Andrew Prutsok

22 hours ago, David Andrews said:

  Hoover was pretty much the ne plus ultra of law enforcement in the public mind.

Except where organized crime was concerned which, I believe, he refused to admit even existed.

Did Mr. Caddy realize in the late 1950s he was building the foundation of one of the greatest grift operations every to grace the planet?

On 3/3/2012 at 4:06 PM, Josiah Thompson said:

Yeah, could be, Pat. Clever idea.

It just struck me that through all the argument over Lovelady being the man in the doorway, nobody thought of this: Let's assume that it was really Oswald in the doorway and the silly speculation is true.. unknown conspiritors switched Lovelady's face for Oswald's face in the Altgems.. what do you think all the other people there would have said? Had it really been Oswald standing there, then wouldn't one of the crowd of people who later mentioned seeing Lovelady, wouldn't some or all of thees people been beating there way to a reporter with the obvious story: "Oswald couldn't have shot the President! He was standing right next to me on the steps!" And wouldn't this have happened within hours of Oswald's arrest.

What do you think, Pat?

JT

Are you really suggesting that "someone would have talked?" That is a novel idea.

Magic barbituates?

It wouldn't be like a member of the Bush family to be involved in a coup, or anything like that.

On 8/2/2017 at 4:24 PM, Ty Carpenter said:

Any thoughts as to who may have called Liggett away from the funeral? Also, who would have delivered that message?

One would think he would have turned his cell phone off during a funeral service.

Thanks Mr. Caddy. Don't know how I missed it. Sorry for posting in the wrong space.

The Senator said she had seen no evidence of collusion. Maybe there is no unclassified evidence of collusion for her to see?

This is my first topic. Been hanging out here a couple years, joined not too long ago. Just not confident enough in my knowledge to engage most here in debate. Be that as it may, this is something a little different and I would like to get input from more knowledgeable people than myself. Please bear with me. I'll get to the JFK connection momentarily.

I was wondering if anyone else has been interested in all of the Trump-Russia/election rigging/quid pro quo/RICO reporting that has been going on, seemingly primarily on Twitter? I've been following three or four Tweetsters who claim to have connections in the FBI, intelligence community, including foreign intel services. Most revelations are coming from people like Claude Taylor, John Schindler, Louise Mensch and someone called The Jester.

According to these people and their sources, the case is a lock and the Trumps and their minions will die in jail as traitors.

I know not whether that's the case and am certainly not advocating their position. I'm a journalist of 30 years and don't jump to conclusions that easily. I'm just attracted to the subject for probably the same reason I'm attracted to the JFK assassination -- the intrigue, mystery, mind-boggling possibilities, a desire to see justice done, the rule of law upheld, etc.

Be that as it may, I think there is smoke there and it seems pretty obvious.  

All of the aforementioned Twitter reporters claim deep ties to intel and that our intelligence community are heroes and that everyone will realize this when all this finally unfolds, if ever.

This makes my reporter alarm bells go off. My natural distrust of the intelligence community (based largely on the great research done by people like you and others), makes me question the credibility of those reporting on Trump-Russia. Plus in the past week or so there has been a lot of sniping and in-fighting among the Tweetsters, when before they all seemed so chummy. It's suspicious to me.

It occurred to me the other day that maybe asking them their opinion of who killed JFK would weed out who among them has some honor and who is merely shilling for the intelligence community.

Today, before I got a chance to pose the question, John Schindler posted this on Twitter in reference to a Daily Beast Story that alleges Russia was behind the rumors that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination. Think I got my answer. Just curious what others think of this. Thanks.

Insert other media

Regardless of the silliness, the guy in the video after the shooting does not look like Ruby.

A proposal presented to the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States of America to murder their own citizens to gin up a war is "...simply a contingency planning study by a staff group with no operational connections to anything. "

"Other than that, Mrs. Kennedy, how did you enjoy your visit to Texas?"

On 6/13/2008 at 11:48 PM, William Kelly said:

No, I don't know if its really his daughter or not, it just sounds real and not uncommon. Oswald's daughters often feel the same way. I just picked up a copy of Robert Oswald's Lee, A Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald by his brother (for a quarter). Similar deal. Penn Jones' "archives" at Baylor are so stark of material because his exwife sold everything at a garage sale. Family members google their relatives, fathers, sisters, brothers, and girlfriends check it out and sometimes express what they know, and feel. That shouldn't change how you think.

The case for conspiracy doesn't rely on Craig, and his daughter's comments certainly don't constitute a bombshell.

As for what Craig says, he gives insight into other deputies, especially Lummie Lewis, who picked up Braden, and Bill Decker, the top dog, who kicked Braden out of Dallas a few years before.

Instead of judging one deputy, look at the whole corrupt County Sheriff system (adopted from the British model), that Skinny D'Amato used to help JFK win the West Virginia primary (According to Sly Hersh's The Darkside of Camelot), and who were on stand down for security purposes even thought their office ovelooks DP.

It was the Sheriff who was to take custody of the alledged assassin cop killer prisoner, as Decker (and Craig and company) would have had Oswald for their own interrogation purposes if he wasn't killed during the transfer.

Craig is just one of hundreds of similar witnesses and subjects in the assassination drama, and every one of them can be totally discredited.

BK

Far be it from a JFK neophyte like myself to question any details of the assassination as stated by Mr. Kelly, but I would take issue with his criticism of the British model of county sheriff systems. Despite possible corruption -- which is rampant in any law enforcement agency, regardless of the system -- it remains the best method for law enforcement. Elected sheriffs who depend on voter goodwill for their continued employment, are a lot less likely to abuse or even murder citizens than non-elected, non-accountable municipal police forces, which came into being only because sheriffs were reluctant to bust heads during labor strife in the 19th century. The first municipal police departments were funded privately and composed of thugs who shoot first and ask questions later. Not unlike today.

22 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Being a relatively new member, I hadn't seen this thread before.

I am intrigued by Ms.Palmer's assessment of her father Roger Craig.

It's obvious she has much personal bitterness towards him.

So much so that you really feel that she experienced something on a personal level that made her dislike Roger Craig to the point of saying almost exclusively negative things about him.  In my opinion it's a very biased emotional view and an unreasonably unbalanced one.

I am not a psychologist so the following are just my layman thoughts regarding Ms. Palmer's strongly negative views of Craig.

"his marriage didn't end due to repeated harassment and threats - unless you count his repeated threats to end his own life." 

The personal bias and bitterness toward Craig in that statement is so obvious. Her statement is more reflective of her personal feelings of animosity toward Craig than any reasonably objective assessment.

In regards to Craig mentioning killing himself ( which many people view as cowardly weakness and are even irritated by hearing such ) I can relate to Craig's despondency and hopelessness in this regard.

Has anyone here ever injured their back severely?  I have.

I had 4 bulging discs ( one severe, one moderate, two moderate to mild ) at one time after trying to move us and scores of heavy boxes myself at the age of 64 because we just couldn't afford the cost of help in this endeavor.

I went to an Urgent Care and the doctor there said it was just a sprain and to take some pain pills and it would go away!

In the next week or so, the pain didn't dissipate or go away. It just kept getting worse!

The doctors I saw kept dodging my request to have an MRI and thought perhaps that I was just looking for attention? 

Finally, one doctor gave me a prescription for an MRI and that's when the real truth came out regarding my back being seriously injured versus just a sprain.

Even with Percocet and physical therapy the pain ( could hardly sleep or get up in the morning)  took months to go away.

During that long suffering time the 24 hour pain and drugged feelings from the pain meds made me think that if I had to endure that kind of pain and loss of work, social and even intimacy life functionality for years, that this might drive me to seriously giving some thought to ending my life.

That's what serious long term back injuries can do to a normal person.

In my 65 years, I have heard similar horror stories and seen people break down from this kind of pain many times, due to back injuries alone!

Now, multiply Roger Craig's more serious back injuries ( and surgeries which often never heal right and cause even more pain! ) and time of suffering X10 versus my back injury episode!

Of course Craig occasionally contemplated ending his life!  

It wasn't his bad, weak or cowardly character that was the problem!

And when someone loses their ability to work and make enough funds to support himself and maybe even a family to something better than month to month...that's just anther huge yoke around someone's already depressed and loss of hope psyche.

And I see Roger Craig's leaving perhaps a neglected ( maybe even abusive ) childhood (at what 10 or 11 or maybe 12 years old ?) AND SURVIVING ??? ... by wandering to other people's ranches or farms and finding work as some type of heroic effort!

And as far as Craig trying to join the military by lying about his age - so did tens of thousands of others! 

And maybe like so many impoverished young men from that era, Craig saw the military as a better way of life with steady paychecks, meals and shelter and clothing?

So, this so-called Bi-Polar kid serves in Korea? In the Army? With no disciplinary actions against him. He got along with hundreds of other soldiers?

Then after the military he goes to Dallas and is not too proud to take on the job of dishwasher?

I too had to wash dishes in my later teens. 2 years worth!

I didn't have the funds to go back to school ( yet I had to pay the rent and feed myself ) and I didn't have any connections to higher paying work through friends or family or a good job market in this small town area or maybe even just a lucky break.

I too wasn't too proud to do this honest work until I could finally find something better. To me it was a sign of character to keep doing this kind of work when so many made fun of it.

And when I view Mark Lane's "Two Men In Dallas" documentary and Roger Craig's interview, I see a calm and thoughtful and perceptive Roger Craig.

 Bi-Polar people are usually manic in their speaking. Craig seems the opposite.

And when Ms. Palmer disparages Craig and his knowledge of rifles ( regarding whether the 6th floor rifle found was a Mauser versus an Italian MC ) ...you are just struck by Ms. Palmer's almost shocking ignorance of Constable Seymour Weitzman's incredible confession ( a man who had owned a sporting goods store and knew rifles! ) of his " stating right there next to Craig" that "the rife was a Mauser"...let alone the entire national media reporting this found rifle as a Mauser also for the first day or two.

And even if Roger Craig cheated on his wife and wasn't a good provider in his years after being attacked and injured and followed and harassed ( for years!)  I dare "ANYONE" to go through half of what he went through and see if they don't lose their sense of self and/or even their moral compass to different degrees.

And whether Craig confronted someone on the steps of the TXSBD or above the grassy knoll who stated they were Secret Service, there is corroboration by other people including Officer Smith who said they also confronted men in this area who stated they were Secret Service (even producing such I.D.! )  which the Secret Service themselves denied having there.

Sorry, Roger Craig cannot be downplayed as simply some Bi-Polar loser who was only after the easy money way out and to satisfy some extreme need for importance, attention and pity.  His end of life woes make all the sense in the world relative to his years of 24 hour-a-day physical pain and emotional and work ending stress.

 

 

Joe, I appreciate your perspective on this. I think it's an important one with which I agree and can sympathize. I have a 28-year-old son who is permanently disabled with bipolar disorder (I suffer the chronic pain, but it's in the foot). Anyway, I think you make great points to which people who have not had to deal with these issues have no clue . My son's condition kicked in high gear around age 21, so I spent the first 48 years of my life blind to them as well. Thanks for posting. I hope your condition improves.

I was watching cable news this morning, something I gave up about a decade ago because of the inanity, but find myself recently drifting back toward (for some odd reason). Anyway, as it relates to Kremlingate, heard many Deep State "experts" on TV and Twitter citing the "trail of Russian bodies" connected to this case as proof positive that something nefarious was/is afoot. Interesting.

In "Family of Secrets" Russ Baker details how Bradlee and Woodward were both ONI. "What's the old saying, once ONI, always ONI..."

I find it difficult to believe anything either of them ever said.

I kind of believe Watergate was another coup by the intelligence community, just too soon after JFK to get so messy about it again.

On 3/7/2017 at 10:47 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

But what is the evidence that Marina was "abusive" rather than just nagging? As I mentioned earlier in this thread, try going into court and saying "yes I hit my wife but she was nagging."

Now Sandy, I'll show you that I do not have such an intense bias against Armstrong that I cannot believe anything he says. In fact, much of what he says about Marina that you quoted is probably true.

A hundred years ago, men could have their women institutionalized for nagging. 

5 hours ago, Ian Lloyd said:

Hi Andrej,

Unfortunately, I don't have the software or capabilities to do that!!! I'm quite sure that Robin and/or others have already done it in the past - maybe an internet search might bring something up or, hopefully, Robin will visit and see this and provide more information.

Nor do I. I believe I have seen it done in the past. Can't imagine it not being on this site, or perhaps ROKC.

5 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

 

I haven't read this whole thread, and what I have to say has perhaps already been covered, debunked, or whatever. Anyway this is my two cents.

What I see is a person wearing a dress, that is, a woman. The shoulders above the arm and the rest of the body below the arm look to be clothed in the same garment, a dress, with a rather wide midriff. While the head looks like it could be Oswald's, the girth of this person as seen below the arm is out of proportion with Oswald.

 

A woman has been identified on the steps, wearing dark clothing, standing in front of the Prayerman figure, which makes his body appear to be wider than it is. Her head comes up right under His arms. Her leg can be seen on the steps below Prayerman.

On 1/29/2017 at 8:53 AM, John Butler said:

Alastair,

Glad you brought up Altgen's bag.  He is accredited with taking only 8 photos.  I've always wondered why such a small number of photos?  He was a professional.  He had his bag with extra cameras, lens, and plenty of film.  He went out to Dealey Plaza before noon.  Why not more photos?  Good question, I guess.

Your dead on about the ageing process.  People were still asking me for an ID when I bought a beer at 26 yrs old.

Been in the newspaper business for 30 years. If I sent Ike Altegens out to shoot the president and he came back with eight frames, I would have fired him on the spot. Once the film is loaded into the camera, it is gone. No reason not to shoot everything.

1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

And Trump steps up to begin the countercoup, and restore our rightful government that has been subborned to an heretical elite for over 50 years! March with our president as he shines the light, uncovering a dark past to restore freedom!

This could still happen. I'm not hopeful, but it's about the only hope I have remaining for this administration.

19 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

Now you bring up Assange and Trump.  Again, I have no idea on that since I have not seen the CIA/NSA/ FBI evidence on it.  Have you?  How?  What is it then?  Once I see it, then I can form a logical opinion.  Please let us know where it is if you have seen it Tommy.

 

I believe the president-elect is briefing intelligence officials about what the Russians did or did not do as we speak. Maybe we will see the evidence soon.

Any damage done to the party was done by the Clintons. They and their DLC mob are the ones who sold out the American working class to Wall Street for short-term, personal political gain. And their people still lead the party.

Thanks for posting. Was experiencing the same issues.

Andrew Prutsok is a journalist with 30 years of experience in the newspaper industry and is currently publisher of the daily Norwalk Reflector in Norwalk, OH. His interest in the JFK assassination goes back decades