Michael Clark

It's an odd claim, since, by definition, Prayer Man is the person in the shadows on the top of the steps at the west end of the TSBD entrance.

If Mr. Butler wants to point out, for us, the Guy On Elm Street Curb With Large Camera With Flash Attachment (GOESCWLCWFA), and make the case that PM and GOESCWLCWFA are one and the same, let's hear it. But, as it is, he appears to be deconstructing the very definition of PM, and that is not helpful.

16 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I’m in agreement with you that the Walker shooting was staged, and certainly tying it to Oswald was part of his patsification. It’s logical to suspect that the reporter was clued in somehow to the Walker interview. I’m glad you agree with the logic that tying Oswald to the attempt on Walker probably didn’t originate with Walker himself. 

I don't think that LHO, in particular, was being set up, as the TSBD assassin, using the Italian Manlicher Carcano rifle, as early as Walker's shooting.

I do think that that model of rifle was being set up as an implement in any of a number of upcoming assassination operations, in the hands of various persons, in various places.

4 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

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

he ended up ............. dying suspiciously before HSCA could get to him.  ............

According to Wikipedia, it was that Assassinations Records Review Board that had sought-out Nagell the day before he died, in 1995.

My beliefs in alien existence are incoherent, inconsistent; split, if you will. They are similar to my religious beliefs. 

When you consider the emmense size of the solar system, our galaxy, then our universe, then consider the number of stars and solar systems in the universe, the chance that there is no other life out there seems so small as to be impossible. 

On the other hand, the fascinating miracle of life, consciousness, sentience and love make me think that it is indeed so miraculous, that it may actually be unique.

Those lattter feelings have waned since I have grown older and have lost the excitement for life that I had in my youth; but I still do and always will remember these great and fascinating questions, and my conclusions, however in conflict they may be, about them.

5 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

OK, it looks like this thread is going off on its own...if anybody has any other Nagell questions just drop me an email.  What I know about him is all in SWHT 2010 and in the research CD in any event.

Larry, I apologize if my post stepped too far away from Nagell. I thought it added a few important details on Thornberry, in relation to Nagell. I have been very pleased to see you posting recently. I hope you will continue to do-so.

9 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Dick does name Negell's defense lawyer in his book and interviewed him at some length - I don't recall his name but you will find those details in Dick's book.  Ironically the lawyer told Dick he would have mounted a much stronger defense if there had actually been proof that Nagell had been in Mexico - which there certainly is, in plenty.  Because he had nothing to confirm that at the time he felt compelled to present nothing more than an insanity defense for Nagell.

Another ironic point is that the trial judge was Homer Thorneberry, a long time friend of LBJ who LBJ later unsuccessfully tried to appoint to the Supreme Court

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

Thornberry was elected to Congress and served from January 3, 1949 until his resignation fourteen years later. According to Dick Russell (The Man Who Knew Too Much), Lyndon B. Johnson described Thornberry as "my congressman". Thornberry is quoted in the book as saying: "It's just unbelievable how many things he (Johnson) and Mrs. Johnson did to help us when we went to Washington".

When John F. Kennedy offered Lyndon B. Johnson the post of Vice President, one of the first people he contacted was Homer Thornberry. He replied: "I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Tell Jack (Kennedy) anything you want, but don't take it." However, soon afterwards he phoned Johnson back to say he changed his mind and that he should accept the post.

On 5th June, 1963, Thornberry attended a meeting with John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, John Connally, Fred Korth and Clifton C. Carter at the Cortez Hotel in El Paso, to discuss the president's forthcoming trip to Dallas. Thornberry was in the presidential motorcade with Johnson when Kennedy was assassinated.

A few days after the assassination Johnson phoned Homer Thornberry and invited him to "come down and have a drink with me". The two men had two meetings in December, 1963. In a taped White House conversation on 17th December, 1963, Lyndon Johnson admitted that he went to parties held at the house of Bobby Baker with Homer Thornberry and Walter Jenkins. On 20th December, Thornberry resigned his congressional seat. The following day Johnson appointed Thornberry as U.S. District Court Judge for the Western District of Texas. This enabled him to replace R. E. Thompson as the judge in the case of Richard Case Nagell.

Tommy, asking this question, initially, on the forum, is one thing. Carrying on is another. What if everyone did this? What if everyone advocated for the membership of another person on the open forum?

I have him as a CIA asset, charged with infiltrating Pro-Cuban groups. I can't really place him in that role in the TSBD, but that is not surprising to me.

And, Paul, there has been a very positive upside to this situation. Trejo has been so busy playing with Ward that he has not derailed and contaminated other threads with his monstrous and  monotonous lists if nothing.

10 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I posted something yesterday on the Trejo/Ward thread titled ‘Walker and Oswald’ which got buried after a flood of posts by the two of them immediately following my post. I’m hoping the moderators will let it stand, however briefly. If I’ve crossed a line so be it. I’m doing this because I’d like to know what you all think of this thread, and of my reactions to it. 

 

Paul, Trejo and Ward are not involved in a debate. Trejo has publicly placed a number of people on "ignore" including yourself and Steve Thomas. That says a great deal right there. Ward has done the same. 

They are not here to debate. Ward, especially, has said as much. I am not going to look for his exact statement, but he said (paraquote) "I don't debate,  I post evidence"

Well, this happens to be a debate forum. In fact, all these threads are not even called threads, they are called "Debates".

Their thread, their Patty-Cake game, does not belong here. It belongs in the research threads section.

Ward is interesting. He touts his pursuit of facts and evidence, but he shacks-up with the greatest offender of honesty and integrity, Paul Trejo. Trejo has exhausted researchers and members who have given-up wasting their time by documenting his purveying of falsehoods. They just let him run now. My last effort was at the beginning of their recent Patty-cake session, responding to Trejo's Codswallop about George DeM, his wife, and their experience with Marina, LHO and the gun. I'll do it again when I get fired-up, but I don't want to run afoul of the moderators by trailing him. Besides it's just too much work, and requires too many farm implements to keep at the ready.

On 6/17/2010 at 1:36 AM, Emil Snizek said:

I've also wondered if Phillips' abandoned text will ever be released to the public (however small it was)... and I've wrestled with there being any possible logical validity to Phillips' tossed-off claim in "The AMLASH Legacy" of Oswald being a potential assassin of Castro etc...

I feel it's ultimately been proven to some degree that Oswald was a part of AMSPELL... so connecting those two projects within Oswald's trajectory is the ultimate temptation, but also the heart of the perennial mystery I suppose. When Phillips wrote that he was 'one of the two case officers who handled Lee Harvey Oswald' do you think he could have possibly meant James McCord when they were working in New Orleans together on AMSPELL?...

I just posted a massive argument with myself on this subject at: http://gnosticdevice.blogspot.com/

if anyone has any particular corrections to help me make let me know, this is just where I try to straighten out my own thoughts on the Dallas>New Orleans>Mexico>Dallas transitions.

The bold, above, is mine. 

AMSPELL  The Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil, or DRE (Cuban Student Directorate). DRE delegate Carlos Bringuier had the famous altercation with Lee Oswald in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, and DRE members quickly spread information about Oswald after JFK's assassination. Ray Rocca wrote in 1967 that DRE was "initially set up as a "psych war outfit": https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10013-10387.pdf

Mr. Caddy, I have a bit of conjecture that requires a preface.

Here is the preface.... I don't believe in The Alien Presence. I do not understand how intelligent people believe in something like this or why they might say they believe in something like this. I consider you to be an intelligent person.

(Segway) Did you not announce that you have a book coming out Soon?

Now, my conjecture.... Could Douglas be pre-discrediting himself, ahead of the release of his book? Could he be doing this as a means of protection? Could he be planning on releasing, revealing, some very important information regarding certain subjects, subjects like Watergate, the JFKA, and the people involved? Could the claims that Douglas is making now make it easy for for interested parties to call him a crackpot, rather than silence or prosecute him?

I just don't get it. 

2 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

So was Helms private assassin "Zap man" in Dallas on 11/22/63 at all or related to it from afar?

 

Ron,  McCord was running a CIA operation to infiltrate the FPCC. He was working for Phillips. LHO was working for the CIA in NOLA.

I don't see McCord doing hands on dirty work in Dallas.

5 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Out of 100+ officers on duty in Dallas on November 22, 1963, why do radio logs indicate the singular report of Tippit at 1254 announcing his location in Oak Cliff?   Why aren't other officers regularly reporting their location?    Is it essential for Tippit to memorialize his time and place for some reason - even as other officers happily wonder around without location updates?

The radio transmissions do record officers reporting their locations. Why Tippit's is the only one recorded in logs, as you claim, is an interesting question.

On 6/17/2010 at 1:36 AM, Emil Snizek said:

I've also wondered if Phillips' abandoned text will ever be released to the public (however small it was)... and I've wrestled with there being any possible logical validity to Phillips' tossed-off claim in "The AMLASH Legacy" of Oswald being a potential assassin of Castro etc...

I feel it's ultimately been proven to some degree that Oswald was a part of AMSPELL... so connecting those two projects within Oswald's trajectory is the ultimate temptation, but also the heart of the perennial mystery I suppose. When Phillips wrote that he was 'one of the two case officers who handled Lee Harvey Oswald' do you think he could have possibly meant James McCord when they were working in New Orleans together on AMSPELL?...

I just posted a massive argument with myself on this subject at: http://gnosticdevice.blogspot.com/

if anyone has any particular corrections to help me make let me know, this is just where I try to straighten out my own thoughts on the Dallas>New Orleans>Mexico>Dallas transitions.

Emil, 

I have recently come to the same conclusion which you raise, as speculation, in bold above. There must be some reason why researchers don't cover this point more frequently, I would like to know what that reason is.

BTW your article on your blog is very well done. I will be reading more. I noticed that your linked article was posted days before your last post here, and your blog drops-off a month or so later. I am curious as to whether you are actively writing elsewhere.

Cheers,

Michael

(Bold emphasis is mine)

On 11/11/2015 at 10:50 AM, Gary Buell said:

I am about 400 pages into this massive book. One minor quibble. He writes that the Milteer-Touchstone correspondence, including the "top gun" memo, is first revealed in his book, when actually i had posted it here and in my blog ten years ago. http://coverthistory.blogspot.com/search?q=touchstone I had come across it following up a lead from Joan Mellon's book, and attained it from the Louisiana library at Shreveport.

Also, from what i have read so far, he disposes of David Atlee Phillips in a paragraph, and suggests that Veciana mistook de Morenschildt for Phillips, which is ludicrous.

Hi Gary, I was hoping you could give us more of your take on this book?

I am not sure what this was about or what, if any, significance it has. It was shared with me today. I figured I would post it and give it some thought, and see what members think of it. It does relate the same information from the document posted above, indicating that McCord worked for Angleton in 1961. Link provided below.

WOOD, COURT FOSTER
In January 1961, James McCord engaged services of "agency employee" who happened to be Court Wood's neighbor to spy on Wood. Court Wood was a student who had recently (in January 1961) returned from a 3-week stay in Cuba under sponsorship of FPCC. See 1 Feb. 1961, document "FOR THE RECORD", From: Kammar; Subject: ______, #188074. Paragraph 2 of 1 Feb. 1961, document reads: "Mr. McCORD expressed the opinion that it is not necessaary to advise the FBI of the operation at this time. However, he wishes to review the case in a month. The file of Subject, along with that of the WH man who is supervising the operation (David Atless PHILLIPS # 40695) will be pended for the attention of Mr. McCORD on 1 March 1961."
Identification of "Subject"
by gbuell on Mon, Dec 19, 2005, 6:35 PM GMT (#1241)
Wim Dankbaar contacted Court Wood, who is now a Christian Minister. He received the following information about the "Subject" of this document: Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 10:41 PM Subject: RE: From Court Wood - In Jesus' Name Ministries The name of my friend from high school is Michael (Mike) Stratton. He has to be the individual whose name was struck out. Right after the few contacts I had with him after I returned from Cuba, I never saw Mike again. I left the Washington DC area in 1964 and traveled to San Francisco to become a hippie. I lived on sailboats until I met a dear couple who, like your good friend Daniel (he really is your best friend if he tells you about Jesus) began to tell me about Jesus Christ. I listened politely and gave my reasons for unbelief, just as you do, but a year later I was awaked by the Holy Spirit to the reality that there really was a devil, that the Bible was indeed the Word of God, and that Jesus was in deed the Savior of the world.That was in December of 1996. Two years later I was back in the Washington area, tried to locate Mike, to share Jesus Christ with him, and found out that he had died as a result of wounds and injuries he received working with the CIA doing covert activity in and around Cuba. It remains a mystery to me what he did. He was always an adventurous type, but I believe a very loyal American, and I do not think he would have anything to do with anything that would harm a fellow American let alone the President of the US, John Kennedy. He was my closest friend in high school. I do not begrudge him spying on me. He did the right thing as at the time I was moving in a very wrong and dangerous direction.
CIA memo for the record, 1 February 1961, by Kammer, Subject [redacted] #188074. NARA, JFK files, CIA January 1994 (five brown boxes) release; Oswald and the CIA,Newman, Chapter 14, pp. 240, 241-243

http://jfkassassinationindex.blogspot.be/2011/08/w.html

A May, 1964, document showing the early interest of Mark Lane in solving the assassination case as well as the FBI's interest in Lane's inquires. This document demonstrates that the Soviets were reporting on the activities of Mark Lane. A Russian informant reports this to the FBI.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32123917.pdf

Polygraph test of Gordon Novell.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10106-10826.pdf

More on LIENVOY, photographic surveillance and wire-tapping, "mystery man", and Oswald. LIFEAT, LIPSTICK, LIMITED, LILYRIC, LICALLA.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10413-10423.pdf

At 3:00

RFK: The TFX, Have you been watching that? The newspapermen think that there's something there. They think that something funny went on."

JFK: " Well you know what went ON, nobody wanted to go to Topeka, Kansas! That's all that went on!"

13 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Bumped as threatened -- after self-appointed de facto wannabe ethics committee, moderator, and political "commissar" Michael Clark effectively "covered" it (after I had previously edited and bumped it) with his inane, derailing, trouble-making, one-sentence post in which he notified members that I had just ... gasp ... edited eleven count them e-l-e-v-e-n of my other posts in this thread) -- and in accordance with the "24 hour rule" as required by the moderators.

 

--  TG

 

And, Tommy continues to create his post, after the fact.

On 2/25/2018 at 4:09 PM, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

Robert,

With all due respect, "write a book?"

With all due respect, Tommy, maybe stop posting garbage?  This reply of yours doesn’t rise to the level of amateur, something you and Trejo seem to share.  Even The Who’s Tommy - though deaf, dumb and blind - could do better.

Should we look at the Mitrokhin Archive, then, as just another in a very long line of CHEKA, OGPU, etc, NKVD, KGB, FSB-SVR "active measures" counterintelligence ops, interwoven oh-so-skillfully with yet another "strategic deception" op?

Rule #1 in intelligence: Consider all the possibilities.  Anyone who doesn’t is an idiot.  

If an intelligence agency or operative(s) have a track record of a certain behaviour, it must be taken into account.  So if your above-cited Soviet (and/or parallel or proxy) intelligence operations have a track record of floating horse manure for western consumption, shouldn’t the prevailing mindset be to question anything and everything they issue subsequently?  

Rule #2 in intelligence: Accept as probable those possibilities that have the greatest amount of genuine evidence.  Anyone who doesn’t is an idiot.

So, for example, if somebody is foolhardy enough to suggest - in the absence of anything remotely probative as evidence - that the Cubans in Mexico City stitched up a Soviet consular official by suggesting he masqueraded as Oswald in visiting the Cuban consulate, (or worse still, that he didn’t visit the Cubans but the Cubans said he did) what can be said?  

There is no “there” there.  There is only feverish speculation, the culminations of which serves no discernible purpose, other than to absolve the most obvious authors of the Mexico City charade, whom you will recall were CIA and not G2 or KGB.  Did CIA (or anyone for that matter) ever cough up a photograph of Oswald?  They should have had some, if he were there.  Did they produce a tape recording of his voice?  They should have been able to, because we know there was/were tape/s?  Did they even provide something as simple, but damning as a fingerprint?  Did they even provide evidence of something as mundane and retrievable as Oswald’s means of transport for entry into and egress from MC?  

CIA’s MC station was well-staffed (quantity and quality of personnel), well-funded, and tasked with monitoring what was a major hotspot for presumed Communist activity in North America.  Somehow that devious Oswald outsmarted them all.  Is CIA so unfathomably incompetent?  Or is there something else, and more easily explicable, afoot?     
 
Apparently, in a city of 10+ million people, there was only one man who was simultaneously thin, short and blond?  Why not run that past Lopez and Hardway and see what they think?

But, but, but, even though the FSB and GRU, ..... by using social media-based "active measures" (aka the "sharing" with us of FSB and GRU-hacked e-mails, and the publishing and tweeting of anti-Hillary / pro-Trump "fake news") made even more effective due to the cumulative effects of 90-plus years of "active measures" interwoven very artfully with 58 years of "operational deceptions," and the legions of "tin foil hat conspiracy theories" engendered over the years thereby, and the resultant dumbing-down-of-our-society-in-general thereby, ..... recently installed a blackmail-able, expendable, "useful idiot" as our president in order to sow discord and chaos in our country (at least mine, Robert), why would those nice Ruskies continue messing with our minds by "giving" us this ... this ... this ..... DISINFO ARCHIVE?

If the foregoing can be accurately translated back into English, it only shows your own tin-foil hat is too tight.  Seems to be that you’re making my own point for me.  Yes, they have a track record of dis-informing the west in Mother Russsia, that continues up until this very day.  So when anybody - Mitrokhin, Nechiporenko, Nosenko, et al - defects with a story, or even documentation, extreme skepticism is the only proportional response.  You’d like to pick and choose, based upon your own assumptions.    

Serious people have suggested the Soviets were behind the Oswald “Mr. Hunt” note, the stories in Paesa Sera re: CMC/Clay Shaw, etc.  Whether they are correct or not, they are responsible and rational to assume Russians guilty until proved innocent.  Nothing that comes from Russia - even the treasures brought by “defectors” - can be taken at face value.  

You think it laughable that the Soviets never seriously probed Oswald upon his arrival.  You may be right.  But it may also be that the Soviets already knew, or had reason to suspect, that Oswald was not a bona fide defector.  Hence, he was under surveillance, but never recruited.

I think it equally laughable that upon his return from the USSR, the CIA displayed no known interest in him.  The Agency knew that Oswald had attempted to “defect” and “renounce his citizenship,” that he had threatened to disclose to the Kremlin any and all military secrets he possessed, and was thus a traitor to his country.  Do you find it explicable that this traitor had his return fare paid by the US taxpayer but was never debriefed upon his return?  Is CIA so unfathomably incompetent?  Or did they, like the Russians, know that Oswald hadn’t been a genuine defector?  And if he wasn’t a genuine defector, who sent him there?

Hmm, but I AM beginning to see your point, Robert ...

After all, those fake archives DO tell us that Yuri Nosenko was a true defector.

Again, you make my point for me.  I say the Mitrokhin material is suspect.  You assert it is genuine - and cite it approvingly - while nevertheless stating it is completely wrong about whether Nosenko was genuine.  So, you get to pick and choose what you believe from the same source.  Interesting... um.... methodology.

--  Tommy 

Or, or, or ... do you think Christopher Andrew, official historian for British Intel and co-author (with Mitrokhin) of "The Sword and the Shield," is  really working for the evil, evil, evil ... (gasp) ... CIA?

And that the Mitrokhin Archive are just another insidious "Langley Production"?

Can you prove otherwise?  Thought not.

PS  Should somebody tell Mister Simkin he's been duped by ... somebody?

John Simkin wasn’t duped by anybody.  He reported accurately what had been disclosed from the Mitrokhin material.  Don’t recall his writings urging either skepticism or credulity.  I just did.  

Somehow, between the time of my prior post today and my attempt to log on just now, my password had been invalidated.  Funny that it worked a few hours back, but now does not.  Interesting, no?  Oh yes, of course.  We are advised “logins entered here could be compromised.”  D’ya think?  I’m flattered.

 

Robert,

If you are so inclined, I think that you should edit this post such that the reader is clear whom it is that you are quoting. Tommy has heavily edited this thread, without any mind for personal, academic or historical integrity.

Cheers,

Michael

2 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Bumped as threatened after Michael Clark effectively "covered" it (after I had previously edited and bumped it) with his inane, derailing, trouble-making, one-sentence post in which he notified members that I had just ... gasp ... edited eleven count them e-l-e-v-e-n of my other posts in this thread), and in accordance with the "24 hour rule" as required by the moderators.

 

--  TG

 

Tommy, Robert Charles Dunne replied, in depth, to your earliest posts in this thread. He quoted you at length. Nearly all of those portions of quoted material are now gone; leaving the reader to have to figure out whom he was quoting. And you claimed that you did not delete anything of substance? It's all right there in RCD's reply.

And you claimed that you edited your posts because you turned a new leaf, yet you left in your jabs at Jim D, where you exclaim how little respect you have always had for him? Get real.