Sandy Larsen

Yeah, that might explain the Hispanic sentiment. Another possibility is that the Biden Administration is giving special treatment to refugees and the illegal Mexicans resent it.

I'm in Utah, which may be even more more red than Texas. But is less dangerous, with little alcohol and fewer guns. Yeah, exactly! The Hispanics may have fallen for the MAGA lies. I envy your optimism. I fear developing an ulcer before election day.

The Israelis say they bombed Rafa to kill a Hamas commander who was involved in stealing humanitarian aid and giving it to Hamas operatives. https://www.timesofisrael.com/strike-on-unrwa-facility-in-rafah-took-out-hamas-commander-who-stole-aid-says-idf/

Yep! It is a long, detailed report. Some might say the report is too mundane to be a spy's report. But a lot of reports are mundane, and back then the U.S. had little information on how Soviet factories were organized and run. Also, what about Oswald's 201 file being filed in Angleton's SIG/CI office, where the agency "spies on spies?"

Congratulations Doug, you are a confirmed target of NIAC, a propaganda organization aligned with the Iranian government. Recall that Iran is the primary supporter of the terrorist organization Hamas. The author of your post, Assal Rad, is a research fellow of National Iranian American Council (NIAC) which, according to Wikipedia, "is widely viewed as the de-facto 'Iran Lobby' due to its history of lobbying for stances on behalf of, and aligned with, the Islamic Republic of Iran." According to Iranian dissident Navid Mohebbi, as reported in the article The Mullahs' Minions: Exposing the Iran Lobby in America: Tehran has been effective at harnessing political divisions in the U.S. to its advantage by exploiting "far-left groups or isolationist right-wing groups" aligned with some of the regime's positions. The article names NIAC as one of Iran's "lobbies" that has organized a massive network of journalists, academics, public figures, cultural and religious centers, and civil society organizations in America that the Iranian regime effectively influences.

Keven, One thing you can do to give more time for forum members to read or respond to a thread is to "bump" it back to the top of the list. It's easy to do... just reply to the thread. Type the message "bump" so that people will know that's what you're doing.

RFK hated LBJ. LBJ hated RFK. Bobby Baker predicted JFK's death. LBJ was afraid he'd be dropped from the ticket, and was telling others that JFK was losing the cold war. Okay. So what's you point?

Ditto. As I was reading State Secret, I immediately quit when I saw the sentence reading, “Oswald was a spy in his own mind.” There's plenty of evidence for Oswald being a paid CIA asset. Here's just one: How do you explain the fact that Oswald just happened to get a job exactly where he need to be for the assassination? Oswald's actions were clearly controlled. He had a CIA handler. Having said that... In all honesty, I'd probably disagree with the premise of your book from the get go, based on what others have said about it. I believe that the purpose of the Mexico City shenanigans was to create the impression that Oswald was in cahoots with Cuba and Russia. That Cuba gave Oswald a $6500 down payment to have Kennedy killed. In other words, it was a CIA false flag op against Cuba and Russia designed to create a pretext for invasion of Cuba, or a first nuclear strike on the Soviet Union at a time when it was thought that the US had a nuclear advantage. The assassination was a military-sponsored CIA-planned coup d'etat.

Was it normal back then to register for the draft when in your forties? I was too young for the draft, but assume that only young men were required to register.

On the large fragment, I see three darker areas around its perimeter that might be beveled partial holes. And I see one on the medium-sized fragment. But there's no way of knowing if any of these are bullet holes. For all we know, the beveled areas could all be due to bone breakage. If there are metal fragments, that might give us a clue. Metal is very x-ray opaque, and so we might see pieces that appear to be floating in the darkness of a bevel, like in the image below. I do see a few white dots at various locations on the film. Even if one or more of these are metal, they could be tiny bullet fragments from a bullet that passed nearby but not through the skull at that point. The bottom line is there really are no definitive beveled bullet holes in the three fragments.

Robert, That's a good question. It could be that it was LBJ who instigated the CIA into planning the assassination, and thus was fully aware of it from the start. But that makes little sense because he wouldn't have approved of the plot creating a pretext for war with Cuba or Russia. That is precisely what he wanted to have covered up! Here is what I think: In the very beginning LBJ figured it was either a far-right nut job who had killed Kennedy, or a communist conspiracy. LBJ had been a Texas politician for years and never feared being killed by his own people. But he did fear being killed by communists. And so he wanted to get himself to safety. Now, later on is a different story. He learned that it did look like a communist plot. He knew that the WC 's job was to cover that up. But he continued on knowing that the evidence pointed to a communist conspiracy.

I sure hope you're right Matt. I'm a bit worried. Have you seen how much Hispanic support has switched from Biden to Trump since 2016 and 2020? My wife, who works with a lot of Hispanics (including illegals) say's that they're unhappy with the Biden Administration allowing migrants from Mexico coming in and supporting them financially. Which makes no sense to me, but that's what they say.

The triangular fragment CANNOT be the fragment that was seen in the limo, discovered by SS Agent Kinney. Being a frontal bone, it could not have escaped through the back-of-head blowout wound. The fragment found in the limo was, in fact, from the back of the head. It arrived at the autopsy too late to be put back in place. A piece of it was broken off and returned to Dealey Plaza and dropped on the grass ahead of where the limo was for the head shot so that it could be "discovered" by someone, who could be used as a "witness" for a (fake) head-shot from behind, i.e. Oswald's shot. Unfortunately for the coverup artists, it was picked up by Billy Harper who had close medical connections who would unanimously identify it as occipital bone. Which it was. In contrast to the back-of-head/Harper fragment that was created by a gunshot, the triangular frontal bone fragment was a created by Dr. Humes during a secret pre-autopsy surgery designed to make it look like the blowout wound was on the top of the head instead of the back. There was no such bevel on the triangular fragment. The docs pretended there was so they could say a bullet exited that area. Again, to support the official narrative of a head shot from behind. In contrast, the Harper fragment indeed had a beveled entrance with a metal scraping on it. As Dr. Mantik has shown, had the Harper fragment been put back in place, that beveled entrance would correspond to the entrance wound near the external occipital protuberance noted by Dr. Humes. The doctors who unanimously identified the fragment as being occipital actually held it in their hands. Dr. Angel is wrong. Dr. Mantik is right on both counts.

Even if Pat is right about Audrey Bell not being a credible witness, it makes no difference. Horne could have chosen from among numerous other Parkland doctor and nurses who said the same things Bell said. The reason Horne chose Bell is because he interviewed her personally. Because of Pat Speer's record of misrepresenting facts, I'm not going to trust his claim that researcher Kurtz interviewed people who turned out to be dead at the time. Therefore, I believe that it is just Pat's opinion that Kurtz was a liar. I believe that Pat formed that opinion because Kurtz reported things that Pat doesn't believe. Like the gaping wound on the back of Kennedy's head. (I would believe Doug Horne over Pat any day of the week.) But for the sake of argument, suppose that Pat is correct about Kurtz and his report on what Dr. Canada said, about the top of Kennedy's head being intact at Bethesda. Horne would still have the statements of Tom Robinson and Dr. Ebersole, which corroborate one another and say the same thing as what Kurtz claims Dr. Canada said. To that, add the fact that Horne doesn't even need the words of these two witnesses... we know from the ~20 witnesses at Parkland Hospital that the top of Kennedy's head was intact before the pre-autopsy surgery I don't have time to critique this Speer argument. But I'll bet it is just another of his misrepresentation of the facts. I'm quite certain that Horne knows what he's talking about. Horne is right about the triangular frontal bone being a product of the pre-autopsy surgery. There was no way for such a fragment to escape through the back-of-head gaping wound. The skull fragment that was brought in later came from the back of the head, not the top.

Dr. Aguilar throws Doug Horne under the bus in his Kennedys & King review of the Paramount Plus documentary, JFK: What the Doctors Saw. I have a good deal of respect for Dr. Aguilar. But in my opinion, what he says about Horne's pre-autopsy surgery theory, he does so out of ignorance. I don't think Dr. Aguilar truly understands the problems his position creates. If he does, then he just sweeps them under the rug like a good lone nutter would. (I've seen numerous cases of forum members dismissing theories only because -- IMO -- they haven't studied the problem. It's frustrating.)

Or it proves that the arrest of Oswald made their plan to blame Castro untenable. Good point. I am going to add that possibility to my working theory.

There is good reason for LBJ to believe that the assassination was an international communist plot, and that Castro was intimately involved. Those of us who have studied the Lopez Report and related material know that the earliest indications after the assassination were that the Cubans and Russians had arranged with Oswald to have JFK killed. Oswald was (supposedly) given a $6500 down payment to get the killing done. That's the reason that Mexican Consulate employee Sylvia Duran and several of her acquaintances were arrested right away and questioned. Of course, the truth is that it was all a CIA false flag operation designed to have the Cubans/Russians blamed, thereby creating a pretext for Cuban invasion or a first nuclear strike on the Soviet Union at a time when it was thought that the Americans had the nuclear advantage. Clearly the military generals were the instigators of the CIA's plan. The fact that Harriman and Bundy were against the idea of the assassination being a communist plot proves that they were NOT the instigators of the CIA's plot. Same thing with Johnson. The military generals were. (Though Harriman and Bundy learned of the plot immediately after the assassination.) The following shows why LBJ thought it was a communist plot. At 1:40 on 29th November, Hoover told LBJ on the telephone: "This angle in Mexico is giving us a great deal of trouble because the story there is of this man Oswald getting $6,500 from the Cuban embassy and then coming back to this country with it. We're not able to prove that fact... Now the Mexican police have again arrested this woman Duran, who is a member of the Cuban embassy... and we're going to confront her with the original informant, who saw the money pass, so he says, and we're also going to put the lie detector test on him." There are numerous other indications of a (CIA faked) international commie plot. For example, (faked) intercepted mail from Castro to Oswald encouraging him to kill Kennedy. And the (faked) intercepted letter from Oswald to the Russian Embassy in Washington where he says that he conducted business with (KGB assassinations chief) Kostin/Kostikov.

Also, for those who missed it: I, like Ron, wouldn't move such a thread as long as it remains relevant and civil. As for deleting a thread... it's highly unlikely I would ever do that. The only things I've ever deleted were individual posts that are pretty bad.

I, like Ron, wouldn't move such a thread as long as it remains relevant and civil. As for deleting a thread... it's highly unlikely I would ever do that. The only things I've ever deleted were individual posts that are pretty bad.

Forum members shouldn't dwell on forum policies regarding contemporary politics. Because there is no penalty attached to talking politics. If a discussion does happen to take place, I don't think any mod is going to do anything about it as long as it is relevant to the JFK assassination and as long a pejorative isn't used against any particular politician or political party. The worst that could happen is that a mod will ask the participants to stop.

You can make comments on contemporary actions as long as they are relevant to the JFK assassination. Even if the actions are done by politicians. What you can't do is have a political discussion involving contemporary politicians. (Making a succinct comment about a politician is okay because it is not a discussion.)

A big part of Pat's problem is that he is easily suckered into believing official narrative created by the coverup artists.

Keven, Thanks for posting that! It's nice to know that I'm not the only researcher who speculates that the fragment was returned to Dealey Plaza for the purpose of creating evidence of the fatal shot being from behind. The only difference between my and Larry Rivera's hypotheses is that he believes that the Harper fragment constituted the whole fragment picked up by the child, whereas I believe that the Harper fragment was a piece broken off from the whole fragment. The reasons I believe that just a broken-off piece of the fragment was sent back are these: There were multiple witnesses who described the BOH wound as being very large... for example, "the back of his head was gone." (IMO, those who saw a substantially smaller hole did so because flaps of remaining scalp covered up much of the huge skull hole.) SS Agent Sam Kinney, who actually held and studied the fragment in the C-130 cargo plane while flying back to Washington, said it reminded him of a clay pot. Well the Harper fragment, IMO, wouldn't remind one of a clay pot. But a larger fragment, one more round in shape and more concave, would.