Michael Clark

9 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

Ad with regard to 9-11. If there was something awfully nefarious that happened, to create a Pearl Harbor, a Maine incident, or a Tonkin Incident, Trump just may know about it. I don't see how he couldn't. He just may be clean with regard to that as well. I only seriously dug into 9-11 last September. I have questions. I would like answers. Some of the answers are not satisfactory. The arenas for questioning that event are contentious and ugly. So I stay away, but I do have my list of questions. If I knew where and how to get my questions answered I would go there, but I don't. I don't trust the MSM. The alternatives are improving, I think.

11 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Michael I like some of the things you have to say. I could agree with you that it's not impossible that  Trump could do some good things that no one else would be able to do, but when you list them as:  shedding light on the JFK assassination, the nefarious intelligence activities of the previous 3 or 4 decades, or, (if your a truther) 9-11.

That's a pretty myopic wish list,  There's more to running the most powerful nation on earth, than placating a bunch of Cter's. Besides, .I don't know what you base that on other than Trumps mention of bad intelligence getting us into the Iraq War (which he supported)but that war was not really spearheaded by the bad intelligence,but was a completely elective war, planned from the beginning of his Presidency, and inspired by the brilliant mind of GWB and his cronies. I agree completely with Paul, you're dreaming.

In running a country there are actual policies, which I've never heard you mention.You referred a couple of times to Trump being a Populist and not a conservative, yet you ignore that all his appointments are either arch conservatives or pro business globalist conservatives.Your so bent on this image you have of a CTer friendly President, you seem to pass off everything he's actually doing.

I get it Kirk. I am however, trying to stay on topic. I try not to treat this forum like my Facebook timeline. In the "Healthy Scepticism" thread I began to notice that there was anything but healthy scepticism of intelligence agencies being discussed. So I tried to make a few points about that and then left it alone. I recall being rather blunt at one point, I was kind of rude, and I hurt my case but that was my attempt to point out that that thread was, almost from the get-go, beyond the scope of this forum.

I'll have to disagree with the characterization of the three subjects above and the potential (wish) for openness as "myopic". Myopic implies pessimism and I doubt that you meant that; it is clear that I was expressing optimism, even if it was the Hail-Mary variety. The Hail-Mary may be all we have, and, with regard to the three "wishes", they are all on-topic.

If I were to venture off topic, you would hear a lot of stuff that can be heard in a hundred other places, but, IMHO, they don't belong here, strictly speaking. 

I kind of wish Paul had given me an ack on some of my points, rather than just throwing the jab. I think that some of the things I mentioned were worthy of an up or down, and what I like about this forum is that more often than not you will get that kind of feedback rather than just typical trolling barbs from miserable people that have nothing better to do or no way of making themselves feel good than throwing stones from behind a computer. 

One important point I had made, which Paul curtly replied to, was that Trump appears to be relatively clean. I made my points before about Labor and the Mafia etc. There is also no Skull and Bones, maybe their is no secret societies, no Iran-Contra. The guy may never have killed anyone or ordered any one killed. That would be astonishing compared to what I have read in the last few months, in my studies of the last 50 years. What I have read in the last few months is a lesson in power politics and how people get owned and controlled and, eventually, horribly corrupt; to the detriment of American citizens, soldiers and many poor souls who find themselves getting killed.

Perhaps Trump is and can avoid that gambit. Perhaps the Intelligence community right now is no different than it was during the BOPI, Vietnam, Iran Contra etc.. Maybe Trump will change that. Maybe he can. Maybe he is clean enough, maybe he is not owned. Maybe he can keep from getting assassinated. Maybe all of this bluster is happening just to satisfy a base to whom he made promises, according to a formula that was put together to win an election. Perhaps things might normalize somewhat once that is done. He obviously craves adulation, he may want to be a hero. But I am repeating myself.

Myopic, in the sense of being nearsighted, with regard to the three "wishes"? Yes, because I am staying on topic. I'll not get into full blown, wide-ranging political discussions because it would be off topic.

Myopic, In the sense of being pessimistic? I'm the one who is pointing out the potential for a silver lining, but within the focus of this sub-forum, so, no.

Am I stupid? No. I understand that there is a lot of fear out there. But let me suggest that there is not "a healthy scepticism of" the media out there. Both the left and right MSM are feeding off that fear. It is dividing families and communities. It's impossible to make a political joke about one side or the other without the hair standing up on someone's neck.

Am I dreaming? no. Am I hoping? Yes. Am I optimistic? Not really. Am I Myopic? No, because I am not nearsighted, and I am fighting pessimism.

Cheers,

Michael

Mr. Caddy finds the best stuff. This was posted on another threads.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/01/29/trump-follows-nixon-nsc-model-except-worse-column/97215090/

On 7/23/2016 at 7:32 AM, Don Kesterson said:

I am trying to research Nixon's world-wide trip in 1964 for a series of novels I am writing about the causes of the Vietnam Conflict. In my research into Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge's run for the Republican Presidential representative, I stumbled onto a website that talks about Nixon taking a side trip to negotiate with the Viet Cong to return five mercenaries who were captured in an OPLAN 34A raid into North Vietnam. It is purported that Nixon paid a VC Lieutenant with a box of gold. (I am guessing it came from Santa Romana, if true). Other purported evidence was a note left for Sgt. Hollis Kimmons, one of his security guards, thanking him.

I am off to the library today to check into some old books but I doubt I find anything. If anybody has any information regarding this trip or if it is all a fabrication, I would appreciate it.

Greetings Don. I see your post from today but it just looks like material quoted from earlier in the thread. I dont see anything new. How is your search and book coming?

meanwhile, I watched this the other day and it seems to have some relevance...

5 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

This is what A.J. Weberman and Bud Fensterwald published in NODULE 15, back in the late 1970's.

What makes it plausible is the book by Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).

.................,,,,.,,,

Naive -- but not impossible.  (Besides that, $25 in 1963 was like $250 today, and LHO had no apartment for his wife and two babies.  So, the motivation was there.)

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I get it. And I can also come up, in my head, with other scenarios where WBF still has a hand in it.

But, alas, I find myself theorizing about LHO and the TSBD, and I don't think JFK was shot from there. I usually try to avoid this area of the conspiracy but I end up finding my way here anyhow.

5 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Alistair,

Gerry Patrick Hemming told A.J. Weberman that he personally called LHO from Miami on 11/21/1964, to offer LHO double the price of his Manlicher-Carcano rifle if he would bring it to the TSBD in the morning, and hand it over to a person whom they both knew.

Since we now have evidence that Gerry Patrick Hemming was connected to Guy Banister in New Orleans (Caufield, 2015), and we know for a fact that LHO was connected with Guy Banister in New Orleans (544 Camp Street), the connection between LHO and Gerry Patrick Hemming is eminently plausible.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

$25 to bring a rifle to your work place, where the President is expected to cruise-buy the next day, and become an accessory to the assassination of the President? What kind of assassin would be calling 24 hrs ahead of time, looking for a crappy rifle to shoot a President? And who would involve themselves in such nonsense? I wouldn't take my gun out to shoot a deer without knowing that I could group 5 rounds in a 4" circle at 125 yards. No assassin would just take a rifle like that from a guy and use it to shoot a head of state, and no one would take such an offer seriously. 

Based on this logic -- if Frazier had been standing next to LHO (i.e. Prayer Man) on the front steps, it seems absolutely certain he would have insisted upon this testimony.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

While I am not buying into the romance angle, and after reading Frazier's recent(ish) account, to which I posted a link, I am inclined to agree..... IF that is WBF on the steps. If it is not WBF, PM could still be LHO.

Michael

4 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

 

Re: the following bit;

Is it the brevity of it that you feel is causing confusion Michael?

Regards

Alistair, no, I thought I had read several differing recollections of the quote earlier in this thread. I just wanted to get the WC testimony quoted.

The JFK assassination research community should work to bring our cause to the attention of Trump; we know that the vast majority of people do not believe the official myth. He may not even be aware of the forthcoming document release. This could make him a hero to many, can he resist?

How would we go about this?

5 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

This bit?

Regards

Yes, thank you 

23 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

 Just on that subject, until I started looking in to the JFK assassination I didn't know that a rifle could be dismantled. lol

Very relevant, Michael.

It speaks to Oswald not taking a lunch in with him, and there are no reports (as far as I know) that Oswald did buy a lunch that day. It's relevant because a lot of theories are predicated on Oswald having lunch.

Kudos.

Thanks Alistair, It also seems to me like someone should have interviewed the lunch truck guy, or nailed down where he got his lunch from. They may have, but I have not seen or heard anything about it. Somewhere I think that I read that he was seen, or claimed to be eating with the colored guys, first or second floor.

1 minute ago, Alistair Briggs said:

 

What confusion do you refer to Michael?

Regards.

The exact wording between lee and Frazier as to what was in the package. It's the third and fourth Line down. I'm trying to highlight it but my iPad seems to want to highlight one word or a whole paragraph.

I'm posting this because there seems to be some confusion on what was said about the package of curtain rods.

WC Testimony: Wesley Buell Frazier

Mr. FRAZIER - Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention and I said, "What's the package, Lee?"
And he said, "Curtain rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today." That is the reason, the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that.
Mr. BALL - What did the package look like?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I would just, it is right as you get out of the grocery store, just more or less out of a package, you have seen some of these brown paper sacks you can obtain from any, most of the stores, some varieties, but it was a package just roughly about two feet long.
Mr. BALL - It was, what part of the back seat was it in?
Mr. FRAZIER - It was in his side over on his side in the far back.
Mr. BALL - How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up?
Mr. FRAZIER - I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat.
Mr. BALL - From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you would measure it?
Mr. FRAZIER - If, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches.
Mr. BALL - How wide was the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I would say the package was about that wide.
Mr. BALL - How wide would you say that would be?
Mr. FRAZIER - Oh, say, around 5 inches, something like that. 5, 6 inches or there. I don't--
Mr. BALL - The paper, was the color of the paper, that you would get in a grocery store, is that it, a bag in a grocery store?

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

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I say, I was watching the gages and watched the car for a few minutes before I cut it off.
Mr. BALL - Yes.
Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in.
So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks. One day you go across one track and maybe there would be some cars sitting there and there would be another diesel coming there, so you have to watch when you cross the tracks, I just walked along and I just like to watch them switch the cars, so eventually he kept getting a little further ahead of me and by that time we got down there pretty close to the Depository Building there, I say, he would be as much as, I would say, roughly 50 feet in front of me but I didn't try to catch up with him because I knew I had plenty of time so I just took my time walking up there.
Mr. BALL - Did you usually walk up there together.
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; we did.
Mr. BALL - Is this the first time that he had ever walked ahead of you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he did.
Mr. BALL - You say he had the package under his arm when you saw him? 

FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - You mean one end of it under the armpit?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he had it up just like you stick it right under your arm like that.
Mr. BALL - And he had the lower part--
Mr. FRAZIER - The other part with his right hand.
Mr. BALL - Right hand?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - He carried it then parallel to his body?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right, straight up and down.
Representative FORD - Under his right arm?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Did it look to you as if there was something heavy in the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much attention to the package because like I say before and after he told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any reason to doubt his word.
Mr. BALL - Did it appear to you there was some, more than just paper he was carrying, some kind of a weight he was carrying?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, yes, sir; I say, because one reason I know that because I worked in a department store before and I had uncrated curtain rods when they come in, and I know if you have seen when they come straight from the factory you know how they can bundle them up and put them in there pretty compact, so he told me it was curtain rods so I didn't think any more about the package whatsoever.
Mr. BALL - Well, from the way he carried it, the way he walked, did it appear he was carrying something that had more than the weight of a paper?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, you know like I say, I didn't pay much attention to the package other than I knew he had it under his arm and I didn't pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn't pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.

47 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Alistair,

OK, we were both half-wrong and half-right.   Even score.

As for the chase: my reasoning goes back to Michael Clark's observation that Wesley Buell Frazier's behavior was suspicious enough to make Michael think of a JFK conspiracy.  What behavior?  Simply that Frazier wasn't suspicious enough about this wrapped package in the back seat of his car.

I had to think about that for a minute.  Michael suggested that if he had agreed to give free rides to a pal, and then that pal brought a covered package inside his car, and if Michael had asked about it -- it would be abnormal for the conversation to be so short -- the same conversation that you quoted above.

The length of the conversation seems abnormally short to me, as well.

So -- I tried to think of alternative explanations, rather than a JFK conspiracy.  The most obvious explanation, in the light of Frazier's "bathroom remark" when the WC attorney asked him about the first time he met LHO -- is that Frazier's critical faculties were turned to low radar.  Frazier wasn't being critical of LHO -- Frazier was being super-accommodating to LHO -- because Frazier had secret designs on LHO.

That would explain it.  As I say -- I would never have raised the possibility unless Frazier had used that "bathroom remark."

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

"Buell would later tell the Warren Commission, set up to investigate the shooting, that he didn't think the brown paper package was long enough to be a rifle.

To this day he doesn't believe Oswald was carrying a gun.

Members of the panel, who included Gerald Ford, later to become 38th President, insisted he must have been mistaken about the brown package carried by Oswald.

'I told them it wasn't big enough to be a rifle, but they said I must have been mistaken,' he said.

'They asked if I was traumatized by the events, but I wasn't. I know what I saw and the package was about two foot in length. I know how long a rifle is and it is not two feet.

'I came under a lot of pressure to change my story, but I refused. I told them what I saw and I know they did not like it.' "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326233/I-drove-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-book-depository-don-t-believe-shot-JFK-52-years-assassination-Oswald-s-friend-says-convinced-patsy-real-gunman-grassy-knoll.html

Hmm, in an article today, Trump added Steve Bannon (Chief Strategist) to the NSC and removed the CJC and the DNI from same. Am I incorrect in directly relating the two events? How strange is it to have a Chief Strategist on the NSC and not the DNI and CJC, and how crazy is it that it is Steve Bannon? Do you think Trump wants Bannon around for such phone calls in the future, instead of Pence?

Both the JCS and the DNI require confirmation. The Senior Counselor, and Chief Counselor do not require confirmation.

and....

"From Wikipedia".... by Presidential Policy Directive 19 signed by Barack Obama in October 2012, the DNI was given overall responsibility for Intelligence Community whistleblowing and source protection.

From Wikipedia: "The position appears to have roughly the same level of authority as the Chief of Staff position. The position's level of decision making authority within the hierarchy of the President's personal staff was reported by the New York Times: "The arrangement appeared aimed at ensuring that both (the Chief of Staff and Chief Strategist) would be required to sign off on many decisions jointly."

--- I bet COS Priebus gets replaced tout de suite! 

On 4/6/2005 at 0:07 PM, John Simkin said:

H. R. Haldeman, President Nixon's chief of staff, claimed in his book, The Ends of Power: "After Kennedy was killed, the CIA launched a fantastic cover-up. The CIA literally erased any connection between Kennedy's assassination and the CIA... in fact, Counter intelligence Chief James Angleton of the CIA called Bill Sullivan of the FBI and rehearsed the questions and answers they would give to the Warren Commission investigators."

I have already written about Angleton's role in removing Mary Pinchot Meyer's diary after her death. There was also another incident where he took away a manuscriot after someone died.

Winston Scott was CIA's station chief in Mexico in 1963. Scott retired in 1969 and began a memoir about his time in the FBI, OSS and the CIA. He completed the manuscript, It Came To Late, and made plans to discuss the contents of the book with CIA director, Richard Helms, in Washington on 30th April, 1971.

Winston Scott died on 26th April, 1971. No autopsy was performed, and a postmortem suggested he had suffered a heart attack.

Michael Scott. Winston Scott's son, told Dick Russell that James Angleton took away his father's manuscript. Angleton also confiscated three large cartons of files including a tape-recording of the voice of Lee Harvey Oswald. Michael Scott was also told by a CIA source that his father had not died from natural causes.

Michael Scott eventually got his father's manuscript back from the CIA. However, 150 pages were missing. Chapters 13 to 16 were deleted in their entirety. In fact, everything about his life after 1947 had been removed on grounds of national security.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKscottW.htm

That is the first post in this thread. The link to the Spartacus bio does not work for me. I am posting a link to that bio that does work for me.

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKscottW.htm

Oswald was getting peppered with questions. I think his answer and the question are vague enough to discount it as not definitive as where he exactly was. Sure, he, sort of, had an opportunity to say that he was on the steps but he has larger fish to fry. The fact that this clip is one of few that survive can speak to the possibility that it's survival was selective.

Thanks Paul, 

I have taken a few liberties in recent days, with things I have claimed that are possible. I'll avoid that in the future. I read-up on Frazier's life after Dealy Plaza. I recall a fairly extensive military career, but I don't recall marriages or children. I'll have to look into that again.

I don't find a young guy like that, befriending a coworker and neighbor odd. Offering a ride in that situation in 1963, with those living and working conditions, struggling, does not seem odd. And Oswald would have seemed to be an interesting fellow with his military and Russian experiences, and who knows what else he may have shared with Frazier.

There definitely seems to be a lot of assertions of gayness, between New Orleans, The Carousel and now the TSBD. It's so odd. And none (?) of these notions are more than suggestions. 

On a possibly ancillary note, I closely read Ruby's first WC interview today, and I am in the middle of the later one. His warning of an apocalyptic doomsday, particularly for Jews, is striking. It's a damn shame that they did not get him to Washington to hear him out. It Is speculation, but it sounds like he would have implicated Walker, The JBS and the DPD.

I find it bizarre that they just let him ramble on and skate areound questions about what he did between, say, midnight and dawn on the 23rd. It is precisely before he says that he picked up Senator that he got sketchy with his testimony. 

Officer Harry Olson drives to the garage at the Carousel, at midnight, with Kathy Kay. He sees Ruby there. A couple hours later Ruby sees Kathy Kay, fooling with officer Carlson, in a car.

Sombody has their story wrong, and something is going on at the Carousel and the garage. I have not seen Ruby state that he went to a diner with Senator in the middle of the night. Perhaps I'll find it after the lie detector test. 

I have to see if Kathy Kay was interviewed by the WC.

I have read several Zapruder film threads and other related articles, blogs etc. I have not read all of this thread. In none of those threads do I recall seening an account of the processing of the Zapruder film that I did read elsewhere and I think it is interesting and it could be helpful.

The original Zapruder film was a "double 8" reel of film. This means that, like a cassette tape, you run it (play or record it), flip-it, and you can then run (play or record) the other side.

The account that I read is that the "B" side, if you will, had Zapruder family recordings on it. When the film was split, the family recordings were restored to viewable condition, as were the Dealy plaza recordings, and then they went off to wherever they went off to.

It seems to me that the "B" side recording, the family films, could be, and could always have been, useful in determining what is presently missing from the film that we see.

I don't know if this has been persued at all but I thought I should bring it up since I have not seen it discussed.

Cheers,

Mike

On 12/6/2007 at 10:48 AM, Jack White said:

Bill...I may be wrong but I feel there is some confusion here that

needs to be researched.

I think there is some confusion between the

SOUTHLAND LIFE CENTER

and the

SOUTHLAND HOTEL

The Southland Life Insurance Center consisted of two large modern

buildings...the Insurance company, 42 stories tall...and the SHERATON

HOTEL DALLAS, 38 stories tall.

If I recall correctly, it was the lobby of the Southland Life building

where Phillips and Oswald met.

The Southland Life building had a penthouse restaurant called La Tunisia,

and Mary Ferrell many times told of having lunch there at the time of

the assassination.

George and Barbara Bush were registered at the Sheraton Hotel on

the day of the assassination.

On the other hand, as I recall (source Mary Ferrell), THE SOUTHLAND

HOTEL was a small cheap hotel (I think on Harwood) near the Dallas

city hall, and was the long-time residence of Homicide Chief Will Fritz,

as it was across the street from his job at the city jail. This is likely

the place that had the all-night coffee shop that Ruby visited. Being

across from the jail, it likely was a copshop hangout.

These memories are very old...but I suggest you check them out,

since I think you got them mixed up.

Jack

Posting this to get another of Jack White's Southland Hotel Cafe's identifications up front.

On 12/5/2007 at 0:14 PM, William Kelly said:

 

Posted December 5, 2007 (edited) · Report post

 

I think everyone has pretty much agreed that David Atlee Phillips was the "Maurice Bishop" that Veciana knew, for a variety of reasons. 

There is the probability that other intelligence officers of a similar rank also used the alias. 

His identification of Oswald as being in Dallas in August of 1963 when Oswald was suppose to be in New Orleans, leads one to believe that Oswald did indeed "go underground," and moved about without creating records and probably on assignment from yet to be identified domestic intelligence network. If you accept this meeting as true then this network was most definately associated with Phillips' operations, something to do with the Mexico City stuff. 

If you accept the fact that DAP met with LHO and AV in Dallas at that time, then their meeting place - a large office building/hotel down Deep Elm, on the other side of Dallas from Dealey Plaza, would lead one to identify the tennants of that office building. 

It would also be interesting if the hotel coffee shop of this building is the same coffee shop visited by Jack Ruby and Larry Crafard after midnight on the evening of the assassination, having just taken photos of the "Imeach Earl Warren" billboard, which Ruby somehow thought related to the assassination. Ruby knew the night manager of the coffee shop and often went there. 

For someone who believes that Veciana met with Maurice Bishop and Lee Harvey Oswald, placing them all together at one place at one time, it would be interesting to find out more about the Pan Am Bank of Miami, where Veciana said he swore allegiance to USA and was given trainining in psychological warfare techniques, codes, ciphers and tradecraft. This is the same bank Robert McKowen said was on the wrappers of the cash he received for arms he sold to Castro, and where Jack Ruby delivered cash at the behest of the Fox Brothers Havana casino owners. 

Is there anything about the place Vechiana met MB and LHO, as I suspect? 

Is there anything to the Pan Am Bank of Miami that means anything and leads anywhere? 

And then of course, we follow DAP back to JMWAVE and Mexico City, and follow the paperwork he's left behind for us to read, however belatedly. 

Now there's some back alleys worth visiting. 

Bill Kelly

 

 

 

 

And here, BK does not Identify the cafe in which  Ruby, Senator and Crafard met, in the pre dawn hours of 11-23-63, as the Southland Center Cafe, or any other cafe. He say it is in Deep Ellum. According to my maps, the Southland Center is not in Deep Ellum.

On December 5, 2007 at 3:16 PM, Jack White said:

 

Bill, as I recall the all night coffee shop visited by Ruby was

the Lucas B&B Cafe on Oak Lawn.

Jack

 

And here, Jack White is saying the cafe, assuming it was the pre-dawn visit by Jack Ruby, accompanied-by George Senator, on 11-23--63, is a different cafe than his identification of the cafe as the "Southland Hotel Cafe" (distinct from the Southland Center) that he (Jack White) says was a hotel behind the DPD station. Jack says that Captain Fritz lived there and that the cafe was a "copshop".

***Here, I will edit-in that (Jack's) quote.***

52 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

My interpretation of the Inquisitr and Wall Street Journal articles is that the infamous 35 page dossier is far from being dead or proved false. Russian intelligence has the goods on Trump gained, perhaps, on his first visit as a businessman in1987 to Russia before he became all-knowing about attempts there to compromise prominent visitors. So there is much activity behind the scenes going on by Western intelligence agencies to establish definitively just how compromised he is today.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-dossier-mi6-christopher-steele-russia-documents-alex-younger-a7528681.html

That said, there is also a growing consensus that Trump is a loon and may snap or have a public breakdown sooner rather than later, leading to his voluntary or involuntary resignation as President.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/carl-bernstein-nervous-republican-officials-are-questioning-president-trumps-emotional-stability/

https://infinite-coincidence.com/2017/01/22/donald-trump-is-going-to-snap-very-soon-and-here-is-how-i-know/

That is unfortunate, my only hope was that Trump is uncompromised, and not owned.

***edit---  Pehaps Howard Stern can save him.