Michael Clark

Glenn, One can only hope...

Tommy, I filled in, above, that I am unclear as to the etiquette regarding the editing other people's posts. I was just looking into it. Right now I am looking up "IBID". Sure, it's awkward, and incorrect, but with a double-take the meaning is not lost on the reader. Also, you said that the problem was in the middle of the post, saying there were missing words. I am not seeing that. did YOU make a mistake, and instead of saying "oops, my bad", deflect to an agreement problem in the second paragraph? Lastly, I'm not a horse, YOU do no not "lead" ME anywhere, and, I have a Moosehead lager in-hand; water is on tap if I need it. Cheers, Michael

Bumpred again, due to distraction...

FYI, for anyone who has not seen the 4th video, It brings Loy Factor, Bernard Barker (Via Loy) and the RFK assassination into the mix.

Deprecating Officer Craig is shameful. I hope it makes you queasy when you make such claims. A reader of this thread can watch this video and decide for themselves if Officer Craig is credible, instead of going to David Von Pines site where the matter can not be discussed here.

Or, more likely, trying to save his life. Phillips wasn't the top of the food chain. Naming Phillips would suggest the complicity of whoever handled Phillips. AV's implying that those above Phillips could be revealed if he, Veciana, were killed, may have been a gambit to save his own life. Veciana would not be looking to out a high level CIA officer to share the blame for his own involvement in a drug conviction, legitimate or not; that's a sadly weak assertion. Cheers, Michael

Since your speaking for Wynne, Tracy, I'll do the same. Wynne would say he was there in 1963. Wynne is a member of this forum.

Since Joe opened a line of questions, I have a couple for Mr. Johnson. - In an early video, other than #4, I believe that you stated that "Vicky"'was a pseudonym, and that she wished to not be named. Video 4 shows a picture of her, yet she is identified as Vicky. I am confused as to wether her name IS Vicky, because, with the photograph being shown, she is, or will be, no longer anonymous. Can you clarify? -Also, the ID of DAP at the dance should be something that can be verified by other sources. Do you expect that to happen? Cheers, Michael

Tracy, Wynne's account is first-hand account and can hardly be described as a waste of time. The veracity of Wynne's account is what matters and the credibility of that account can be the subject of debate; It's importance cannot be debated. Cheers, Michael

Tracy, I did read your article. It did not get the attention that could be described as a study, I am sorry to say. I will look it over more carefully. Regards, Michael

Tracy, with regard to Vecania's description of the building, it can fairly well be said that it is the Southland Center. He described a blue tile facade, and described it as a large office building. It was the largest office building west of the Mississippi at the time. I am assuming that I have this ID and source correct. I don't have it in front of me. Cheers, Michael

Tracy, from the above, and prior comments, it sounds like you are willing to accept that the meeting occurred, if it did not include LHO. Yet, If LHO is said to be there, then you have numerous objections, including objections to the facts that allow You to believe the possibility or likelihood of a meeting between Bishop and Vecania; and even allowing Bishop to be DAP. When a LN'er stumbles as hard as you are stumbling here, Tracy, it makes the opposite case much stronger than if he or she had not attempted to do damage to the story in the first place. Best Regards, Michael

With all due respect Tracy, like Paul Trejo's exasperated defense of Ruth Paine, it is my opinion that your methods and efforts do discredit Fonzi's and Veciana's claim that this meeting did occur, only serves to add credibility to the story. Regards, Michael

Tracy, Thanks for rigorusly testing the veracity of this important story. I do want to point out, however, that, with regard to the time of year, you are seeing or describing discrepancies where there are none. There's no morphing of a story here. Those accounts are consistent and non exclude one of the others. Summer ends by Sept 21, except to kids, teachers and folks who work at vacation hot-spots. May I ask, Tracy, if you believe that Antonio Veciana met Bishop dozens of times? Cheers, Michael

Thanks David. Like photo-analysis, I admittedly shy away from getting into the nitty-gritty task of accounting for minutes and seconds. This is not due to laziness. It is simply because I doubt my own accounting, accuracy and ultimately the ability to creating a meaningful scenario or argument based on such minutia. I appreciate your taking the time to provide the above data and will juxtapose it with my beliefs, understandings and suppositions and re-evaluate my fluid theory. Cheers, Michael

As an academic excercise when it comes to what the Government is telling me, I ALWAYS assume that I am being lied to. Then look at whether that assumption makes any sense and adjust beliefs accordingly. It's really important. iMHO

Roger that David. Thanks for your explanation. I made a short statement of what I was thinking, above. Paul took the time to ask some questions and invited me to respond, which I did, expanding on things a bit. Whenever I do that I almost always make things less clear than what I said or intended to say. I see from your reply that I did not do a very good job. So allow me to go to my original statement and actually make an even more breif account of my thoughts. I think that LHO's flight from the TSBD caused all, on nearly all, resources to be focused on finding him. It was a distraction that let the real perps get away. I think that that is exactly what was meant to happen. Cheers, Michael

Will do Paul. If LHO had been killed, say, by Baker, at 12:35, then the full-force of the DPD would not have been looking for Oswald for the next hour or so. At 12:35, with Oswald dead, no-one could rationally, or responsibly, assume, and act on the assumption that there were no more shooters. Scores of people and police scrambled up and into the parking lot and reports were made of shots coming from there. At 12:35, with one gunman dead, the case could not be made that It was a lone-nut operation. It would take the full force of the Federal government, and an "esteemed" Presidential Comission to discount the testimony of witnesses and officers, and formulate an absurd lone nut theory. It could not be done at 12:35 on 11-22, with a single dead shooter. A wide-spread dragnet for possible accomplices would have to have been ordered. But, having a specific suspect, with a name and description, known to have slipped away from the scene, all efforts could be brought to bear on that one man, LHO, for the next hour or so. By the time LHO was finally arrested, the possibility of spreading a net for, and focusing on, unknown conspirators would have been largely lost and a LN scenario could take shape. To be sure, this isn't even integral to my evolving pet theory. It just seems self evident to me. A single dead-guy, at 12:35 in Dealy Plaza, on 11-22-63 does not make a case for calling the investigation closed or making any conclusions, at 12:35. Cheers, Michael

Worthy of note Is that when Dulles got word that Harry Truman was preparing his 12-22-63 statement, in which he laments his creation of the monster that the CIA had become, he (Dulles) scrambled to Truman's home, begging that the statement offer him a reprieve from criticism; Truman Acquiesced. Limit CIA Role To Intelligence by Harry S Truman The Washington Post December 22, 1963 - page A11 Harry Truman Writes: Limit CIA Role To Intelligence By Harry S Truman Copyright, 1963, by Harry S Truman INDEPENDENCE, MO., Dec. 21 — I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency—CIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President. I think it is fairly obvious that by and large a President's performance in office is as effective as the information he has and the information he gets. That is to say, that assuming the President himself possesses a knowledge of our history, a sensitive understanding of our institutions, and an insight into the needs and aspirations of the people, he needs to have available to him the most accurate and up-to-the-minute information on what is going on everywhere in the world, and particularly of the trends and developments in all the danger spots in the contest between East and West. This is an immense task and requires a special kind of an intelligence facility. Of course, every President has available to him all the information gathered by the many intelligence agencies already in existence. The Departments of State, Defense, Commerce, Interior and others are constantly engaged in extensive information gathering and have done excellent work. But their collective information reached the President all too frequently in conflicting conclusions. At times, the intelligence reports tended to be slanted to conform to established positions of a given department. This becomes confusing and what's worse, such intelligence is of little use to a President in reaching the right decisions. Therefore, I decided to set up a special organization charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without department "treatment" or interpretations. I wanted and needed the information in its "natural raw" state and in as comprehensive a volume as it was practical for me to make full use of it. But the most important thing about this move was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions—and I thought it was necessary that the President do his own thinking and evaluating. Since the responsibility for decision making was his—then he had to be sure that no information is kept from him for whatever reason at the discretion of any one department or agency, or that unpleasant facts be kept from him. There are always those who would want to shield a President from bad news or misjudgments to spare him from being "upset." For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas. I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda. With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda about "Yankee imperialism," "exploitive capitalism," "war-mongering," "monopolists," in their name-calling assault on the West, the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people. I well knew the first temporary director of the CIA, Adm. Souers, and the later permanent directors of the CIA, Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg and Allen Dulles. These were men of the highest character, patriotism and integrity—and I assume this is true of all those who continue in charge. But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field—and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere. We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.

In my estimation, Oswald's escape from the TSBD was critical to the plan. Oswald's escape allowed a focus of all resources to look for one person; the identity of, and a description of whom, had immediately been established. If LHO had been killed immediately, there would be no reason to refrain from setting-up a dragnet to locate and arrest possible conspirators. Cheers, Michael

John Simkin opened this thread with the following: In the early 1960s the KGB was involved in a “honey trap” operation involving politicians based in London and Washington. This operation was identified by the intelligence agencies in both countries. However, instead of breaking up the operation, the intelligence agencies decided to use this information in order to manipulate these politicians.

Tommy, when Bill is done with your tape, may I please borrow it? I'll get it back to you ASAP!

8 years, tons of data, can't dig in to it now....... Bump!

I was poking around in the DPD archives today. Ruby's address book is there, in photostat form. I did not search for that particular entry. Cheers, Michael

Yup. I thought of that. I did compare it to other sources (Marquette vs some other source) and it is consistent. I am summing that Griffin said.... "quote xxxxxx unquote" or there must be some convention used.... IDK? Cheers, Michael