Michael Clark

28 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

I met Frank Sturgis on June 17, 1972 around 9 a.m. in a substation jail of the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. He was one of the arrested burglars and a long time associate of Howard Hunt, who recruited him for the burglary. Columnist Jack Anderson knew Sturgis and was surprised to see him in the Washington, D.C. National Airport where they had a conversation on one of the trips that Sturgis made for one of the DNC break-ins. There is plenty of evidence from various sources that ties Sturgis directly to the CIA.

 

Hunt is clear that he believed that the plumbers (Himself, Sturgis and company) were breaking into Watergate and Ellisburg's office, not as matter of political intrigue, but as a CIA intelligence operation looking for evidence of international espionage.

27 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

Frank Sturgis was a Radical Right mercenary.  The CIA often exploited his type, but never hired them full time; they never had the "right stuff".

Frank Sturgis was a hot head.  He fought along side Fidel Castro and Che Guevara (and Interpen guys) in 1959 and was prized by Fidel for his fighting spirit.

The people most similar to Frank Sturgis would be hot heads like Gordon Liddy.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Liddy was an attorney and FBI agent, county prosecutor, and ran for a congressional seat and eventually worked for the White House.

Sturgis was a college drop-put and cold blooded-killer.

Yet, Paul Trejo thinks they are fair comparison beceause he thinks they are hot-heads.

12 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Oh please.  Read Joan Mellen's book on the subject.

Its the definitive look at that whole milieu and Billy Sol.

Subject for a new article Kennedy's and King article?

It's been debated a few times recently.

And, to be sure, a dialectic inquiry is the opposite of a debate. Paul is by no means engaged in a dialectic. He would be hard pressed to claim he is even engaged in a debate. He is presenting his dogma, demonstrating zealotry.

My BA carries a minor in philosophy. I had to brush-up on this, thanks to Mr. Trejo, but it comes back quickly. 

Coolio!

It's Channell 4 in England, not BBC. I thought the Brits might have a connection to get permission for good links to good video. Some of the YouTube videos have audio that is out of synch. 

It might be old school stuff for UKers, but I just discovered it, and I am hooked.

Thanks for the consideration all.

5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

Apparently, you fail to understand the dialectical meaning of methodology. 

I'll give you a clue.  The dialectical methodology of Hegel, for example, begins with a thesis (a premise) and proceeds to an antithesis (a counter-premise) and then proceeds to a synthesis (a conclusion).  Upon this method a person could construct an entire Encyclopedia -- which is just what Hegel did. 

It's a matter of understanding the dialectical power of a syllogism.  I suppose you missed that class.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I see Paul's problem, he thinks he can carry on a dialectical inquiry by himself, in a bubble. That explains a lot.

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

 

 

The only time one might argue that the WC gave Michael Paine a break was in their weak handling of the phone call wire-tap of 11/22/1963.  But that is easily explained by selfishness of the WC -- if they had pressed the issue correctly, they would have had to cough up facts about the illegal nature of that wire-tap, and arrest their own wire-tappers.

Ok, Paul Trejo is claiming that the Warren Commission had wire-tappers in place on 11-22-63. A couple days ago he was wondering who "ordered" the tap.

So, excluding that, the WC was very stern with the Paines.  They especially grilled both of them for possible Communist ties, to answer many rumors of a Reds-did-it CT. 

The Paine's were given softball question, outs, and passes throughout the testimony; critically, with regard to the John Abt call.

 

Replies in bold

54 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

I also have no problem believing that CIA agent E. Howard Hunt was a low-level flunky in the plot to kill JFK.  He even confessed this to his son, so that's a fact.

 

This upholds a theory that the JFK plot wasn't a CIA plot, 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul Trejo says H. Howard Hunt was a "low level flunky" prior to the assassination. Must be Paul's flunky reading and use of his Hagelian Dialectics. Throw-out the Hegelian encyclopedia that you have conjured-up in your head Paul.

-Hunt was the son of Everette Howard Hunt, Sr., an attorney and Republican Party official.

-Hunt graduated  and Brown University in 1940.

-During World War II Hunt served in the:

---U.S. Navy 

----United States Army Air Forces,

----Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in China

 - Hunt joined the CIA in October 1949 as a political action specialist, in what came to be called their Special Activities Division. The CIA was the successor organization of the OSS.

-Hunt became station chief in Mexico City in 1950, and supervised William F. Buckley, Jr., who worked for the CIA in Mexico during the period 1951–1952. Buckley and Hunt remained lifelong friends.William F. Buckley was godfather to Hunts children.

-In Mexico, Hunt helped devise Operation PBSUCCESS, the successful covert plan to overthrow Jacobo Árbenz.

-Following assignments in Japan and as station chief in Uruguay, Hunt was given the assignment of forging Cuban exile leaders in the United States into a broadly representative government-in-exile that would, after the Bay of Pigs Invasion, form a provisional government to take over Cuba.

-After the Bay of Pigs, Hunt became a personal assistant to Allen Dulles.

-Hunt was asked to assist Dulles in writing a book, The Craft of Intelligence, that Dulles wrote after he lost his job as CIA head in 1961.The book was published in 1963.

And Paul Trejo concludes that Frank Sturgis invited Hunt in on the plot to kill JFK...and

"This upholds a theory that the JFK plot wasn't a CIA plot, "

.........some flunky. He ends up working in the White House EOB in 1972.

Regarding the Suzanne LaPaugh Liggett  1961 Yearbook photo mentioned in Tom Scully's thread.

I called SUNY Binghamton and the girl at the desk pulled the yearbook, found the photo and told me that scanning and sending it would not be a problem, but that she wanted to ask the acrchivist.

The archivist said she wanted to put the request through the library Dean.

I just received a response that they will not provide the photograph....

**** note to self:  Don't tell librarians what you are researching. A five hour round trip would have yielded the photograph.

Dear Michael:

A very cool episode of Time Team with Latin inscriptions found in a cist grave, that matches a Roman architictural fragment.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLiw5X7jx1CENkgHgMNFLAKro2aSe_PQ4Q&v=NBXnNkgCeXs

7 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I know it's already been edited and I make my share of mistakes but was he maybe thinking of Darth Bader?

***** deleted. Seemed funny last night

Douglas Cady, Do you think that Michelle Clark and Dorothy Hunt's plane wen down accidentally?

......

On 4/11/2013 at 11:09 PM, Lindsay Anderson said:

Paul

I think this is a massive jump and almost belongs on another thread -

I have not studied the material related to Secret Service Complicity in any detail but - from the things I have seen, (mostly from James Fetzer), there is the stuff that happened after the first shots were fired (such a a limo stop) and the stuff before, such as the dog leg turn, stand-down, bubble dome removal etc. The stuff after the bullet can be argued to be down to (being kind) insufficient resources, equipment and training resulting in them getting it so wrong when under fire.

The stuff before the bullet though - what evidence is there that the failings were unusual. Maybe standards slipped so low that those mistakes were being made regularly - did security take a marked dive when Kennedy became president or had it gotten lax well before then. When did security start to fail. Someone must have looked at this challenge as it seem a fairly obvious one and I would suspect there would be records; Manhole covers - check, windows - check, that kind of thing. Security was no doubt improved after the assassination, but that proves nothing.

Agreed. Paul Trejo will jump the shark, pop--squat, and jam the pipes of any thread that he can.

11 minutes ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Tracy,

About Jane Roman: I can't say I'm surprised about that statement. But you cannot deny the fact that headquarters withheld vital information from the Mexico City station. Why was that done? Is it not likely that Oswald was part of a CIA operation against the FPCC and that someone wanted to conceal this? 

 

Mathias, I am in agreement with this 2006 Larry Hancock take on that situation.

On 9/23/2006 at 11:24 AM, Larry Hancock said:

Good point John - although have to consider that there could well be two CIA camps in operation here. It could be that the Mexico City staff were doing their job quite well and became aware of Oswald and began investigating him on their own. This would explain the observation by the interpreter that the office was "hot" about Oswald even at the time the first call was being translated.

Oswald may have come onto their radar screen independently from whoever was running the compartementalized opearation. Then you run into the conflict of the local office being hot about what he's really doing there and the covert faction trying to lower their attention so their compartmentalized operation doesn't get stepped on.

Which probably explains a large amount of the apparant internal conflict and contradiction we see between different CIA elements immediately following the assassination. Talk about "conflicted"...

Personally, I see a "stovepiped" operation, rather than a "compartmentalised" operation that kept Jane Roman from forwarding this LHO information to MC. Angleton was by-passed, in my CT.

On 12/21/2009 at 5:11 PM, James Richards said:

I post the following purely as a curiosity.

The link below is the first part of a most interesting series concerning Mitch WerBell. The other links can be found on this page.

The whole thing is a bit cheesy but there is some interesting tid bits including the piece of equipment shown at the 5 minute mark. Over the years, I have had several conversations with many of the anti-Castro guys of the early 1960's and they said that a version of this type of weapon was around at the time. More information regarding this to follow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrtrmeITQNk

Cheers,

James

(The above bolding is mine)

Just another example.

-Missing reference (link?)

-Dead YouTube link (nothing can be done about that)

-No indication of an edit

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Another installment in my long-distance debate with Greg Parker 

...........

Mr. Parker would like us to believe that there is nothing to see here.  Just move on, eh?

Jim, I recently had a collaborative cross-forum posting exchange with Tom Scully. It went well, and, while I had some concern, It did not run afoul of the admins here at EF.

I am concerned that this cross-forum, "debate" is of a different nature and might result in rules or decisions that would prohibit any such cross-postings; effectively throwing the good out with the bad.

Just an observation. I've seen things like this happen before.

Cheers,

Michael

On 11/22/2006 at 5:21 AM, James Richards said:

Here's another Lee Henry Oswald document from October of 1963.

The description they give of Oswald certainly isn't of the man shot by Jack Ruby although they quote his 201 number correctly.

FWIW.

James

This is a post inquiring of Educationforum Admin or anyone else who has an answer to the following question....

What happened to the document that James Richards apparently posted?

There are many EF threads that are gutted due to broken links, Photo hosting accounts gone dead or edits.

But in this case, and many cases, particularly of James Richards (which seem so important)  there is no longer any hint of a link and there is no notation of an edit at the bottom of the post.

I looked way-back to see if, indeed, edit notes were recorded at the bottom of threads (thinking older software or features might account for it) and they are there. 

Does anyone have a clue? I'll admit that I do hold-out some remote hope that there is a chance of recovery of some of these items.

As much as I would like to have James Richards back I would not expect him to take on the chore of restoring all the lost docs, pics and links; but, the larger concern is the slow attrition of the value of this forum as stuff disappears. 

I've mentioned it before, and Admin has acknowledged this particular problem, but the vast majority of Spartacus links are dead, due to the "schoolnet" element being present in the URL's. 

The forum is experiencing an anemic entropy, due to these issues. I hope it it doesn't continue, and in some cases it can be reversed, and there are postential solutions to some matters.

........

In any event this is an interesting thread and if my post does not get the attention I'll re-post this elsewhere, in the forum development thread.

Cheers,

Michael

6 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

 

Kudos on identifying that 1st call from Michael Paine to Ruth Paine, right around the end of lunch time.   

As for the 2nd call, which was wire-tapped, I estimate a time-frame after 2pm.   

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Can someone verify what Paul is talking about with the second call, or is this one of his myths? I would dig-in, but I would be looking through 5000 questions in testimony, just from Ruth, to look for something that I don't recall being there.

38 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

Paul:

Thanks for pointing out the multiple calls.  .......

I was not so much "conflating" (good word, kudos to Michael C. for using it previously) as pointing out that Ruth said nothing about the alleged later call (around 1pm, no transcript).   The first call was brought up several times in Michael's WC testimony:

 "I called Ruth immediately after getting back just to see that she would turn on the radio and be clued in with the news, but this was before the TSBD was mentioned." (Vol II, p. 424)

 "I called her immediately getting back to the lab, so she would be watching and listening and getting clued in to the news, start watching the news." (Vol IX, p. 449)

It’s interesting that his  colleague Ray Krystinik disagreed with Michael about where they were and what they discussed when first informed of the news.  Of course, there is no mention of the "waitress" that Ruth attributes as breaking the news.  Michael testified to being with a co-op named Dave, talking about "assassins" no less:.......

 

Thanks,

Gene

8 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Roughly translated from this ducument using my iPad voice text function.

Yeltsin/Clinton cashe ducument regarding LHO Russian Consulate letter.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/other/yeltsin/html/Yeltsin_0028a.htm

 

Do we have the source of our wire-tap?

Do we have the reason why a forged letter would be generated?

-------------

At 16 hours 00 minutes, the U.S. Telegraph agency reported that police in Dallas, TX, had arrested a U.S. National Lee H. Oswald, 24 years old, Chairman of the local branch of the FPCC, on suspicion that he had assassinated Kennedy.

It is also reported that Oswald was in the USSR some time ago and is married to a Russian woman.

It was ascertained by checking at the consulate section of the embassy that Oswald really did spend several years in Minsk,  where he married Soviet citizens Marina P. (born 1941). In June 1962, they returned to the US. In March 1963 Marina applied to return with her daughter to the USSR for permanent residency. The KU of the Ministry of Foreign Affair of the USSR (October 7, 1963) reported that her application was rejected.

The counselor section of the embassy has the correspondence between Marina and Oswald regarding her return to Russia.The last letter from Lee Oswald was dated November 9 (the text was transmitted on the line of nearby neighbors).

 

Roughly translated from this ducument using my iPad voice text function.

Yeltsin/Clinton cashe ducument regarding LHO Russian Consulate letter.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/other/yeltsin/html/Yeltsin_0028a.htm

Do we have the source of our wire-tap?

Do we have the reason why a forged letter would be generated?

-------------

At 16 hours 00 minutes, the U.S. Telegraph agency reported that police in Dallas, TX, had arrested a U.S. National Lee H. Oswald, 24 years old, Chairman of the local branch of the FPCC, on suspicion that he had assassinated Kennedy.

It is also reported that Oswald was in the USSR some time ago and is married to a Russian woman.

It was ascertained by checking at the consulate section of the embassy that Oswald really did spend several years in Minsk,  where he married Soviet citizens Marina P. (born 1941). In June 1962, they returned to the US. In March 1963 Marina applied to return with her daughter to the USSR for permanent residency. The KU of the Ministry of Foreign Affair of the USSR (October 7, 1963) reported that her application was rejected.

The counselor section of the embassy has the correspondence between Marina and Oswald regarding her return to Russia.The last letter from Lee Oswald was dated November 9 (the text was transmitted on the line of nearby neighbors).

5 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Michael,

 

Thank you. You're right.

If you go to Google Maps and take a look at the street view south down Crawford between 9th and Jefferson, you can see that they turned 10th St. into a little alley running between Patton and at least as far as Storey. Maybe back in '63, 10th did run as far as Beckley. I'm not sure what that building is on the east side of 10th and Beckley looking east down 10th, but comparing that now to the City Directory in 1961;  between expanding that Adamson High School grounds on 9th,  it looks like they eliminated a bunch of apartment buildings too. The whole idea of eliminating three whole blocks of a paved street just kind of threw me there.

Steve Thomas

Steve, I noticed that I did not include my link. No matter, the same photo is in David Josephs post with the aerial photo on the top of this page. And, as you just said, you figured it out.

13 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

The only authority of FBI agents Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams that I recognize is the fact that they were lifetime FBI agents.

They were also whistle-blowers on the FBI, and they also paid a price for that.

The proofs will come by October 26th of this year.

Now -- if the proofs don't come -- I have already committed publicly -- I will cease my insistence that the US Government is withholding records about Harry Dean and General Walker.

Yet I still maintain today -- I fully expect that these upcoming releases of US Government documents will change US History.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, By my rough calculations, we have to hear you repeat yourself about 300 times between now and October 26.

By the way Paul, are you sorting through the documents, or are you waiting for Ernie, or someone else, to do that for you?

I would think that if you were sorting through the released documents you might have found something interesting to share, regardless of the fact that I have never seen you share anything interesting except for your personal myths and zealous diatribes.