Michael Clark

1 minute ago, Bill Miller said:

He says that when Oswald was met on the 2nd floor by Patrolman Baker that he never had a coke because Truly and Baker didn't mention it in their statements or testimonies.

Thanks Bill, 

4 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

You were likely reading Probe Magazine cloak-and-dagger drivel from the 1990's.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, You added nothing here; just a cheap, speculative cloaked dagger in Mr. Di Eugenio's back.

You are the most prominent Paine apologist and you have interviewed Ruth. Can you say whether she did or didn't work for USAID in SA?

Cheers,

Michael

1 hour ago, Bart Kamp said:

This is highly misleading Miller, you have some interesting tricks up yer sleeve, but they do not amount to much.

You need to pub the ones where he is wearing his shirt not his t-shirt!

While you are at it you and Trejo need to show the coke story source Both of you are masters at quacking without presenting evidence, so again, get back into the game dude and show us all.

Oh and do not think for a second that you are let of the hook regarding the B&T entry from the NYTH article.

Quit posting until you admit your mistakes or show us the proof.

Get to work!!! Or continue to lose every ounce of cred you thought you had..........

This is the Education Forum so educate us all

Am I missing somethin?, Is there confusion as to where the Coke story came from? Is Bart just rejecting that account or claiming that there is no account of the Coke?

Cheers,

Michael

2 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Michael:

I found the paragraph in Mr. Kelly's blog essay you refer to:

"Later that very day I met with former Congressional investigator Gaeton Fonzi, and asked him in which building lobby in Dallas did Antonio Vechina meet with his CIA case officer “Maurice Bishop” and find him meeting with Oswald?  Fonzi said, “The Southland Building,” thus presenting another possible destination for the fleeing Oswald, though one that he apparently had a change of mind about before getting there."

 

The idea that Lee originally thought to go where possibly his handler(s) may have been is very interesting indeed.

Yes Andrej,

It may be if only notional interest, but because I like Wynne Johnson and his story, I am fascinated that his account may be the only authorative one placing the meeting in the Southland center.

Likewise, and more relevant, is the Main Street Southland Hotel posted above. For a while I was inclined to believe that Ruby, Senator and Crafard had gone to the Southland Center on 11-23. It now looks more like it was the Main St location, where Fritz lived.

Cheers,

Michael

Here Bill Kelly says that Gaeton Fonzi said that the meeting happened in the Southland Center

"I met with former Congressional investigator Gaeton Fonzi, and asked him in which building lobby in Dallas did Antonio Vechina meet with his CIA case officer “Maurice Bishop” and find him meeting with Oswald?  Fonzi said, “The Southland Building,”

http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2012_05_01_archive.html?m=1

About 3/4 of the way down on this page is a pic of a different Southland Hotel, at 1200 Main St. This would be the place that Jack White mentioned, adding that Captain Will Fritz lived here. This would jibe closely with Crafard's and Senator's testimony as the place they went to on the morning of 11-23-63.

https://srhistorical.wordpress.com

On February 10, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Andrej Stancak said:

 

I would like to turn the attention of Forum members to a remarkable testimony of Mr. Wynne Johnson. Wynne was 15 years old in 1963, and had a girlfriend Vicki. Vicki and Wynne liked to visit the roof of the Southland Center to view the scenery of Dallas. And so they did on September 7, 1963. As unexpected and unbelievable as only the life can pose, these two children became witnesses of an event which researchers of the President Kennedy assassination consider as a clear and undisputed proof of a direct contact between Oswald and Maurice Bishop alias a CIA asset David Atlee Phillips: their meeting in Dallas in September 1963. Thanks to Gaeton Fonzi’s research, we know that that meeting also included Antonio Veciana, one of the chief representatives of anti-Castro movement in Miami. It was Veciana who told Fonzi and the House Committee about the Bishop-Oswald meeting.

Wynne and Vicki were approaching the Southland Center when a taxi cab passed and a young man, Lee Harvey Oswald, stepped out. Oswald entered the main lobby, met with Phillips and both men started to talk. Shortly, Veciana came in via a different entrance. And while the three men stood together in the lobby, Wynne and Vicki also entered a long corridor and headed towards the three men.

Mr. Wynne Johnson recorded details of their encounter with Oswald, Phillips and Veciana in three video sequences. Wynne followed every possible lead to support his story. More than fifty years which elapsed could have taken its toll on the vividness of Wynne’s memories. However, Mr. Wynne Johnson had the courage to come forward and speak. Mr. Johnson, in my view, is an honest man and seeks neither fame nor money. Wynne also shows a certain type of charming naivety in his approach towards researchers and certain books owing to the fact that he did not research the assassination case for fifty years. This only strengthens Wynne’ testimony in my eyes.

Mr. Wynne Johnson posted his story on YouTube, and this is how I came to it. I decided to suggest Wynne to present his story to the Forum members since his story is also a part of the history of the assassination case, and as such it has to be preserved. I would therefore appreciate if those researchers who disagree or have doubts about this comparatively recent testimony could express their views in a polite way – about the same polite way as it was the custom in old Forum posts from 2005.

Please find here the links to Mr. Wynne Johnson’s YouTube videos:

Southland Center 1963, part 1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKw_ELuXYj8&t=5s

Southland Center 1963, part 2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO1-Ezw6Qkw

Southland Center 1963, part 3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhxMlnkeFV4

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

 

I wrote a message to Wynne few weeks ago. I wanted to know what could be the reason for Lee Harvey Oswald to undertake a long trip from New Orleans to Dallas and not to spend any time to converse with Phillips.

This is what Mr. Wynne Johnson wrote back. I am copying the relevant part of his email with Wynne’s approval:

Mr. Wynne Johnson, 9-10/2/2017:

“With a certain qualification, the only people at that end of the lobby arrived in the order: Phillips, Oswald, Veciana, and then, simultaneously, Wynne and Vicki.  Oswald had a very short amount of time with Phillips before Veciana came in.  This is known from Oswald himself in phone conversation with Judyth Vary Baker.  See her book Me & Lee.  I myself know that Phillips and Oswald did not have much time together before Vicki and I came in, but slightly longer than you might think, because Vicki and I came down the long corridor at an exceptionally slow walk. …

It is true that Oswald was supposed to meet with Phillips that day, but Phillips sent him away, back to New Orleans, as soon as the three of them got outside.  We know this both from what Veciana told Fonzi (see his book) and what Lee himself told Judyth.  What they did not know is the probable reason why Phillips changed his mind about talking to Oswald then.  The reason is me.  Phillips suspected that 15-year-old -- in fact, probably both of us 15-year-olds.  I assure you that this actually happened. 

I saw Veciana in person in Miami in October, 2015.  He does not remember the encounter well. We spoke entirely in Spanish.  Although I did not ask him, a good friend of his had told me by e-mail that he did not know English very well in 1963.  Therefore, he could well have been in a kind of foreign-language fog, so that he did not understand what was said and whatever he heard would have become easy to forget.”

 

Andrej, did Veciana confirm, to you, that this was in the Southland Center?

Cheers,

Michael

http://www.syracuse.com/state/index.ssf/2017/03/schneiderman_bharara_trump.html

This video sucked me into the rabbit hole, after my interest in this case had laid dormant for many years. 

I am copying a post I made on another thread. I would like to nail down where this meeting took place. Also, if there is any earlier, authorative account as to the location of this meeting I would love to hear it.

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

The building where DAP/LHO/AV may not be of much consequence. It has been, however, something I have been curious about since I hopped down the rabbit hole in November. It was Wynne Johnson's video, about this meeting, indeed, about his presence at this meeting that sucked me in.

I have seen no authorative accounts of the meeting being at the Southland Center aside from Wynne Johnson's. I have read some of AV's interviews and watched some videos, and unless I missed it, he never identified it as being the Southland Center.

I have seen William Kelley state that it was the Southland Center as far back as 2007, but he gives no source. 

Bill White corrected William Kelley on another thread, identifying it as the Southland Cafe, near the police station, and more in line with the testimony of Larry Crafard and George Senator when identifying the cafe they went to on 11-23 with Jack Ruby.

Again, I know it is not necessarily very important, but I am curious. If anyone can share an earlier account, for the location of the LHO/DHP/AV meeting, than the 2014 account of Wynne Johnson, I would really love to hear it.

Cheers,

Michael

40 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

Ruth Paine came from a wealthy family.  Money was never a problem for her.  She regularly took 3-4 month summer vacations with her close-knit family.

Why was Ruth hanging out in Dallas in a half-crappy lower middle class house?  To reconcile with Michael?  To take in needy foreigners?  To hang out with Buell Wesley Frazier's relatives?

Wasn't there something better for Ruth Paine to be doing, like with her high-class, close-knit family?  Did Ruth Paine have a career, or was she just a housewife in limbo?

I believe she worked for AID in South America. I read this along with some scathing criticism of the results of that "effort".

24 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Michael,

 

I have not done research in this area, so I can't comment intelligently, but I wonder if anyone has done a cross-reference between the sightings of a second Oswald and the kind of car he was supposedly driving. Are there any two instances when he was "observed" driving the same kind of car?

 

Also, to the best of my knowledge, there aren't any occasions of a second sighting, at the same time, but in two different locations. I don't know of any instance where Person X says, "I saw Oswald at 3:00 PM here", but Person Y speaks up and says, "No, that can't be because I saw him at 3:00 PM here", all the while the real Oswald is working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, or visiting Marina or whatever.

 

PS: I've always been intrigued by the sightings at the radio station in Alice, Texas. There were at least two witnesses, separated by at least 24 hours, weren't there?

 

Steve Thomas

Steve,

I wish I had taken notes from the beginning when I started reading WC testimonies; with specific attention to times and places for a bunch of characters.

It would also be interesting to nail-down all the accounts regarding Lee's ability to drive. I have seen several opportunities for doing this but it was not done, at least in the the testimonies I have read. Perhaps the WC did some questioning, at some point, with an eye towards nailing this down.

When a friend or family member asks me what I have been up to, and I respond that I have been reading, I like to have a response when asked what kind of stuff I have been reading. I can usually bring up a interesting tid-bit to validate their curiosity. With this case, it's difficult to bring up anything without invoking a dark cloud. The dual Oswal angle would be an interesting part of the tale but I have nothing solid, in terms of having a casual tale to tell in mixed company.

Cheers,

Michael

6 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

The Albert Guy Bogard, Lincoln Mercury, ........

Personally I know I'll never come close to knowing anything close to the truth in this area so I leave it to those who have done some decent research.

But, I still feel the possibility is there, based simply on the complex planning that must have gone into the plot itself. These planners were serious minded people thinking on so many levels. 

Thanks Joe,

7 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Michael,

IMHO, there are always at least two "innocent" possibilities:

1 )  Mistaken identity / faulty memory + Imagination-based embellishment or "filling in the gaps"

2 )  Prevarication 

--  Tommy

Thanks Tommy, I am guessing that that is what this post will revolve around if it is not allowed to die.

Cheers,

Michael

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Michael,

I think it's smart to ask for innocent explanations for specific two-Oswald situations. Otherwise we will end up re-arguing the same situations that have already been argued in the TWO MARGUERITES thread.

Thanks Sandy, I was definitely trying to avoid bickering. So, I was thinking that maybe people who have some explanation for why  they think an of-cited second Oswald incident need not be what it seems. 

For example, at the furniture mart, maybe someone has a good explanation for the problem.

I guess I was a bit optimistic when I posted this, last night. I am not so optimistic this morning. I guess any responses will just be that someone is lying, and bickering will ensue.

Cheers,

Michael

Alright, I lied. I'll ask for an explanation to a specific situation. Can someone explain what happened at the furniture mart? 

I have read about a number of situations that speak to the possibility of there being two Oswalds. Some of them I have no other explanation for other than the existence of a second Oswald. I thought I would open a thread for those who don't believe in a second Oswald to make their case in specific circumstances. I don't want to try to control the discussion so I'll ask for non believers to offer explanations for particular instances where a good explanation can be offered that runs counter to a two Oswald theory. I won't ask for explanations for the specific situations I am thinking of and I just hope they might be addressed.

So, non-believers in the 2 Oswald theory, help me out here, please; what explanations do you have for some of these circumstances. 

Let me just request some explanation for the Oswald that can drive a car and the one that can't.

Cheers,

Michael

22 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear George,

I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald may have been impersonated on a short-term basis from time to time, including the time Craig saw someone who strongly resembled Oswald get into the Rambler Station Wagon and "escape".

That's very different, however, from alleging that two boys from two different families were picked, when they were adolescents, by the CIA in order to eventually become very similar-looking, Agency-controlled and / or manipulated "doppelgangers" some ten years later.

--  Tommy  :sun.

Dear Tommy, 

That is well put. It is also a concise and collegiately offered distinction that opens a dialogue that, I believe, needs to be broached.

Cheers,

Michael

6 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

Yes, Greg Parker has also guessed Aspergers Syndrome as LHO's malady -- and the observations match well.  

Yet IMHO .......

 He was smarter than his Marine officers, but they were bossing him around. 

......................

  LHO thought he was smarter than all of them.

......................... 

LHO always felt he was smarter than his work superiors -- and he had this chip on his shoulder.  It glowed.

I don't think he felt that he was smarter than anyone. His interests, self-education and affliction set him apart and he would recognize that as a problem and a flaw. These things (affliction aside) would be as much a comfort as a curse.

Today, these things are less stigmatizing. Education and the ability to put a name on   an affliction and thereby explain and express its nature make things a lot easier.

IMO

8 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

I kind of agree - he could have had a successful life in the USSR, but I think he could have had a successful life after his return to the US too. You go on to mention that you believe, had he stayed in Russia, that he would have 'buckled down' and got a 'middle position'; I reckon the same could be said in terms of after his return to the US. I reckon that was where his life was heading tbh, that he was coming to the realisation that he needed to 'buck up', a second child on the way, a wife to support, that he wanted to 'settle down' in to a 'normal' lifestyle in the US - almost as if he was on the point of 'maturity'. Sure, perhaps he had to take one step back to go two steps forward, but I genuinely think that he was heading in the right direction...

This is where it gets complicated. lol I say that with consideration of other CT's, including your own. I can see then why a thought of Oswald having stayed in Russia would 'act' as a 'catch-all' in 'predicating' him being the 'Patsy'... The difference I suppose, in overly simplistic terms, is that, as per your CT theory, had he stayed in Russia then there wouldn't have been a JFK assassination - in other CT's, had he stayed in Russia there (likely) would still have been a JFK assassination but we would be talking about some other 'Patsy' instead of Oswald. Indeed, if Oswald was the 'lone assassin', had he stayed in Russia then he couldn't have been the 'lone assassin'...

I suppose then that it is indeed 'comforting' to consider how different things could have been had Oswald stayed in Russia... and yet it is also 'moot' because he didn't stay in Russia. lol

For some reason the Oasis song 'Masterplan' just popped in to my mind, and especially the following verse...

I digress!

Hemmingway was not the best speller, it used to drive his editors nuts and when they complained about them, his retort was "Well, that's what you're hired to correct!"

Regards

I think that Oswald had some flaw which, in his day and age, would have marked him and held him back in social and professional situations. I took a guess at Aspergers being a possible affliction at one point and I soon found that others had made the same observation; so I am inclined to go with that. Today, it would, perhaps, not be held against him so strictly. It was mild enough to allow him entry into certain circles, but it was present enough that further along he would be kept at arms length and ousted in some circles and eventually dispensed with by the CIA.

Cheers,

Michael

Three related threads.

5 hours ago, Chris Bennett said:

I always wondered why Westbrook said this. Given that we now know Westbrook was at best up to some shady things that day (the wallet, et al), is it possible he gave this order as the scene commander to cover up for the arrest of a second person who was brought out back to the alley and who might have looked similar to Oswald?

Chris

Chris, that seems to be an excellent explanation.

Cheers,

Michael

Cross referencing another thread.

On 6/13/2005 at 7:39 PM, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

Pat Speer said:

While I haven't studied the CIA behavior in Mexico as much as I would like, I did stumble upon something which may or may not be well-known.  I certainly found it interesting. Here's my train of thought..

I believe the CIA created a file on Lee Henry Oswald long before the assassination.

More than a year after Oswald's appearance at the US Embassy in Moscow, CIA opened a file on "Lee Henry Oswald."  One might think that a guy threatening to betray US military secrets to the Soviets would catch the CIA's attention in a more timely fashion, and that they'd at least get his name right.

However, there is an alternate explanation that I think explains both the time and name lapses, though entirely my pure unadulterated speculation:

When Oswald appeared at the Embassy, a file was opened in Langley, in his proper name, that was subsequently segregated from the central files.  This was not an unusual practice, and there may have been a fairly legitimate reason for such segregation, per below.

Later, a file was opened on "Lee Henry Oswald," that was placed into the Agency's central files.  This would have been a "marked card" or "barium meal" operation that would allow "somebody" within CIA to scrutinize where that information went within CIA, and watch from where within the Soviet infrastructure that false-name data was reflected back to Langley [via CIA moles within GRU or KGB,]

Further to the marked card speculation, we've known for some time who that "somebody" was; that it was Angleton's CI/SIG who marked the "Lee Henry Oswald" file so that anyone requesting data on him from within CIA would have to identify themselves before being allowed access to the material.  It was via this trip-wire method that Angleton could watch to see whom within CIA had an interest in him.  And, ultimately, how it might bounce back from the Soviets.

Given that Angleton's chief raison d'etre within CIA was finding enemy moles inside the Agency, this may have been a perfectly legitimate exercise.

However, after the assassination, by keeping the original true name file sequestered from others, this left the first CIA notice of Oswald in memo form as something citing the wrong name and coming more than a year after it should have done.

The fact that the false name was still being bruited about within CIA - four years after the defection, three years after the file was opened and 16 months after his repatriation - is hard to rationalize, unless the marked card operation was maintained throughout.  CIA had ample opportunity in the interim to fix the error, unless it was maintained intentionally.

It's theorized that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico shortly before the assassination. I believe the real Oswald was there, and was observed by a mole (or caught on a bug) in the Soviet Embassy, and that a false record was put into the files to protect this mole's identity (or the existence of the bug). This false record included fake phone calls made to the embassy--the transcribers couldn't be trusted to merely create fake transcripts from whole cloth, perhaps they were even being tested. I believe this is what Helms meant by citing "sources and methods" as a reason for the CIA's lies. It should be remembered here that tapping phone lines in Mexico was not illegal for the CIA,

It was a joint venture with Mexico's DFS, in order to ensure there's be no international flap in the event it was discovered.

and that the existence of these taps would have to have been  suspected by the KGB, but that having actual bugs within the walls of the embassy would have to have been considered of the utmost secrecy.

The Lopez Report (the HSCA report on Oswald in Mexico) reflects that on one of the transcripts Oswald called the Soviet Embassy and identified himself as Lee Oswald, and went on to tell his story, spelling out everyone he spoke to inside the embassy, etc.  I believe this was planted information, that is, information derived from the mole, or the bug--but put into the record in such a way that a mole within the CIA would not know the CIA had a spy of its own (or a bug) within the Embassy.

Probe Magazine Interviews with HSCA Deputy Counsel Robert Tannenbaum in 1996 and former HSCA Counsel Richard Sprague in 2000, however, indepently report that the transcripts said the caller in Mexico identified himself as "Lee Henry Oswald." If so, since the Lee Henry Oswald file at the CIA preceded this incident, it would indicate the impersonator is working off flawed CIA information.  They have thus left their fingerprints on their charade.

No doubt Angleton would have been pleased to watch this use of deliberately-tainted 'marked card' information, if the above speculation is correct.

Are the actual transcripts available?  While it's possible Sprague and Tannenbaum have maintained contact, and jointly remembered the story incorrectly, if they haven't, the chances of them both remembering this story incorrectly in the same way would have to be considered miniscule.

Or perhaps I'm simply wrong that the Lee Henry Oswald file preceded this incident.  I'd appreciate some help sorting this out.

You're quite right about this, Pat.  You'll note that various government agencies also had a penchant for referring to our boy as "Harvey Lee Oswald," which may be a similar marked card gambit, or just a mistake that recurred from one file to the next like a virus.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

"Later, a file was opened on "Lee Henry Oswald," that was placed into the Agency's central files.  This would have been a "marked card" or "barium meal" operation that would allow "somebody" within CIA to scrutinize where that information went within CIA, and watch from where within the Soviet infrastructure that false-name data was reflected back to Langley [via CIA moles within GRU or KGB,]"

According to the above speculation, LHO was of great interest to the CIA, even beyond that which his sabbatical to the USSR, would appear to warrant. Or, planting information markers was a matter of routine for Angleton, or the CIA in general.

I cought the tail end of this while driving home a few minutes ago while listening to our local, Albany, NY., NPR affiliate, WAMC. I was hoping to find a written essay to share but I have only found the audio version. Here it is.

http://wamc.org/post/listener-essay-i-was-wrong