Joe Bauer

You think?

EXACTLY!

Did the lady on the bus say Oswald was carrying a jacket with him? Oswald simply left the jacket Frazier stated he was wearing that morning at the TXSBD? Someone must have found Oswald's left behind jacket later...yes? And of course many Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses never came forward. Out of fear and not wanting to go through the stressful process of police interviews and maybe even hounding by the press?

A couple of questions: You say Oswald left his jacket at the TSCBD when he left to go back to his room? "A couple of problems with your timeline. We have footage of a lot of Oswald's co-workers in the aftermath of the shooting. It appears they all put their shirts back on at lunch. Oswald undoubtedly came down for lunch. So he would have put his shirt back on at that time. He couldn't have put it on later because he never returned to the domino room after encountering Baker and Truly. >>>>> He did leave his jacket there, after all. <<<<< So he must have put it on when he first came down at lunch...when he spoke with Piper. " Did Buell Wesley Frazier testify that when he took Oswald to their workplace that morning, that Oswald was wearing a jacket? Or, was Oswald simply wearing a shirt and no jacket? Just read the following WC testimony of Wesley Frazier: Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in. Wasn't it nippy cold that morning? Maybe even drizzly overcast grey? If Oswald was wearing a jacket to work and left without it, was it found later in the TXSCB? Also, Oswald kept another jacket back in his room? Another short waisted ( Eisenhower) style one? And Oswald was wearing this jacket when he supposedly shot Tippet? Then Oswald tosses the jacket as he runs away from the shooting scene? One assumes he tossed the jacket thinking he would be too easily noticed by the cops if he wore this? Knowing that witnesses to him shooting Tippit would have seen him in the jacket and tell the police this in their description of the shooter? The tossed jacket is soon found by the police however? Did the cuff sleeves of the jacket show gun powder residue? After firing a revolver 4 times with a hand next to the sleeve, you would think there would be some...yes?

Just to add more eyewitness testimony for comparative perspective: Arnold Rowland Warren Commission testimony: Mr. SPECTER - What, if anything, did you observe as to the clothes he was wearing?Mr. ROWLAND - He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway, and then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt under this, at least this is what it appeared to be. He had on dark slacks or blue jeans, I couldn't tell from that I didn't see but a small portion.Mr. SPECTER - You say you only saw a small portion of what?Mr. ROWLAND - Of his pants from his waist down. Carolyn Walther 12,05,1963 FBI report: "Shortly after this, a man in the crowd across the street to the west of where she was standing apparently had an epileptic seizure, and an ambulance came by and took the man away. Shortly after the ambulance left, she looked back towards the TSBD Building and saw a man standing on either the fourth or fifth floors, of the window on the south side of the building, which faces toward Elm Street. This man had the window open and was standing up leaning out the window with both his hands extended outside the window ledge. In his hands, this man was holding a rifle with the barrel pointed downward, and the man was looking south on Houston Street. The man was wearing a white shirt and had blond or light brown hair."

Jack Ruby F***** every citizen of the United States when he whacked the only person that could have revealed the truth about who murdered their president. Oswald was all we had! But, he was everything! Ruby blew it all away, the entire case, the truth, when he blew away Oswald. Thanks a lot...."Sparky!" Jack Ruby will forever be known as the man who shot the most important truth revealing person in American history. What an absolute worst American damage causing legacy to leave forever. The biggest fool in American history? And the DPD in November, 1963 were totally to blame for this truth destroying tragedy to happen. They really were. The DPD had Oswald in the palm of their hand. Alive and well! And they ignored advice from so many, even in their own ranks, not to risk Oswald's life ( Oswald was the most threatened criminal suspect in American history!) by transferring him in broad daylight, with advance notice to the public regards when and where and having a blinding light crowd of pushing shoving press people within feet of Oswald just as he was being led to his transport vehicle. AND only having two security escorts "at his sides" instead of surrounding him completely to shield him from a leaping inches away gut shot attack like Ruby's? The national media could have, should have blared headlines of outrage over Oswald's death in the hands of the DPD and by the gun of a local strip joint owner who claimed he was avenging Jackie Kennedy's honor, dignity and saving her from a trial of Oswald. To this day I am surprised that never happened.

I thought I read that Ferrie's voice was higher pitched than the one we hear on this tape?

So, you are inferring that Oswald's claim of being a patsy was specifically referring to the DPD only, choosing him as one because of his having lived in the Soviet Union? Or, could there be another nefarious force Oswald was referring to who he felt was behind making him the patsy besides the DPD? "I'm just a patsy." Damn...if only Oswald hadn't shouted out this loaded with intrigue claim to the world press. The term "patsy" is not typically one perp's use to defend their innocence. It is a loaded term. With all kinds of suspicion arousing interpretations.

So, the pamphlets with the Camp Street address are bogus? Did Joe Newbrough have any comments about even the possibility that Oswald may have had some contact with Banister or ever been in the building in anyway? Same with ever seeing David Ferry with Banister? In Garrison's book "On The Trail Of The Assassins" he cites Banister's part time investigator Jack Martin as saying he saw Oswald among the "like a circus" strange people crowd coming and going to and from Banister's offices. Who here believes Jack Martin said this to Garrison?

Hosty made this "chuckling" WC testimony Oswald truth hiding admission in a later interview. I can't remember where to find the tape. Yet it is out there. I've viewed it many times. Hosty was more afraid of losing his job and pension than not being totally truthful to the Warren Commission. Think how much the American people were kept from important JFK/Oswald/Ruby truths by many others protecting their jobs and pensions over telling everything they knew? Hosty always came across to me as kind of a bumbling low level agent. He's sitting in a downtown Dallas Diner for lunch while JFK was being cut down in Dealey Plaza?

I believe what you say about Oswald in New Orleans. If true, my goodness, how important is this fact in knowing the full truth about Oswald? And to the rest of the JFK story regards Oswald? Dallas FBI agent James Hosty ( "Assignment Oswald" author ) actually chuckled when years after his initial Warren Commission testimony he was asked why he didn't tell the committee about his being ordered by his boss to destroy at least one document his office held about Oswald. And his doing so. His answer to the question why he didn't mention this to the committee was "I wasn't asked." I wasn't asked." ??? So, Hosty's violating his sworn " so help me God" oath "To tell the truth, the "whole" truth and "nothing but" the truth" to the Warren Commission ( whose almost sacred mission it was to get to the full truth about the JFK assassination to the American people ) is looked at later by Hosty as ... a laughing matter? The FBI purposely destroyed hugely important evidence about Oswald...and the man who did this "chuckles" about keeping this information from the American people when they were desperate for the whole truth? I found Hosty's "full truth" avoidance ( through purposeful omission ) actions and especially his chuckling admission about doing so later deplorable. Hosty's loyalty to his employer clearly trumped his loyalty to the Warren Commission and the American people. Of course, after we discovered the Dallas Oswald evidence destruction via Hosty's admission, it is totally reasonable to assume the FBI withheld much about Oswald in New Orleans as well. Almost forcing one to realize the Warren Commission was not provided the full truth about Oswald by the very agency they were depending on for such information most of their investigation. The Commission's integrity was totally dependent on what the FBI was providing them. I recently listened to a You Tube debate between Mark Lane and senior council for the WC Joseph Ball on Dec. 4th, 1964 at California located Occidental College. Imagine if Lane knew about the Dallas FBI admitted ordered destruction of Oswald evidence the day ( or next day ) of Oswald's murder and Oswald's FBI connection in New Orleans the Summer of 1963 during the debate? Same goes for Lane's later debate with Warren Commision assistant council Wesley Lieberer and even during Lane's go with William F. Buckley on Buckley's TV show firing line? That Oswald evidence destruction and withheld Oswald New Orleans FBI connection info would have set Ball, Liebeler and Buckley back on their Warren Commission defending heels. Many years ago I caught a radio station interview of Hosty to promote his book "Assignment Oswald." Something Hosty volunteered in the interview raised my brow. He told the interviewer "we had three of them." Three of them? What? He was referring to Warren Commission members that were feeding his FBI information through out their investigation. Again, a complete violation of their charter framework of complete unbiased independence integrity. We all knew WC member Gerald Ford was an FBI man, but Hosty's quoted admission of two more WC members being secretly connected to them during the investigation just adds to the realization truth that the WC was unethically compromised like that. How can anyone not question the WC's integrity knowing these facts?

Excellent point Michaleen Kilroy. One of the big white elephant truths in the room. This psychological trait is so real. Everyone feels this fear in their lives. We all block off and refuse to even deal with so many things. On an entire societal level America has been afflicted with this blocking out fear on many levels and with many specific areas of the most major historic importance. Who killed JFK, MLK and RFK? Who killed Dorothy Kilgallen? How corrupt were LBJ, Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover really? The true mental instability state of Donald Trump. Etc. Etc.

I have posted a different agenda proposition regards Bloomberg and his 1 billion dollar 2020 presidential primary campaign effort. I believe Bloomberg spent his all-time record presidential primary amount ( and for only a 1 and 1/2 to 2 month campaign! ) not to win the primary nomination at all. Bloomberg knew he didn't have a chance in **** for that outcome. In my common sense contemplation analysis Bloomberg's agenda was to make sure the surging vote count candidacy of Elizabeth Warren and the decent one of Bernie Sanders was curtailed and cut off up to and after Super Tuesday. And that Joe Biden win the nomination. Throughout the beginning months of the primary, Warren was doing well. She at one point was the highest vote getter! Biden was well behind her and was also well bested by both Warren and even Sanders in the debates up to that according to polls. Biden even lost support after each debate. Warren and Sanders came across as more alert and vigorous in those debates imo. Biden looked tired, made some stumbling gaffes and really didn't have as clear of message regards his political agenda goals compared to Warren's and Sander's. Bloomberg's biggest concern about the 2020 election was not Donald Trump. It was a possible Democratic party candidacy of Bolshevists Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. He clearly stated this in a recorded talk he gave to a gathering of Goldman Sachs execs/investors before he announced his own very late entry into the primary campaign. I don't have the quotes in front of me, however they were clear in the message that he ( Bloomberg) feared major social reform advocating Warren and Sanders as a more dangerous threat to America than Trump. Especially Wall Street America and the often referred to 1%. It was right after Biden was seriously fading in the polls that Bloomberg launched his mind blowing massive financial campaign. Within days even we were getting Blomberg campaign literature in our mail boxes. He was also instantly running national TV and I believe even radio ads as well. It was a blitzkrieg effort. Bloomberg wasn't even counted in the first primary campaign months. After he entered, the highest he ever got in national polls was slightly more than 10%? His entering the primary so late and with quite limited established national recognition support so seemed illogical in my political knowledge thinking. I kept wondering why Bloomberg was doing this when it was obvious he didn't have a chance at the nomination. I believe he stated he entered to race because he didn't think "any" of the Democratic candidates would be able to beat Trump? I thought that was a BS explanation. It didn't make sense. In making this claim he was including Biden? Bloomberg's candidacy did draw down Warren and Sanders poll numbers. Biden's numbers began to increase. By Super Tuesday Biden was surging ahead of Warren and Sanders. In the weeks before Super Tuesday Biden's camp had made an all-out effort in bringing in black vote support for his campaign and away from Warren and Sanders who's political ideologies were clearly more beneficial to black American interests. I believe deals were made with the highest Black political leaders and groups to sway their support toward Biden. It's only a speculative guess on my part but I believe Biden promised to name a black woman as his VP choice to seal the ultimate full out support deal. Super Tuesday sealed the nomination for Biden with entire black voting blocks giving him states that should have gone to the more progressive Warren and Sanders. Bloomberg's true "Save America" mission was accomplished. His mind blowing, record setting BILLION DOLLAR, illogically brief 1 to two month long primary campaign run came to an immediate stop. His most feared threat enemies Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders ( not Donald Trump ) were toast. In this sense Michael Bloomberg actually WON. Biden has always been much more corporate friendly than the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Delaware has been a tax haven for them for decades. Curious though, was any of Bloomberg's 1 billion dollar campaign run monies expenditures tax deductible?

Really. Didn't know that. And what usually happens to the patsy or fall guy in a major crime? Either the cops do him in...or the bigger criminal masterminds do.

Of course. I knew that.

The point of the thread? "I Am Just A Patsy" ? That shouted statement to the world press by the man who had been instantly anointed as the killer of JFK before a real and substantive investigation had barely begun is "one of the most iconic and important ones" ever proclaimed and heard in the history of major world changing events. In fact, Oswald's shout out "I Am Just A Patsy" is probably the most well known and remembered quote in the entire JFK assassination story. The thought provoking breath of that famous Oswald shout out is way beyond any single ( and highly subjective ) contemplation of it's suggested meaning. Imo anyways. It is such a loaded with curious interpretation proclamation. It is one thing for a desperate criminal suspect to shout out "I Didn't Do It!" And or "I Am Innocent!" But to make a specific and less common guilt diversion claim like "I Am Just A Patsy" suggests something more to a suspect's defense tactic and posture. It is suggesting others are involved. At least in the minds of millions of people like me. Yes, it could not mean that others are involved. Perhaps I and others "want" it to mean that. But either way...the "I Am Just A Patsy" Oswald shout out was and always will be an iconic quote event of the ages. And an inescapable part of the suspicion laden mystery mind set held by tens of millions regards the JFK event.

>>>At this point I am starting to consider you mentally ill, <<< ??? To fellow members of this higher plane JFK truth seeking forum-the best we have on the internet. Please keep in mind the fact that it is a gift to us all and we need to protect it's mutual respect sanctity. Not judging anyone here. Just offering an English gentleman ( now come on Lads ) cooler heads type pat on the shoulder when our brilliant minds heated passions in debating get a little too, shall we say ... personal and carried away?

Interesting that so many nearby residents came to their doors within seconds of the shooting and saw what they did.

Those are some really sad statistics. Include suicides as well. Especially young people doing this. My biggest fears about the well being of my children have always been their safety on our California roads and highways, their personal safety when encountering or socializing with people of dysfunctional behavior and their never being able to earn and save enough money to live on their own in safe areas. California is just too crowded, fast and expensive now compared to when I was young in the 50's and 60's. Too diverse actually. Too divided and stressed economically and culturally. Homeless people are everywhere. Violent gangs are everywhere. Drugs everywhere. Rents criminally too high. Unchecked illegal immigration by the millions. Young people can't afford to pay rent on their own. Holding off marriage and having children even into their late thirties. It's not too irrational to conclude that California is almost beyond saving as a healthy place to start a family anymore. But, damn. The weather here and ocean shores and forest trees just make it hard to leave. Someday, maybe our military priority obsessed government will realize that our nation and society is in too many ways crumbling from within...and needs massive military budget sized help to begin to heal the damage.

I just never felt her eyewitness sharing story was very reliable. She saw a man at the scene besides the fallen Tippit. Her physical description of this man was just too vague and unsure imo. "kinda chunky...???" She did say she saw this man wave his gun holding hand and arm as a type of warning signal to another witness to "go on." That part of her sharing seems more believable to me.

I think everyone can agree with the following assertion: That there were for sure a good amount of persons who saw and heard things about the JFK assassination and/or many of the various characters connected to it, including the most well known main ones, who never came forward to publicly share what they saw, heard and knew. And the reasons for their reticence were so obvious. Every now and then some direct descendent or friend of the family or who knows what connection type person will make a claim that they overheard or were even told things by someone who did see, hear or otherwise knew something about someone or something related to the event. However, even bombshell revelations that had been kept hidden for perhaps a lifetime, lose their credibility and press interest due simply to the difficulty in verifying the source due to deaths of the direct eyewitnesses. Lot of fear surrounding the JFK assassination. Main characters and witnesses getting whacked or dying suspiciously. Their deaths widely reported. It would be fascinating to hear some of the most intriguing "never shared" stories of JFK event engagements. One can be sure they exist.

Allowing for "one" thread to discuss major current events of the day as a side forum does keep some members checking into the main JFK one more often imo. At least me anyway. I scan every new posted thread in the main JFK focus forum. Ones that inspire me I read and may respond to. The Joseph McBride thread is just a fun distraction one to take a break from the heavier JFK ones for me from time to time. Like running out the main theater seats to the snack bar to get some malt balls or other sweet treats.

Mark, I believe that swaying others isn't more the intended point of this thread versus the one your fellow moderator expressed regards her feeling it is more a release valve one? I believe that rock hard stances on issues we bring up on this thread can be swayed "over time" if evidence comes out bolstering certain takes and views over others. It is separated from our regular JFK focused posting threads well enough that anyone here can clearly avoid even looking at it's contents.

I too often actually listen to posted links like the Ball/Lane debate above in their entirety. Sacrificing time I should be using to get some needed fresh air and exercise. Like this Occidental College debate however, most of the linked pieces are still just too damn compelling for me to walk away from. Ball does a good job in this debate. Lane has to fight more aggressively to get his points in than usual. Ball's "Spencer Tracy" wise man movie role tone and speaking manner helps him in his audience approval responses. Lane is fiery though and matches up decently well in his strong logic tennis match return strokes and even aces Ball several times. I want to comment more on this debate later today. It's basic debate argument is a foundational one that is so important in over-all assessment of JFK event truth. I would like to interject some larger story dynamics which I believe prove that there was a conspiracy versus the WC finding of just one lone assassin who got incredibly lucky in defeating an army of security and initiating the ultimate worst possible defeat against them they could imagine. And minutes after doing so, the president's shooter simply saunters a few blocks away to catch a city bus, then catches a cab back to his dinky boarding room miles away? In this debate, Ball himself just trashes the Dallas Police and even Henry Wade regarding their actions the weekend of the assassination. Important stuff there.

For those who want to hear Joseph Ball's description of Helen Markham as an "utter screwball" you can skip to the 1 hour and 43 minute mark of the recording to hear Ball say this.