Joe Bauer

Yes Ron, it is odd to see " one" issue year date different than every other one on that entire list. Guess it's just another oddity to add to the already huge stack of other's regards Oswald.

Denny, exactly. There are so many incongruous and illogical actions, words, findings, time lines and other facts and testimonies ( usually involving Oswald more so than Marina, Ruby and others ) that contradict or make no sense that the whole thing together often becomes a murky mind twisting mess. If this state of illogical and confusing contradictions is the result of a planned truth obfuscating format, I'd say the planners were incredibly successful, almost genius. Sometimes I am stopped just by pondering the scenario which says Oswald did the shooting of JFK and then Tippit and then tried to shoot and kill DPD officer Nick McDonald in the Texas Theater...knowing that if he was successful in killing McDonald it would have been a last gasp suicide mission initiating a full bore fusilage firing toward him by the other officers present. What a desperate murder/suicide mad run! If Oswald really blew JFK's head apart inches from his young wife's face, then just 45 minutes later pumped more bullets up close into Tippit than necessary to kill him and then aggressively tried to blow a hole into officer McDonald in the Texas Theater just one half hour after over-wasting Tippit ... what does one make of Oswald's brutal murder spree and mental state? The morning of 11,22,1963 Oswald seems calm with Buell Wesley Frazier on his way to work. He doesn't show any anxious behavior during his morning work hours according to those co-workers who say they saw him that morning, and he casually walks ( no mention of his running ) away from the TXSBD and catches a bus and then departs the bus and hails a cab to his apartment after the motorcade shooting chaos. He changes clothes there and apparently picked up his pistol. Within minutes of walking away from his rooming house, Oswald is blasting 4 bullets into Tippit and minutes later life and death battling with DPD officers in the Texas Theater. I am always wondering ( again if this scenario as described by the WC is true ) about the sheer brutality of Oswald's wildly desperate actions that day. It would take someone seriously pathologically violent and murderous to perform the deeds assigned to Oswald that day. Was Oswald this cold blooded and violent? Did his personal history reflect this? Oswald was the husband of a young bride. He was the father of two babies. He loved his children. He didn't lose his cool after being physically assaulted by Carlos Bringuier in New Orleans just months before 11,22,1963. Whoever lined up a rifle shot and was willing to blast JFK's head and brains to bloody bits just inches from his wife's face...had to have a true murderer mentality, if not a professional hit man one. To be able to cut off the normal empathetic feelings of common bond humanity by brutally murdering someone who is not immediately threatening you takes the mind of a cold blooded killer. Was Oswald this stone cold killer? Had he ever killed anyone before JFK? Blew a hole in their head when they were not an immediate threat to him personally? I know, the Walker attempt will be used to paint Oswald this way. Could Oswald have been programmed to be this brutally violent after a lifetime of not being this way? Hard to believe Oswald was willing to ruin his children's lives with the actions he took that day. He knew that they might have to grow up and live with the taunting of their being the children of a beloved world leader murderer. He was willing to have them suffer like this? Roscoe White allegedly confessed in private to his church pastor that he had killed men in his life. Both on foreign soil and here in the states. White "was" a trained assassin if this confessional story was true. But was Oswald one as well? If Oswald killed Tippit, he must have decided that he was going to be killed himself at any minute imo. Same with DPD officer Nick McDonald. If Oswald hadn't been shot/lynched in the DPD basement less than two days later, maybe some expert interrogators could have eventually learned the truth about his murder spree and why he was so motivated to kill that afternoon. But, it's the brutality of Oswald in this killing spree scenario on 11,22,1963 that throws me. It was so extreme. Like he had completely snapped! BLIND RAGE type stuff. Yet, Oswald's demeanor once under arrest and under questioning was always described as noticeably calm. He did get angry, defiant and offended in tone at times, but nothing like someone who was out of their mind with killing rage. Just more conflicting things to ponder regards Oswald and others in this at times surreal story.

deleted

Oswald's quick murder right inside the DPD building just two days after 11,22,1963 was a huge relief to many. A question worth contemplating ... a relief from what? They got rid of JFK, and less than 48 hours later they got rid of his national media touted lone nut killer. One of the most efficient high level murder "Cased Closed" conclusions ever.

Deleted

Seeing video interviews of people like Leavelle or anyone else directly involved in Oswald's completely failed security ( and including those of Dallas D.A. Henry Wade ) where they are presented in a kind of quaint old man way, sharing personal "right there" recollections and even funny side stories ( with shared laughter ) will always be very unsettling to me. Losing the most important criminal suspect in American history while Oswald was literally handcuffed to his DPD police security and right inside the DPD building is a loss not just impossibly incongruous and highly suspicious but also so monumentally important in it's entire society impacting truth and trust damaging way, it's a tragedy on an epic scale almost beyond any historical equivalent to compare it to. A truly honest and accurate full front page American newspaper headline on 11,25, 1963 should have read ... "DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT OSWALD SECURITY FAILURE DESTROYS JFK TRUTH INVESTIGATION." That it did. Joe McBride has often recollected how he found one area of the JFK assassination story and researched the Hell out of it. That this kind of "one area" focus can often produce more distinct, understandable and pertinent facts than perhaps trying to cover too many areas of the event in one full swoop. If there is a book focusing solely on the Oswald lynching while in 1963 DPD custody please send me the title. Because of the almost incomprehensible loss to our society as a result, I find it almost unbelievable that this single story hasn't garnered such an effort. How it came to be. Who were the principle parties? Were they directed and under orders by higher up's including perhaps LBJ himself? How serious were the battles over security measures? Why was the more responsible security advice ignored and over-ruled? I've shared my opinion that everyone in the DPD involved in ignoring the most simple and obvious security advice regards protecting Oswald both in custody and his transfer movements and instead publicly announcing such, doing so in the day time hours and allowing a press presence bordering on chaos with scores of frantically shouting, body bumping camera men shoving their cameras literally up into Oswald's closest security handler's crotch, should have been fired and the subjects of a separate investigation into Oswald's worst case scenario security failure...murdered! Inside the DPD building basement on the morning of 11,24,1963 was the scene of two murders ... that of Lee Harvey Oswald ... and also the singularly best chance at knowing the real truth behind the murder of JFK. Our most sanctioned history books should correctly state the truth of Lee Harvey Oswald's murder in DPD custody as one of the most costly American society effecting security failures ever.

Always wondered why Ferrie felt he had to take himself out in the nude. Couldn't he at least have left on his briefs to save his first responding body attendants the trauma of seeing his disturbingly odd hairlessness? Did Ferrie have a last will and testament? Wonder who got his wigs and fake eye brow make up kit and any other weird items he left behind? They would make for some fascinating social party conversation. And I must say that I can't help think of David Ferrie ( or Groucho Marx ) every time I see Roger Stone with his own exaggerated wide arc, black dyed eyebrows. Especially in such stark contrast to Stone's completely white hair. Stone and Ferrie also share a weird body reputation. Ferrie's body was completely hairless, Stone's is adorned with a huge entire back covering Nixon tattoo.

How frustrating it is to read about something so explosive as what this Dallas based commercial photographic processor person Robert Hester and his wife have supposedly claimed, and yet never knowing, for sure, whether it is true or not.

When I was attending high school waaay back in the late 1960's, we had classes such as "Social Studies," "Civics" and "History" where young people could learn about our society's and country's political and social history right up to real time issues in these areas. We had art classes, music classes including actual singing and a full fledged band. P.E. and afternoon sports was a serious part of everyday high school life. We had many beginning trade classes such as metal shop, wood, auto, electric, even mechanical drawing. Today most of these areas of instruction have been eliminated or cut back so drastically with only the core areas of instruction ( reading, math, science ) left remaining. With the social studies area of high school so diminished, our young people never have a forum to learn about and discuss issues such as the ones we feel are so important here. Our own kids never showed any interest in our boomer generation history, especially the political history aspects. Mostly, they have been focused on how to make enough money just to survive financially ( student loan debt hangs like a dark depressing cloud over everything ) and not fall into being dependent on their parents into their thirties or even becoming homeless. It seems the dream of just being independent financially takes up most of their mental thoughts and energy. Things like the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK and who perpetrated them and why are the farthest thoughts in their minds.

How about a star studded "WHO REALLY KILLED JFK, RFK and MLK" or "JFK,RFK, MLK WE STILL CARE" TELETHON ? A full one or two day event shown on public television stations nationwide? Inter-spliced with famous video scenes, speeches and personal experience memorials to these three leaders? Ask any major celebrity who still cares about these three tragic losses to appear and put in their two cents. Singers could perform songs that connect to these three popular leaders. Well known conspiracy writers and researchers could share their conclusions. Viewing audience members could be asked to donate to a fund supporting a regular yearly national remembrance and presentation venue of these historical events. One last big national audience performance by Mort Sahl?

Yes, quality major films always reignite more interest. I know that almost every year, there is a major film done with the Jewish holocaust under the Nazis as a main backdrop and these keep this tragedy in the minds of new generations. I believe it will take 2 to 3 major budget films done by great directors and with all-star casts to reignite interest in the JFK event in the minds of our younger people. We have said this here on this forum many, many times..but a big budget film on Dorothy Kilgallen , her remarkable, high achieving and celebrity glamorous life and suspicious death with connections to her JFK/Oswald/Jack Ruby investigation would be a fine first film for this purpose. Perhaps a new film centered on Mark Lane, Abe Bolden or even a new film on Jim Garrison might help. Otherwise, only some death bed confession by someone close to the main suspects may spur more interest.

Denny, I just finished listening to the first 25 minutes of the Mary Farrell interview. I have to finish listening to the entire interview in half hour intervals throughout today when I can find time to do so in between my daily duties. Ms. Ferrell reminds me of Mae Brussell in her incredible commitment to research of the JFK assassination. Just an incredible effort and feat on both of their parts. These two women were fierce in this endeavor. They uncovered so much information it would be like taking on a graduate masters degree level course of study to examine even much of it in a serious and substantial way. I will never come close to seeing and reading everything they discovered and documented, but in just short bursts of review, what I see is that the more they discovered, uncovered and reported, the more their information dots and puzzle pieces begin to connect and fit together to reveal a clearer picture of truths regarding not just the JFK event specifically, but many other purposely hidden ones as well. However, I do not agree with Mary Ferrell's assessment on the RFK assassination nor her negative take on Jim Garrison's obsession with the CIA even though she later apologized to Garrison when she discovered he was right about Clay Shaw in this regards.

Great interview of Officer M.N. McDonald. A few thoughts that I will add too later on. I'm struck by the life and death desperateness of Oswald when McDonald physically confronted him in his theater seat. Oswald punches McDonald in his face and then draws his pistol and actually tries to shoot and kill McDonald on the spot. Oswald must have known that doing so would have resulted in his being shot and killed immediately by the other officers present. It was a suicidal mind set on Oswald's part. Oswald barely escaped this fate, partly because McDonald somehow restrained himself from shooting Oswald during the scuffle even while he ( officer McDonald ) had his gun pressed right against Oswald's mid-section. Oswald was acting so violently and knowing any second he would probably be blown away. Oswald was clearly ready and expecting to die right then and there. Wonder why he went into this extreme all out kill and be killed mode? It was suicidal madness. McDonald casually admits that Captain Fritz never took notes or had a tape recorder or stenographer present during his interrogations of suspected criminals. McDonald said this was Fritz's style forever. Mind blowing. Many times interrogation tapes can actually help suspects if they are being interrogated improperly or illegally. Not keeping any records of these interrogations is a violation of these suspects rights in many ways. An interrogator could abuse those rights under those circumstances. McDonald said the DPD was the most honest of any big city police force "in the world." Wonder if he felt that way in their involvement in the trial prosecution of blacks? McDonald said he used to frequent Ruby's clubs and even visit with Ruby in a local coffee shop when out of uniform. Kind of a red flag there in the area of individual character and closeness to Ruby if you ask me.

Just embarrassing? The DPD had the most important criminal suspect in American history right in the palm of their custody hand. And they presented him wide open, with just two escorts at his side, right inside their own building to hit man Jack Ruby ... here you go Jack! Barney Fife would have considered a tighter Oswald transport security plan than the DPD. Lee Harvey Oswald was alive, unhurt and could have changed the course of our history had he been allowed to live and perhaps at some point revealed what he knew about the JFK assassination. Oswald's security should have been on a level so beyond the circus created by announcing his movements and location during broad daylight to the general public ( and Jack Ruby ) and parading him within feet of crowds of reporters who weren't even checked out properly. Armed, Mafia connected strip joint owner Ruby comes and goes unchecked in the crazy jammed packed DPD corridor crowd all Friday night? And he then slithers into the supposedly "press only" DPD basement crowd Sunday morning unchecked as well? The impact of that worst case scenario of Oswald's security ( his murder right inside the DPD building ) cannot be adequately quantified. Oswald's murder while he was "literally in the hands of his police protectors" did more damage to our society in so many areas that have never been truly acknowledged...especially in our trust of our government and government leaders at the highest levels, and that to this day still exists. The public announcing and parading security plan actions of the DPD regards protecting Lee Harvey Oswald were beyond mere negligence to a preposterous degree. They were crazily/highly suspicious illogical considering the unprecedented importance of protecting the most threatened criminal suspect in America's history and "the one person" who could have best provided us with the truth regarding the killing of JFK. What an unfathomable tragedy. The federal police pulled guns to get JFK's body quickly out of Dallas and LBJ and Hoover immediately ordered the transfer of the presidential limo and much other important evidence back to Washington D.C. But they left behind the most important piece of evidence in the assassination of JFK to remain in the hands of the totally incompetent, generally racist, JFK hating and cop killer revenge mentality DPD? Oswald couldn't have met a worse fate had he been turned over to a madly worked up public street demonstrating lynch mob! Considering Oswald's super importance, he should have been taken immediately out of the hands of the nonsensical press accommodating, good-ole-boy DPD and sequestered at a federal military property where his physical protection could be guaranteed. Listening to DPD detective Leavelle recount his Oswald security experience in his last years and with the same attitude he has expressed from the beginning of this event, one can clearly see that he has never comprehended at all the true national and world historical impact of his department's total failure in the most important security responsibility they were ever assigned. The protection of the most important criminal suspect in America's history and who could have provided our society with the truth regards JFK's murder...Lee Harvey Oswald. Leavell's lucky he and the entire lot of DPD department heads weren't fired or even criminally charged for the biggest and most important society damaging security failure in American history.

Sylvia Odio's Oswald visit story is one of the most compelling and important in the entire affair.

Noticed when Law asked Leavelle whether he had any regrets about the historical event he was involved in...Leavelle stammered and "kind of" expressed a little remorse regards the Oswald security situation in the DPD basement that day. Leavelle says the basement should have been cleared completely of anyone besides the DPD. Leavelle knew the super crowded basement area allowed for Ruby to be in there to kill Oswald. Law didn't follow up and ask Leavelle who was responsible for that security decision mistake and whether there were concerned suggestions made to those in charge of Oswald's security to move Oswald without announcing when, without press right there and during the night? Notice also Leavelle still gets a sadistic kick out of telling how he kicked the living $XXX out of a reporter who dared stick a camera up between his legs when he was physically moving Oswald from one office to another. Leavelle boastingly chuckled he kicked this guy so hard he flew across the room...and how this reporter didn't mess with him no more after that. Leavelle never made me feel like he was some kindly old man in his later years versus the mean, tough and probably racist cookie he was during his DPD career. And I have always wondered, did Leavelle really say in a recorded interview something to the effect that JFK's killing wasn't any more important to him than just another ni##er killing? Versus fellow police officer Tippit's...now THERE'S a killing worthy of his deepest personal concern.

Danny, the Sylvia Odio - Oswald visit incident and her sworn testimony detailing this was so incriminating to the official WC non-conspiracy line, they basically ignored her story. I found her to be truthful and sincere as I am sure millions of others did also. Put Sylvia Odio in front of a jury back then and I am sure they would have reached the same conclusion. The JFK assassination story is so full of conspiracy suggesting testimony and documented factual peripheral events that involve the main characters like Ruby and Oswald and Marina, etc. you cannot help but logically consider a conspiracy by the sheer weight and number of these. Just off the top of one's head you can come up with a dozen seriously WC conflicting testimonies and events that make up just a small part of the mountain of evidence ( both circumstantial and direct ) suggesting ...shouting ... CONSPIRACY! The Sylvia Odio story. The WC decision to believe mentally addled and Mafia connected Jack Ruby over mentally together and highly regarded journalist Seth Kantor regards Ruby being at Parkland hospital when JFK was being treated there ( versus Ruby denying this ) is a mind blowing corruption of the official finding record. The Raleigh, North Carolina call attempt to a John Hurt by Oswald from the DPD jail, which clearly happened, is another serious cog in the official finding conclusion machinery. The Rose Cheramie / Louisiana state police officer Francis Fruge story ( see picture of Fruge below) is yet another story that suggest conspiracy and one must remember that everything else Cheramie related to Officer Fruge turned out to be true, such as the narcotics dealing ring connection, the names of her transporters from Florida to Texas, the fight in the Silver Slipper club ( verified by the club owner who remembered the incident and even the names of the two men involved ) her background as a drug runner helper and prostitution worker. She knew Jack Ruby and worked in his club briefly. She did have a baby in Texas whose custody she lost. The call to the DPD dispatcher the night before Oswald was killed imploring him to relay the message that " they were going to kill Oswald" the next morning when he was being transported out of the jail building. And the dispatcher recognizing this caller as Jack Ruby as he personally knew Ruby. Ruby's note passed to Sheriff Al Maddox proclaiming the JFK assassination was a conspiracy. The Earlene Robert's story of a DPD car coming to the front of her rooming house and honking twice while Oswald was inside changing clothes. The Julia Ann Mercer sworn affidavit story. The Joseph Milteer story. The Abraham W. Bolden story. The Carolyn Walther story. The Mark Lane interview of former Jack Ruby employee Nancy Hamilton. How about the tapped phone line recording of Michael Paine telling his wife Ruth the day of the assassination ... "we know who's responsible" ? It just goes on and on and on like this. The response from the official investigating bodies regarding all these testimonies are always the same. These people are ALL attention seeking XXXXX or just hugely mistaken or mentally ill. All their stories are just wrong to a whacky degree. But we all know this can never be the case regards everyone of these witnesses. And never forget Walter Cronkite's one-on-one interview of LBJ before LBJ died, where Johnson himself says ... " I cannot honestly say I have been completely relieved that there might have been international connections" regards JFK's murder. My God! What more does one need to hear beyond " Lyndon Johnson's own words" to let go of the ridiculous "lone gunman" WC conclusion? Johnson HIMSELF is suggesting a conspiracy! One has to continually battle their own common sense and logic to keep believing there was no conspiracy in the JFK assassination. Millions of people still to this day believe the JFK event was a conspiracy. They have no logical choice. Just a cursory examination of even the most commonly reported evidence and testimony forces you to this conclusion. 2:44 lyndon johnson speech documentary by walter cronkite !!! President Lyndon Johnson gives an interview in September 1969 with Walter Cronkite about his thoughts on the Warren ...

And of course the question of who benefited "the most" from JFK's killing? LBJ, big oil, certain military contract corporations and the small group who owned the majority interests in them, Hoover, The Mafia. Or was this revenge for those who blamed JFK for the Bay Of Pigs? Segregationists hate? Ultra Right Wing who felt JFK was a communist agent. General Walker seeking revenge for his forced commitment into a mental institution?

An idea regarding a possible first question to consider about the JFK assassination: WHO BENEFITED THE MOST BY RUBY KILLING OSWALD? If it was a Russian plot, was Jack Ruby working for them in eliminating Oswald just two days after JFK, thereby keeping Oswald from breaking down and revealing this truth? If Oswald was doing this for Castro, again, Ruby did Castro a favor in eliminating someone who could have broken down and revealed their involvement. If our highest military, political and secret agency leaders TRULY BELIEVED ( with proof ) the Russians (or Castro) were behind JFK's assassination ( that they would actually take our President out-on our own soil!) do you really think they would allow this act of war to go unpunished without like-minded retribution? We didn't do anything more to those two regimes after JFK was slaughtered than our normal adversarial relationships before the assassination. That non-response tells me the Russians and Castro were not the guilty parties here. If our highest authorities were convinced Castro was behind the JFK murder, they would have gone in with 200,000 troops and a massive armor attack and wiped Castro out within 3 months.

The worst possible scenario ( life and death fight for survival ) for LBJ, Hoover, Jimmy Hoffa and the entire Mafia nationwide would have been an RFK presidency. Eliminating RFK was probably the highest priority necessity of their entire lives and history. RFK was the final and most dangerous threat of all ( beyond even JFK and MLK ) to these massively corrupt groups and individuals. Amazing the level of risky public exposure openness taken by RFK and his people when they had to know how murderous these devilish corrupt forces were.

What did you think of Corsi's book on the JFK assassination Jim? Could you provide me a link to your review? Thanks. Any reason why you didn't critique Roger Stone's book on the assassination? It's suspiciously curious to me that you have Bugliosi writing a book supporting the Warren Commission and their final report and conclusion, and trashing "conspiracy" books, their writers and their believers as "conspiracy" nutcases. Then Bugliosi writes another book about the 2,000 presidential election and Florida vote count stoppage by the Supreme Court "The Betrayal Of America" that suggests a conspiracy to undermine our democratic voting process that borders on treason! And Bugliosi didn't buy the RFK death finding final report? He's supporting the conspiracy angle of that case? What an illogically conflicting configuration of conspiracy belief tenets. Guess there's worthy conspiracies that don't automatically make one a nutcase if they believe them versus unworthy ones? Jerome Corsi writes book after book promoting conspiracies. Everyone casting Democratic party and leftist political leaders and their followers as the boogie man...but then he writes one on the JFK assassination that goes completely against his entire career left versus right political beliefs? Roger Stone same thing? Did these writers take on these obviously incongruous literary efforts because they simply felt a book on the JFK assassination was just a guaranteed book selling gold mine too easy and good to pass up? If so, how disingenuous. Watched an interview of Jerome Corsi on MSNBC the other day where he was defending his innocence and promoting his truth telling image to a national audience regards the Mueller investigation by planting specific points of selective facts in his presentation. He has always seemed to me to be a very suspiciously motivated and financed person in the world of political writing. And he said something in this interview that seemed particularly ominous. He mentioned his "training" in some agency capacity regards how to evaluate and deal with political issues? Need to pull this interview up again to quote him directly.

I've viewed the Buzzsaw interview three times in the last couple of years. With Roger Stone being criminally charged now it makes the interview even more interesting. I noticed Jim Di refrained from commenting at all ( but with an eye roll? ) when the subject of Judyth Vary Baker came up, as well as E. Howard Hunt's end of life "LBJ did it" confession. Roger Stone comes across as a reasonable, calm and even nice guy to a point. But still, there is something off about Stone imo. Dual personalities maybe? Here is a guy who has been performing seriously unethical political "dirty tricks" for decades and for, it seems, anyone who will pay him the highest amount of money to do so. He's an amoral mercenary in this regards. I don't know how much money Stone, or Corsi, or O'Reilly or Stephen King, or even Bugliosi or Jessie Ventura made for their JFK event books, but the subject seems an almost guaranteed book advance gold mine for people who already have a famous name. Didn't O'Reilly's sell a million copies? Jim Di, I am sure you critiqued Stone and Corsi's JFK event books Did you grade them highly? And as I have mentioned many times, I always totally agree about LBJ being much more corrupt than any writer has ever described. To a murderous degree. I believe Madeline Brown's recollection of LBJ angrily "growling" into her ear the night of 11,21,1963..."after tomorrow those G.D.Kennedy's will never embarrass me again. That's no threat, that's a promise." Speaking of corruption of our highest leaders; ' Hoover? Please. Nixon gets a $500,000 bribe and pardon's Jimmy Hoffa? The Mafia's guy Spiro Agnew is placed on the Nixon ticket? Robert Maheu? Donald Nixon?

Regards the mention of "Miguel Cruz" in Garrison's papers and his possible involvement with Oswald during the time Oswald was in N.O. and doing his political leaflet hand out work there, we do know that "Rafael Cruz Sr." had indeed moved to New Orleans just months before Oswald's activities. Rafael Cruz Sr. proudly details in his life recollections his noticeable political activism work in Texas right up to the time he moved to N.O. This included speaking to groups in public forums about his experiences in and views on Cuba during Batista's time and after Castro took over. But in searching Rafael Cruz Sr.'s Bio info I could never find any mention of his political ( or personal ) life and Cuba issue political activity work in N.O. It's a black hole in his memoirs. It's as if Cruz Sr. completely stopped any of this as soon as he arrived in N.O.. Which I find highly unlikely and suspicious. New Orleans was perhaps the first or second hottest hot bed of Cuban resistance activity ( Miami the other ) and Cruz being already well known as an outspoken anti-Castro activist in Texas, surely immediately knew some of the more important figures in the N.O. Cuban community ( Carlos Bringuier especially ) and should have been immediately known by them as well. How could anti-Castro Cuban activist Cruz Sr. live in a city like New Orleans at that time and not "at least" have kept up with his fellow activists there or had some contact with them to some degree? And Cruz Sr. surely must have known about the Bringuier/Oswald leaflet confrontation as it made the local newspaper headlines and was even reported on N.O. radio and TV.! Supposedly dropping immediately and completely out of the highly energized, exiled expatriate Cuban activity world in New Orleans seems totally out of character and illogical for a man so dedicated and committed to this cause back in Texas which wasn't as energized and involved as New Orleans was at that time. Rafael Cruz Sr. will not even go there when asked about his time in New Orleans and the black hole in his biography regards this. I would like to ask Cruz Sr. if he kept up at all on the hot and heavy Cuban political scene in New Orleans while he was there and if not...why not ... contrary to his much bragged about political activism in Texas just before moving to N.O.? And also ask him if he was aware of the Oswald/Bringuier angry confrontation affair in downtown N.O. and what he made of it and Oswald? I'm sure Rafael Cruz Sr. will never answer those questions. I have to believe Cruz Sr. had some contact and interaction with his fellow Cuban expatriates during Oswald's and his mutual time in New Orleans. Cruz's political activism history right up to N.O. suggests he should have been involved with many things Cuban there and perhaps even including some connection to Oswald if only in a curious interest capacity. Rafael Cruz Sr. has a reputation of kind of a flim-flam man. So his complete silence and/or denials about anything nefarious on his part politically during his time in New Orleans when Oswald was doing his thing there...is justifiably suspect. IMO. Oh, and perhaps Rafael Cruz Sr, occasionally used the alias first name " Miguel" back then. He was involved in covert work at various times of his life, at least in Batista times. In the well known photo of Oswald handing out leaflets in N.O. in 1963 with another young man also handing out these alongside Oswald, and that has been rumored to be Rafael Cruz Sr. ( as seen at the 4:27 mark in Barbour's video above ) this person does indeed resemble Rafael Cruz Sr. relative to the published pics of Cruz Sr. as a young man. Thin build, head and forehead shape and height, facial features, hair line, hair color, length, style, ear shape, size and their sticking out distance from the head. Oswald and the other leaflet holding man look about the same age ( Cruz Sr. was born the same year as Oswald - 1939 ) and they are dressed exactly the same way. One cannot argue convincingly that the other man in this photo with Oswald looks nothing like Rafael Cruz Sr. at that age.

Stone definitely seems like the kind of person who carries a gun or some other self-defense weapon on him at all times.

Realized this post was totally out of context with the original thread.