you know what the WC did with Ruth's material, including the three metal boxes and the diary - I've wondered about this for awhile.
  2. Yuri Moskalev was believed by the CIA to be the probable "mystery man" that Win Scott ID'd on 11/22/63 as Lee Harvey Oswald.
  3. I saw this thread - just wanted to add the comment that Moskalev is described as "a dark blond" - also here, which adds the enticing detail that Moskalev's wife was Vera Nikolayevna - the same patronym as Marina Oswald - is there some spycraft going on here?
  4. i believe he lived in Marin County - I will ask Gary Aguilar. any other ideas?
  5. I remember researching Tyree many years ago, and I shouldn't be taken as an expert, I just found it not well documented.
  6. My mistake - Marguerite was in Fort Worth, not Irving. If anything, I think it's more likely that they were unwittingly moved to Irving as the ideal people to move into the Oswald orbit, as he was motivated by all things Russian - and so was Ruth. The Paines moved to 2515 W. 5th in Irving in the second weekend of September (not October, as stated above) and went on to buy the house there. Marguerite was living at 3124 W. 5th. in Fort Worth, several miles away. By October, she was living elsewhere in Fort Worth. It's a weird coincidence they lived on the same named street during September - although the Paines were in Irving and Marguerite was in Fort Worth - was it an accident? Oswald came back for a three day weekend during the second week of September, and then departed to the USSR in what turned out to be three years.
  7. I believe I have found the origin document to this story - it is 124-10130-10284 (unredacted version). Also see Commission Document 212 (redacted version). It is a 12/17/63 memo by SA John Wineberg, stating that a confidential informant informed his partner William Betts that an Edward Cronk allegedly said that LHO and his wife got in touch with Ruth through the pen pal program of the Young Friends Movement. Specifically, it states that "on December 16, 1963, PH T-1 (whose name is redacted) advised SA William S. Betts, Edward Cronk, Executive Secretary of the Young Friends Movement of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, 1515 Cherry Street, Philadelphia, PA, said he met Ruth Paine in Indiana in 1955...She and Cronk are both members of the Young Friends Movement... "According to Cronk...he said Lee Oswald and his wife got in touch with Paine through the pen pal program of the Young Friends Movement. He said Lee Oswald had never been to Philadelphia. "Cronk said although he was personally acquainted with Ruth Paine, he did not know Oswald, nor the situation in Dallas relative to the Oswald family and Mrs. Paine." The follow-up that I see is an 12/22/63 memo from Dallas saying to re-interview Cronk in light of a 12/11/63 Hosty memo, pages 11-12. That Hosty document says (on actual page 11 but written page 8) that the Paines met the Oswalds at Everett Glover's Dallas home in the spring of 1963. Then I see an urgent memo from SAC, Philadelphia to Director, 12/24/63, discussing among many other things an interview directly with Cronk by two other agents. Cronk told the agents that he had "no information that Ruth Paine corresponded with Oswalds while they were in Russia." The direct interview with Cronk reflects this report, and adds that Cronk said that Paine was not active with the pen pal group after 1957. Cronk seemingly disappears from the record at this point - no further follow up. It looks like either PH T-1 made it up, or Cronk lied in his re-interview. It is at least possible that this story was disinformation designed to confuse the record. To me, what remains the strangest link to LHO pre-1963 is the Paines' decision to move to Marguerite Oswald's neighborhood in Irving right before Oswald's departure from the military and return to Irving supposedly to take care of his mother. Michael first assumed responsibility for the new home in June 1959, and they moved in during October 1959, during the same time that Oswald returned home to see his mother...before he abruptly left after 3 days and boarded a freighter in New Orleans, with his journey winding up in Moscow.
  8. why are officers looking at that wallet? (though I do not know where you get "10-20 minutes" time looking.) Officers are looking at that wallet because it was "found" by someone. Who gave it to Owens? I still think Croy planted it - Owens was his chief. Why are Barrett and Jez backing up Croy's story? Why are all three of them making it up, IMHO? I think to cover up a blunder - other people at the Tippit crime scene may remember that there was an unexplained wallet there, and this is being played out to convince them there is an explanation and there is no need to go public. I believe Callaway turned over the revolver no later than 1:30 - and that the wallet was reviewed on camera at 1:40 or later. you note from your experience as an attorney that when officers ask citizens for identification today the usual practice is not to ask for or want to hold a wallet, which may have been the same practice or sensitivity then, so what explanation accounts for departure from usual procedure in examining someone's identification, seen in the WFAA-TV video? Again, because the wallet was "found", not provided by Callaway or any other wallet owner. whose identification was in the wallet and what happened to that wallet? Croy said it wasn't Oswald - but couldn't remember the name. More phoniness from him. Croy says there was no Oswald ID -- so why does he say the wallet belonged to Oswald? Again, why are Croy, Barrett and Jez making up this story about Oswald's wallet being at the Tippit death scene? what is the connection of that wallet with officer Tippit's pistol with which it was both seen and reported to have been in association? No one says there is a connection except for you - because you see both the wallet and the revolver in the same hand in the video - can you post the clip that shows that, and the Ken Holmes interview you have been raising? Thanks for whatever you can do. and above all, the $64,000 question, why is there no report or record made of that wallet in any of the contemporary police officer reports? That is the big question - I think it is because the wallet in the video and the wallet in evidence have many similar characteristics: 1. Both wallets have a leather flap that snaps over a photo section, 2. Both wallets have a metal band fixed to its leading edge. (Dale Myers, With Malice, p. 298) 3. Both wallets also have a zipper over the cash compartment. And also...Croy could not produce his witness...so if it's true that he reported it at the time - that would have caused an enormous scandal. And, again, ...three law enforcement officers claim that they saw Oswald's wallet at the Tippit death scene. Whether their claim is true or false - and at this point, I am leaning towards false - why are they making such a big statement that flies in the face of the record? Again, I think it is to protect a blunder that occurred - I think there was an Oswald look-alike wallet at the Tippit death scene that caused some conversation and confusion, and they are trying to deal with it in a variety of ways to make sure the story goes back to bed. This is the same strategy Barrett used in both admitting and denying that he was at Dealey Plaza with Buddy Walthers at 12:39 pm on 11/22. See Mark Oakes video about Barrett on youtube: Barrett was one of those higher-ups, and he has spread confusion ever since - in the 80s he said it happened, but mistook Westbrook for Westphal and O.H. Lee for Alek Hidell - how is that possible on the most important day of his life?
  9. Greg, On what basis are you asking me this question about "holding on to the story" of the Oswald wallet? I wrote it in the first two sentences of my post: "There were two similar-looking wallets. Both wallets have a leather flap that snaps over the photo section, with a metal band fixed to its leading edge. (Dale Myers, With Malice, p. 298) Both wallets also have a zipper over the cash compartment." That is not an accident. I also added that I believe Kenneth Croy may have brought the first wallet with him to the scene, and pretended that he was given it by a witness. Croy's story was that the witness told him he found it in the shrubs, which is pure malarkey. Croy was no good. The Warren Commission thought he played the role of a fullback to conceal the presence of Jack Ruby until the very last minute. Their concern was valid. Croy knew Ruby. I think Croy was in on the killing of Oswald. I will grant that Croy could have cooked up the entire wallet story years later just to be in the history books - but the two very similar wallets remain a big problem. Let me flip the script - on what basis do you think the wallet belonged to Callaway? Why would four policeman be passing around this Callaway's wallet for 10-20 minutes: Croy, Owens, Doughty and Westbrook. As an attorney, I have done a lot of criminal law. Cops do not want to handle your wallet. It violates the laws of search and seizure, unless you have been arrested. Even more importantly, they don't want to be accused of stealing money. Cops ask for the ID. Not the wallet. These four attorneys were asked this question - and they all said the same thing - the cop should not ask for the wallet. I don't know Ken Holmes - and he didn't claim receiving the wallet - and for all I know he could have made up his story just to be in the history books.
  10. After years of studying Tippit, I concluded a few years ago that there were two similar-looking wallets. Both wallets have a leather flap that snaps over the photo section, with a metal band fixed to its leading edge. (Dale Myers, With Malice, p. 298) Both wallets also have a zipper over the cash compartment. One wallet was "found" on the scene by Kenneth Croy, the first officer on the scene, who received it upon arrival from an alleged "unknown witness". I think Croy brought it with him. He handed it to his chief Bud Owens, who showed it to ID section chief George Doughty and then to the ranking officer on the scene Pinky Westbrook,. All this was captured on video, which got broader circulation in the 80s and 90s. The other wallet was found by polygraph chief Paul Bentley while riding with Oswald from the Texas Theatre to the police station. For years, I touted Bob Barrett as a truth-teller. Barrett "revealed" that Westbrook asked him while looking at the wallet if he had ever heard of Lee Oswald or Alek Hidell, whose cards were allegedly in the wallet. I called him numerous times in the year before he died in 2017. No return call. Now, I don't believe Barrett. I think he is the worst kind of xxxx - on the Tippit wallet and many other things. I don't believe the Callaway story, either. There is no evidence to support it, only conjecture. Callaway told Myers there was no billfold at the crime scene. It is plain that he was denying any knowledge of seeing or hearing about any wallet at the scene. (Myers, p. 300) It takes further unwarranted conjecture to conclude that Callaway was too embarrassed to admit that his wallet was taken away from him. I'll admit this, I am embarrassed that I ever believed Barrett. Look at his track record - here's ten bullet points: 1. Barrett's November 22, 1963 report says nothing about the wallet being found at the scene. There's no way to get around the wallet captured in the video - but it goes unmentioned in every law enforcement report. 2. The same Barrett report also claims there was an indentation on the primer of Oswald's revolver. FBI firerams expert Cortlandt Cunningham testified there was no such dent, busting Barrett and Jerry Hill's false narrative about LHO trying to shoot his revolver in the Texas Theatre and that there was such a marking on the primer. (see item 8 in my article, linked here). 3. Also in the report - Barrett says someone else grabbed the revolver and gave it to Bob Carroll - then he says (fourth paragraph from the end of the attached 1983 Montgomery Advertiser story) that he grabbed it himself and pulled it from Oswald's grip. At this point, I am tempted to write off everything Barrett says as "stolen valor" - like claiming credit so you can get a combat medal - but it's even worse than that. 4. See pp. 27-38 (a series of FBI memos of 1967). It sure looks like Barrett took custody of the Paschall film and made a duplicate of it? That's what Paschall's lawyer thought. This film was important evidence of Dealey Plaza on 11/22. Now Paschall only has a duplicate, and no longer has the original of the film. Why? Barrett admits having possession of the film - he kind of had to, because Paschall and her lawyer knew his name. But there is no record of any FBI agent taking possession! FBI agents are not allowed to take custody of evidence without a paper trail - especially someone's film. Barrett and another agent followed many leads to obtain and review such film. Barrett claimed that he was in the film - actually...no one has yet been able to find him in the film. 5. In the attached 1984 article, Barrett states he was "one of the last cars to arrive at the Tippit scene" - but he also claims that he saw Tippit's body being removed!!! This is another whopper. Barrett's 11/22/63 report states that he got the news about the Tippit shooting at 1:25. He was in Dealey Plaza at that time. There is no way that he got to the Tippit crime scene before 1:30 - ten minutes after Tippit's body was taken away by ambulance. The argument has been whether Tippit was shot at 1:07 (multiple gunmen version) or 1:15 (lone gunman version). Assuming the radio log accurately indicates the call for his rescue was as late as 1:17 pm, Tippit's body was picked up in two minutes and removed by 1:20. Croy claims to the Warren Commission to have been the first cop on the scene, and saw his body removed. Researcher William Weston says that Croy was immediately followed by H W Summers and Roy Walker. Dale Myers agrees, and puts the time of their arrival at 1:21. (Id., p. 112) They learned "a cab driver" (Callaway was with a cab driver) had picked up Tippit's gun and left the scene. Weston adds that Hill, Owens and Alexander all arrived at 1:22, after the ambulance had left. 6. I believe the police have consistently told a story that changes the sequence of events at the plaza by 8-15 minutes - the goal to push back the Tippit shooting to as late a time as possible (1:16 instead of 1:07, I think the true time), in order to give Oswald enough time to get to the Tippit scene. I remain unconvinced that Oswald was at the Tippit scene. Barrett even walked the route from the Tippit scene to the Texas Theater and wrote a report on it. 7. Much of this may have been done to hide the truth, indicated in the Oakes video - (and determined by researcher Richard E. Sprague in a study to have been taken at 12:39 pm)...that Barrett actually was the officer photographed with Buddy Walthers in Dealey Plaza that day - and Barrett actually did pick up a bullet or a fragment from a bullet from the scene in the minutes after the assassination. Walthers' wife said Buddy told her that "the man" picked up a bullet. (Oakes, at 5:35) Wathers' partner, Al Maddox said "an FBI man" picked up a bullet. (Oakes, at 6:00) Walthers died in a 1969 shooting with a notorious criminal named Bob Cherry while on duty with Al Maddox - was Walthers' killing some kind of set up? Both Barrett himself and his boss Robert Gemberling identified the man in the Dealey Plaza photo with Walthers as Barrett - only to deny it later (also in Oakes' video). Barrett went so far as to write Oakes a note when the photo was mailed to him - "that's me in the photo, sorry." Odd phrasing. Oakes calls Barrett to thank him. Barrett says, "my mistake, I meant to write 'that's not me in the photo, sorry.'" Barrett is a disinformation artist. Patrolman J. W. Foster told the WC he saw a bullet strike the turf right alongside the concrete by a manhole cover - there is supposed to be an arrow pointing to the mark, according to the transcript. (Can you see any mark - I can't?) Also see Mark Oakes' video, start it at 2:00 with Patrolman Foster's statement, and the location as reported in the 11/23/63 Fort Worth Star-Telegram at 4:35 (also see Jim Marrs, Crossfire, p. 315) - but the Warren Commission refused to believe it. On 11/22/63, while serving on jury duty, Edna Hartman and her husband Wallace saw two parallel holes while standing near a manhole cover. She and her husband went back on Sunday the 24th, but the grass was trampled over and they could not find the holes again. Her report was taken months later, 8/10/64, by two FBI officers - one was Robert Barrett! The Hartmans had been downtown for jury duty, and responded late in response to a public appeal. Edna Hartman told Jim Marrs that a policeman on the scene told her the shots came from the grassy knoll. She asked the cop if the two parallel marks she was looking at were gopher holes, and the policeman said, "no ma'am, that's where the bullets struck the ground." (Marrs, Crossfire, pp. 315-316). Cameraman Harry Cabluck photographed the scene and saw more than one gouge on the ground. He was told the gouges were formed by a bullet (or bullets?). He took his photos hours later and never saw a slug. (Marrs, at 315; also see Sprague who documents the Cabluck photos) Cabluck is still alive. Robert Groden never got access to the early generation Cabluck photos. But Barrett's report quotes them as saying the shots came from the TSBD, not the grassy knoll, and that a "bystander" - not a policeman - supported that view. 8. In Barrett's report, Barrett claims he was in Richardson, Texas until noon and got to Dealey Plaza by 1 pm. This is well after Walthers claims that he was out in the plaza with the FBI agent looking in the grass for a bullet. 9. Barrett confuses things still more in the 1984 article by claiming that he studied all the angles of the shooting, and that his trajectory study shows that Oswald was shooting at Connally! This theory was picked up by the son of famed NYT journalist James Reston - JR Jr. wrote a whole book on this - claiming LHO was trying to get even for then-Secretary of the Navy Connally deciding not to upgrade Oswald's discharge, which resulted in Oswald's loss of his GI benefits - which would be a useful motive for shooting that day. More confusion, cooked up by Barrett. That Connally-killed-Oswald's-benefits story may have been one of the original reasons the planners chose LHO as the patsy, discarding the theory when they realized they didn't need it. 10. In the 1984 article, Barrett tells the story about the wallet - but this time, instead of citing Oswald and Hidell - he says the cards are for Oswald and O. H. Lee (the resident at 1026 Beckley). Was this done to prove Oswald was O. H. Lee? This is the most important day of Barrett's life - why is he getting all the facts wrong? Why did the story of the ID of O. H. Lee change to the ID of Hidell? O. H. Lee would not tie him to the rifle purchase - Hidell would. How did Barrett get it wrong in 1984? Why should we believe his more recent version? The Tippit evidence - and the Walthers & Paschall evidence - should be reviewed over and over again until we get it right. There is nothing simple in the JFK case - not when key investigators tell lies over and over again. Barrett 1984 PART 2 (1).pdf
  11. I used Doug Thompson's fascinating article as part of the new epilogue to my revised series of essays The Twelve Who Built the Oswald Legend - let me know what you think. Connally didn't believe Oswald was the shooter Doug Thompson, the webmaster at Capitol Hill Blue, had dinner with John Connally in 1982. Connally told him "you know I was one of the ones who advised Kennedy to stay away from Texas. Lyndon was being a real asshole about the whole thing and insisted." Thompson asked Connally if he thought Oswald was the shooter. "Absolutely not. I do not, for one second, believe the conclusions of the Warren Commission." Why didn't Connally speak out? "Because I love this country and we needed closure at the time. I will never speak out publicly about what I believe." Connally's actions are why Oswald was stuck without GI Bill benefits - something Oswald needed to fix Nellie Connally wrote in her book From Love Field that John Connally personally signed the documents that gave Oswald an undesirable discharge. Oswald hand-wrote a memo shortly before 11/22/63 describing his experience with "street agitation" - citing his recent arrest in New Orleans. He may have written this for his still-unknown contacts in Dallas. In my opinion, Lee Oswald's note to Hosty and letter to the Soviets was motivated to be seen as a player in the world of espionage - this was his best shot to get his GI Bill benefits ASAP. When Oswald's room on Beckley was searched, all three of his key undesirable discharge rulings from 1960-1963 were found together among his few possessions in that tiny room. I don't think that taking a pot shot at ex-Navy secretary John Connally or JFK from the highly insecure sixth floor of the book depository was a good way to make that happen. The way for Oswald to get his benefits was to make himself seen as an important player in the world of espionage - if he could figure out his place in the scheme of things. I think Oswald's 11/9/63 letter and his letter to Hosty at about the same time were two halting steps in that direction. I also think that Oswald was involved in doing some favors for someone in the tense behind-the-scenes atmosphere of 11/22. Why else would he head to the Texas Theatre, except to look for a contact? And why in the world would he not bring his handgun to work if he was planning to shoot the President? Only a crazy person would fail to bring his protection along with him if he wanted to get away. Anyone conducting a long-distance ambush is trying to get away. Oswald was not crazy. Meanwhile, it's a sure thing that the planners of the Kennedy assassination had access to the Oswald file. One glance at it would provide convincing evidence that Connally took away Oswald's military benefits - and, in turn, provide a factual foundation for the cover story. The Connally part of the cover story was a "spare part" that was never used - but it was available, if needed. Navy counsel Andy Kerr's memoir A Journey Among the Good and the Great also backs up Kerr's account of Connally's involvement in Oswald's loss of his GI Bill benefits. Kerr wrote that he advised Connally: "In Oswald's case, my conclusions were that his complaint had no legal basis, his request was without merit, and that Connally should not involve himself in any way. This routing slip supports the story about how Connally deep-sixed Oswald's attempt to obtain an upgraded discharge by directing "appropriate action". "I recommended that he refer the letter to the commandant of the Marine Corps for 'appropriate action'." (Emphasis added.) This phrase meant, in clear officialese, that the secretary was washing his hands of the case. The commandant could do with it as he wished. No one could doubt that the result would be. It was a kiss-off. "A day or two later, Connally called me into his office. He had obviously read the entire file and was intrigued. We discussed the case for half an hour or so, and at the end he said, "I agree with you, Andy--this is the way we should handle it." He then signed that second piece of paper that sent Oswald's letter on its way, we thought, to oblivion." And, in fact, that's precisely what happened. The Warren Commission has a memo dated 2/26/62 - three days after the purported cc from Connally to Fred Korth, at a time when Connally was clearing his desk as Secretary of the Navy to pass the reins to Korth - stating that the Oswald matter was being "routed to CMC (Commandant, Marine Corps) for 'appropriate action'." (Emphasis added.) There's no sign that Fred Korth saw this memo. There's an initial "C" on the bottom - that may be from Connally. Connally's signature looks similar. Instead, a week later, Oswald was sent a "kiss-off letter" from Brigadier General R. Tompkins of the Marine Corps, saying that your letter "was referred to me for reply". Kerr's colleague Hank Searles also corroborates Kerr's account. Searles recalled the morning that Kerr opened the Oswald letter, read it, and advised Connally to reject it. Are there any indications that Fred Korth ever saw any of Oswald's requests for a discharge upgrade?
  12. I have reported on the Gannaway relationship with convicted wiretapper Robert Denson in 1963, reprinted below. Denson, head of the Tri-State Private Detective Agency, was hired to work on Jack Ruby's trial defense. Denson was working on protesters appearing with placards supporting Ruby. This late 1964 FBI memo by Robert Barrett indicates that the Gannaway-Denson relationship was being monitored by none other than Criminal Intelligence detective Don Stringfellow (identified as DL T-23) Stringfellow is infamous for passing a phony report to the military during the afternoon of November 22 - so seeing Stringfellow snitching on his boss Gannaway indicates a big lack of harmony within the Special Services Bureau - because Revill was snitching on Gannaway too. Maybe Stringfellow and Revill just wanted to get Gannaway fired - or was it more than that? The same memo goes after assistant DA William Alexander for having custody of the Oswald diary that was leaked to LIfe Magazine - which is more understandable - it mentions how Alexander hated the FBI and was referred to by people who knew him as "a vicious nut". Why did Jack Ruby love Alexander so much - even though he was his prosecutor? Why did Alexander leak info about Oswald having Hosty's "home phone, office phone and car license number", and plant phony info that Oswald was an FBI informant? I should mention that "police department number" is provided for many suspects - we should conduct a public records act request in Texas using these numbers!! Here is an interesting FBI memo written by Robert Barrett from 3/15/63, entitled Crime Conditions in the Dallas Division. It names Jack Revill as FBI T-1, who wants his identity confidential. Revill reported to Barrett that a close relationship continued between Gannaway and private detective Robert B. Denson - even though Denson had recently been convicted in the Tyler federal court for wiretapping. The word was that Gannaway was going to retire soon and go into the private detective business with Denson. Denson ran the Tri-State Detective Agency. Denson was later hired by the Ruby defense team. He would shoulder reporters aside and ask them not to photo him - but both he and Belli denied that he was Belli's bodyguard. When Karen Lynn Bennett testified on 12/23/63 at a Ruby bail hearing, she was followed out the door by defense attorney Tom Howard and Denson.
  13. On Guillermo Ruiz and Antonio Garcia Lara as witnesses who saw the Oswald character as being the actual "LHO" - see Escalante's JFK: The Cuba Files, pp. 130-132. On the other hand, I have to say... As someone who does cautiously use Escalante as a source - because of his stature within Cuban intelligence, his willingness to write books on the subject and engage with researchers - and because he was shut down by the Cuban government, indicating that after a long period of openness a period of silence was necessary - I find it very troubling that all of us don't vet his work more seriously. After all, Escalante named five shooters in Dealey Plaza. Why has there been no follow-up? Why has no one (I can't read Spanish well at all) gone to Havana and reviewed the sources that Escalante does cite in his books as located in the government library? Does anyone know if Escalante is able or willing to discuss the JFK case at this time?
  14. After a number of years, I finally got this epilogue written wrapping up the Oswald Legend series. The great thing about it for me is that I learned new things writing the revision - the biggest one may have been about Oswald's push to obtain his GI benefits and how that affected everything. The process really drove home to me how much disinformation was embedded in this case before 11/22 - immediately afterwards, and in the following months and years. All comments welcomed. https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Oswald_Legend_Epilogue.html
  15. Hi David, Thanks for reaching out to me personally telling me that you wrote this response. I am only occasionally on this site and I don't know the traffic patterns or when I have been asked a question directly. I should begin by saying it would really really help David if you offered a RIF number whenever you post an excerpt. I have to learn what you do - it's very helpful - but it becomes a serious problem when the person who receives it can't review it in context. Let me check to see if my understanding is right on your position... On my point about evaluating Escalante's evidence - as near as I can tell you, you simply don't believe Escalante and believe Veciana, do I have that right? I am not sure about Escalante, but I feel sure Veciana cannot be trusted on any level. Are you saying Veciana named the shooters in Dealey Plaza? For all the reasons Newman spelled out in his books, I don't believe Veciana. He has no crediblity for me. On your statement that "The overwhelming evidence is that Harvey Oswald was in Texas for that period working for the FBI (possibly on assignment from CIA to get info on what the FBI was doing)." I don't believe in "Harvey Oswald" as a separate individual from Lee Oswald. I think Oswald was a frenemy of the FBI - an off-and-on source who got mad at Hosty. I think Guillermo Ruiz was a double agent that Veciana tried to bring into the game from time to time - and that Ruiz's real affinity remained with Cuba. I love the "fudge" document you found on Slawson. I think that is the kind of document that deserves much more analysis - did you ever find the missing pages? Bill
  • Create New...