Michael Clark

Hi Mark, Apparentlly this is too much for a particular member to get his head around and since I have seen the same fallacies I wanted to chime in about a particular one, the non sequitur. non se·qui·tur ˌnän ˈsekwədər/ noun a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement. Your first three examples are examples are non sequiturs, and it is painful to see Wallton's inability to understand what you are saying. If Oswald shot at General Walker, then he's guilty of the Kennedy assassination. If Oswald shot JFK, then he's also guilty of killing Tippit's. If Oswald shot Tippit's, than he's guilty of the JFK murder. And, of course, Walton felt the need to shuffle through his same old, tired hit list, it never fails.

This is not a criticism Paul..... I don't understand why you don't use the quote button. To make it clear what you are responding to is one reason to use it. But another reason to do so is that the quoted party will receive notification if that feature is enabled, in this case, Bill Kelly.

Ok. You said: "Who ordered the hit? I believe the pecking order is Pentagon first, in this case the US Army. "

That is excellent, Paul. Thank you. One question, Do you see the Navy, or ONI, as having put a few necessary grams on the scale that led to the tip?

That is par for the par 1, one-hole, mini golf course, run by Trejo and Ward that you seem to be frequenting. Paul Brancato asks insightful, intelligent and difficult questions and gets told to go-away, and put on an ignore list. It is revealing, actually. Trejo is getting some desperately-needed reinforcement for his perpetually failing theory. Cudos to Mr. Brancato, for flicking on the light switch, at the right moments.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/docid-32332692.pdf 13 Page document. Money Laundering and drug transactions in Cuba. NYC Fur trade, Prostittution. Mafia arms procurements.. FBI informants. Subject: Sebastian John Larocca First National Bank, Meyer Lansky, money laundering with Cuban money. Lansky banned from Cuba. Albert Anastasia assassination, Appalachin conference, division of gambling rights in Florida. Joseph Silesi, Santos Trafficante Harry Barnett, Salvatore Badalamenti, Saul Gold, Abraham Chait, Joseph Berger, Sam Berger Informants: T-1 Albert Cupelli T-2 Joseph Amato T-3 Anthony Ciborski T-9 Lt. John Thompson NYPD T-11 Alex Fudemam T-13 Michael Romanelli T-14 Rocco Covucci T-15 William Cassillo T-18 Pasquale Cossentino T-20 Frank Calluccio T-29 James Anthony Madden T-30 Guido De Phillips T-31 Dominick Spollidoro T-36 Lorraine Devine T-38 Gloria Baily T-40 Lt. M. B. Phillips, Los Angeles. T-41 Cpt. James Hamilton,, Los Angeles T-47 Vincent Cmar T-48 James C. Hill, Tampa T-52 Albert Silverman, Tampa T-53 John O'Mara T-55 James Trombetta T-58 Hodges Hamilton, Dallas T-59 Edward Weinstein, NYC, Banker's Trust T-61 R. Ellis, NYPD T-63 Frank Nolan, SA T-64 Minnie Matheson T-66 Max Heilbronner T-67 Arthur Newman, Havana T-68 Eugene Niannini T-72 Lt. Sal Fiola T-74 John Fells T-75 Jack Herbert Reiner T-83 Harry Finkel T-85 Bernard Hughes T-87 Frank Vescio T-89 Joe Schonberger T-91 Percell Granville T-92 John Andrew White

That is just not the case. You are seeing an admonishment of how you act, not how you think. I am hoping you will see that, and come-around at some point. Your negative characterizations of this forum and its members, at nearly every turn do not pass the "would I want everyone to act as I act" test; if we all did this, we would all be slinging a barb at everyone else, in an obligatory way, with every post. Jason Ward and Michael Walton are of this ilk, I hope you see fit to refrain from such manners.

(Italics are mine, substituting are for were)

Mervyn, I saved this document because I am interested in CIA location codes, (this on defines the code for Helsinki). It may or mayot not be familiar or of interest to you but I thought it relevant-enough to share. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/180-10142-10338.pdf

David, I was not really referring to those things. This is kind of important to my point, about which I made myself rather clear, back at the Mrs. Tippit posts. I don't have handy, nor do I think I need to refer to, assessments of Tiipits intelligence and character, which tend towards the negative. I am not talking about him as a husband, or family man. Are you aware of those appraisals? If so, do you kind of ascribe to those assessments? Again, as mentioned above, I get the feeling that he was much smarter, more capable, more intelligent and savvier than for which he is often given credit. What do you think?

Jason, Are you, like Paul Trejo, hoping that all the things that you believe might be revealed, someday, by some unseen, unexpected, unimaginable, surprise disclosure; sometime in the future? Are you hoping that all of this evidence, which of course is the foundation of all that you and Paul Trejo purvey around the forum, for carts and shovels to collect, might one day be released by the dark deep-state that is preventing you from receiving the recognition of your genius?

David, Lets take a few steps, posts, back, regarding the videos. will you offer your opinion on your feelings and understandings regarding Tippit's character, integrity, intelligence and the like. Of course this question probes your understanding in relation, or contrast to commonly stated assessments of him, as a person. Of course I am assuming that you are aware that the above mentioned assessments of Tippit are often assessed unflatteringly.

Ostentation, playing dumb.... you can try to pick-up fools elsewhere.

David, how about a ~big hug~ for Jack Ruby.

And, of course, according to you and Jack Ruby, Ruby murdered Oswald out of lamentation of Jackie Kennedy's grievous situation, right? Go ahead, David; state your agreement with that.

Shameless...

David, you are implying that Tippit's murder played no part in the failure to protect Oswald. Correct me if I am wrong.

Mike Robinson gives the only clue from a source that I believe to be credible, Mike Robinson. I don't believe he can know who was talking about who. But I believe his story when he says that a cop did-it, inasmuch as we can be sure that he was hearing a cop talking to another cop. Do we really know who Tippit was? As I posted, a few posts above, I believe he carried more sophistication than for which he is usually credited.

David, that's an ostententatious guilt trip. LHO, was murdered while in custody of some 70 Dallas police officers, by a known, creepy, mafia thug. Dont give us any of that garbage. Even you should bemoan that crime.

Jason, You are as much of a conspiracy theorist as the next guy, or gal. Your rantings of how you only present only evidence are absurd.

Thanks David. I can only find this one assassination era video (interview) of her. My point in asking was that I had thought I had seen an vintage video of her from which I came away thinking that Mrs. Tippit seemed far too sophisticated and intelligent to be the husband of the man that we are so often led to believe was a simple, sorry example of a man and a cop. This video does not belie that impression which I had, but does not really give me the same impression that I had.

DVP, I have seen only one video interview of Mrs. Tippit, from around 1963. Do you have or know of any more?

Get over yourselves. What about Tippit and JFK?

Following the above post... Bold is mine

I would like to point out that the name, and focus, of this thread was changed at some point from "General Walker and Lee Harvey Oswald" to it's present name, "General Walker, Lee Harvey Oswald" and Dallas Officials". There is no "edited" notation in Paul Trejo's opening post, so, I assume, he asked a moderator to do it. I was recently and privately admonished for posting information that was deemed, or could have been deemed, as derailing of this thread. Jason even gave members a taunt, characterizing this thread, thusly: "Over in the Walker thread where CIA-ers do not tread," (was the word "dare" edited-out? I can't be sure enough to say so. Post linked below). So what do we do? The title change makes it look like early posters were here to obstruct this thread whilst Jason and Paul Trejo play a shell game with the topic, possibly even reporting on members who come around their sand box. lastly, Paul Trejo has publicly announced that he has placed several "Class-Act's" of this forum, such Paul Brancato and Steve Thomas on an ignore, as well as less capable debaters such as myself. Jason has done the same thing. In an admonishment I received privately, I was asked why I did not PM Paul Trejo or Jason if my input was welcome. How could I? So, it is with those observations put-forth, that I make the case that, in large, Paul Trejo and Jason have been allowed to carry-on a research thread disguised as a debate, and have beeen allowed to truncate the discussion as they see fit by the petty use of the ignnore tool, and by, indeed, manipulating the moderators who do not deserve to be so used and manipulated. So, miffed, I rest my case.