Michael Clark

Paul, you fabricate garbage all the time and you get called on it. That is what it is and unfortunately must be accepted, I guess. Michael Walton fabricates slander of other members all the time. I don't see how that is acceptable.

Yes Sandy, and Jack makes no claim that the inset photo is fabricated. It is shown briefly, and it is clear that he was working with it but he makes no claim as Paul stated. Paul made this up and can't bear to admit it.

Typical garbage from Michael "Oh-so-hurt!" Walton. Sandy must have not noticed Walton's genius at some point and so he now, repeatedly, over and over, takes something that Sandy said and fabricates a story around it, making stuff up, in an effort to mock Sandy. Michael here is making a bogus synopsis of Sandy's thoughts feelings and opinions and it is totally out of place. He does similar things to me. He should be banned from this forum, all he does is critcize and fabricate slander about other members. The "hurt" in Michael Walton is pathetic, as seen in this gem...

Paul said: " In my reading, James Hosty's stated objective in his WC testimony, and to Ruth Paine (according to her WC testimony) was that his visit was all about Marina Oswald. " That is worth fact-checking to find out if Paul's "Reading" resembles Hosty's "stated objective.."

Poooooofffff! Like a puff of smoke, Paul Trejo, the wannabe dialectic prestigitator (and oft-times prognosticator) pretends that he explained-away his false statement. Rather than admit to being wrong or hasty in making his claim he prefers to don the hat of the prevaricator, thinking that no one will notice.

Off the top of my head.... The police stopped by his house on the 23rd after a complaint (from his wife?), checked his gun and concluded that there was nothing to be seen there. He then took off to Philadelphia in a red car, possibly a camero and maybe a convertible, and returned to Dallas within days, with a different car. His departure on Saturday leads me to surmise that Crafard may have gone with him, some of the way. His story is interesting because some researcher (Slandria, Tink Thompson, Fonzi?) caught up to him some years later and had one or more lengthy interviews with him. Ill check what I just wrote with a re-read when I can. Mike ***edit. ok, time to fact check my memory. First off, it wasn't a camaro which was introduced in 1966. ***it was a Thunderbird. Regarding the rest, reading Bill Kelly's introduction to that thread gets you pretty far, there is no need for me to summarize.

Thanks Mike, that's a great challenge! Thanks for posting it. Finding a story that was been disappeared..... BTW, great last name, and first name. Ha! Michael

Vaganov? http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23787-phone-lines-crafard-and-senator-at-the-carousel/

Paul Trejo is still carrying a mouse in his pocket....

You mean that you have spent all this time and effort in debunking Armstrong's book, and you never had a copy! That's crazy. To be sure, I hold you to a different standard than Michael Walton. Tracy, I am shocked and disappointed. There is a nother link that requires no key for the download. I'll post it here when I find it.

You are right on, Ron. It's all very odd. There is arguably a lot of back and forth about Oswald having been at the club. Most of it starts around p. 40 in this Mcadams text, the text is disjointed. P.40 is after the higher numbered pages. Mr. GRIFFIN. We also discussed at lunch whether or not there you have any recollection of any connection between Ruby and Oswald, and you mentioned to me a statement that you heard made at one time. Would you tell us what that was? Mr. CRAFARD. I believe that was the one I made just as we got out of the car. Mr. GRIFFIN. That is right. 45 Mr. CRAFARD. If I recall the words, I said, I told you that I believe that before I left Dallas I had heard someone state that Oswald had been in the Carousel Club on at least one previous occasion, that I wasn't positive who had made the statement, that I believed that it was made before I left Dallas. Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you indicate to me you had some idea? Mr. CRAFARD. I thought it had been Andrew. Mr. GRIFFIN. By that, you mean Andy Armstrong? Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. You say before you left Dallas? Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. What do you mean, before you left Dallas the last time? Mr. CRAFARD. Before I left Dallas after the assassination. Mr. HUBERT. You mean before you left Dallas on November 23? Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. It seems to me that something had been said about Oswald being in the club, and I figured that probably it had been Andrew who said this because I had talked to him--been with him-- more than I had been with anybody else on that day. Mr. HUBERT. Have you seen Andrew since? Mr. CRAFARD. Only at the Ruby trial in Dallas. Mr. HUBERT. Did you mention it to him, then? Mr. CRAFARD. No; I hadn't even thought about it. Mr. HUBERT. Did he talk to you about it then? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Well, now, this statement must have been made to you between 12:30 on the 22d and about really 5 or 6 o'clock in the afternoon of the 23d. Mr. CRAFARD. That is right, sir. Mr. HUBERT. You didn't see Andy after that, did you? Mr. CRAFARD. I only saw Andy--I never saw Andy after the 22d, when President Kennedy was assassinated. Mr. HUBERT. That is right. Andy woke you up, you all looked at TV, and then Jack came in and they all went off and you went to bed. Mr. CRAFARD. That is right. Mr. HUBERT. Of course, you got up the next morning and talked to Ruby. Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. It wasn't Ruby who said that, was it? Mr. CRAFARD. I don't believe so. Mr. HUBERT. It wasn't George Senator who said it? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Did you see anybody else? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Did you talk to anybody else other than that girl on the phone? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. She didn't mention it to you? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Who else could it be but Andy Armstrong? Mr. CRAFARD. I said I believe I heard this statement had been made before I left Dallas, I am not positive that it was made before I left Dallas, I might have heard the statement afterwards, after I left Dallas or after I went back, but I believe I heard the statement before I left Dallas on the 23d. Mr. HUBERT. If you did hear it before you left Dallas, it had to be Armstrong; isn't that right? Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. There is no question about that? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Because you didn't speak to anybody else that you could have gotten it from? Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Now, you think it is possible that you read it in the paper? Mr. CRAFARD. No; I don't believe so. I didn't read the papers on it too much. I had a couple of the papers---- Mr. HUBERT. Do you think you got it over the radio or TV or any other news media? 46 Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. Your thought is that you got the statement that Ruby--that Oswald had been in the Carousel Club from a person? Mr. CRAFARD. Yes. Mr. HUBERT. Now, if it was after you left Dallas, can you help us as to what person that might have been? Mr. CRAFARD. No; I cannot. ................... Mr. HUBERT. Now, I come to, in effect, the question I asked you this morning, Larry. I don't want you to feel bound by what you said at another time unless it was the truth. Mr. CRAFARD. I realize that. Mr. HUBERT. I suggest to you that the real motivation for leaving Dallas was that you had found out that Oswald had been in the club, and that the matter was getting a little too thick for you and you wanted out of it. Mr. CRAFARD. No. Mr. HUBERT. That is not true? Mr. CRAFARD. No, sir; that is not true. .................... Mr. CRAFARD. That is right, if I wasn't in Dallas. I believe that I heard the statement before I left Dallas on the 23d. Mr. HUBERT. That being the case, unless you want to tell us some other things, it had to be Armstrong. Mr. CRAFARD. That is right. That is all I can--I can't say for sure who it was, and I can't even say for sure that I heard the statement before I left Dallas. But I believe that it was. ..................... Mr. CRAFARD. I know definitely that I was told by somebody that Oswald had been in the club, but I haven't given that fact too much thought until we was talking this afternoon during the lunch break there, and it seemed to me the statement had been made to me before I left Dallas.

And if your suggesting I read the testimony in depth, I have. I read it three times, along with Senator's officer Olson's and Kay Olson's. Along with Ruby's testimony it gives me the absolute creeps.

There is almost nothing else out there on Crafard. Maybe nothing else. I was glad to see something.

Agreed, it took me five minutes to trace the quote in the article to the book, find the footnote and discover the larger quote and context in the trove of information that is the Nassau Conference. What an incredibly valuable five minutes.

Thanks David. I apreciate your efforts. It was a very important conference.

Thanks Sandy, I looked for it and missed it. Still...

Thu hurt is strong in this one.....

It's just really disappointing that we can't have a decent discussion about a decent article without the same three hooligans throwing sucker punches, and kiscks to the head, like rabid dogs, thugs or vermin. This article stood clear of the the larger Harvey and Lee work, but a hurt-child and dedicated ramshackle couldn't leave it be. lay dome some straight-up criticism, find fault with references citations or arguments, that's fine. Waltons hurt and despondency over his works bending ignored has created a disturbed child who needs to be removed from tha class of normal students. Walton has whined about no one paying attention to his garbage before, and we all have to pay for his delinquent, childish acting out. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/profile/7252-michael-walton/?do=content&type=forums_topic&change_section=1

In reference to the ROKC In reference to the JFKassassinationfurum Why does Michael keep offering these onsolicited didbits. It's kind of odd that he claims to know no nothing about Duncan's Forum when no-one asks. It's kind of odd that he says he's not a member at ROKC, when no one asks him the question. And "Michael Walton" appears to have no other presence on the Internet, in relation the JFK, or anything else. I think I am going to try to track this guy down and see if he has any clues. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/profile/6325-mark-henceroth/

Absolutely. You can't necessarily take it to the bank, but it is short-sighted to not even consider it. 50 years of an antagonistic relationship withCuba and a care-free hegemony of Guantanamo informs my thinking that that is exactly what was planned. It would not have happened under JFK, I don't think he could imagine it.

Bold is mine. Rubbish is Paul Trejo's

I am wondering what members and researchers think of the December, 1995 Nassau JFK Conference. Any criticisms, follow-ups or any other thoughts on this? I find it pretty interesting as I read through it. http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027.html " The three day seminar produced the prospects of all participants meeting again, informally face-to-face, to discuss at a later time, many of the issues in Nassau, Bahamas. Invitations were to be open to anyone willing to attend. And so the process of historical exchange was initiated as was the exchange on the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was decided in Rio that a "one-on-one" meeting be held in Nassau with the Cubans. Without billing, fancy brochures, press conferences, book marts, and the frills of the agenda, a group of highly motivated individuals gathered to put their collective minds toward trying to resolve some of the issues surrounding the JFK assassination at Nassau. Three Cubans attended the meeting to report on what they had found in regards to Cuban documentation on several issues. Carlos Lechuga, former Cuban diplomat, attended, as did two retired Cuban State Security officials, General Fabian Escalante Font and Arturo Rodriguez. Wayne Smith from the Center for International Studies acted as moderator. Others in attendance were: Gaeton Fonzi, Jeremy Gunn (Council and Chief Investigator for the Assassination Review Board), John Judge, Andy Kolis, Peter Kornbluh * (National Security Archives), Mary and Ray LaFontaine*, Jim Lesar (AARC), John Newman, Alan Rogers, Dick Russell, Tony Summers, Russ Swickard, Peter Dale Scott, Ed Sherry, Noel Twyman and Gordon Winslow. *Attendance for one day only AGENDA. The agenda was adhered to fairly well with many agenda questions fixed in advance. The sessions included the following topics, with about two hours set for each. Most exchanges ran over the time allotted. The topics were: 1. JACK RUBY. 2. CASTRO-KENNEDY CONTACTS IN 1963. 3. DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS AND OTHER CIA FIGURES. 4. EXILES. (Odio, gunrunning, other exiles, JM/WAVE) 5. OSWALD IN MEXICO CITY. (This included AM/LASH.) CUBAN RECORDS. There were no records produced by the Cubans to verify anything presented. When pressed on the availability of records, General Escalante said that there is no procedure set up within the Cuban Government to declassify any record. He speculated as to how Claudia Furiati obtained Cuban documents for publication in her book, ZR. "She probably wrote to the Cuban Government", he said. He has been permitted to look at any record he seeks, but is not permitted to make photocopies But in the Portuguese version of her book, ZR, there is a notorized affidavit by General Escalante Font that the State Security documents given to Mrs. Furiati are true and correct copies of the originals. [see her documents from JFK MENU ] Tape one http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-1.html Tape two http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-2.html Tape three http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-3.html Tape four http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-4.html Tape five http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-5.html Tape six http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-6.html Tape seven http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-7.html Tape eight http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027-8.html

I don't see much information, findings publications or research that was produced as a result of the 1995 Rio de Janeiro JFK conference. I am wondering if members have resources, links of any information that relates to that conference. From Rio to Nassau: A small look into Cuba's JFK records In August 1995 the Minister of Culture invited several individuals to Rio de Janeiro to partake "in a governmental program for culture and social discussions enlargement". The Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro co-promoted the seminar "to increase the value of justice questions and to improve the knowledge and practice of 'parallel powers', a characteristic widely present in our society today". It was billed as an International JFK Seminar. Papers were given by Wayne Smith, Cyril Wecht, Gaeton Fonzi, Gordon Winslow, John Newman, James Lesar, Fabian Escalante Font, Arturo Rodriguez, William Turner and Eric Hamburg. All presentations were structured around the agenda set by Claudia Furiati. Some of the topics covered were, The Warren Commission evidence, the CIA, Mafia, and Cuban Exile theories, Oswald's intelligence ties, the Miami-New Orleans-Dallas Triangle, Mexico City, and the plan to implicate Cuba and the USSR in the assassination of JFK. http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0027.html

Well, Armstrong's book has citations for his passages. And instead of rambling incoherently about something that you never read, you could have taken the time to check that citation. That's called research. Research is fun and interesting because invariably you come upon many more interesting documents and sources. And, I found the source for the quote that you seem to be soooo hurt-about, but rather than check it out you decided howl-foul with the Walton-Whine. Here is the larger quote and a link for that quote. FYI, a group of Cuban's, exiles, researchers, investigators and authors got together in the Bahamas in 1995 to sort out and document what they could, while they were alive. "Without billing, fancy brochures, press conferences, book marts, and the frills of the agenda, a group of highly motivated individuals gathered to put their collective minds toward trying to resolve some of the issues surrounding the JFK assassination at Nassau. Three Cubans attended the meeting to report on what they had found in regards to Cuban documentation on several issues. Carlos Lechuga, former Cuban diplomat, attended, as did two retired Cuban State Security officials, General Fabian Escalante Font and Arturo Rodriguez. Wayne Smith from the Center for International Studies acted as moderator. Others in attendance were: Gaeton Fonzi, Jeremy Gunn (Council and Chief Investigator for the Assassination Review Board), John Judge, Andy Kolis, Peter Kornbluh * (National Security Archives), Mary and Ray LaFontaine*, Jim Lesar (AARC), John Newman, Alan Rogers, Dick Russell, Tony Summers, Russ Swickard, Peter Dale Scott, Ed Sherry, Noel Twyman and Gordon Winslow." From that conference..... "In 1972, this CIA official had an interview with our agent. Our agent at that time had a different case official. But this man came as a.... as a leader, as a boss or something. Had an interview with our agent. This interview was... took place in Mexico they were just having a few drinks. In between, Kennedy [Kennedy's name] came into the conversation they were talking about... into the conversation, not Kennedy came to, into... So when the subject comes up this character explains to our agent that after Kennedy's death, he visited his grave and peed on it and said he [JFK] was a communist and such and such. We still didn't know who Harold Benson was but when Claudia Furiati did her research, among the people we interviewed was this agent. We showed him a group of photographs. Plus we already knew about David Phillips. I'm speaking of 92 and 93. And the photograph that we showed him was a photograph of David Phillips. And so he pointed out as Harold Benson. This is all the information I can give you. There are some other informations. .................. So Mr. Walton says that DAP could not get near JFK's grave to desecrate it. And Mr. Walton knows this because he lives nearby. And Mr. Walton would rather cry foul about Armstrongs passage, because the book used to be priced beyond his budget, but he does not bother to check it out now, even though it's free. And this goes on day after day after day.

Roger that Jim, but, Mechanic or plotter, he was Bona Fide CIA, was he not?