Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jason Ward

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Jason Ward's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  1. I guess it is if you already believe in Harvey and Lee. There are 100s of Oswald sightings in evidence and IMO more than half are mistakes or deliberate frauds. Steenbarge's sighting isn't enhanced by waiting 20 years to mention it - when another phase of assassination interest was peaking in the media. If this very detailed account was made in 1963 I'd take it very seriously. In 1978 I take it as creatively enhanced memory. Jason
  2. One of the several reasons why I believe it is worthwhile to investigate Walker and the Radical Right is because that's who Earl Warren and many others assumed killed Kennedy: SOURCE All items available in the Warren Commission Hearings & Exhibits https://www.maryferrell.org/php/showlist.php?docset=1006
  3. In case readers are not aware, Harry Dean is the only person active on this thread who had a connection to Oswald etc. in 1963: Much more on Harry Dean: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=75354#relPageId=2&tab=page No, Roger, my plate is full with reading at the moment. Plus, I have a day job and a family and aging parents and....everything... I hope to get to Craven's thesis. I've read Walker's testimony in places but haven't given it a full treatment. For the moment, the most glaring point that stands out is the way WC attorney Liebeler ambushes Walker into perjury around the German newspaper article; the article that shows Walker has unpublished/nonpublic information about Oswald on 22NOV63. In my reading of the evidence posted above in this thread, Decker, Curry, and Fritz are the stage directors of Dealey Plaza. So-and-so has a brother who was once in the CIA doesn't connect this murder to the CIA in my book. Jason
  4. David Von Pein is a much-needed voice of rational evidence-based discussion on this forum. Jason
  5. The Dallas authorities have original jurisdiction and their ongoing decision to ignore the assassination speaks volumes. The truth could still shake things up badly. BTW, just to nitpick, the Texas Attorney General is not really an active crime-fighting office. The Dallas DA, the DPD, and the Dallas County Sheriff's Department are in prime positions to release old-hidden evidence and even generate new undiscovered evidence; in the unlikely event they want to re-open the case and risk upheaval in their own agencies. Jason
  6. I work on projects for Rex Bradford at the Mary Ferrell Foundation and I hope everyone will just browse through the huge collection - you'll be very surprised at what you find just by random searches. In case anyone is looking for more primary source material on this subject, there is a wealth of General Walker information here: https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_Walker_Documents.html?search=general walker
  7. For one thing, he's a secondary player as far as official and most conspiracy theories go, which is to his advantage. He gets less attention. Maybe Westbrook's less obvious role is a deliberate part of the plan? - - - based on the fact that while all the action at DPD headquarters was around Capt Fritz and Oswald, Westbrook is inexplicably in the decidedly less interesting HR office. Even more inexplicably, "Oswald's pistol" is processed in this HR office, along with the usual comedic chain-of-evidence routine and inconsistent testimony that is typical of Dallas police officers on this the most important day of their career. {PS - I have some catching up to do. I've been busy at work and with the family, but there are a lot of points posted over the last week that deserve a response} Thanks for looking at evidence and asking pertinent questions. Your serious input is appreciated. 🎖️ >>>In memory of all the people who died for America - this is their Memorial Day <<< Jason
  8. Hi B.A. Copeland, Thanks for adding some intelligent comments to the thread. IMO the method of this crime points to who "these guys" might be, and IMO the method of the assassination isn't often looked at rationally. I am not a cop nor a professional investigator, but at one point in my career I did bank and insurance-related investigations often involving major crimes. I took 4-5 classes, which, again, doesn't make me an expert. With that said, I feel fairly confident in applying a few truths from basic crime science to Dealey Plaza - and the top line item I invoke is that the method of any serious crime will 9 times out of 10 tell you a lot about who you are looking for. Forget motive. Look at method. The assassination was a wildly dangerous circus stunt. It almost failed. Trying to kill someone as they drive by in a convertible is absurd for anyone who has easy access to the president. There were 100s of witnesses, dozens of cameras, and a slew of Dallas doctors indicating a frontal shot and therefore a conspiracy. Half the witnesses heard shots from places other than the TSBD and a few witnesses saw more than one shooter. This tells me a couple things: 1. The conspirators were not Washington insiders who had easy, private, controllable access to the president. The conspirators had no choice but to take a big risk at both success and at getting caught. Professionals do not choose the most difficult, most risky method of attack. The CIA or FBI or ONI and so forth could have made it look like a heart attack, they could have had JFK killed in a private place with no witnesses, they could have controlled the doctors, they could have made sure there was no film. They could have killed JFK the way RFK was killed if they wanted a "public" job. Moreover, Washington insiders could have simply removed Kennedy with scandal - real or framed. If the CIA wants to kill, there is never a hint of any conspiracy, they pull it off perfectly. The CIA killing the president risks prison for the conspirators and risks the end of the CIA - there is simply no rational way this can be "a CIA" job unless you believe "the CIA" is criminally insane. 2. The conspiracy to kill is completely separate from the cover-up. You don't need a theatrically rabid communist like Oswald to be the official assassin if the conspirators plan a lone nut explanation. Likewise, no need for the grand public fireworks show in Dealey Plaza if the conspirators plan a Lone Nut explanation. In short, in my view everyone is caught up in motive and illogically using motive as part of the "proof" in their assassination theories. IMO the method of this crime shows an overwrought, overdramatic, needlessly risky murder which decidedly points away from a CIA which has killed or removed leaders all over the world. I talk to Paul Trejo because he sticks close to the evidence and because in my opinion the method of this crime points away from any deep CIA/government conspiracy. This is a wild west circus stunt perhaps one missed shot away from failure - that happened to succeed....and covered up professionally by those not active in the murder, it seems to me. The people who shot Kennedy have the same childish understanding of public perception as those who printed the anti JFK flyers and anti-JFK newspaper ad in that morning's Dallas Morning News. Is Walker the author of the assassination? I don't know. I believe his personality and friends are better suspects than the Ivy League elitists at the CIA. BTW, I too am very suspicious of DPD Capt. Westbrook - his Warren Commission testimony is examined in detail earlier in this thread. He's perjured himself and obviously a conspirator, IMO. I hope you'll comment or critique what I say, and thanks again for joining the thread. Jason 1. General Walker was a suspect as early as 22NOV63: 2. DPD Capt Westbrook's story doesn't add up and suggests the police are the operations crew of the assassination, IMO. SOURCES 1 - Dr Jerry Rose, "Nut Country: The Friends of General Walker." The Third Decade, Vol 5, Iss 5. July 1989. 2 - Dr Jerry Rose, The Third Decade, Vol 4, Iss 3. March 1988.
  9. Hi Paul, FBI agent Hosty says Oswald had FPCC contact right around the time of the Walker shooting on 10APR63. Correlation does not imply causation. However, correlation does imply correlation so I have to ask how the shooting of General Walker in April is related to Oswald's April move to New Orleans, and the April(?) contact between the FPCC and LHO? SOURCE HSCA Administrative Folder, Lee Harvey Oswald, Vol. 6. NARA 124-10369-10018
  10. Hi Paul, I think some of those who have the CIA running the assassination likewise incorporate some rogue Radical Right players as an admitted possibility. The problem in all theories is in connecting an identifiable leader with the ground crew in Dallas. In this thread we've spotted cops who are obviously part of the conspiracy. But who are the cops in bed with, or following? IMO the likes of Buddy Walthers are ideologically, culturally, and of course physically closer to General Walker and the southern Radical Right than anyone in Washington or the CIA. In many cases these cop types in Dallas distrust or sometimes despise the entire federal apparatus, CIA/FBI included. I think it's farfetched to imagine Sheriff Decker working with east coast elites like the Dulles brothers or Bush family. All CTs are missing a link. Jason
  11. Hi Paul, Obviously I have no doubt Dr Caufield told you that Garrison's first CT was a Radical-Right-did-it explanation for the assassination. I believe that Caufield inspected Garrison's files and today we find evidence as to why Caufield would tell you this (see document 1 below). However, I have to be honest and say that once believing the Radical Right is to blame and then switching to a CIA-did-it narrative really doesn't make sense. 1. According to Jim Garrison's discovered witness Rudloph Davis, the Lake Pontchartrain training camp was a creation of the John Birch Society. In interviews, Garrison says the FBI raid on this camp is the last straw that solidifies anti-JFK sentiment and begins the assassination plans. So why does assassination lore equate the camp, David Ferrie, and the CIA? Why not the JBS instead? SOURCE 1 - HSCA Segregated CIA files, Jim Garrison Investigations, Reel 25, Folder F, Volume 4, NARA 1994.05.06.08:46:54:280005 the CIA didn't kill Kennedy
  12. That's how it worked in 1963 as well. The "deep state" both then and now has no need to risk the wildly dangerous, circus-show stunt of trying to kill someone as they drive by in a convertible, cameras rolling. Those in power have and had many ways to defrock a president. Dealey Plaza barely "worked" with 1-2 "good" shots and several misses; furthermore it never really "worked" since the conspiracy accusations began, loudly, right away. Sloppy evidence is all over the place. The "Deep State" destroys presidents with no or very little second guessing from its opponents - zero reason to do this in public, with cameras, with Dallas doctors indicating a frontal shot right away, with 100s of witnesses, etc. Jason
  13. Hi Paul, Your question is interesting. I might say your question is another way of asking: What has New Orleans got to do with the assassination? From a historiography perspective, New Orleans is relevant because that's where Jim Garrison did most of his work. But didn't Jim Garrison say the CIA-did-it, both in his books and in the Oliver Stone movie JFK? 1. Serious students of the assassination believe LHO is a right winger?.........(according to Jim Garrison) 2. The CIA analysis of Jim Garrison's work invokes the extreme Right, so why is the CIA concerned? 3. Guy Bannister was an extreme right winger or a CIA operative? 4. Does David Ferrie reactivate his former teenage student Lee Harvey Oswald into the Anti-Castro efforts in New Orleans as Garrison says? 5. Is Garrison telling us that Oswald's patsyhood and the entire assassination begin with the 21JUL63 FBI raid on the anti-Castro Cuban camp at Lake Pontchartrain? SOURCES: 1, 3, 4, 5 - Eric Norden, "Jim Garrison, a candid conversation with the embattled district attorney of New Orleans," Playboy. October 1967. pp 59 - 2 HSCA segregated CIA collection, box 42. NARA 1993.07.20.15:03:55:870280
  14. I agree. The DPD stage managed the assassination, while the sheriff's department seems critical mainly at the TSBD. The WC testimony makes this obvious and the disturbing thing is that it apparently took a few years for anyone to read enough of their testimony to make a big deal about it, which is what I see Jim Garrison doing. If people would simply read the WC testimony, the starting point and critical people are obvious. Furthermore, everyone is so caught up in the high drama of conspiracy theories that very few are actually looking in Dallas; almost no one looks closely at the cops, which is IMO the one and only place there is certain guilt. In fact, as of this moment, I would say the cops are the only known guilty parties, 1. so is it possible that the cops themselves killed Kennedy? With no big sponsors or overlords other than themselves? Even though I myself have this hangup, I also have to ask: 2. Why is everyone obsessed with Oswald? If he's the patsy, then who gives a damn what his story is? I feel like we might understand everything about Oswald and still never get to the bottom of the assassination because Oswald is really at the fringe. He's the patsy, he's the diversion; meaning the conspirators want us to look at him - so why are we all looking at him just as the conspirators want? As usual, I think a different approach could do some good. Haven't we all been up and down Oswald 1000 times by now? In my research I must add Dr Jerry Rose to the list of those critical to the development of the Radical Right - Walker theory. If you read through Rose's old stuff he's working and meeting with Dr Caufield a lot along the way, from way back.... Also there is Harrison Livingstone.....here's a snippet from his book, which in turn quotes Robert Goodman. What do you think of the FBI raid on the Lake Pontchartrain camp as the last straw that "may have sealed Kennedy's fate?" SOURCE Harrison Livingstone, The Radical Right and the Murder of John F Kennedy. Traford Publishing Co (2004). p 98.
  15. Hi Mervyn, This is where I depart from your train of thought. There is no reason to invoke the supernatural or extraordinary, is there? For everyone else in the world using a passport is sufficient to confirm their identity. Why suggest that in Oswald's case there is no "proof...LHO was involved," when for everyone else in the world we believe they alone use their own passport unless strong evidence suggests otherwise? LHO may or may not be truly interested in ASC. Evidence of his interest or non-interest in ASC is not so important when we consider that the true value of ASC is the ability it affords Oswald to legally travel. If he is interested in traveling overseas, he needs at least nominal college plans in place to leave the country as a reservist. ASC provides this. As always, David, I appreciate very much posting evidence instead of mere commentary. In my work there is no evidence of CIA involvement whenever we encounter the unexplained. You take the evidence differently and see the CIA as the only explanation in places where I see alternatives equally or more likely than the CIA, which is of course fine with me. I just have what we might call a stricter standard of evidence and am totally comfortable with saying "we don't know why Oswald did xxxxxx." The unexplained does not equate to the CIA for me. Jason
  • Create New...