Michael Clark

And BTW, John Ritchson, who posted in this thread was, IMO, a great Ed Forum contributor. The activity page of his forum profile comes up blank for me; you have to click on "All Acivity" , then "Topics" or ""posts" to see his contributions. He was run off the road, into a tree and eventually died as a result of his injuries. The power went out at his home and his ventilator stopped working, and he then died, as I understand it.

@Jim Hargrove, Sorry if this has been covered before, but I am wondering if John Tower's efforts on behalf of Marina and LHO have been a focus of research for you guys?

And here is the thread that I created which Michael Walton misrepresented, mocked and about which he leveled false accusations, without providing a link to which a reader would be able refer.

I addressed your off-topic schoolyard invite for off-line gossip and private slur party here:

This is an important example of how Michael Walton spins bogus representations of other members postings in an effort to make them look foolish and discredit the larger community. Then Michael continues to peddle his myth, inviting members to PM him for the scoop. He posted this (below) yesterday. He claims I was banned for posting issues like this to his Bio page. I was not banned for this or at this time. I was banned for two weeks in May because I was part of a trio who were together forming a critical mass of bickering and flooding the forum. It was acknowledged the I broke no rules. I also received a week and a half ban in December, 2017, for being too negative around the holidays. Michael Walton, in the post quoted below, states that I was banned for posting to his bio, and that he reported me, initiating the ban. This is not true. It is, IMO, a better option to call out bad behavior and false accusations, here, rather than muck-up the thread where the false accusation occurred. If I am informed by moderators that this is not appropriate I will not do it again; yet I would appreciate an alternative to posting an off-topic rebuttal to an off-topic slur in the middle of a forum debate. On 1-4-18 , Michael Walton wrote: "Really Gene? This all goes both ways. The folks who post rebuttals to this theory have posted solid rebuttals and we too are attacked for being "ignorant" and worst by the same people you list above. As a matter of fact it got so bad that one unnamed member here was throwing all kinds of venom on MY PROFILE PAGE. When I reported it this member was "banned" from the forum. Guess what? Shockingly this member is now back. And if you don't believe me - which seems to be the modus operandi here on EF - send me a PM and I'll be glad to share the venom."

Bernie, I did a quick survey of your EF posting history. in the last 6 years you have posted @400 times. Of those 400 posts, 14 were NOT, at a glance, relaeted to the two Oswald problem. Every other post ( nearly 400) just disrupts threads that explore the dual Oswald issue. I have questions about the two Oswald problem. None of your posts that I have read have been of any help in answering my questions. None of your posts show any interest in the JFKA. You are just interested in breaking-up this facet of the discussion. I don't understand and I do not care why you obsess on obstructing the dual-Oswald discussion. I just wish you would go away.

I am looking for that "All the Presidents Men" youtube scene where Bernard Barker tries to whisper that he works for the "CIA". I'll edit-in that clip, here, if I find it.

David Atlee Phillips was clueless? Yet you accept that he met LHO and A. Veciana in Dallas in September of '63? How do you you explain your Walker-did-it-theory and exclude Hunt, Phillips, Veciania, and LHO? The Admins of this forum should insist that you blog your junk before dumping it, “ad infinitum", here.

That is accepted and appreciated. Our relationship is reset. It is forgotten. I am not proud of having stooped low in an effort at retaliation.

For clarification, Sandy shared a cool story about how, as a teen, he repaired a TV for the guy who invented the TV. Very cool story. Bernie ridiculed Sandy for sharing that story. He then insinuated that I stole somebody else's stories and shared them as my own in an EF thread that I opened, elsewhere in the forum, called "Scary Stories Thread". Bernie's dirty shot at me: "Maybe you could copy this exchange and sell it off as one of your 'scary' stories...!" My Scary Stories Thread... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23797-scary-stories-thread/ Bernie, I received a couple of accolades for one of my stories... right on the originating Jeep forum, to which I shared a link in my EF thread. -"that was the most descriptive story i have ever read in my life!!!! -"Lol thank you for the entertainment. I felt like i was there!" -"... awesome story! -"Wow that was a great read. Very well done made me feel like I was there."

Bernie, I looked at your posting history in your profile, and it is you who are obsessed. I also saw a few of your music videos, and I am still laughing... 😂

At 10:42, of this 11-29-63 phone conversation, Hoover states that LHO was confronted by police and cleared by LHO's boss at the front door of the TSBD.

The latest and most absolute reason that the Trejo theory is wrong just occurred to me. It has been my working assumption that JFK absolutely had to die in Dallas that day; and therefore there were increasingly reckless plans A, B and C in place. Paul's plot and his perps could not have afforded a messy, reckless, desperate fall-back to a plan C or D with bombs or very heavy automatic large caliber guns being brought to bear on the limo and killing or wounding everyone. Paul's plotters could not fall-back on a messy, bloody coup and conspiracy. The consequences of such an outcome preclude any possibility of an attempt at such a thing.

By bad, that was Trejoeque of me. I think I was just trying to tap it out quickly.

Century Firearms Manufacturing co. In Vermont was, I believe, linked to the Montreal gun smuggling and importation business, and somehow linked to the assassination. I think it was Gerry Patrick Hemming who claimed the key to the assassination would be found in Montreal.

The shooters, Anti-Castro Cubans, did the ground work and the shooting for free. Their payback was supposed to be a Cuban invasion. Conspiracy was buried and they got double-crossed.

Very good point. A revealed conspiracy was supposed to be the result.

M Investigators conflate method and motive all the time. How often have you heard of police characterize a likely perp by how a murder was committed? “This was up close and personal, the perp knew the victim”; “ this was obviously a case of simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time”; “this was obviously a thrill killing, we’ll hear from this guy again”; “this was obviously a contract killing”. Jason your claim makes no sense.

The job of the Radical Right was to see no evil and hear no evil, but they were to make a lot of noise and static, creating the expectation of the attempt, and making it difficult to detect. There job was almost exclusively passive in nature until the fact of the hit came-to-be and the time came for clean-up, cover-up and the suppression of witnesses and facts.

Hi Roger, In my view, the failure angle was quite well covered. The Perps were Anti Castro Cubans who would have been identified as Pro Castro, along with the sheep dipped LHO, and a war with Cuba would have stymied any investigation or discussion of the facts; whether JFK was wounded or alive. My theory states that as things turned out, that the Anti Castro Cubans got double crossed by the presentation of a lone-nut instead of a conspiracy. The perps wanted and expected an invasion of Cuba and they got double-crossed. More and more, I become convinced that the perps were the same guys that turned up at watergate, in order to get Nixon to act on Cuba. Hunt, Mccord, Barker (all CIA), Gonzales, Sturgis, Baldwin, and Liddy. Some patsy-perp was killed or wounded on the knoll as per the plan indicating conspiracy. That death, person or body were hidden, to foment the lone-nut tale. All bases were covered. If the double-cross or the assassination failed, the perps would get their war with Cuba, and few outside of Cuba would have lamented that outcome.

Thanks, Jim. Is it JA's or your contention that Harvey and Lee knew each other or knew that they were part of this manipulation?

Bernie, Your personal attacks on Sandy are disgusting. Stick to the evidence. Sandy's career and experience is quite impressive. You probably have missed it since you seem to singularly circle in the waters at the H&L end of the pool.

Nice slam dunk Sandy. It's great to see you squash these pests under your foot. I have to say, the rabid persistence with which these pests attack the work of Armstrong makes me think, more and more, that there is something very important in it. It must be of the greatest importance to attract such a swarm of pestilent naysayers. My interest has always been in answering a couple of questions regarding obvious occasions where Oswald was impersonated. I am now thinking that Armstrong's work may very well be the key to the mechanics of the assassination. Keep up the good work Sandy.