Michael Clark
-
Posts
4,737 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Clark
-
-
30 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:
I agree, what did he have to lose? Still he acknowledges keeping shut in his Russian Hack conference because he didn't want to be part of the "political scrum".It depends on how you look at Obama. I look at him as backing down a lot. Yes sometimes it is "damned if you do or don't" and sometimes a President just has to show courage and be damned. It wasn't the majority of Congress, but the leadership and selected members......
I like Obama. He is a true statesmen and we needed and need him. I could lay out some criticisms but I will demure. I Demure because he had a lot of enemies; vicious angry enemies that would have torn us apart if he had let them. Van Jones was spot on when he characterized the rabid forces of that election cycle as "blacklash". Trump and this administration, and these first 100 days, at least, are going to be a wholesale repudiation of a black President. It makes me sick when I read comments calling his administration a "failed experiment".
I regret that in the last several posts I failed to tie my comments into the purpose of this forum, the JFK assassination. If I chime in again I will not fail to do so.
Cheers, Mike
-
48 minutes ago, Tom Neal said:
Michael,
Definitely an interesting article. The last comment about exhuming JFK's remains begs the question: Who could we trust to do it?
BTW, are you sure you didn't vote for Trump?
I know i sound like I might have, but I did not.
To be sure, regarding your "Dynasty or not" statement, that's what I get from absolutely everyone to whom I have mentioned it. I have received absolutely no validation to my point on the dangers of Dynastic power; zilch, zero, nada. I am not trying to convince you to embrace my POV on that, I promise. I wish I could, however, just for the sake of this argument, express how emphatic about that point I really am. It is perhaps the most defining principle of our country. It's so defining that it is not even mentioned in the constitution or bill of rights. Our notion of popular sovereignty is the essence of our form of government, constitution, and is pre-eminent to any Bill of Rights. Our government rules at our will, not the other way around. The rights of the people of the English commonwealth are granted at the pleasure of the crown. Honestly, if we just poo-poo the idea that we have to reject daynastic power, we could save a whole lot of money and aggravation by just asking the queen for an application for readmittance to the Commonwealth.
I learned a whole lot last fall. I read the Federalist papers, I ruminated on the meaning of our revolution and government. My political life has changed. My image of American freedom is no longer defined by the picture of the three guys drumming, piping and carrying a flag that I remember when I was 8 years old during the Bicentennial. And I am thankful. I am thankful that the past election stirred me to think, read and imagine what our revolution was really about; and I am a changed person politically.
So, again, my aversion to dynasticism is serious and an absolute priority. I am embarrassed that the only person who agrees with me is Barbara Bush.
I like Hillary Clinton. I think she is eminently qualified to be the Presidnt, and I have never done so well as I did under Bill Clinton. But, I'll make one more point about HRC that I think is huge, even if it pales in comparison to my aforementioned pet-political-peeve; and that is that she, they, would have come with baggage, and who knows what might have been in there. Part of the beauty of elections and term limits is the ability to sweep away baggage and have a fresh start; why would you give that up?
-
-
Wow! Great thread. Enlightening to me as to what you folks are really doing here. It's an attempt at a serious and legitimate (or as close as possible) investigation.
So far as I can tell, the Commerce St. location for the Southland cafe, came from Mary Ferrel. And, in this thread anyway, it has not been followed-up.
-
Deleted not helpful
-
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
I am seeing that the Southland cafe has been addressed. I'm not sure it has been resolved, but I do see that the question has been raised.
-
Vicki is the name, or pseudonym of Wynn Johnson's girlfriend with whom he went to the Southland Center. They were both 15 years old. It was Vicki's mother who warned her and Wynne to never mention the encounter.
Vicki has thus far chosen to remain anonymous and will not confirm the story.
-
I am kind fishing here. A post that I made will kind of explain......
Regarding this thread. I am surprised at How little attention Wynne Johnsons video gets on this forum. I am just trying to figure out why that is, as much as I would like to hear what all of you think?
Southland Center Dallas, September, 1963
-
.... bouncing old ones; without really having anything to add.
I am surprised at what I do not see in here. There are many topics which I have tried to track down over the last several months and, after having found this site to be a great resource, found shockingly little for them here. Perhaps there is a reason for it that I have not picked-up,on yet, I just don't know.
So I am wondering if it is an ok idea to create threads, kind of like a wiki-entry, even if I really don't have much to add? I likely will get few or no responses to this and will just go ahead and do it. I will then surely find out why it was not a good idea; it's just how I end-up rolling somethimes.
I am going to bounce an old thread that is of great interest to me, but it is a subject that gets little attention, and I'll see how that goes.
The thread is the Maurice Bishop= David Atlee Phillips thread. I'll be posting links to the Wynne Johnson videos which are also something I see very little debate on in these forums. This is of great interest to me because, after my interest in the JFK assassination laid dormant for 24 years, Wynne Johnsons video opened up the flood gates and I have been sucked down stream.
-
26 minutes ago, Tom Neal said:
Michael,
Thanks for your response, and I SINCERELY hope you are correct. Nothing would give me greater pleasure that to be dead wrong, but I foresee another victory for the "invisible gov't." As controlled by the owners as the media was in the JFK era, since Reagan forced them to become entertainment and propaganda driven only, our sole hope is the internet. Trump's rednecks are not online, and would only go to Fox News sites if they were. The gov't is elected by the masses who *choose* ignorance over facts. Until the other half of the voters acquire some knowledge of how things *actually* are done we have no hope of changing the current system.
Greed runs the U$A, and about half of the voters are OK with it as they too are addicted to money.
Bernie sat down with Wisconsin voters post election and asked why they voted for Trump. They believe that "maybe" Trump will bring bank jobs to America. Right. What about every one of Trump's companies that use only overseas labor? Not going to happen. As dishonest as the average politician's campaign promises are, with Trump they ain't seen nothing yet! They will eventually realize they have been had, but will continue to make the same mistake as their ignorance makes them gullible.
Trump is not a business man, he's a con-man. He's made, and lost, his fortune by screwing over the competition and not paying his debts. He won't fare well doing this to China for example, as we will continue to need their money. His notion that "we just won't pay them" what we owe is born from a lifetime of doing just that in his business dealings. I predict his impeachment, but that is far from a happy ending.
With Hillary we would have had a liberal Supreme Court and the power to make changes that are desperately needed. With a Republican president we will have a Republican Supreme Court for many years to come who will exacerbate the current already unacceptable situation. With control of the WH, the Supreme Court AND Congress what possible change 'for the better' could come from this administration?
PLEASE convince me I'm wrong - - I need *some* hope...
My problem with HRC, and it was an absolute game ender, is that she represented Dynastic power. Her husband was President. You do not, in a Democracy, field a presidents spouse, or child, or brother for the office of President. You certainly don't vote for them. Dynastic power is the end of Democracy. Of course, my pleadings fell on deaf ears during the run up to the convention. This is also a large source for my contempt for the Bush's, except Barbara, who said the same thing I am saying (too many Bushes!) even if it was one Bush too late.
(I actively supported Evan McMullin ( a CIA agent, go figure), hoping to win a crap shoot on a Utah win and a 270 EV denial with a vote in The House.)
Even as a kid, when I asked my parents about JFK, and why he was shot, and when I had other questions, and was told about RFK, and that people thought that nepotism was bad, this stuck with me. This was my parents talking to a curious child. I get it. Regardless of RFK's capabilities, or JFK's need to have him around, you just don't do that.
Trumps inbred whitehouse staff is pretty scary, with his son-in-law setting-up a cot in the White House. Trump is a true wannabe dynast. It would be wise to ensure his tenure is short, and definitely forgoe all future Trumps in the office of President.
The second most important thing I can say, next to the warning against dynastic power, is STOP TELLING THE RIGHT THAT THEY ARE STUPID! That just sets them off and makes them HATE you more than you know. It makes them gravitate directly to that which you despise the most. Telling people that they are stupid for how they feel is just, well, stupid.
I may be grasping for hope in thinking Trump can put an end to the unconstitutional powers of the 4th branch, the intelligence branch of government. But his temperment is, it seems, just right for the job.
-
26 minutes ago, Tom Neal said:
Has any new hacking info appeared since the original DNC hacks? I don't think so - yet, when the release of info that Putin was helping Trump get elected could have hurt his election chances, there was virtual silence from the media and the intelligence services. During the debates, Hillary was clear that the hacks were designed to hurt her, yet that got no traction. Now that Trump is assured .........
........If Trump does what the real powers want, they will allow him to indulge his greed. If Trump doesn't follow orders (he won't!) the Republican Congress will impeach him, and the party will install a Cheney-like VP to keep bible-thumper Pence on track.
I have been mulling this around myself. You have good questions; I think they sound similar to mine above (go figure ;))
The Bay of Pigs example has already been mentioned. Another example of this pattern of behavior is old, but instructive and relevant to this forum. It is John Newmans WW3 virus, attributed to James Angleton. I am surprised that it is so infrequently invoked in this forum. In Short, Oswalds activities and alleged activities were buried such that they would not arise until 11-22-63, after the assassination. Once LHO was killed, and there would be no trial, a cover up was necessary to hide the massive intelligence and law enforcement failure, as well as WW3.
The Russian Hacking Virus was intended to force Trump to cave into the intelligence community, and Democrats as well as the media are partners in the plan.
It is unavoidable that I sound like a Trump apologist or supporter. I am not. I am, however interested in seeing this fourth branch of invisible government dismantled and it just may happen.
-
1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:
Dallas Police, Dallas Deputies and Ex-General Edwin Walker -- here is where we should be looking. LHO was on the 2nd floor of the TSBD, as Roy Truly and Officer Marrion Baker honestly testified.
Regards,
--Paul Trejo -
Testimony of Larry Crafard. According to his testimony, on the morning of 11-22-63 he was asleep in the Carousel Lounge, until he was awoken at @2 in the afternoon when a co-worker arrived and started blaring the news of the assassination over the radio.
-
On 7/12/2016 at 10:18 PM, Mike Machanska said:
...the shooter could also be Larry Crafard, who was an expert sniper (not sure what arm of military) and he worked closely with Jack Ruby. He left town the day of the assassination and was known to be close friends/crime associates with James (Sutton) Files who many believe was the shooter behind the fence on the grassy knoll..
To be sure, Larry left town the next morning, Saturday. He quit his job at the Carousel and hitchiked to Michigan with $7 in his pocket.
His WC testimony states that on late Friday, 11-22 he got a call from an unknown girl who was calling about a job at the Carousel. After about 4 hours of chatting with her, he states that she said that she was taking a bus out of town in the morning. He never gets her name or where she was headed-to on the bus. After he hangs-up with her, Ruby calls, and tells him to grab a camera and that Ruby was going to pick him up immediately. This is when Ruby, himself and Senator ride around, take pics of the "Impeach Warren" billboard, visit the post office, and drive to a cafe. The cafe is the "Southland Hotel Cafe" according to Senator, although they both place it just off Commerce, not far from the Carousel. George H. W. Bush happened to be staying at the Southland Hotel that night, and it is said that David Atlee Phillips met with Oswald and Vinceza there some weeks before.
-
On 1/6/2017 at 1:41 PM, Paul Trejo said:
Ray,
Too many people claim to have seen LHO in this or that context -- most of them just mistaken about it (e.g. the guy at the gun store, installing a scope for an "Oswald" who didn't even look like LHO).
Regards,
--Paul TrejoTrying to quote mike machanska's post about Larry crafard being the shooter in this pic. But I keep picking up Paul's quote. So I am posting in order troubleshoot. I'll probably delete this if I can't properly edit it.
Edit- can't seem to delete this....
-
Following up on the question of which cafe George Senator, Jack Ruby, and Larry Crafard went to, before dawn, on 11-23-63.
Recalling that Seanor said it was the Southland Hotel Cafe, but claimed that it was on Commerce St.....
Mr. SENATOR. Then from there we went to the Southland Hotel coffeeshop.
Mr. HUBERT. Where is that located?
Mr. SENATOR. That is on the corner, on Commerce, and I don't know what the little side street is, but it is just below the Adolphus Hotel on Commerce Street. I don't know what the side street is.Larry Crafard does not recall the name of the cafe but also placed it on or near Commerce St. WC's Mr Hubert can be seen as leading Mr. Crafard in his testimony.
Mr. CRAFARD. I don't remember the name of the cafe. I could take a person right to it, but I can't tell you the name. Mr. HUBERT. How far away was it from the Carousel?
Mr. CRAFARD. About 2 1/2 blocks.
Mr. HUBERT. Which way?
Mr. CRAFARD. I believe it would be south.
Mr. HUBERT. What was it, on Commerce Street?
Mr. CRAFARD. It was half a block off Commerce, two blocks down Commerce and half a block off.
Still curious as to where Senator came up with the "Southland Hotel Coffeeshop" identification.
-
On August 17, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Sean Murphy said:
What marks Prayer Man out is precisely how phlegmatic he appears.
--
--does he appear to show the slightest curiosity as to what is happening.
Asperger's Syndrome?
i am thinking they had to do 2 things:
-They had to put a Coke in his hands due to some unknown or known testimony or statement or photo that might pop up.
-And they had to put him lower in the building than they originally had planned. They settled with the second floor encounter scenario.
i have to read the Baker and Shelly statements and see what they look like.
-
Thanks Lance. I don't intend to peruse this at all. The biggest reason is that I don't think Oswald did it and I try to avoid him, the TSBD, etc. I am left with little to go on with regard to the Dal-Tex building and the other players who fill out the larger garment of the conspiracy.
With regard the WC testimony however, and with all respect to you, and I appreciate your comments, but the commission opinion that you posted is the last thing to which I would give any credibility. The commission discrediting something or someone is a red flag that would draw me directly to whatever it is that they are trying to discredit.
If they had testimony from the Hunter family stating what the commission says they say, that might be a different story. But, I always keep in mind that people may be saying something because they are afraid, or for other reasons.
There are two women at the store, one sitting near the door. The 4 Oswalds come in. LHO brings a scope and returns it to the car and comes back in. I guess, if Mrs. hunter is to be disbelieved, the only thing to be discredited is her witnessing Lee driving to and from the store, with the detail that they are going the wrong way down the street. I believe her, because the other lady was there and I don't see any need to interject a minor detail when the rest of the encounter is not really in question.
This was my first run-in with the two Oswalds whereas I had been dodging those threads and stories because they seemed cooky to me. I'll still avoid them in general. I like episodes and stories that I can relate to friends and interested parties, stories that typically revolve around the larger issues of politics and intrigue.
Thanks again Lance!
-
I figured I would post this here. It seems like someone close to the supposed James Files location saw too much.
-
On 11/5/2015 at 10:27 AM, Greg Wagner said:
Black Op Radio interview with Jerry Coley: http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black753a.mp3
That link didn't work for me. I found this YouTube interview. It also contains good info in Ruby.
-
Castro's testimony to the HSCA is worth reading. What is almost amusing is that you may detect that Castro is aghast when he is told that the HSCA's budget is $5 million dollars. He then asks if that is for just the assassination of JFK. He is told no, it is for the investigation of all the assassinations that they are investigating.
it's interesting that the Zapruder family was paid $15 million for ownership of Abraham's famous film.
What is sad is the role that racism has played in this long, crappy story. If Cuba and Puerto Rico were white and English speaking nations, long ago they would have been American states through an expanded concept of Manifest Destiny.
interview of Castro:
-
And regarding the Harvey and Lee book, no thanks. I stumbled upon this myself while reading WC testimony. I don't need or want to be guided to or through it. I spent the last 6 years studying ancient Roman History. I like that because of the mystery, vagueness and questions that arise over the lack of information, and the need to put together pieces of what was not lost over time. This whole thing has mountains of information and it just gets foggier and foggier. It is unsettling to say the least.
-
On 1/6/2017 at 10:27 PM, Jim Hargrove said:
Deleted, the quote function pops up sometimes and I can't get rid of it.
38 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:There is no need to suppose that anyone is lying. With the Furniture Mart account, there are three possibilities:
1 - The witnesses were lying, for no obvious reason.
2 - Oswald, his wife and their children were all impersonated as part of a ridiculously complex conspiracy involving a duplicate Oswald, beginning when he was 12.
3 - The witnesses were mistaken, as witnesses often are.It isn't difficult to see which of these three options is the most likely to be correct (clue: it isn't option number two).
If you can get hold of the Harvey and Lee book, you will have hours of fun identifying this sort of logical error. Almost every time a witness account can be interpreted as part of an Oswald-was-impersonated-from-the-age-of-12 conspiracy, critical thought goes out of the window and the account is accepted without question. It happens over and over again, and with documentary evidence too. Someone made a mistake when filling in a piece of paperwork? Don't be silly! It's all part of the conspiracy! Take away every example of this sort of error, and the 'Harvey and Lee' theory just collapses.
Jeremy, it's crazy stuff. How does it get explained? Does LHO know how to drive, or does he not? Is Marina lying about him not knowing how to drive, and that she NEVER drove with him? It's utterly baffling.
-
Can you imagine George De Mohrenschildt being tasked with finding a couple of twin, or lookalike Russian girls who could be absconded to the USA for "Operation Doppleganger"?
i guess that I can...
Obviously there's a healthy amount of skepticism about american Intelligence here.
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
JFK once said: "C'mon man! Do you really think that people in this forum want to read this kind of crap!". Or, at least, he probably said something like that to somebody at some point.