Glenn Nall

I believe the proper way to deal with someone like Paul is to ignore him, he's already taken up too much space on this topic already. The challenge has been extended, if he's got anything of worth to say he'll take me up on it. And if he has nothing substantial to add, he'll continue making personal attacks without addressing the evidence.

That's right Martin, the proper way to deal with the simple, blindingly obvious truth is to ignore it.

Paul, as a long time member and observer of behavior on this forum, I have noticed that when any person of historical interest comes here, there is someone waiting to pounce on them and make their bones by "exposing" them or some such thing. Sometimes they have legitimate complaints. Sometimes not. It's clear from your posts, however, that you plan on harassing Mr. Lane on points raised and spun by others with the clear-cut agenda of discrediting Mr. Lane.

If you do so, you should at least first familiarize yourself with Mr. Lane's previous response to Bugliosi, etc, starting here:

Lane's response to Bugliosi

After reading Mr. Lane's article, and taking notes, you should start a separate thread in which you ask him questions not answered in his article. He may or may not respond to this thread, I don't know. But that's the proper way to ask the man questions. Posting on every thread in which he participates and saying "But Mark, what about Bugliosi..." can only be considered harassment.

And no, there's no double standard. I, for one, think it would be swell if the likes of McAdams, Posner, Myers, and Bugliosi were members of this forum, so that people could ask them questions, which they would be pressured into answering. Tellingly, however, none of them will participate in a forum such as this, where the weaknesses of their argument and occasional lapse into lying would rapidly be exposed.

"Tellingly, however, none of them will participate in a forum such as this, where the weaknesses of their argument and occasional lapse into lying would rapidly be exposed."

yet another reason the SBT is of such disrepute - its followers are...

Yes it is, for those who like to hear things from the horse's mouth.

Those wishing to hear from the horse's other end still have their own spot to congregate.

Very amusing, well done. Though it would be slightly more effective coming from someone that is able to distinguish one end of a horse from its other.

If you're so certain that Mark Lane's work doesnt stand up to scrutiny, why haven't you posted anything on my "Mark Lane Challenge" elsewhere on this forum?

Because I enjoy a challenge.

i know this thread's 4 years old, but I have to ask:

do you often talk to people like this face to face, or just within the physically protected confines of the internet? have you ever been "accosted" for being so respectful of others with whom you disagree? how many times?

CTKA

Google gave me Central Texas Kickball Association.com. That's not it, is it...?

just kidding. i'm aware of the site.

Dawn - agree with you for many years, maybe still. But McBride got me thinking about the possibility that Tippit might have been more than that. He was certainly frantic in his movements from about 12:45 pm until his death shortly after 1pm.

Glenn - in addition to his proximity to Dealey Plaza after the killing, the alibi for his whereabouts in the half hour before is very weak. There is no evidence that the story of his taking a shoplifter into custody is true, and to me it reads more like a deliberately planted story to mislead researchers into questioning whether Tippit might have been in uniform behind the picket fence. We owe McBride a debt of gratitude whether he agrees with this or not. He is also the intrepid researcher that dug up the very important Hoover memo to 'George Bush of the CIA.

i realize i'm opening myself up to a number of creative responses, but i'll ask anyway:

ok, so what are the opinions of James' Files and W. Dankbaar's revelations that one Gary Marlow, friend of Files', shot Tippit?

thanks, ya'll -

didn't take it that way at all. just wanted to clarify the difference to myself between Walt's work and Joan. i realize you're being tactful. better that than the "free verse" so many use.

thanks

i remember that you had mentioned your friendship with Richard once before, too, and was figuring that you'd pipe in sooner or later here.

I'm coming to enjoy Richard's writing and his obvious work a lot.

and thanks, you answered what i was looking for - that explains how the Rambler got from Wing to Richard to Jay.

I see Dr Walt Brown's name pretty regularly and had the idea that his work is reputable; is that your opinion, too?

Re Joan Mellen types, it's so incredibly disappointing so many in this mystery have such an ugly, transparent and still damaging agenda. I see it in every forum I visit. Smart asses who don't write to add to the thread but to take away from it somehow, exposing their own selfish agenda to appear smarter than the other person with ridicule and ambiguity.

IF this Rambler turned out to be an absolute zero in terms of direct connection to the whole thing, it's quite amazing that so MUCH material could still be spawned just from the research of its origins. Ya know? The places, people and connections that it took Richard are incredible in their relation to JFK and the coup. Very hard to imagine the car doesn't somehow relate directly. The association with the addresses and people in Miami is another interesting angle.

thanks, Dawn, hope you're well.

once again, Pat, I find myself agreeing with you and your approach to this thing.

what you've said is dead right, that even the people with whom I agree tend to shoot themselves, and the rest of us, in the foot with shoddy work, gullibility and cherry picking that critics see through and then attack.

I haven't spent much time on your site - i will do so. My aim is, as well, to present whatever I present with an emphasis on organization - for the laypersons - and as objectively as possible. Unlike many websites, I don't think quantity means a thing. It's the quality and understandability of the contents that matters.

it's also highly beneficial for a website to include similar content for SEO purposes, and in keeping with a networking philosophy I will want to include links to - um, the "better" - websites.

in a subject so enormous, I'm sure mine will find a more focused direction - at the moment I'm having a blast putting names to names to names, and letting the trail go where it will.

thanks, man

The documents are documents. Not sure what you're trying to say. Mary Ferrell herself is dead. Rex Bradford, who oversees the site, has an impeccable reputation.

Now...about one more thing: Do you go to your car dealer and ask them to recommend a "better" dealership? Do you go to your physician and ask him/her to recommend a "better" doctor? Just wondering...

*** and for the record, Mark, the reason I asked was to that I can put together a LIST of good (for lack of a better word) websites' links on the CURRENT website I'm building.

Here are some I visit occasionally.

http://www.prouty.org/

http://ratical.org/

http://aarclibrary.org/

thank you, Roger. I'm glad you could understand my cryptology.

you've misunderstood me - "the more reliable" as opposed to "the less reliable", which are many.

NOT as opposed to this very website. I thought that was made clear when I compared the two types:

"there are so many obscurely named ones which do seem to be pretty good, and some websites that look good on the surface but offer only so much drivel and agenda (or implantation) once inside."

was that sentence that unclear? then I apologize.

If i did not like this website, I would not continue to attempt to participate in this website. there are members here who are easily tactless enough to say many unprompted things in a rude manner - I am not one of them.

some of "the more reliable", or some of "the better" usually means as opposed to "the lesser" or "the not so good".

I'll try to speak more slowly in the future.

i should learn to write more clearly.

by "how to view" i meant fro what viewpoint would one visit her site, if at all. I've heard controversial things about her and the website.

post Google response:

oh. hell.

i recognize the name (from distant memory) as a CIA? name - although I didn't want to just make that leap... I did wonder if it's the same as the name in my memory.

Good God, it seems I need to clarify my Subject Line - I do NOT mean BETTER than this website. First of all, this is a FORUM (and, yes, a website) - not what's referred to as an informative, or "brochure" type website. And by BETTER, I mean BETTER than those really crappy ones that are all over the place and which have little to offer.

If ANYONE thought I meant BETTER than this one, I didn't.

it's like that list of books - those are some of the "better" books on the subject, as opposed to saying list of the "best", which most people are realistic enough not to write, and as opposed to the "lesser" books.

I hope I haven't offended anyone. else.

anyway, much like the lists of good JFK books many of you have recommended in the other thread, i wonder if I could impose upon some of you to list some of the more reliable websites that are available these days? there are so many obscurely named ones which do seem to be pretty good, and some websites that look good on the surface but offer only so much drivel and agenda (or implantation) once inside.

i.e. - how does one view Mary Ferrell's information...? I've heard some very polarizing opinions.

thanks, whomever -

Thanks, Mark, for the reference -

If i may ask, and with respect, - so this IS the same U.T. Rambler RBartholomew spoke of, owned by George Wing? Is that what I'm reading here? what's the connection between Mr Plumlee and the car, then?

fascinating.

someone asked what the registration of that plate # would return, and it's in the article that Wing bought the car from CB Smith, also connected to Ransom and Rostow and Johnson (LB), et al...

I get the story, but how did they come about the conclusion in the first place? How demonstrable is the evidence that it's the Oswald Rambler?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for a nice neat package like this to wrap everything up. But how likely is it that someone is still using the escape vehicle to commute to and from work every day 26 years later?

it's like so much else of this blasted mystery - it's too curious to make any sense, and it's way too curious to leave alone.

i mean, hell, there's an almost direct line from U. Texas to DH Byrd to Mac Wallace just for starters.

...from UT to Dulles and Hans Gisevius to George Bush...

right, my main issue concern was how it is that someone just happens across such a vehicle who would know enough to pay attention in the first place, and yes, why would someone be driving such a car so long afterward -

unless, it's the somewhat far-fetched idea Barth. presents in the first place, the idea that someone is trying to "pass a message" under the table. he even compares it to another similar tactic used somewhere else in the mystery - i can't remember what exactly...

he says this, though - that he's not implying that this IS "the car".

"According to the rule of falsifiability, if this car was not involved in the assassination, the evidence will prove the claim (that it was involved) false. If the claim is true, the evidence will not disprove it. So far none of the evidence disproves that George Wing's station wagon was the car seen by Michael Kensington, Roger Craig, Marvin Robinson, Helen Forrest, and Richard Carr.⁵⁸⁹ Neither does it disprove Wing's Rambler was the one known to Oswald as the car that took him from Dealey Plaza. The search for evidence continues however. Help in that search is both needed and requested from the research community."

- the fact that Michael Kensington sees a similar car at the Miami cuban Hideaway goes a long way in the possibility of this tying together.

"But perhaps this car had nothing to do with the assassination. Perhaps like the back seat magazines and the missing pages, it too was just a sign or a signal, something that would attract the attention of someone knowledgeable about the JFK assassination, something which would help put the other clues into perspective and lead to previously unseen relationships in the mosaic of the Kennedy assassination."

my mainstay, and the work I'm doing putting all the names together into a chain - or group of chains, is the immense degree of "interrelationship" that the piece brings out.

http://stemmonsfreeway.com/rostow.php

posting html isn't working...

"On May 29, 1989, a Rambler station wagon was noticed on the campus of the University of Texas at Austin (UT) which fit the description of the getaway car reportedly seen by Craig, Robinson, Forrest, and Carr on November 22, 1963.⁸ A cursory examination of the car revealed apparent associations between it and persons whose lives were intertwined with Lyndon Johnson's political machinery, the military-industrial-intelligence complex in the U.S., right-wing politics, and Latin American politics.

Connections between odd characteristics of the car itself and information found elsewhere on the UT campus could be interpreted as a trail of clues in the form of coded messages connecting this Rambler, its owner at the time, and its previous owner to the JFK assassination.⁹ These clues appear to have been deliberately planted due to specific interrelationships in their content and the encoding technique used.

Specifically, the Rambler was found bearing a 1964 Mexico Federal Turista window sticker and displaying at least two magazines published in 1963 on its rear seat. Although this made it only a minor curiosity, it became increasingly intriguing with subsequent study.

Physical, anecdotal, and documentary evidence has revealed a mosaic of relationships extending from the car's owners to individuals who have been and are currently subjects of interest to researchers of the conspiratorial aspects of the assassination of President Kennedy."

[...]

"The car was a light, warm-gray 1959 Rambler Cross Country Custom station wagon (License No. 711-TQC). The paint looked old and appeared to be original. During a two-year period of observation it was usually parked near Batts Hall which houses the university's Spanish and Portuguese Department. It had a 1964 Mexico Federal "Turista" Automobile sticker (registration no. 243495) in the right rear window and a "D" (for disabled) UT parking sticker on the windshield. In the back seat were two issues of Esquire magazine published in 1963. Only one of them still had a cover. It showed an illustration of Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton in the movie Cleopatra. The back seat was in disrepair but the interior upholstery appeared to be original.

The car was photographed a year later in exactly the same condition as when it was first seen. This was done because every time it was observed up to that time nothing about the car had changed, not even the identity, number, location or arrangement of the magazines;¹² despite the car's daily use. By chance, the day it was photographed, the car's driver was also captured on film driving the Rambler. This lack of change remained through the entire two-year period of observation ending in mid-1991. It was beginning to seem that there might be some significance to the display of these particular magazines in this particular Rambler station wagon with its 1964 turista sticker. In any event photography was the best safeguard against the car's disappearance before it could be studied further.

On November 9, 1990, a request was made to the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles in Austin, for an ownership history of the Rambler. The first question to be answered was whether or not Ruth or Michael Paine had ever owned it. Unfortunately the clerk at the Division of Motor Vehicles said all of the state's ownership records prior to title numbers beginning with the digits 85 were routinely destroyed, which included those for this car.¹³ Fortunately the same man had owned this car for the past twenty-seven years and his title showed up in the current computer record. A Title and Registration Verification was obtained for two dollars. It was typed like this:

NDX 239845 LIC 711TQC EXPIRES MAY/91 EWT 2800 GWT 0000
$40.80 TITLE 33883954 ISSUED 05/07/65 ODOMETER N/A
59 RAMBLER SW D713121 REG CLASS O1
PREVIOUS OWNER CB SMITH MOTORS AUSTIN TEX
OWNER GEORGE GORDON WING, 2101 ROBINHOOD TRL,AUSTIN,TX 78703
LIEN 04/13/65 UNIVERSITY FEDERAL CREDITUNION,PO BOX 8090 U T
STATIO
N,AUSTIN TEX
PLATE AGE: 2.

The possibility remains that the Paines owned the car prior to C.B. Smith because its ownership history during its first four years is yet to be established despite several attempts through various means. But just because Oswald was under the impression that the car belonged to Ruth Paine in 1963 does not mean that it did. Bert Sugar and Sybil Leek apparently had information that Paine borrowed such a car.¹⁴ (me: and it's mentioned later that she borrowed a car regularly from Jack Ruby...)

Nevertheless the identities of the two known owners have proven to be of potential importance to the events of November 22, 1963.

Cecil Bernard Smith, the previous owner, personally knew Lyndon Johnson. He was a major land owner in Austin who opened Austin's first Volkswagen dealership at Sixth Street and Lamar Boulevard. He was a native of Texas and a star athlete in college. He donated money to Johnson's political campaigns and to UT. During the 1980s C.B. Smith donated land to the university to endow five chairs in Mexican and Latin American Studies..."

"George Gordon Wing, the owner of the car from April 1963 until his death in December 1991, was a Ph.D. and associate professor in the Spanish and Portuguese Department..."

[...]

APPENDIX

The Mutilated UT Library Books and Rambler Back seat Magazines

The following are the nine books discovered missing or with pages removed at the Perry-Casteñeda and Benson Libraries on the campus of the University of Texas at Austin. The first was discovered in June 1989; the rest in May-June 1991 when only the author and one other person knew all of the facts about what was being found. No books were found after these; but books with missing pages yet to be found, now that word of them is more widespread, are less credible. Following the nine books are the only two back seat magazines to be positively identified of at least four that are visible in photographs of George Wing's Rambler station wagon. The identity of the third is at present only tentative, but the visible elements on its cover do appear to be an identifiable match.

1. Anthony Summers, Conspiracy, (NY: McGraw Hill, 1980), pp. 125-26, 447-52, 545-46, 593-94; discovered June 1989.
2. Robert Sam Anson, They've Killed the President, (NY: Bantam, 1975), pp. 197-98, 255-58, 267-68, 275-76, 297-300, 307-14, 331-34, 387-88; discovered May 1, 1991.
3. HSCA Volume V: Trafficante testimony, pp. 363-68, 373-76; discovered May 9, 1991.
4. Jaques Cattel, ed., Directory of American Scholars, Vol. I, (NY: R.R. Bowker Co. sixth ed. 1974), p. 672 (only the Nathaniel Weyl biography was removed, the rest of the page remains intact); discovered May 13, 1991.
5. Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-Up, (Berkeley, CA: Westworks, 1977), pp. 7-22, 27-28, 31-38, 41-44, 51-56, 61-62, 65-66; discovered May 13, 1991.
6. Wim J. Meiners, De Moordfabriek: Tussen Dallas En Watergate, (NY: Ace; Bussum: Centripress, 1974), pp. 42-64, photos 4 pp.; disco vered May 23, 1991. Note: An intact copy of this book was obtained through an interlibrary loan from the University of Kansas Libraries; E / 842.9 /.M43.
7. Warren Hinckle with William Turner, The Fish is Red, (NY: Harper and Row, 1981), pp. 31-40, 43-46, 53-54, 101-04, 111-26, 131-34, 155-74, 203-06, photo section: 8 pp., 215-18, 223-24, 335-38, 349-52; discovered May 24, 1991.
8. Michael Canfield with Alan J. Webberman, Coup d'Etat in America, (NY: Third Press, 1975); confirmed missing May 24, 1991.
9. Julius Mader, Who's Who in CIA, (Berlin: Self-published, 1968), pp. 577-78; discovered June 1, 1991.

Magazines made conspicuous on the back seat:

1. Esquire, August 1963, Vol. LX, No. 2, whole No. 357.
2. Esquire, January 1964, Vol. LXI, No. 1, whole No. 362.
3. Life, June 7, 1963, Vol. 54, No. 23.

bump

yes.

my apologies, I thought it was obvious. are there others who've written so extensively about the Rambler(s)?

I'm still a little foggy on how it got this person's attention on the UT campus, about how these books and magazines were "displayed" so as to get attention. It doesn't sound ridiculous whatsoever, after reading it carefully - would just like to know more details.

Barth.- wrote this in 96 i think, and suggests several things that would warrant more research - I wonder how much has been done since this article...

reason I asked, was just a bit curious about your need to exaggerate - "The memo's authenticity was established decades ago" - i'm pretty sure the memo isn't "decades old" as far as research material goes - it's the second time you've responded like that to me, and i'm not sure why.

i try diligently to find reliable, reputable researchers in whose material I can trust; your experience is surely something that should gain the attention of many, but i'm not so sure about the delivery.

no disrespect intended. just sayin'...