Tom Little

https://www.cwporter.com/jfksex.htm

As Douglass and other writers on the conspiracy have suggested Oswald's double could have been used in a number of operations. But Oswald himself was being handled and controlled by CIA agents so I don't doubt that he could have done that as well. As for Kennedy and his mistresses he must have had a hell of a guilt complex with all that Jackie had gone through. He had plenty of warnings he was in imminent danger but was indifferent and oblivious to the threats.

Thanks for the excellent analysis. Within a couple years Mark Lane's "Rush to Judgement" came out with very strong witness testimony destroying the official version of events. There were numerous books and films like Burt Lancaster in "Executive Action" with some plausible versions of events. One thing to keep in mind is that the truth tellers are dealing with a huge industry web of the military and the intelligence agencies with huge stakes in promoting their agendas. Not just the CIA, but you have numerous other intelligence agencies that don't seem to have the goods on Donald Trump yet, with NSA, the most powerful computers AI, some high IQ people--but still the truth takes forever to come out.

Files doesn't say that he was with anyone behind the fence, no one It is inconceivable there was not a spotter or second person. You have to have corroborating accounts, one person' s version is insufficient. Some have said it was Ruby who was nearby without positive identification; also that Ruby knew all about it, without giving a plausible rationale for why he would shoot Oswald with nothing to gain.

If you go over to the JFK murder solved site, Dankbaar has been posting a lot over there recently. He challenged Jimmy Files to unearth the box of his fellow assassin's diary and saved Dallas documents Charles "Chuckie Typewriter" Nicoletti's. Files said he buried the stuff before he was put away in jail for the duration. Files got out of the pen last year and is a good friend with at least one forum member. Credibility is a huge issue. Files could be legit, but he could of just as easily manufactured it for some money, he knew all the players in the Chicago mob, and could have worked back claiming to be the only assassin behind the fence, which doesn't make sense. He never mentioned Ruby as his team associate, or anyone else. It makes sense there were several teams, they needed to have a headshot, they wanted it from behind, but their clean up crew was able to make like the lone nut theory was valid.

Are there any good rebuttals of this book's assertions? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630449/EXCLUSIVE-Bobby-Kennedy-ordered-Marilyn-Monroes-murder-lethal-injection-prevent-revealing-torrid-affairs-RFK-JFK-dirty-Kennedy-family-secrets-new-book-claims.html

I looked at a lot of the Amazon reviews of the book, the local library ordered a copy for me. I have been just going over the introductory sections and then the Dallas connections with the assassination. Some bias in this book, as the writer makes strong reference to Thomas Merton's reference to "the unspeakable" as if evil should not be spoken of?? What nonsense, and my concerns over the tendency of Catholic mystics and writers like Douglass to romanticize JFK as a martyr fighting for peace, when all evidence showed an extremely reckless man in his personal life, a sex addict, together with other failings. The truth should come out especially of evil, conspiracies, CIA criminality--if anything people are complicit in blocking the truth from coming out.

One link on the Bobby Baker version of events on Rometsch: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511225/Kennedy-Ford-affairs-East-German-spy-loved-oral-sex.html

I have been reading through the Douglass book "JFK and the Unspeakable". It strikes me as a Catholic apologetic, the writer was a graduate of theology at a Jesuit school; I also have a degree from one. He makes JFK look like he was suffering greatly against the CIA and its huge appetite for militarism and intrigue. Much of that is true, but he wasn't a martyr.Something that keeps coming up in my thinking are trying to see the assassination plans so they make sense, and so the different versions are credible. James Files says he was alone behind the fence, other versions like that of that of Gordon Arnold and the deaf mute Ed Hoffman describe pairs of men. How do we reconcile these and other versions?

I have been self employed pretty much all my life. I ran a tree and landscape business for many years and am a local major numismatic dealer, ebay seller.