Benjamin Cole

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

Hope everyone has their popcorn ready, the sh*t is starting to hit the fan...

OK, I am outnumbered, so I beating a retreat. 

Just remember, the Cheney-M$M version of 1/6...is like the Warren Commission version of 11/22...

A manufactured narrative, and the purpose is political....

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

     If you really believe that Donald Trump has not been aligned with the Koch/GOP plutocracy, you're simply naive.  The examples are legion.

     Are you not aware that Trump's judicial appointees were all referred by the Koch's right wing Federalist Society -- the people behind the disastrous, plutocratic Citizens United SCOTUS ruling?

     I took the time to point out the actual historic relationship between Trump and the Koch GOP-- in contrast to Trump's professed contempt for the Kochs.  Did you read the examples I posted relating to Keystone XL, tax policy, EPA policy, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare?  Obama and Biden have disagreed with Trump and the GOP Koch-o-cracy on all of those major policy issues.

     As for partisanship, I'm a progressive Democrat who voted for Bernie Sanders in our local 2016 and 2020 primaries.

     I don't have any illusions about the corruption of American politics by money, but I agree with Ron that you need to do some remedial reading about dark money and the GOP Koch-o-cracy.

     As for Liz Cheney, I despise her father's political legacy-- always have-- but I commend her honesty about the January 6th Trump coup attempt, and the collusion of the GOP Sedition Caucus in that debacle.

     Also, you still don't seem to grasp the nature of Operation Mockingbird as a propaganda establishment focused on covering up covert CIA and military black ops.  You continue to overgeneralize about its nature and focus.

Well, we have different views.

As for Liz Cheney, I think the default position is that when she speaks, it is a narrative in favor of the globalist Cheneyite GOP.

Truth, in any and all circumstances, is not on the agenda. 

I do not expect Cheney to have any interest in the truth of what happened on 1/6, anymore than you would expect Liz Cheney to go on truth-finding mission on 9/11. 

But, into 2022 we go....

On 1/3/2022 at 6:46 PM, Craig Carvalho said:

I agree Ben. I do believe Oswald was in Mexico City. And like you I am also beginning to believe he was impersonated during his stay there. Proof of this was established in the telephone intercepts. I was always of the opinion that the CIA's Mexico City station had called the Cuban embassy using Oswald's name in order to elicit information about Oswald's visits there. Nevertheless, the CIA lied about the recordings to the bitter end, (HSCA - Anne Goodpasture). They claimed that the tapes had been erased just days after being transcribed yet the FBI listened to them in Dallas after the assassination, and it was agreed that the voice on the tapes was not Oswald's.

BTW, I did see that documentary with Kostikov and company when it aired back in 1993. As far as the Soviets were concerned I think they would have said the Easter bunny had visited the embassy if that's what we wanted them to say. I don't believe they, (USSR), had anything to do with Oswald or the assassination. They simply did not want to be implicated in any way, (guilt by association). But it's entirely possible that Oswald did go there, and I believe he did. I don't think they were lying.

Getting back to the visa photographs. I have turned this over in my mind again and again. If Lee Harvey Oswald was the man in those four photographs what would the harm be in establishing that fact. The cat was already out of the bag so to speak. It also gave the CIA the opportunity to produce photographic evidence that Oswald was indeed in Mexico City without having to jeopardize their surveillance programs.

The only motive for the CIA to withhold such evidence would have been if the man in those photographs was not Oswald. That would have strongly suggested a conspiracy in the assassination. And the identity of the man in those photos would have lead them directly to those involved.

Win Scott in Mexico City knew this, and so did CIA headquarters. The only thing CIA headquarters could not be certain of is what Scott had hidden in his personal safe. The only thing it could have been was something the CIA should never have been able to obtain... photographs that were technically on Cuban soil... inside the Cuban embassy.

P.S. I can understand Scott's desire to protect an asset within the Cuban embassy, but there has been no indication in any of the previously or newly released documents that would suggest that Scott shared this information with headquarters. Again, if it was in fact Oswald who appeared in the visa photographs it certainly would have closed that door in terms of any alleged conspiracy... especially in one where the CIA might have been implicated. Indeed knowledge is power. Nowhere else is this more apparent than within the intelligence community. Add to this fact the CIA's compulsion for compartmentalization and it becomes even more so, and no single person within the CIA could have attested to this more than the beneficiary of Scott's private cache... James J. Angleton. 

Craig C.--

The JFKA saga is endless, but I am amazed more has not been made of the four missing ID photographs of LHO witnessed by Duran. I think a reasonable deduction is the four photos were a match for the "Oswald" she dealt with. But they are not photos of the LHO we know. As you know, Duran said she dealt a blond man. 

Great posting by you. 

A reasonable deduction is the four photos have been suppressed. 

What that means, at a minimum, is a CIA cover-up. Does it mean LHO was in fact a CIA asset? Or other intel agency asset? Can't figure it out. 

46 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

What I want to know is how a shameless lying moron like Max Boot acquired such a prominent mainstream media platform in the U.S.

I know that he has been involved with the Council on Foreign Relations and with the PNAC Neocons who promoted the War on Terror after 9/11.

Who gave him a column in the Washington Post?

The WaPo did. 

What used to be the "liberal' media---Rolling Stone, WaPo, NYT, Daily Beast, Newsweek, MSNBC, CNN et al ---has become totally infested with former national-security-state commentators, or CIA-lap dogs. 

I can hardly believe it myself. It seems less like something you would read in pulp novel but rather in a cartoon-book, it is so obvious.

That's how you get the WaPo fronting for Max Boot-CIA. 

I would not mind the WaPo giving op-ed space to the full range the political spectrum (barring hate groups). They are a national newspaper, and that is fine.

But when Max Bootisms become their prominent take on the JFKA and the globalist security state....you are reading poison. 

1 minute ago, Ron Bulman said:

Ben and everyone else should read Jane Mayers excellent Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right: Mayer, Jane: 9780307947901: Amazon.com: Books  The coches are featured.

W and R--

I entirely agree the billionaire class is funding the two major political parties today, and played a prime role in the development of the non-Trumpian globalist right wing (the Cheney wing, if you will) of the 'Phant Party. 

Why is Liz Cheney the new WaPo-Donk hero? 

Perhaps the difference between us is you are partisans, adherents and supporters of the Democratic Party. Thus your arguments tend to be partisan arguments.  

You never address the ugly realities of the modern Donk Party, its affiliation with Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood-media, the globalist-CCP connections, the merging of the Donks-globalist-national-security-state and media. The divisive and ugly ID politics. A total P.U. 

I am no fan of the establishment GOP, and its desire to cut social welfare programs (but never the VA and military outlays). 

Well, we disagree on these issues. I see a crapulent, coprolite Donk Party, eager to reassume service on behalf of its globalist donor class, under woke-sheep's clothing. 

And the guy who put tariffs on Sino imports? Bush jr., Trump or Obama? 

It was Trump. Why? 

The Koch brothers have been mentioned in this forum. And it appears true the Koch brothers were and may be influential in establishment GOP circles. The Liz Cheney wing.

Here is President Trump tweeting in 2018:

"President Donald Trump on Tuesday slammed the powerful Koch brothers in a series of tweets as “a total joke” who run a “highly overrated” network of donors.

The tweets come just a day after the conservative network said it would distance itself from the commander-in-chief and other top Republicans who don’t support their agenda.

“The globalist Koch Brothers, who have become a total joke in real Republican circles, are against Strong Borders and Powerful Trade. I never sought their support because I don’t need their money or bad ideas,” Trump tweeted.

“Their network is highly overrated, I have beaten them at every turn. They want to protect their companies outside the U.S. from being taxed, I’m for America First & the American Worker - a puppet for no one,” he wrote, before dubbing them, “Two nice guys with bad ideas.”"

---30---

The Trump story was always more complicated than the simple ID politics or morality tales told in the M$M.

Trump was and is a deeply flawed individual.  There is little disputing that. 

But it was Trump who upended the CCP-China-US globalist-multinational bandwagon and imposed tariffs on Sino imports. Trump---Trump!---who crossed the most commercial, profit-seeking enterprises in all history, who were doing business with the CCP, the most powerful political party in history.  

Obama was a facilitator of the CCP-globalist regimes, as was Bush jr. and the Koch brothers. 

The Donk party presently appears gung-ho on importing more cheap labor into the US...but says because the immigrants are non-white this must be a sacrosanct virtue, and anyone who questions illegal immigration is a racist. 

Thus, divisive ID politics becomes a cudgel against anyone working for a living in the US. 

The blue-red story or Trump story...is not the simple morality tale many want to believe---or what the M$M wants you to believe. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-slams-koch-network-overrated-after-group-distanced-itself-w-n896036

On 1/3/2022 at 12:32 PM, James DiEugenio said:

You know, the Washington Post's Fred Hiatt died about a month ago.  But apparently his imprint on their editorial page lives on. Because notorious nutty neocon Max Boot was allowed to write a truly stupid column in which he attacked both the 1991 feature JFK and the 2020 documentary JFK Revisited.  

My belated reply to Max, where he gets booted. I mean anyone who can write that JFK was trying to topple Lumumba or that Posner discredited the ARRB is an MSM clown.  

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/max-boot-vs-jfk-revisited-202201021703

 

James D.--

I don't know where you get the strength to read this coprolite from Max Boot, and then comment on it.

And you are right: The WaPo will to this day give a platform for clueless hit piece from Max Boot (obvious CIA mouthpiece) but will not explicitly call for total and unconditional release of the JFK files, and an honest re-examination of the case---which any newspaper should.

Since when are newspapers against transparency? And for censorship?

If the JFKA is so clear, then a fair re-examination, well-funded but led by non-government types, should be harmless and would indeed strengthen the public's sentiments toward government. 

The WaPo is beneath contempt. 

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-the-gop-civil-war-over-the-january-6-capitol-riot-martyrs?ref=home It Sends the Wrong Message’: Inside the GOP Civil War Over the Jan. 6 ‘Martyrs’
https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-the-gop-civil-war-over-the-january-6-capitol-riot-martyrs?ref=home
"Many of those events take place outside courthouses or in parks. Another Jan. 6 event, organized by a far-right political candidate, calls for a “patriot martyr vigil” outside the Orange County, California FBI office.

The event’s organizer, Nick Taurus, is an outspoken fan of the white supremacist Nick Fuentes, and is currently running a longshot campaign to unseat Democratic Rep. Katie Porter in California. Taurus is a longtime participant in physical clashes with the left. This summer, two weeks after announcing his candidacy, he uploaded a video montage of himself ripping up a Black Lives Matter sign and repeatedly punching a man who was on the ground. The montage is set against an audio clip of Barry Goldwater proclaiming that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.”"

I'm telling you, we're back to 1964.

Steve Thomas

Steve T.

I am not here to defend racism, or far-right nuts.

But you realize the Daily Beast has been outed as a CIA front? 

For whatever reason, the Donk-national security state-allied media is magnifying every possible racial schism. 

I was alive in 1964, and I remember Goldwater's campaign, and his theorizing about the use of nuclear weapons. I remember the racial politics of the time. 

LBJ seemed like the better choice...yet he was getting us into Vietnam. 

As I say, bring me a better political party. 

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

     I've posted numerous examples of the major policy differences between Democrats and Republicans in our debates-- everything from tax policy and environmental protection to healthcare, infrastructure, and education.

    It never seems to register with you.  You're always in broadcast mode.

    Regarding healthcare, it took 16 years after Clinton's failed attempt for a Democratic POTUS and Congress to finally succeed in establishing a universal healthcare framework for the U.S., in 2009.

    How did the Koch-funded Republican Tea Party respond?  They spent the next decade trying to defame, defund, and sabotage the Affordable Care Act.

     After 2010, the Tea Party Koch/GOP House also passed two Paul Ryan budget bills that would have, essentially, abolished Medicare for retirees born after 1959.

    Do you, at least, understand the difference between Republicans and Democrats on healthcare policy?

    Here's another difference to consider...

W-

I am not a cynical person in general, but in regards to the two major political parties today...I am.

Why are the health insurers pouring money into the Donks? Silicon Valley, the multinationals, media-Hollywood, Wall Street? 

The Donks do some posing. Offensive woke-caterwauling, etc. 

I think Nancy Pelosi summed it up neatly recently; members of Congress should profit from the capitalist system.  

I share your concerns, but in reverse: The Donks have merged into the national security state and allied media, and now want tech-social-media to act as privatized state censor. 

The Democrats of the 1960s, the Kennedys, the McCarthys, even Hubert Humphrey...gone. 

Clinton brought us NAFTA.

Obama brought much expanded commercial relations with China.

Bush jr. brought us not one but two fantastically expensive but counterproductive wars, and is now a Donk hero. Liz Cheney a titan of democracy, and Donk savior. 

The Donk-Biden DoD budget is $769 billion, larger than was Trump's. With bad luck, the US could be drawn into war (or provoke hostilities) in the Ukraine, Iran and Taiwan, Venezuela, Syria, other places. 

Sorry, I can't vote Donk. 

Please bring me a party I can vote for. 

Add on:

Far be it from me to tell others what to post, or what is relevant in this forum. 

My personal take is the JFKA is relevant in this forum, and then the globalist-national security state, and its manipulation/control of events and media. 

In this context, issues as healthcare, or agriculture, or infrastructure, or Federal Reserve policy...well, not germane. All are very important issues, of course. 

But OT, IMHO. 

But hey, each to his own. 

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

    The U.S. gets worse health outcomes than other nations on some public health metrics, despite spending more.

    Sadly, our healthcare non-system in the U.S. is still organized around maximizing profits for corporations (health insurance, hospitals, Big Pharma) and individuals.  Private healthcare corporations now spend more money on lobbyists and political campaigns in the U.S. than the military-industrial complex. 

   And a substantial percentage of every healthcare dollar spent in the U.S. (about a third) is siphoned off by health insurance corporations for "administrative" purposes.  A well known New England Journal of Medicine analysis from the pre-ACA years found that U.S. health insurance corporations were taking about one-third of every healthcare dollar spent for insurance "administrative" costs, compared to just 16% spent on administrative costs in Canada-- a system that covers everyone.

    Republicans in the Senate (along with Joe Manchin and Kysten Sinema) are still blocking legislation that would help reduce drug costs in the U.S., which are significantly higher than costs in other countries.

   The only successful efforts at healthcare reform in the U.S. during the past 60 years-- Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare-- have all been accomplshed by Democrats, against staunch Republican opposition.  Bill (and Hillary) Clinton failed in their half-assed attempt at healthcare reform, and nothing was attempted for the next 16 years.

     Unfortunately, the original 2009 ACA plan that included a public (insurance) option was torpedoed in the Senate Finance Committee by Max Baucus, (D-Montana) Joe Lieberman, (D-Connecticut) and every Republican on the committee.  Then after sabotaging the bill, the Republicans voted against it.

      

    

The establishment GOP never talks about privatizing Walter Reed or West Point. Or the VA for that matter. Even the libertarian ideologues. Hypocrisy rules the GOP, but then what else is new?

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/478511-progressives-raise-red-flags-over-health-insurer-donations

But the Donks take health insurance money too. 

I understand you think there is a difference between the Donks and the 'Phants. To me, which shade of purple poison you want to drink?

Further, I am uncomfortable with the modern merging of the Donks, the national security state and media.  

The WaPo is a CIA-Donk mouthpiece. 

Times have changed. 

5 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

As far as I can tell from Greg's post the approval of that calls as with the other calls Oswald requested was standard protocol for DPD, they had practices in place to log them and it would have looked strange to flatly have refused the calls - something that Oswald could have complained about to the press. 

Oswald was going to get to make calls, and made several.  The problem very early appears to have been that someone suspected he might make a call that would be embarrassing or damaging in some fashion.  Hence a legitimate call was simulated, but with instructions for it not to be connected so Oswald would not know what was happening.  If it was a "help me" call he would think he had been had, given a useless contact. 

Equally important such an early call should have been intensely investigated, it appears it was not, but that blocking it rather than using it was the objective.

I'll be interested in Greg's take but it looks to me like somebody was very worried about who Oswald might try to call and suppressed the way the call was handled....then when an inquiry was made they tried to remove the whole thing from the record.

If we assume a competent coordinated effort to prevent LHO from completing a phone call, but having the illusion that his rights were protected, then this explanation makes sense. 

It sure seems a "real investigation" would want LHO to complete a call, which was traced and tapped. 

One "problem" I always have with the early days after JFKA is there may be conflating of bungling with planning.

Then there is the added confusion of multiple agencies being involved, and at least one agency pushing an agenda (the CIA) and a Dallas Police Department that seemed to regard proper procedures as mysterious. 

Add to that the uncertain nature of even earnest witness recollections. 

But over and over again, it looks like a true investigation was not pursued. That is, let LHO make 50 phone calls if he wanted, tap and trace and follow leads....

6 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

I'm definitely interested in that book, Douglas. Nixon had a health care plan? I'd love to know what happened there; America's health system is a giant clusterf*ck, and it's inexcusable.

The US spends double on healthcare (as share of GDP) what many European nations, or Japan, spends, and gets the same results. 

But then, the US balances that by spending double or triple on the military than other nations and gets worse results....

These gigantic realities persisted or persist under Trump and Biden....

Trump on occasion talked about getting out of overseas military bases, but never did anything. Biden does not even bother to talk....

5 hours ago, Craig Carvalho said:

Over the years debate continues regarding Oswald's alleged trip to Mexico City. I say 'alleged' because we have yet to see absolute proof that Lee Harvey Oswald was in fact the man who entered both the Cuban and Soviet embassies that weekend in late September - early October of 1963.

There is however some evidence to suggest that someone may have impersonated the future alleged assassin.

Concentrating on the Cuban embassy staff who interacted with Oswald, Silvia Duran had probably the most contact in terms of time. But I have never seen any comment made by Duran that directly identifies the Oswald in Mexico City to the Oswald who was being held in Dallas for the murder of JFK. As a matter of fact in her description, given to the Mexican authorities, she claimed Oswald had blond hair.

As for the Cuban Counsul Eusibio Azcue who had a face to face confrontation with Oswald, he testified before the HSCA that he would never have associated the Oswald in Mexico City as being the same as the Oswald in Dallas.

Azcue was soon afterward replaced as Counsul by Alfredo Mirabal Diaz. Diaz was also present during this confrontation. In Diaz's testimony, while he admitted having seen only glimpses of the man calling himself Oswald, Diaz would only say that the man in the visa photographs was the same man who visited the Cuban embassy.

Ah, the visa photographs! Yes indeed! While the CIA station in Mexico City claimed to have missed Oswald's entrance(s) and exit(s) because of flaws in their surveilance program, we did have photographs afterall. And these were photographs supplied by the man alleging to be Oswald himself.

In her statement given to the Mexican authorities Mrs. Duran claimed to have recieved four photgraphs from Oswald upon his first returning to the Cuban embassy. She went on to state that she did in fact complete Oswald's visa application, (in duplicate), and stapled one photo to each copy and then had Oswald sign both of them in her presense.

Within just a few short weeks, and prior to JFK's assassination, Oswald's in-transit visa was approved by the Cubans with the caveat that Oswald obtain a Soviet visa as well. Logic would indicate then that at the time of Oswald's arrest in Dallas there must have still existed a paper trail on the Mexico City Oswald which would have included his photograph. 

Why was this avenue never explored? Or was it?

This leads me to wonder...

What exactly did Mexico COS Winston Scott have tucked away in his personal safe. A safe that soon after his death would be emptied by none other than James J. Angleton. The contents of which have never been seen publicly. If nothing else this case certainly has more than it's share of twists and turns.   

"Ah, the visa photographs! Yes indeed! While the CIA station in Mexico City claimed to have missed Oswald's entrance(s) and exit(s) because of flaws in their surveilance program, we did have photographs afterall. And these were photographs supplied by the man alleging to be Oswald himself.

In her statement given to the Mexican authorities Mrs. Duran claimed to have recieved four photgraphs from Oswald upon his first returning to the Cuban embassy. She went on to state that she did in fact complete Oswald's visa application, (in duplicate), and stapled one photo to each copy and then had Oswald sign both of them in her presense."--Craig C.

This seems important to me. It seems Duran accepted the four photographs as accurate representations of the LHO she saw.  Has anyone else ever seen these four photos? 

As for LHO never visiting Mexico City...I think he did, and was also impersonated while there. 

See this: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYI4PqtIyE0

Go to 1:04 mark. V. Kostikov and two other guys say they met Oswald, evidently the “real” LHO, in the Russian embassy. This program was first aired in 1993. 

This appears to be the real Kostikov. He may be lying, but for what purpose? 

My guess is LHO was impersonated and somewhat stage-managed through the whole Mexico trip. It was a "biography-builder" episode. The plan was to use LHO in a false flag, but unsuccessful JFKA.  But anti-Castro Cuban exiles, or perhaps CIA rogues, piggy-backed on the false-flag op, and made it real. 

Either way, the CIA could hardly have the story come out it was CIA-affiliated people who murdered JFK. Hence, the cover-up. 

For those of you with an interest in Op. Mock., another must read from Glenn Greenwald.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/nbc-news-uses-ex-fbi-official-frank

Actually, what we have today is OpMock on steroids. 

Instead of working through compromised or sycophant journalists, today the Deep State just places its own directly into a compliant media. 

If you are Jeff Bezos, owner of the WaPo, and want CIA contracts, this arrangement works out nicely. 

In a case of this magnitude, LHO was making unrecorded phone calls to unknown parties? At a time in the case when almost nothing was known about LHO's motives, operations and possible confederates? 

Another JFKA fact-set that challenges the imagination....

7 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Ben, Again, What's your source that the FBI provoked the 1/6 riots?

Boy, that Tucker special  on that faded into obscurity. I assume you cared enough to watch it after recommending it so heartily to us. But we haven't heard you follow up on that. Obviously you could have. All you had to do was subscribe to Fox Nation for a month for free and drop it if they require payment afterward. Did you?

My own research, see the mysterious Christopher Alberts, the lone  protestor to enter the Capitol with a firearm, but who was released on 1/7, and has not even been prosecuted since.  The treatment of Alberts vs. Mr. Buffalo Horns...is fishier than the National Aquarium. 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

then see also:

https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/

and also 

https://www.revolver.news/2021/10/meet-ray-epps-the-fed-protected-provocateur-who-appears-to-have-led-the-very-first-1-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol/

This is a fair review, please see this first. They are fair independent journalists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjtFUf_P4cE&t=370s

Kirk: the M$M and intel-state affiliated media is not investigating this event, and the federal government is not investigating this event. 

Indeed, there has been no investigation into who instigated the 1/6 scrum, or why the 3,500-member Capitol Police was so thinly deployed that day, and then stood down. The fact that there is no investigation into the cause of the 1/6 scrum does not mean they were no causes. 

The Warren Commission investigated LHO, and the Cheney Committee investigated 1/6. 

Happy New Year. A little more honey and little less vinegar in 2022! 

Remember, not everything is red v. blue, Donk v. 'Phant. You can be a big blueman or redman, but that has nothing to do with the JFKA.

Same on the 1/6 scrum.  For me, this ain't about politics. It is about a fabricated event. 

Keep an open mind. 

4 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

I have never been able to accept that Connally was hit by the Magic Bullet because of his turning around to his right and continuing to hold on to his hat. I'm sure a lot of people hold that opinion. He said he twisted as far as he could to see Kennedy. So he twisted as far as he could to the right after losing four inches of rib on his right side? And how does he hold onto his hat after the radius bone has a compound fracture and at least part of the tendon to his thumb is severed. Not to mention he articulates his wrist downward  as he tries to squeeze his hat between himself and the door as he turns. It seems too Farfetch'd. And Doctor Shaw felt the wound was too serious for a delayed reaction like that

But if Connally was shot around or after frame 290 how do we Square the trajectory through his body against the location of the shooter. The trajectory led back to one of those Towers or roof of the building on the Southeast corner of Main and Houston. The red brick building. Is that the Old Courthouse? Never heard of a theory that put a shooter there but that's where they would have to be.

Chris B.--

Thanks for your comments. Interesting question. 

One problem is that when JBC is struck (Z-295 to Z-300), his torso is hidden from the Z-camera's view, below the door of the limo. You can see JBC's head, and then he opens his mouth in pain.  He then crumples into his wife's lap. So, I am not sure of the attitude of JBC's torso at the time of the bullet-strike. 

BTW, an additional bit of info, from JBC in front of the HSCA:  "Connally: I was knocked over, just doubled over by the force of the bullet. It went in my back and came out my chest about 2 inches below and the left of my right nipple. The force of the bullet drove my body over almost double and when I looked, immediately I could see I was just drenched with blood. (1 HSCA 42)"

---30---

So, JBC recalls being immediately incapacitated after being struck. Not turning around and looking. 

But, to repeat, I am not sure how to tell where the JBC bullet came from, other than we know it struck JBC in the back. JBC said he thought the gunshot sound was from the TBSD direction. I am open to two guns in the TBSD, possibly one with a silencer. But hey, the Dal-Tex building is possible too. 

Another oddity is the bullet strike through the dorsal side, or wristwatch side, of JBC's wrist. JBC's surgeon thought that could have been another separate bullet strike.  Try holding the dorsal side of your wrist to your chest. Normal position is dorsal side out from chest. 

JBC did say bullets were entering the cab of the limo as if from automatic weapons fire. 

The lone gunman story...just does not hold water. 

49 minutes ago, Bill Fite said:

I especially liked this line and section:

 

Egads, Long dragging out the old homophobia charge is beneath contempt. My impression is that for the time and place, Garrison was fairly tolerant. While Garrison may have made some wisecracks at the time which are no longer acceptable, he suspected not homosexuals but the CIA or CIA assets and affiliates of complicity in the JFKA. 

The remarkable aspect is that despite a shoestring budget, CIA plants and saboteurs on his staff, and lies (Clay Shaw was in fact receiving CIA payments), and national ridicule, Garrison was barking up the right tree. 

I can remember reading Garrison's interview in Playboy magazine back in 1967.  I was 12, but I remember reading the story, and it sounded like Garrison was the Man from the Moon. The "CIA murdered JFK" was the sort of stuff far left-wing nuts printed. National Enquirer stuff. 

Now, after decades of research---well, Garrison was right or on the right path. 

It has been a humbling and sobering few decades. 

2 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Philip Zelicow supposedly worked out that the whole 9/11 conspiracy was carried by Al Qaeda, before doing any investigation. The commission was setup to show that. 
 

The science is that whoever is the architect of the study, and oversees the study, controls the outcome. 
 

Seeing a pattern here ....
 

 

If an official investigation confirms my biases, then it is good. If an official investigation does not confirm my biases, then it is ungood. 

If the M$M confirms my biases (which the M$M helped manufacture), then it is good.... 

https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/16/nancy-pelosi-owns-january-6/

Interesting version of Jan. 6 events. 

My real question:

Th Warren Commission decided, before "investigating," that LHO was the lone gunman, and everything devolved from that. We know the results of such a premise. 

If the 1/6 Committee decides before investigating that there were no federal instigators on 1/6...then what? 

On 12/29/2021 at 3:22 AM, Micah Mileto said:

Nope, can't be it. See the stabalized Zapruder film. https://youtu.be/Sqk3sdfXFkc

Excellent version of the Z film. 

Note that Governor John Connally does a near 180-degree turn in his seat after JFK had received his neck-throat shot. 

I suspect it is this reaction of JBC that was the primary reason the Z film was suppressed. Obviously, JBC was not struck by the same bullet that passed through JFK's neck. JBC is looking to see what happened. 

JBC is then struck around Z-295, or about one second before Z-313, and the headshot(s) to JFK. 

Which rules out a lone gunman, armed with a single-shot bolt action rifle, as the perp of the JFKA. 

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Man, Jeff is so good.  I think this may be the best thing I've read about Revisited or the story about it. 

Agreed

Washington Examiner

"Nancy Pelosi, husband buy call options worth millions in Google, Disney despite ethics concerns from party"

by Barnini Chakraborty, Senior Investigations Reporter |  December 31, 2021

WaPo

"Pelosi announces plans for 'solemn observance' of first anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection" 

by By Amy B Wang / Jan. 1

17 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

JFK Revisited: Oliver Stone and the New JFK Fact Pattern - CounterPunch.org

BTW, this is the best review of JFK:Revisited I have read yet.  Morley's dismissal is Alecia Long is especially trenchant. 

6 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

JFK Revisited: Oliver Stone and the New JFK Fact Pattern - CounterPunch.org

And James DiEugenio is mentioned. Olive Stone surely deserves a hand for the great job he did in helping DiEugenio make JFK:Revisited.