Jamey Flanagan

@Sean Coleman Well, let's just say this.....I believe he was blackmailed and that's probably why he let the mob do as they please. I don't believe any blackmail was required however in the JFK coverup. Hoover was reaching the mandatory age for retirement and only a decree from the President could change that. And no way in hell JFK was gonna keep him on as director! He took exceptional satisfaction in relaying the news of the President's death to Bobby, whom Hoover hated with a passion!

I believe the mob was most definitely highly involved. And I'll even give you the fact that Hoover wouldn't even publicly acknowledge the existence of organized crime because he'd been blackmailed by them into inaction much the way he blackmailed others to get what he wanted. Thus Hoover and the FBI were compromised. I'll even take the argument that the CIA was compromised because certain agents were joined at the hip with mafia guys on the whole Cuba issue. I'll even give you LBJ for the hell of it. He was about to be dropped off the ticket and quite possibly even see jail time if he were drug down by the Bobby Baker and Billie Sol Estes stuff he was involved in. We know that RFK would be happy to see LBJ serve time. So even not trying to make any mob ties to LBJ, he's definitely along for the ride if you get rid of Kennedy and make him President. The entity that I just can't see is the Secret Service. They were knee deep in this assassination plot! How is the mob gonna influence them? Any ties to the SS? That's one of the places it being a mob plot from the get go loses me.

I think it was very telling that not long before the assassination there was a prominent article written discussing just how powerful the CIA had become and how they had already disobeyed Presidential orders and that if there was a coup in our country that it would come from the CIA. You watch the movie Valkyrie or a documentary on project Valkyrie and you see some similarities between that attempted coup and the successful coup that occurred on 11/22/63.

@Chris Barnard Sorry, but you just can't find things conspiratorial anymore upon a Google search, lol! I was just going by memory on my post of things I've read over the decades in books, articles, or websites. I did find this however: Was Jack Ruby A Manchurian Candidate? By Michael J. Levy 11-9-2 Was Jack Ruby in a hypnotic trance [under mind control] when he went into Dallas police headquarters on November 24, 1963, and shot Lee Harvey Oswald--if it in fact was Oswald [Marine records show that on Oswald's 1959 discharge papers he was 5'11", yet the November 1963 autopsy report states he was 5'9"]? There are numerous suggestions that Jack Ruby's mind had in some way been manipulated, looking back on his testimony before the Warren Commission investigating the assassination and from experts' testimony in his murder trial of Oswald. Ruby's first attorney was Melvin Belli. In his book "Dallas Justice," Mr. Belli stated: "Never once did he [Ruby] voluntarily mention Lee Oswald by name. Never as far as I could see, was he willing to concede that there had been this living, breathing human being who had died at his hands. It was strange because he had the capacity to summon up sympathy for almost anything." Even more revealing were the psychiatric diagnoses made of Ruby. Dr. Walter Bromberg stated that Ruby was "pre-set to be a fighter, to attack." He continued, "definitely there is a block to his thinking which is no part of his original [italics inserted] mental endowment." And Dr. Roy Shafer elaborated by saying, "He [Ruby] appears not altogether in control of his body actions, as if they occur independently of his conscious will at times." But it was Dr. Manfred Guttmacher, a leading criminal psychologist, who was caught in a quag. He testified that, yes, Ruby's brain had been "damaged," but couldn't figure out exactly how. He further testified that he felt that at the time of the shooting Ruby had suffered a "functional psychosis." "It would be functional, not organic." Dallas Assistant Attorney Bill Alexander then asked Dr. Guttmacher, "Well, by functional mental psychosis, do you mean a psychotic condition for which there is no known organic cause?" "Yes," responded Dr. Guttmacher. "Doctor, Alexander asked, aren't you shooting both barrels at us? On one hand, you say he's got brain damage, and then you say, no, he does not have brain damage." This suggests the possibility sophisticated mind control techniques were used on Ruby that neither the experts nor the police were aware of. Of course this is not far-fetched today. In early 1977 the CIA released a document dated 1-22-54 raising the question, "Can an individual be made to perform an act of attempted assassination involuntarily...?" The document, under the codename "Operation Artichoke," took the question a step further, "against a prominent (foreign) politician or if necessary against an American official?" The question was left unanswered. Contrary to popular myth, a hypnotized person can be made to do things they would not ordinarily do. This is especially true if the hypnotized person is led to believe this is "normal" behavior, or some other trick is used. As well, a person need not show signs of 'trance.' There was at least one reporter who believed Jack Ruby's mind had been tampered with. It was Dorothy Kilgallen. She was the only reported to have had a private interview with Ruby after the killing. Shortly after that interview she proclaimed she was going to "blow the JFK case sky high." Interestingly, in her December 3, 1964 syndicated column she wrote: MEMO TO PRESIDENT JOHNSON: Please check with the State Department, the leaders of our armed forces, or our scientists to discover what -- if anything -- we are doing to explore the ramifications of "cloud-busting," which in its refined stages, means thought control and could change the history of the world. Sadly, and ironically, she wrote in her September 3, 1965 column referring to the assassination: That story isn't going to die as long as there's a reporter alive -- and there are a lot of them alive. But she wasn't to be among them. Just over two months later she was found dead in her New York apartment. Initially her death was described as an apparent heart attack, but was later concluded to be from a massive overdose of barbiturates and alcohol intoxification. The medical examiner could not determine "whether it was an accident, a suicide, or murder." Her apartment was found in shambles; her Ruby notes were never found. ----- What better way could there be to close out a larger conspiracy than for one of the major players, Ruby, to kill the person framed for it, Oswald, and have no memory of who put him up to it than by using mind control... Comment From Marilyn A. Guinnane Maguinnane@cs.com 11-10-2 Jeff, In presenting the possibility of Jack Ruby having been mind-controlled, writer Michael J. Levy evidently isn't aware of the program delivered to the CIA by the Nazis, called MK Ultra. It is trauma based mind control, brought about by torture, until what used to be termed multiple personality disorder emerges. These personalities, fractured off the main personality, can then be programmed like a computer. There are literally thousands of mind-controlled victims out there, who are triggered into action, ala Manchurian Candidate, by various codes thrown out there by the media and so on. These MK Ultra victims click into action, robotically, so that I'm convinced that the probability is great that the recent Sniper & his illegal alien sidekick were of this ilk. Also many many of the shootings that take place, spreading fear among the populace (oh please, wonderful government, save us!!) as well as undermining our second amendment. Mr. Levy should read Trance Formation of America by Cathy O'Brian and Mark Phillips; Susan Ford's (aka Brice Taylor) self-published book, Thanks for the Memories; David Icke's many incredibly informative books (www.davidicke.com). George Orwell should have entitled his famous book "2004", because "1984" was right on the money, and it's just around the bend.

Thanks @Ron Bulman! I'm looking forward to seeing it!

@Greg Doudna that surprises me! A pleasant surprise to be sure though. Just from seeing a few posts I assumed you were probably an Oswald did it guy. But you know what they say about how when you assume something you make an A$$ out of U and Me. So I guess I shouldn't assume anything. Lol! I agree with you on the Oswald did not do it at all part, although I always include the caveat these days that THE Oswald shot by Jack Ruby did not shoot anyone. I am very open-minded about the John Armstrong Harvey And Lee angle so I can possibly see the real Lee Oswald (Lee Oswald from birth) being involved in the assassination as either an active shooter or plotter and possibly one of the men at the Tippit shooting scene. I think the mob was most definitely involved, but I lean more towards CIA men being the actual architects of the plan and enlisting the mob for help. Many anti-Castro Cubans were involved. I'm positive LBJ himself knew that it was going down, I just don't think he was the driving force behind it. He was definitely involved in the cover-up after the fact as was Hoover (who most likely had advanced knowledge as well).

This is a SUPER long thread so I haven't (and probably won't) go all the way back through 40 plus pages to find out, but I was curious as to what people thought of the Destiny Betrayed 4 part series as opposed to Through The Looking Glass? I watched the latter and enjoyed it but was a little underwhelmed. Keeping up on the assassination over the many years there wasn't a whole lot of information in it that I didn't already know. So, this is probably just from my perspective and the more casual followers of assassination lore would be more highly entertained. I was really anticipating the much longer Destiny Betrayed and wasn't aware that it had been released until I saw someone on an earlier post here referring to it. I checked and it's not available on any channels on my Roku TV that I can find. A Google search showed me that it's on this app called DocPlay or something like that but I'm gonna have to subscribe or do a two week trial. I would gladly do that but the app wasn't available on my Roku TV so I'd still have to watch it on my phone apparently. Anyone know an easier way to watch this on an actual TV?

@Greg Doudna, I'm just curious as to your overall view of the assassination. Are you an official story, WC report, Oswald did it alone guy? An Oswald did it but with help guy? I was just wondering.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I love listening to old broadcast from her! I think her perspective was ahead of it's time and that she was closer to the truth in a lot of these things than many thought at the time. I hope her research finds a good home!

I know some have speculated in the past that Oswald may have been an MK Ultra subject. Nothing would surprise me in this case, but I would tend towards no on that one. However, Ruby is a different story. Even before the Jolly West visit to him in prison. His claims of not remembering the shooting of Oswald, reports of him not knowing why he was being accosted in the basement just after asking why they were attacking him and identifying himself to them, and then you have him being in a excited, nervous state in the cell and asking for a cigarette and then after being told that Oswald had died his whole demeanour changed and given the cigarette he had just asked for minutes earlier said he didn't smoke. Are all of these things definite proof or signs of him being in a hypnotic state at the time? No. It could just be that Ruby or his loved one's lives actually depended on whether he killed Oswald or not. But his shooting of Oswald and Sirhan's shooting of RFK sure do have many similarities! Sirhan, in a similar vein, upon being told that RFK had died seemed to just snap out of it and start acting normal again where he previously seemed to be in a daze of sorts.

I'm open minded about CE 399 to the extent of I do not accept that it caused 8 wounds in two men, lol. Personally if I had to make a guess I'd tend to believe the account from Sam Kinney's friend about Sam admitting that he found the bullet while cleaning out the car and put it on a stretcher somewhere in the corridor. Seems an odd choice of what to do with it for sure, but I can buy that he found it in the car. I think it could have been the one that caused the dent in the chrome just above the windshield. Maybe it stuck in there and with vibration from bumpy roads or something it fell out. But, that's just a guess. I'm open minded to an extent, like I said. I used to agree with the theory presented in JFK, that it was planted, possibly by Ruby. I could still see that.

@David Andrews is correct! Although BWF did own an Enfield that was confiscated, there were also reports previous to this of an Enfield being the murder weapon that was found. Possibly why, according to BWF in his account in The Lonestar Speaks of being interrogated and presented with an affidavit to sign saying he was a conspirator with Oswald. And if he hadn't read it first and just signed it then history may have told a different story! That's how these cops operated back then. No telling how many false confessions people signed because they were told they could sign that paper and go home and they didn't read it. They were also known to beat confessions out of people. That's probably a big reason they allowed the media such access to Oswald so they could see he didn't have any fresh bruises on him aside from those he got in the theater scuffle. There were also reports of a thirty aught six as being the murder weapon I believe.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but this supposed SS Agent wouldn't be the only one who hitched a ride to Parkland, right? Wasn't there a confirmed story about an agent in the road hitching a ride with some newsmen in a news van or something like that? I recall reading that in two or three different threads on here at some point.

Haha, we might not agree on everything @Pat Speerbut we can agree on this! Now, I'm sure you are mainly referring to JVB........and with me the jury is still out on her. That doesn't mean I buy her story 100% but that doesn't mean I fully dismiss it all either. To me, there's something there. Call me crazy, but the meat of the story (which was already presented in Dr. Mary's Monkey) makes an awful lot of sense to me. David Ferrie with all the mice in cages at his apartment, being friends with Dr. Mary and her mysterious death and the details surrounding it.....you throw in a guy like Oschner (may not be spelled correctly) and INCA and them being behind releasing the record of the debate Oswald took part in. There are just an awful lot of dots that get connected. Maybe she didn't have as big of a role in it as she lets on and embellishes many things, maybe not. I just can't write her off as a complete cook. I own the book Me And Lee which I enjoyed, and would have enjoyed even if it were put out as historical fiction. And listening to her speak she sounds very intelligent. Maybe intelligent enough to make up a lot of her story. To me, having the Lewis couple corroborate her story goes a long way. But I can see why many write her off as another Beverley Oliver or James Files. And I have always LOVED Jim Marrs! I bought the Barr McLellen book and I liked it but wasn't blown away or anything. There's some meat there. I think LBJ definitely knew it was coming. May have even helped some in planning. May not. Who knows? Lol!

You're quite welcome @Denny Zartman! I have dipped my toes into the pool of blood story, so to speak, lol, and have also looked into the dead secret service guy angle before also. But I hadn't really heard the story (as far as I could remember anyway) about the guy running out toward the Presidential limo and shouting something, possibly a warning, until I read about it in The Lonestar Speaks. So, imagine my delight in searching older posts and find that article that hit on all these points at least a little! Great job @Vince Palamara!

Was going back through some of the older threads on here today and ran across something peculiar. Not saying it is of any significance though but found it strange since earlier on here we had discussed a possible 45 slug found in Dealey Plaza. Anyway, someone had posted quotes from witnesses who had said that at least one of the shots sounded like a handgun and several who said the shots sounded like they came from inside the limo. I'm not trying to push this theory so just stay calm, lol! Anyway, the last quote was one of the Parkland doctors. I can't recall which one. When asked about the damage to Kennedy's skull he said it was the equivalent of someone shooting him in the head with a 45 caliber at close range. Not saying that happened of course, but I thought I would share that after my previous post.

Bumping this thread back up to the top because I think it is VERY important! The article from Vince is definite MUST read! It contains three of the most perplexing mysteries in this case and with this case that is saying a lot!!!! You have the dead secret service agent story reported on day one. You have the pools of blood reported by Coley as well as others. And you have the story about a man approaching the Presidential limo on another street well before it got the the kill zone on Elm and seemed like he may have been trying to warn the President before being tackled by secret service agents. Those three topics intrigue me very much! Thank you for the work you have done on this article Vince! And thank you Joseph McBride for sharing it with us! I'm a big fan of your work on the Tippit shooting!

Let me state that I believe 100% that Oswald, at least the Oswald that was the accused assassin, absolutely did not fire a shot at General Walker. But, that being said, him taking a shot at Walker seems to fit more in line with his real politics once you weed through the official rhetoric. Especially his liberal stance on civil rights. He seemed to really care about racial equality. I could buy him being convinced by puppet masters pulling his strings behind the scenes to shoot at Walker (whether it was a planned miss or an actual attempt on his life) if the so called evidence weren't so obviously manipulated to point at Oswald long after the actual crime was committed. As far as any personal reason for him to shoot at JFK, I can't see one. I can buy him actually trying to shoot Connally before JFK although I don't believe he fired a shot at anyone that day.

Gentlemen, can we all please get back on topic? Because all of you are never going to agree or to give an inch to the other side so that makes this exercise pointless and just leads us further away from the topic at hand. Anyone have anything else to add on the Zapruder film, it's copies, the Geraldo showing, etc?

One episode of The Lone Gunman podcast they had a viewer "call-in" segment which was obviously just them doing the voices. But it was pretty hilarious cause they used the name Huge Anusworth or something to that effect as a caller. Sounds about right! That guy was a HUGE anus! They also had a caller that went by Joan's Melons on that same segment. Pretty funny stuff!

Yeah, it certainly was never "officially" identified nor even acknowledged. I think even Buddy always denied it, although I could be wrong. I believe it was Roger Craig maybe that said it was a 45 slug as he was in that picture with the two picking it up and looking at it. I know many people attack Craig but I find him to be an honest man and just a victim of circumstance. In the wrong place at the wrong time and saw too many things and wasn't afraid to tell anyone interested what he saw. I have no reason to doubt him. Many of the things he was ridiculed about and examples used to call him a xxxx (like seeing Oswald and identifying him as the one who ran down the slope and got into the Nash Rambler) have proven to be correct over time. People have probably even doubted his story about seeing the Rambler at all but you can see it in some pictures of Dealey Plaza in the aftermath of the shooting and many other witnesses have spoken of it as well. It may be nothing but I always try to take all the puzzle pieces and put them together if they fit. This one hasn't exactly fit yet but I have heard other stories of someone firing a 45 during the shooting though I didn't consider them as reliable as Craig. Seems like either Frank Sturgis said something about someone firing one or someone else said Frank Sturgis had fired one. It all can get a little foggy over the years so forgive me if I've misspoken. Other things that don't quite fit yet but are intriguing are things like the pools of blood seen by Coley at the news as he came to be known. Jean Hill, in early testimony, before her story started changing had said something about seeing the pool of red liquid as she ran up the knoll but was told that it was red soda that someone had spilled and she accepted this and dropped it. However, Coley said the camera guy with him bent down and stuck his finger in the pool and tasted it and said it was blood. I've seen pools of red soda before and what I saw could not be mistaken for blood. I just don't know what to make of this though. We do have a few people who have mentioned something about the Secret Service agents firing back at an assassin but not very many have attested to this so it's just one of the many strange things you hear about that day.

Let me ask you this question gentlemen......what do you make of the assertion that Buddy Walthers found a 45 slug when following a bullet trail in the grass? There are pictures of him and someone who claimed to be an FBI man. He bends down and picks up something. Hands it to the other guy who puts it into his pocket. That have been other reports and tales of a handgun been fired at some point in the shooting. Do any of you think a handgun was used? If so, do you think it was just fired once and missed? Do you think any of Kennedy or Connelly's wounds could have been from a 45? Or do you just dismiss this story entirely?

I'm just afraid of what may happen should he pass away before it gets released. Not sure if he has any emergy plan lined up or not. I am very worried that if this should happen and some other entity has control of it then either it will be edited or changed or even most likely never see the light of day.

If I'm not mistaken there is also a forum topic on Chappaquiddick. Although none of these others really get any play at all. May have been one on Watergate too. As far as ones that could tie back into the Kennedy assassination.

Yes Sir Michael Crane, I most definitely agree!