Jeffrey Reilley

I have been trying desperately, albeit on a small scale, to get people my age and younger to understand what happened on that November day. Youth today does not understand, or even care, about the gravity of Kennedy's assassination. It was a power play the likes of which have not been seen in our borders before or since. They showed us all, each and every one of us, what they can do if we try to stop them. I remember Prouty said something in regards to the masterminds wanting Johnson to see exactly what happened to Kennedy as a sign to him of what could happen to him. Well, it worked for all of Americans, for we all got to witness it. If we think about possible solutions, what could they be? Nobody has had to pay the piper yet for the crimes that have happened, and continue to happen.

I will be getting this as soon as it is possible.

So, after the Secret Service bungled their main objective(keeping the president alive) and disregarded their own policies and regulations...I.E. not travelling adequate speed for a convertible, letting windows be open along the route, coming to a near stop after drawing fire...they decided to kick it into hyper-drive once Jackie decided she couldn't be separated from the body? I guess the SS agents present knew they had screwed up pretty big, like Custer big, but I find this to be odd. Didn't they also immediately start wiping down the limo of all the blood and brain matter at Parkland? Their actions come off as illogical, and that usually indicates something funky afoot. I agree Mrs. Kennedy was most likely in a state of extreme shock, but convincing her that it would be illegal to remove the body of her husband for the sake of a better chance at finding out who, what, and why quickly, should not have been impossible to the point where they drew their sidearms in some dramatic fashion. The first hours after a crime like that are crucial. Why would any agent of our government, especially law enforcement allow the victim's body to travel half way across the country during the opening hours of investigation? No matter who that person was, that shoots giant red flags all over the sky in my eyes.

Yeah the more I read, the more I became skeptical of the veracity of the text. Still though, very interesting and eye opening, even if only half of what is written in there is true.

"...a) met Howard Hunt and Jean Claude Perez (Chief of ORO) in Madrid; went to the Caribbean with Laszlo Varga, Lajos Marton, and Buscia; c) went to New Orleans and met with Carlos Bringuier; d) went to Dallas and met with General Edwin Walker; e) went to Lake Pointchartrain and helped' train anti-Casto Cubans. It is known, in any event, that during this period he had many contacts with anit-Castro Cubans. It is also known that he visited Spain in July, 1963."- on page 14. Well, that seems a bit concerning...

Well, I'd then be inclined to believe that she was not being completely honest in her letter. The first thing I thought while reading this was, if the IRS had to produce his tax returns, then the FBI would be up a certain creek without proper paddling equipment, and would then have to at least acknowledge LHO's status with them in some capacity. She sounds like a lot of people in the public eye...say you want one thing, but do things that bring about the opposite.

Did anyone from the ARRB tell her that if she had signed off on the tax records release, it could have forced the FBI to release the documents she was requesting? Seems like that may have been the play the ARRB was trying to make.

Thank you, Steve. I know this is off topic of the thread, but this is a person that got a good look at, talked to, and even, if my memory serves correct, looked at cars in a parking lot with, someone that should ignite a lot of interest. His testimony is in the WC. Why was there no follow up? Where were the others later on...Garrison, HSCA, and investigators/researchers/journalists that believed that there was most assuredly a conspiracy? I could be mistaken, and there is some follow up, but I have never read it. "He had on a sports shirt and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like, and hands that looked like auto mechanic's hands. And, afterwards, it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the time we were so pressed for time and we were searching. And he had produced correct identification and we just overlooked the thing. I should have checked the man closer, but at the time, I didn't snap to it." Someone that gets a good look at another man's hands probably got a good look at his face, skin tone, noticeable scars, accents, eyes, shoulder width, and a hundred things that I am probably missing. It surprises me that the three tramps got so much attention in the 60's, but a police officer that spoke to a man that was posing as a Secret Service agent in close proximity to a spot that a lot of individuals thought shots were fired from, wasn't questioned more. Again, I could be way off here, for I am but a novice.

Does anyone know if Joe Marshall Smith was ever questioned at length after the Warren Commission? Shown pictures of possible people that could have had phony SS credentials?

No, I did not. I then never thought of it again until yesterday. It does have me thinking though... So a guy walks into a theater without paying soon after the President of the United States gets shot, and right after a fellow officer had been gunned down, and that was why Dallas police showed up in full force to the theater? Wow. Don't break laws in Dallas. --I know what probable cause is. I was confused by the statement that the concept of probable cause wasn't around. I was reading plenty of cases where convictions were overturned based on lack of probable cause in the 40's. I get confused easily though. My bad.

I don't want to sound like an idiot, but the concept of what? I was just wondering. I read your statement and then fell into a rather boring rabbit hole of reading court decisions regarding violations of the fourth amendment. Now my eyes hurt, I feel illiterate after reading lawyer speak, and I am more befuddled than when I started. -A long time ago, when I was in high school, I asked that same question about LHO ever being formally arrested. And if so, for what?

I was watching a documentary the other day, and the first bit of dialog was the only thing that stuck. It was a very biased piece made by ex-cia people, and one of them says, in a very nonchalant way, "The one thing that everyone has in common, on both sides of every war, is that they all think they are the good guys." That, for some weird reason, really hit home to me. I guess I never thought of it that way. That is why I believe Harvey, Morales, and crew are the ones that did the deed(s). They thought they were just. Very few people wish to be the bad guy, but some people go so far for what they believe that they cross into delusion, and from there you fall at 9.8 meters per second per second into the abyss.

Very insightful review. Thank you.

Now, this will sound completely ignorant, but why was Edwin Walker called Ted? In the little reading I have done on Edwin Walker's familial background, which is little more than none, there is nothing on his folks or family. According to this link, James Theodore "Ted" Walker was born 1877. Chances of this being entirely unrelated, probably 99.97%, but the time frame would have fit nicely. Geographic locations, however, seem a little "iffy" --Side note, it is nice to see that the Bush and Busch family have been so friendly for so long. As recently as when I left my previous job at a very private golf course, members of both families are members there and play together frequently...well, as frequently as those upper elitists are there and get together.

Wide w's and wide l's by Oswald. Skinny ones by the other. Interesting. It made me look at my signature compared to others in my family. I get a kick out of that stuff

If Sanders had won, and then gone on to become president, would the youth have felt empowered, and in that feeling of strength, would these "deep state" folks lose some rather important footing? Keeping the masses thinking they are helpless, weak, and without options is what keeps them in power. I hate using "them", so I guess "powerful yet undefined others" is better, but I am at work and typing, and I am going for speed over grammatical prowess. Anyhow, I doubt, if said people exist, they would simply let youth gain momentum. Far too risky for "powerful yet undefined others", and they too know what happened in the 60's. "...There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda. . . . You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning. . . . And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. . . . So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.”-Hunter S. Reminds me of that for some reason

If Sanders had won the ticket, Sanders would not be alive. Of that, I am certain. Of the two remaining after that, it didn't much matter. They all are aiming towards the same outcome. I'm not saying there is some organized group of elitists that sit at a table making plans with each other, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were. Greed, says history, knows no bounds. I wouldn't put anything past powerful people with means, in bed. Did the young people succeed when you weren't a 67-year-old fart? Or did the younger generation's best chance at a candidate for change get whacked? If anything, your 24-year-old self has probably been desensitized to the point of indifferent acceptance. I think most people are victim of that, myself included. Youth has the advantage of not being as tainted as we older people. Though I am only 33, I have an engine with lots of miles and very few oil changes, if ya dig. Too many times has the "small" guy been shown what happens when the "big" guy feels their power threatened. I'm losing my train of thought so I will just abruptly end this, for I am merely a golf ball whacker guy. It is sunny and I must do my job.

I'm new here. I want to know everything I can about the history of our intelligence community. I have found JFK's assassination is one of the only areas, and its aftermath, where the intelligence community had to come out of the shadows and show how they operate. I want to either prove my suspicions correct or eat crow and humbly go back to just whacking golf balls everyday. I believe that our country has been the proverbial "bad guy" for quite a bit of time now. We became a corporate driven government a long time ago, and the story I want to tell involves this. I like fiction, so I get some wiggle room with the truth aspect of everything, but the roots will be in truth. Anyways, back on track... I've been reading on this forum for a couple of years now, and never felt the urge to post. No reasoning behind it, just never felt the urge to join the conversation. Having said that, the amount of hubris, arrogance, and self-righteousness some people throw out there for anybody to read is shocking. So cut and dry, black and white, if you aren't with me you are against me type stuff, with every single thing, and then the discussion becomes a finger pointing contest between the same five people who seem to only want to reread what they are saying, in some chest thumping proud way. Get over yourselves! I would like to learn a thing or two, not read a topic and then see pages of people arguing over the same discrepancies.

It also gives people...i.e. Phillips, Angleton, Hoover, the people that seemed to act illogically or guilty following the assassination, it gives them a reason for acting so: Cover their 6.

Mike, Simpich's book is on Mary Ferrell's website. I read it in one, albeit very long, sitting. Mind will be blown. Explains everything and makes me think David Morales, Bill Harvey, John Rosselli, and their little clan of merry assassins were also quite clever.

Good point...Back onward

What would you do if you wanted to e&e without raising any suspicion? Walking right on out of there, although very simple, is a very effective plan. Blend right in with unsuspecting people.

Have you ever been on the phone with a stranger for multiple hours? Have you ever had a potential employee talk to you for a couple hours on the phone? That doesn't make sense. As well, if you were going to quit your job and then hitch it to Michigan the next day, why would you bother with an all night phone call and driving around taking pictures? Definitely intriguing.

None of those actions seem logical in the least.

I think this has a lot to do with the JFK assassination, actually. It may not be perfectly aligned with other threads, but I believe the best way to know what is going on now, in regards to who exactly is in control of this country and how they may use their power, is to look into the past. The article does a great job of describing the parallels between what we've(United States) done in recent years and what we did in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. I actually believe that if Bernie Sanders had gotten the ticket, he would not be alive today. It didn't matter who won between Hillary and Don, they are puppets tied to same hand. Sadly, I am slowly starting to believe that we(United States) have been the "bad guys" for about 70 years.