Benjamin Cole
-
Posts
7,079 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Benjamin Cole
-
-
On 2/17/2021 at 5:20 PM, Greg Doudna said:
Interesting Mark. On the shot originating from lower than the sixth floor, and also the evidence in your video clip that bullets shot through tree branches and leaves go straight and are not deflected, is it possible the shot was fired from the half-opened window, fourth from the right, on the second storey of TSBD facing Elm Street (the lower left window in this photo identified as taken at 12:42 pm Nov 22)? https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ad/f2/9b/adf29b8dd4e97d0f73cb1159303dc20f.jpg
The reason that window in particular might be of interest is because it is the window of an office, locked and believed unoccupied and not in use on Fri Nov 22 the day of the assassination--into which, according to testimony to the Warren Commission, a Mauser rifle had been taken and temporarily stored two days prior to the assassination, on Wed Nov 20. That is the window of the office of Warren Caster, district manager of the Southwestern Publishing Company. Caster himself had an ironclad alibi the day of the assassination--he was in Denton. Caster testified that after taking the Mauser to his office after lunch on Wed Nov 20, that around 4 pm that day he took the Mauser back out of the TSBD with him to his car and home that night, and that it remained in his family years later.
Caster testified that he had bought two rifles that day (Nov 20) on his lunch hour (the other being a .22 gift for his son)--giving verifiable specifics concerning name of the store and time--and then brought them in their cardboard packaging into the TSBD where he showed them and they were handled, before taking them to his office until he took them with him driving home after work that day.
It is possible to imagine a mechanism for how the Mauser that was taken into that Elm Street-facing office on Nov 20, could have been present in that office two days later on Nov 22, that is also consistent with Warren Caster's family years later having the same Mauser he bought during his lunch hour that day and brought home that day. If the Mauser that entered the TSBD and was taken to that office on Nov 20 was a different Mauser than the one Caster had purchased, and then Caster left that day with only one of the two rifles, the .22, and then took home both the .22 and the Mauser he had purchased (which under this thought scenario did not enter the TSBD) ... that could be a mechanism for the Mauser that was taken to that office on Nov 20 also being in that office on Nov 22 at the time the JFK motorcade passed.
A private office with the door locked, believed to be unoccupied, would make an excellent location for a shooter without being disturbed or seen. Since the Southwestern Publishing Company's offices were very close to the stairway at the SE corner of the TSBD which descended directly to the doorway entrance on Elm Street, it would be much easier for an assassin in the ca. 15-30 minutes between time of the shots and police thoroughly searching the floors of the TSBD, to make an unnoticed exit from the building. The locked unoccupied office of Warren Caster on the day of the assassination has received little attention as a possibility for the shooting that day, it seems because of three things: assumption that the window was closed; assumption that the tree in front of that window which largely blocked vision to Elm Street and the motorcade would also make line of fire to the motorcade impossible; and finally no good reason to doubt Warren Caster's testimony or character. In any case there never was further investigation of the circumstances of a Mauser having been taken into and temporarily stored in a private office on the second floor of the TSBD which had a window facing the motorcade on Elm Street two days before the assassination--a Mauser which had been displayed and shown to a few other TSBD employees including Oswald on Nov 20 and handled by some (though not handled by Oswald).
Warren Caster was a long-time Southwestern Publishing Company manager and he had solid alibis concerning both his whereabouts Nov 22 and the disposition of the two rifles he purchased on Nov 20. There also is testimony that one of the secretaries of the Southwestern Publishing Company remained in the publicly-accessible reception area next to Caster's locked office on Nov 22 at the time of the assassination, and never volunteered having heard the sound of a shot fired from what she would have assumed was the unoccupied office adjoining hers. Ian Griggs believed Warren Caster, believed there was nothing further to this story than freak coincidence. But it is troubling that it was not investigated further so that exculpation could have been established on the basis of fact rather than trust, in the manner that leads are run down and people cleared otherwise in a criminal investigation. As Griggs reported, Warren Caster told him (Griggs) that nobody ever even verified Caster's alibi in Denton that day! (Caster noted that to Griggs as a negative aspersion on the quality of the investigation.) The lack of running down other leads, such as this one, of course fits into police and FBI thinking, particularly after LHO's death on Sunday morning Nov 24, that there no longer was need or purpose served in running down any other leads, since the case was now believed to be clear and closed. All of the many 6th floor line-of-sight photos and trajectory reconstructions and calculations--compared to none (?) at all from that 2nd floor window ... this is what came to mind to me from your comments on trajectory and the video.
Very interesting post. Fascinating information.
-
4 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:
My journey started going down the mob route too, Giancana, Marcello, Cuban casinos repossessed etc. The more I read the more logical it seemed the CIA were involved, and I am open to the military being involved too. How do you separate those two anyway? If Prouty is to be believed in regard to him explaining the network of CIA in the Pentagon, FBI, and other security apparatus. But, they are all facilitators, I believe the east coast establishment ‘eminence grise’ gave the nod. How do you separate the ‘Power Elite’ and the Yale allumni and other Ivy leaguers at the CIA at the time? I just think JFK wasn’t good for business and any personal grudges or other narratives are largely incidental. Sure Dulles and co hated JFK, as well as a lot of the mob and Cuban exiles where lots of motive is found. But, the profits from wars and regime changes represent something much bigger. “War is a racket” by Major General Smedley Butler really shed light on just how many ways the public can be deceived and exploited.
As a plotter of any such plan, it makes sense to have layers of deflection. LHO, USSR, Cuba, Mafia, and Cuban exiles provide plenty of subterfuge. Once the game was up with LHO being alone, the MSM propagated and precipitated the Cuban/Mafia stuff like wild fire.
it’s one of the most intriguing stories of the 20th century. I often ponder what draws so many of us to this and causes us to use so much of our time?! Are we idealists searching for truth? Or do we just like a good murder mystery?
I look forward to John Newman’s new book, anyway.
Cheers
Chris
Smedley Butler....man, oh, man. What a name, what a character, and yes, his insights remain germane to this day....
-
8 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:
I think one of the other schools of thought is that LHO had infiltrated a plot and was informing, or so he thought. Perhaps informing to the FBI. It's that one thing we don't know for sure, or if it was him who informed on the Chicago plot (the same day the Diem brothers were killed). LHO may have thought he was informing on the right wing loonies. All this stuff about an abort team listed in some books, mentioned by Tosh Plumlee further muddies the waters.
The RFK thing is fascinating. But, would Garrison have had an informant that high up? If he indeed did. Or was there a backchannel between hm and RFK. If you understood there was 100% a conspiracy, then when RFK enters back into politics, you'd assume he would be a target and as his status elevates he becomes more so. Even on a less direct level, Garrison could have had access to all of the death threats getting rained on the Kennedy homes, targeting Ted and Bobby. One might assume they are not the work of nuts but a concerted effort to deter them from running for higher office. The contents of the threats are appalling, too heinous to even write here.
I certainly look forward to reading your article when complete.Thanks for your sentiments. On and off I have been reviewing the JFK case since it happened. The advent of the internet has really invigorated the topic. I can actually remember getting LIFE magazine (as an eight-year-old boy) in 1963-4 and reading and re-reading it as gospel on the assassination.
Over the years I have always wanted to read a plausible version of events. One with only few participants. I looked at the Mob-Marcello angle for long time (as did Robert Blakey).
But, when one ponders the LOH backstory, the FBI control and manipulation of evidence, the WWIII scare-story, the WC cover-up...then the Mob story looks weaker and weaker. The Mob can't do all that. My guess is, if the JFK assassination was a simple mob hit, then US investigative agencies might have actually investigated, and brought the perps to justice.
John Newman seems to working on US Army intel version of the JFKA, and let's see where that goes. But he is already on record (along with Dan Hardway) that the CIA had been handling LOH for quite a while.
Well, stay tuned....
-
4 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:
According to Larry King a wealthy Miami financier, Louis Wolfson, was giving $5,000 in cash--equivalent to $36,000 in today's money--per month to Garrison. Wolfson did this via Larry King and another go-between, Dade County State Attorney Richard Gerstein. According to Larry King, Gerstein received the $5000 in bills from Wolfson and personally conveyed it himself covertly to Garrison one month, and the other months Wolfson gave the $5000 to Gerstein who gave it to Larry King to give covertly to Garrison.
Garrison needed the money to investigate the JFK assassination. But was there a quid pro quo? Why the envelopes of cash in secrecy instead of something above-board and disclosed?
Gerstein, the central go-between figure in Larry King's account, is apparently said by a lot of people in Miami to have had Mob connections. https://justicebuilding.blogspot.com/2007/08/in-end-big-murder-case.html.
"Someone could write a book about the Market Connection case. Gerstein had provable associations with Miami Beach gangsters. There are pictures of his top assistant, David Goodhart, meeting with them. Goodhart, an ex prosecutor, ex judge, ex defendant, ex inmate, and now convicted racketeer. No one alks about it anymore but it is out there and everyone who has a law license in this town pre 1980 knows it."
"The Market Connection caper was circa 1972. It involved one Frank(?) Martin, the owner of a gas station/grocery store that was supposedly the location where bribes were exchanged for judicial favors. Dave Goodhard was involved in this as was Gerstein and a number of his underlings who later became judges. The Miami Beach episodes were different and involved allegations, corroborated by photographs, that Gerstein was paid off by the mob. He allegedly took his payoff by visiting a haberdashery on the Beach where he would slip into the dressing room, try on a pair of pants where a pre-determined amount of cash was already inserted in the pants pocket and walk out after trying on the pants and not buying them."
The above are, it should be emphasized, anonymous comments posted to a Miami legal history blog, and other comments note that Gerstein was never convicted of any of these allegations which were brought by a political opponent governor. The blog editor himself say diplomatically and noncommittally concerning Gerstein: "there were rumors, whispers, and unsubstantiated allegations". So this is street talk or local hearsay, disputed by Gerstein's defenders. In fact in this obituary Gerstein is remembered as being an organized crime fighter in some prosecutions: https://miamiarchives.blogspot.com/2015/07/who-was-richard-e-gerstein-and-why-is.html.
However the same Gerstein appears in Larry King's story as the go-between between Wolfson, the financier, and Garrison, courier of bags of large sums of cash.
Wolfson, the apparent source of the money (or was Wolfson himself a conduit?), had criminal troubles but I cannot find a reputable online source linking Wolfson to organized crime directly. (Disreputable sources such as Daniel Hopsicker and Alex Constantine have plenty of Mob allegations and claimed facts linking Wolfson to organized crime.)
Miami was where Meyer Lansky, head of the Jewish Mafia, had moved from New York. According to this source, Meyer Lansky was business partners with Santo Trafficante in ownership of at least one gambling casino in Cuba, the National Casino of Havana, prior to the takeover of Castro: http://cuban-exile.com/doc_126-150/doc0126.html (item 13). Trafficante of course was also of Miami and considered a leading figure of interest in the JFK assassination, with Blakey/HSCA naming Trafficante along with Marcello of New Orleans as having had means, motive, and opportunity to have done the JFK assassination (though no evidence found that they were), with HSCA recommending that FBI investigate those two (that never happened).
And so, a question: what, if anything, did someone want from Garrison, in exchange for conveyance of unreported sacks of large sums of cash to Garrison?
According to Larry King, Wolfson was a personal believer in conspiracy theories and that was the reason Wolfson supported Garrison in that manner.
Neither the FBI, the Warren Commission, nor Garrison ever looked at the Mob as involved in the JFK assassination, even though Ruby's killing of Oswald had all the earmarks of a Mob hit.
If Larry King had not talked (and assuming Larry King's account is true), this unusual conveyance of bags of cash to Garrison may never have come to light.
HL Hunt's right-hand operative, John Curington, told me that Garrison sought money from HL Hunt to finance his investigation, though HL Hunt did not give Garrison anything. Curington also told me that New Orleans Mob boss Marcello would make visits to Dallas and HL Hunt (and Curington) would meet with Marcello, away from the office.
Separately, it has been reported (with Curington apparently the source) that HL Hunt explained privately at the time why he would not financially support an investigation into the death of JFK as had been suggested that he do (perhaps referring to Garrison?): that (a) he, HL Hunt, knew, did not suspect but knew, there was a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK, and (b) if he, HL Hunt, were to fund an investigation of it, "he would be a dead man". This was reported in June 1977 in a National Enquirer story.
There are at least three untimely deaths related to the JFK case which look like they could go back to Marcello: Oswald, Ferrie, and Dorothy Kilgallen. New Orleans attorney Dean Andrews, who received a phone call from someone asking him to go to Dallas to give Oswald legal representation--on the same weekend that both Marguerite Oswald and a partner of Mob-connected attorney Clem Sehrt independently later reported Marguerite had phoned Clem Sehrt, her childhood friend, that weekend seeking legal assistance for her son--Dean Andrews feared he could lose his life if he disclosed who made that phone call to him.
But Garrison never looked at Marcello or Trafficante or any other Mob direction in the JFK assassination. And Marcello was so little looked at by Hoover's FBI and the Warren Commission that Marcello's name does not even appear in the Warren Report's index. Even though Marcello by most accounts controlled Mob operations in the city of the scene of the crime, Dallas. And his name does not even appear in the Warren Report index?
And so this story of Larry King, of monthly conveyance of bags of large sums of cash to Garrison sourced from Miami and conveyed to Garrison via a Miami figure rumored to be Mob-connected, combined with Garrison's seeming avoidance of what any outside observer would consider on the short list of suspected operatives in the JFK assassination, just seems "odd". Was Garrison going to get around to investigating Marcello and Trafficante "later", at some point? Or had Garrison decided in his own mind that Marcello and Trafficante were cleared, exculpated, not figures of interest, from the getgo?
Did the bags of Miami cash going to Garrison of Larry King's story--if accurate--influence Garrison's decisionmaking with respect to directions of his investigation?
Greg D.---
The mismatch in "the Mob got JFK" is in the history of LOH.
As John Newman and Dan Hardway have posited, LOH was being run by the CIA, to Russia and back, then into New Orleans, and down to Mexico City and back, and possibly even into the TSBD. A biography of LOH was created, and then even the story that nuke-WWIII would break out if LOH was not painted as a leftie-loser-loner. The Mob had nothing to do with any of that.
The FBI enhanced the evidence and the paper trail, and the WC---well, you know the WC story.
Robert Blakely was a mob-hunter prior to the HSCA. He saw the Mob everywhere. However, you can see Youtubes later in Blakey's life, when he says he thinks Eladio Del Valle and H. Diaz were involved, and (to Blakey's credit) that he now believes the CIA badly misled him. The Mob angle, even for Blakey, is not so compelling.
My guess is the CIA turned to the Mob to get LOH, after the event. The CIA has vast, but not infinite, resources. They needed LOH silenced, but who could do it? LOH was in Dallas. They put their feelers out to the Mob, with whom they had bedmates on getting Castro.
That led to Ruby.
-
2 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:
I think you’ve likely read far more than me or at least different stuff on this part of the plot. The whole LHO getaway and Tippett situation has been talked about a lot on here and there never seems to be agreement.
Perhaps he (King) was already on his extension. I guess the bigger picture is that he is fuelling conspiracy talk as opposed to suppressing it. If you’re the perpetrator you’d want sleeping dogs to lie.
i had always assumed he was in the lunchroom when it happened and when he becomes aware that JFK is shot, he gets the hell out of dodge. If you were really firing at the president, you’d want to be there and set with some time to spare, not legging it up stairs and lacking composure. It’s my understanding that the motorcade was late too, did LHO have that info? Even if you are missing in the suggested false flag operation, I still think you’d want to be there with some time to spare.
As for the pilot, I think he is never going to live if he sees and flies LHO. There is a suggestion by one ex-CIA guy in Lisa Pease RFK book “A lie too big fo fail” that the actual assassins were neutralised straight after Dallas, after being lured to a meeting.
James W Douglas in “The Unspeakable” also talks about a flight out of Dallas with only a couple of people on board (suggested assassins).
We also assume that Oswald’s definition of the word “patsy” is an accurate one. He doesn’t say he has been setup or framed.
i think this is where the waters get very muddy. The pilot can be a drama seeker, and if he did indeed die of a heart attack, it could be natural.I think Larry is being honest.Verily, I am editing my "false-flag fake assassination version" as we speak.
Everyone has their own take. If LOH was a know-nothing witless patsy, then why take a taxi home and get a gun? Why did not LOH assume right-wing loonies or a deranged nut, or even lowlife thugs took a potshot at the President? If he was uninvolved, then why worry about anything?
One spooky thing was Garrison telling King, "They are going to shoot Robert Kennedy too."
My guess is Garrison had a good source inside the CIA who was feeding him info.
-
1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:
It's a bit of a revelation. I am trying to think of a motive for Larry to lie or make that up, seemed very candid.
Well...Larry King showed extraordinarily bad judgement in using $5k cash to pay his own IRS tax bill rather than delivering the cash to Garrison. Taxes? You can always get an extension in payment from the IRS, or go on payment plan.
But, set that aside. Larry King probably did the hear the tape as described.
Of course (you are probably ahead of me on this) is the purported pilot on the tape telling a real story, or just a drama seeker? Or even a CIA plant sending Garrison up another box canyon? At this late date, and without even the tape, all that remains are ciphers.
That said, yes I strongly suspect LOH had arranged for a getaway car (although LOH once said escaping somewhere by bus is not a bad plan, as cops do not check busses. Ironically, and perhaps tellingly, cops were checking busses after the JFK shooting). The car-ride dematerialized, or LOH decided not to take the ride, after the JFK assassination happened for real.
The Larry King version, of course, suggests LOH played a role, one that became the patsy role, in the day's events. In the Larry King version, LOH was a patsy, who initially anticipated escape help.
Add on---A bit shaky on this point: Who would hire a mercenary for $5k + $5k to provide an airplane ride to a Presidential assassin?
So the hired pilot figures out the next day, when he reads the newspapers, that he just gave a plane-ride to Mexico to the President's assassin. So the pilot mulls things over. I can keep quiet, but if LOH's escape is tracked back to my plane I then become an accomplice in a President's assassination. I better squeal---meaning I say who hired me.
I rather think LOH's get-away ride was a car, driven by a Cuban/CIA asset who was in on the intentionally unsuccessful false-flag JFKA. The ride never happened after JFK was shot for real.
-
23 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:
Great interview Doug. Very very interesting.
@Benjamin Cole You may like this.
Chris Barnard---
Thanks for the heads-up.
-
On 11/2/2020 at 1:29 AM, Larry Hancock said:
This is simply a notice that Rex Bradford has finished an immense amount of work and Tipping Point is now beginning on the MFF site. I will post a notice in the book section of the forum as well and answer question and engage in discussions there rather in this main section. I will also be blogging on it and am happy to chat there or via email at larryjoe@westok.net
As I said earlier, Tipping Point represents my personal analysis and observations on the conspiracy. I know there will be disagreement and that is to be expected. For those who want to engage with it, and hopefully profit form the research and information it presents - great. It's not intended to sway anyone else from their preferred scenarios or views.
We will put up a new section every one to two weeks, finishing it up online in December for a totally free read - with the book to follow for those who would want it all together in print. I hope that will allow readers to really dig into the references and cited documents, several of which are hot linked either in the body or in the end notes. In that regard, kudos to David Boylan and Bill Simpich who were involved with a great deal of the brand new documents research which went into Tipping Point.
If you wish to pursue it, this link will get you there:
Larry--
Congratulations on an earnest and intelligent effort.
We can kibbitz, even disagree---but we should all recognize excellent work when done.
And if we disagree, let us posit other plausible scenarios for public discussion...and save for those divinely inspired, any one of us could be off target.
-
59 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:
You are probably right that the 8 hours delay in taking the paraffin cast of Oswald is just enough that, if someone believes on other grounds that it is airtight that Oswald was the shooter of JFK, the NAA on the cheek paraffin cast could be considered uncertain as opposed to exculpatory. Maybe more accurately put would be that the NAA on the cheek cast is "strong" stand-alone indication that Oswald did not fire that rifle that day, slightly less than "decisive".
Oswald was reported by Earlene Roberts to have rushed in and out of his rooming house in Oak Cliff in a hurry without a bathroom stop to wash up. Following his arrest, at the Dallas Police Station, on Saturday Oswald told reporters police were denying his human rights to a shower. Police Chief Curry in response to reporters' questions about this did not say "he did take a shower!" but rather, "if he wants to take a shower, he can". That says Oswald had not had a shower. The nitrates found on his hands do not establish that he fired a pistol but do argue against Oswald having washed his hands thoroughly prior to the paraffin test. This leaves only the 8 hour time delay itself as the basis for impeaching what otherwise would be an exculpatory finding that Oswald did not fire the Carcano.
I see from a Minnesota Dept. of Public Safety website that "after four to eight hours it is unlikely that residues will be found on a live and mobile individual's hands ... the residue can persist for longer periods of time on some areas of interest such as on the deceased, on clothing or other stationary objects". A Los Angeles Forensic Toxicology Expert Witness website (for defense attorneys defending accused clients) says "residue collected after more than six hours of the gun being fired could be considered unreliable", citing handwashing removing nitrates from the hands. A Missouri State Highway Patrol Crime Lab site says, "As time passes after discharge, GSR [gunshot residue] particles can be removed from the hands by contact with other objects or by hand washing. After 6-8 hours, analysts would not expect to detect GSR on an active person." But of course Oswald did have GSR on his hands 8 hours later. As Pat Speer points out, why should Oswald's cheek not have GSR, if his hands did, at the time that paraffin test was done, if there had been gunshot residue from firing a rifle on his cheek? (For, contrary to expert opinion testimony set forth in the Warren Report not based on any test data, Vincent Guinn actually tested rifles like the TSBD Carcano, and gunshot residue was found on the cheeks of the shooters of those rifles in 8 out of 8 such tests.) The chief concern with the time delay of paraffin testing of hands in all of the sources that I have seen is the GSR coming off by either handwashing or by the hands rubbing the GSR off against other things. I could find no published data or studies on how long GSR remains on cheeks but simply reasoning logically: unless the face is washed thoroughly, there would be less occasion for GSR to be lost from the face compared to hands since face skin comes in less contact with things than do hands. And Oswald's hands did have GSR at 8 hours. Therefore the absence of GSR as expected from a shooter of a Mannlicher-Carcano from the Oswald cheek paraffin cast taken at the same 8 hours, not only from the finding of the less-reliable chemical test done that evening but more importantly and separately the finding of the highly accurate NAA analysis done later under high secrecy, appears much stronger in weight toward exculpation than the Warren Commission wished for the public to realize. It seems likely that if the NAA aspect of that paraffin cheek test had been brought out in court properly in a hypothetical trial of Lee Harvey Oswald, that unless the prosecutors showed the jury an absolutely airtight case against Oswald on other grounds, a jury would consider the NAA paraffin cheek analysis more than sufficient to establish "reasonable doubt" that Oswald fired the Carcano that day.
And as Pat Speer brings out, the way the NAA followup testing of the paraffin casts was done and reported just smells to high heaven. It was essential, if the Oswald-alone case was to be presented in a tight, neat package, to dispense with the paraffin test analysis which failed to find gunshot residue on Oswald's cheek as a rifle of the kind of the Carcano did leave when fired. The way not just the chemical test, but the NAA analysis, was dispensed with was not by claiming the 8 hour time delay made the test unreliable, but rather by claiming the cheek paraffin cast had been contaminated and therefore was useless for delivering useful information. As Pat Speer brings out, that was a sidestep. That there was some kind of contamination of the outer side of that cast does not detract from the essential point that the inside surface in contact with Oswald's cheek did not show evidence that he had fired the Carcano, that would be expected if he had fired it.
And most stunning of all to me was this: the NAA data of that paraffin cheek test not only was not published in the Warren Report but it was considered classified and secret, forbidden to be seen by the public. Harold Weisburg and Jim Lesar filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against the FBI and Atomic Energy Commission to get the test results of the NAA paraffin cast analyses. The Justice Department opposed this in court, saying in 1970 that "the Attorney General of the United States [John MItchell] has determined that it is not in the national interest" to disclose those NAA test results.
How could disclosing scientific test results obtained through a method with state-of-the-art accuracy (NAA), of the paraffin cast of Oswald's cheek, "not [be] in the national interest"?
It sounds as if the reasoning was: if this data were to become public, it might call into question whether Oswald shot at Kennedy that day. That was not in "the national interest".
It is a sad day when pursuit of truth, of establishing true innocence or guilt of an accused person in the eyes of history, becomes regarded by state authority as "not in the national interest".
The sniper's nest, the linkage of the Carcano to Oswald, and Oswald's actions that day do call for explanation. It is also the case that all of the TSBD employees were questioned and not one reported seeing anyone unusual or who did not belong in the building that day, increasing the focus on Oswald who was in the building as connected to the extraordinary events involving the TSBD that day. But in light of the NAA analysis of the Oswald cheek paraffin cast, it might be asked whether (a) some form of a false flag or phony assassination attempt--so in keeping with known "Northwoods" Joint Chiefs' intentions both before and after the assassination--is correct, as you suggest, but also (b) no one fired a rifle from the 6th floor window, or from the TSBD, at all that day.
Greg--
I do not believe LOH shot JFK. I think he took one or couple of wide misses, on purpose. The Tague shot, for example.
Still, you and Speer raise excellent points---why no telltale traces on LOH's cheek?
That is a weakness in my version of events, which I will post after a couple more edits.
Nevertheless, there is a possible mix of explanations for LOH's "clean" cheek.
1. A false negative due to time delay. And it may be LOH only fired once, not three times. The Guinn tests followed WC gospel of three shots. We do not take WC as gospel---except when we do?
2. Perhaps Oswald did wash his face, maybe with a garden hose en route to the Texas Theater, maybe in the Texas Theater, or maybe even when taking a bathroom break at the DPD. He did not take a shower in DPD custody---but really, he never used the john either? Are you sure?
Earlene Roberts testimony is clear, as you say---but really, if LOH had ducked into the bathroom quietly, would she have noticed? She was never asked directly about this possibility
3. It sounds whimsical, but LOH could have put saran wrap, or possibly a sheet of paper, on his cheek when firing.
4. The circular sniper's nest may have created a swirl of air outwards, which blew out when LOH fired his one shot (not three shots).
Any mix of the above explanations might result in a false negative.
So why did Oswald's hands test positive, but not his face? Many answers for this one. Perhaps his hands came into contact with (common) items that test positive, after the assassination. False positives, in other words. Perhaps LOH really did shoot Tippit, many times, and with a revolver, and that left a strong "dose" on his hands.
I am open to the idea that LOH, realizing he had been framed, and thinking he had been done in by powerful figures, was in a desperate frame of mind when he met Tippit. The timelines do not add up, but maybe.
Anyways, that is what I can think up today.
-
1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:
Benjamin Cole writes:
It's true that the eyewitness evidence for a gunman on the sixth floor is jumbled. But we know that a gunman was seen several times over the 15 minutes or so before the shooting. We also know that Oswald was on the ground floor around five minutes before the shooting, when he saw James Jarman and Harold Norman enter the building by one of the rear entrances (http://22november1963.org.uk/lee-harvey-oswald-alibi) .
If Oswald was the (or a) gunman, he must have started out on the sixth floor; then, at almost the exact time the motorcade was due to pass by the building, and not knowing that it was running late, he must for some unexplained reason have dashed, unnoticed, down to the ground floor, where he saw Jarman and Norman; then he must have dashed, again unnoticed, back up to the sixth floor to take his potshots at Kennedy; and finally he must have dashed back down to whichever floor Officer Baker was actually on when he noticed the presence of someone who didn't match Oswald's description.
Placing Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting is fundamental not only to the lone-nut argument but also to many conspiracy-based alternative scenarios. The balance of the evidence very strongly suggests that he simply wasn't there.
Jeremy-
Thanks for your comment.
Well, maybe.
On the other hand, let us say you are relatively crafty and smart fellow ala Oswald. You want to be seen just before and after the shooting in innocuous locations, so indeed you to try to arrange just that. Plant exculpatory evidence.
Five minutes--from when LOH saw Jarman and Norman--is plenty enough time to get upstairs.
People have re-traced LOH's steps on the way down many times, and he had enough time to run into Marion Baker.
Also, neither here nor there, but please read the WC testimony of Amos Lee Euins. He states flatly he saw the gunman, and the gunman was bald. I ask this every few days, but why is Euins' testimony always ignored?
-
7 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:
Benjamin I think Pat Speer has shown the LHO paraffin test data is as strongly stand-alone decisive that LHO did not fire the Carcano, as about any single piece of evidence can be, when the full facts are considered. This is not referring to the original chemical paraffin tests carried out by the DPD the evening of Oswald's arrest, which while they suggested LHO did not fire a rifle that day fell short of exculpation because paraffin tests done chemically were, as you put it, "dicey, both false positives and negatives". However that description does not apply to the NAA (Neutron Activation Analysis) subsequently carried out on the DPD paraffin casts at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which is highly accurate and which from Pat Speer's analysis is practically certain positive exculpation establishing as a baseline fact that LHO did not fire the Carcano that day.
In fact, Pat Speer's 4f, "Casts of Contention", http://www.patspeer.com/chapter4e%3Acastsofcontention, may be just about the strongest single stand-alone evidential exculpation of Oswald as a shooter of JFK there is. It takes work to read through Pat Speer's analysis (58 pages printed out) but it is just devastating, showing not only the exculpation but agencies' dissembling in the way that exculpatory evidence was handled and reported. If there is a rebuttal of Speer's 4f I would like to know; I am not aware of any. I am surprised Pat Speer's 4f has not received more attention.
Thanks for your contributions and I look forward to your article.
Greg--
Ok, I have now read through Speer's chapter 4.
Excellent work by Speer.
Speer makes a solid case that anyone shooting a Mannlicher-Carcano should have telltale residue (chemical or metallic traces) on their cheek afterwards, for at least several hours.
There is the problem of washing the face. It seems unlikely Oswald washed his face, but then there are times his whereabouts are unknown, after the shooting. Though unlikely, Oswald might have washed his face with a garden hose, or inside the Texas Theater before taking a seat. There is some confusion about Oswald going upstairs or not at the theater. I wonder where the bathrooms are.
Possibly Oswald even washed his face at his rooming house, through not mentioned by the landlady. But if he made a quick jag to the bathroom before or after entering his room, would she have noticed? As I recall, she was watching TV or reading a book.
Also, are we certain Oswald was never even allowed a bathroom break while being detained? The DPD has been lambasted for poor police procedures.
It is little surprising that something such as which way the breeze is blowing can affect cheek-test result. Sure, the breeze was blowing towards Oswald, which should enhance the amount of traces left on Oswald's cheek. But, we all know breezes can swirl.
Lastly, the casts of Oswald's cheek, which admittedly were negative, were done many hours after the event. The longer one waits, the higher the chances for a false negative.
All in all, I think the negative result of the cheek test in Oswalds case is suggestive, but not conclusive. And yes, the FBI and the WC lied their teeth out about the whole matter, and they framed Oswald in many other ways. I am amazed they didn't just rig the cheek test too--ala CE 399.
I am being a bit whimsical when I say Oswald might have used saran-wrap on his face before shooting. Since I contend LOH was part of a false-flag but phony assassination attempt, there would be no need for that. But maybe he planned on a little insurance in case he was caught.
-
51 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:
Benjamin I think Pat Speer has shown the LHO paraffin test data is as strongly stand-alone decisive that LHO did not fire the Carcano, as about any single piece of evidence can be, when the full facts are considered. This is not referring to the original chemical paraffin tests carried out by the DPD the evening of Oswald's arrest, which while they suggested LHO did not fire a rifle that day fell short of exculpation because paraffin tests done chemically were, as you put it, "dicey, both false positives and negatives". However that description does not apply to the NAA (Neutron Activation Analysis) subsequently carried out on the DPD paraffin casts at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which is highly accurate and which from Pat Speer's analysis is practically certain positive exculpation establishing as a baseline fact that LHO did not fire the Carcano that day.
In fact, Pat Speer's 4f, "Casts of Contention", http://www.patspeer.com/chapter4e%3Acastsofcontention, may be just about the strongest single stand-alone evidential exculpation of Oswald as a shooter of JFK there is. It takes work to read through Pat Speer's analysis (58 pages printed out) but it is just devastating, showing not only the exculpation but agencies' dissembling in the way that exculpatory evidence was handled and reported. If there is a rebuttal of Speer's 4f I would like to know; I am not aware of any. I am surprised Pat Speer's 4f has not received more attention.
Thanks for your contributions and I look forward to your article.
Greg D--Thanks for head's up on Pat Speer's work regarding Oswald's cheek, and I will of course check it out, as Pat Speer is a very solid researcher and thinker, and I will get back to you.
As idle chit-chat, I wonder what would happen if someone placed Saran-wrap style stretch-wrap on their face before firing a rifle. Saran wrap was introduced in 1949.
-
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:
Those were the days when someone like Lane could get on a big program.
Not only---as you have so competently pointed out, the mainstream media savaged Jim Garrison in every way possible.
Yet Garrison won the right to a 30-minute rebuttal on NBC on July 15 1967, after NBC had smeared him. And this was when the networks were huge and important, and dominated broadcast news.
Can anyone imagine today any figure like James Garrison getting 30-minutes free and clear on national TV to defend himself? You think CNN or Fox would ever do that?
Today, even fringe groups (that I usually disagree with) are knocked down from lesser Internet platforms.
Well, at least for now, we have Kennedys and King, or the Education Forum. One might wonder for how long. It has become acceptable to torpedo anyone off the web.
If Kennedys and King or the Education Forum are booted, who will note or care?
-
3 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:
I ended up watching the G. Gordon Liddy one also with Buckley. Very slick operators indeed. It must be some education you get at Yale, Buckley was another Skull & Bones.
There is yet another great one---
Yes! Buckley and E. Howard Hunt!
Hunt admits on national TV that there were plans drawn up to murder columnist Jack Anderson and that he would have completed the mission if the order had come down from the White House. This is a horrible laugher---and chilling too.
If a guy will baldly state on national TV that he would have murdered a columnist---a newspaper ink-stained wretch, not even accused of being a spy, etc.---then what else would he participate in?
-
The above discussion contains excellent observations from Pat Speer, who I usually agree with.
Also, really, ACSI and CIA never coordinated?
-
On 3/5/2021 at 11:55 PM, Chris Barnard said:
What a sharp man Mark Lane was. It's interesting to watch the obfuscation and deflection tactics of 1966. Potentially ex-CIA Buckley is eloquent as ever but, he struggles with lane as an adversary.This is a wonderful display by an ex-CIA man, as Buckley tries to define Mark Lane as someone who wants to make money, and to get Oswald off the hook as a fellow leftie-commie. The words "conspiracy theory" come alive.
It turns out Buckley took his cues from the CIA playbook, which had recommended all these tactics in dealing with the JFKA. But Buckley was a smart guy himself, whatever his politics and biases.
Mark Lane mostly held his own, which is saying something, as he was in Buckley's wheelhouse, so to speak.
-
20 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:
Paul B--
Excellent line of inquiry you present.
And my sagacious answer: "Well....not sure."
Can we simply discount all the excellent work John Newman (and others) have done in establishing that LOH was an asset being run by the CIA? Those observations still hold water, no?
Certainly James Angleton knew Phillips and of LOH. Certainly Phillips was active in the exile, anti-Castro movement, as was LOH.
OK, let us grant that at some point in the early 1960s, Veciana had a falling out with the CIA, and switched over to working with Army intelligence (though some researchers contend he still worked for both, unique among assets).
But does that mean LOH stopped working with the CIA? No. LOH remained a CIA asset.
Does the Veciana-CIA falling out prevent Phillips from working with LOH? No.
Even more....would a Veciana-CIA falling out mean Veciana would never meet again with Phillips (Bishop)? There are formal organization line-charts and rules, and then there are guys who still meet informally and talk.
Is there no connection between LOH and Phillips? Seems likely there was a connection, as both LOH and Phillips were so active in the same circles.
Actually, whether Veciana did, or did not meet, Phillips in Dallas in late August-early September is not so vital to my version of events.
For that matter, someone besides Phillips at the CIA could have put LOH up to a false-flag fake assassination attempt on JFK, which was then leaked and piggy-backed on by Cuban exiles, who fired in earnest (Del Valle). I suspect it was PR guru Phillips, from his final statement to Kevin Walsh (elements of the CIA did it), and his confessional, unpublished last manuscript.
John Newman is a titan among researchers. But he seemed almost peevish in his presentation in his vilification of Veciana. He accused Veciana of stealing from the CIA. Then, this turns out to be $600 of explosives, that Veciana may have used in other, non-CIA, anti-Castro missions.
As I say, we will have to wait for Newman's work to come out. I will repeat myself, and say I am leery of any assassination plot that has dozens of actors, and was carried out under the formal aegis of the CIA or the Pentagon.
After the fact, yes, many (all government employees, and most prominent members of the media) followed orders, and joined the "LOH is a leftie-loner-loser" story line, and "but we have to avoid WWIII."
Newman contends those story lines were planted by Angleton before the assassination.
My version holds water, yet has but two, and possibly three witting actors. It is more plausible.
That does not make my story line the truth---it just makes it more plausible.
Add on (sorry).
OK, let us reason this out:
Let us posit LOH is a mere, unknowing inert patsy on Nov. 22, set up by Army intel. His career as CIA asset and government informant has petered out, and he is but a warehouseman, working on sorting and packing books in the TSBD.
So, LOH is the lunchroom buying a Coke, when JFK is shot (this is odd, as LOH was interested in politics, and could be expected to watch the motorcade, but let that go). LOH hears gunshots, but has no idea what has happened. Might be a common street shooting, might be firecrackers, or car backfire.
Next thing LOH knows, Dallas motor cop Marion Baker is pointing a gun at him. Ray Truly says LOH is one of our ours, and Baker proceeds up the stairs past the clueless LOH.
LOH wanders outside, then reasonably deduces something serious has happened, and then, from all the commotion, that JFK was shot. But by who? A thug seeking glory? By an angry right-wing nut? A disgruntled Secret Service man who lost his mind? The innocent, inert LOH would not know.
So...LOH leaves the TSBD (a little unusual) hails a taxi (unusual) goes home and gets his Smith & Wesson .38, stuffs it in his waistband (very unusual), and heads on foot to the Texas Theater---even though LOH has no idea what has happened, other than JFK has been shot by parties unknown, possibly mere lowlife.
Really...this scenario just does not hold water.
If LOH was a completely clueless patsy, why would he hail a taxi (relatively costly), and go home and arm himself, and seek refuge in the Texas Theater?
If Army intel was making LOH a completely clueless patsy, were they not worried he might go down to the motorcade route and watch (and be photographed)? Or actually have lunch with fellow employees in the domino room?
And how did Army intel even know about LOH, who was a CIA asset?
Sure, Army intel could still then pin the "murder weapon" on LOH through the (possibly phoney) paper trail, but then by deduction LOH would have accomplices. Which would raises more questions.
Well, let us see what Newman comes up with.
-
8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
Did this presentation make you reconsider Phillips connection to Oswald? There is Mexico City evidence that Phillips was part of incriminating LHO as a Cuban or Soviet agent, possibly setting him up as a patsy. But there is no reason to think he met Oswald or ran him. That was a somewhat logical conclusion until Newman got down in the weeds and dug up a wealth of documents (he and a few other intrepid researchers like Malcom Blunt have been figuring out how to actually read Intelligence documents, which are notoriously difficult to parse because of multiple pseudonyms and aliases and obscured tracking pathways through the system). I saw him in action at a conference two years ago in SF, which Jim D graciously invited me to attend. Once we let go of Gaeton Fonzi’s well meant research into Phillips/Bishop and realize that Alpha 66 was working for Army Intelligence not CIA, something kept hidden from Fonzi and others deliberately by Veciana, and climb out of that long rabbit hole we can see clearly the role of Lansdale, on ‘loan’ from CIA to Army intelligence ACSI.
Benjamin - you are right - Newman has come a long way since he wrote that first book.
There are some interesting threads here on Army Intelligence. I know you’ve worked hard on your theory but it was clearly based on DAP running Oswald, and Oswald somehow being more than ‘just a patsy’. Newman makes a point of saying that killing was the province of the military. JFK himself was worried about a military junta, his JCS, enough so that he asked Frankenheimer to make 7 Days in May into a movie and let him film some of it in the WH.
One more thing I like to point out - and Lansdale is a perfect example of this - there is no hard line in the sand between CIA and MI.Paul B--
Excellent line of inquiry you present.
And my sagacious answer: "Well....not sure."
Can we simply discount all the excellent work John Newman (and others) have done in establishing that LOH was an asset being run by the CIA? Those observations still hold water, no?
Certainly James Angleton knew Phillips and of LOH. Certainly Phillips was active in the exile, anti-Castro movement, as was LOH.
OK, let us grant that at some point in the early 1960s, Veciana had a falling out with the CIA, and switched over to working with Army intelligence (though some researchers contend he still worked for both, unique among assets).
But does that mean LOH stopped working with the CIA? No. LOH remained a CIA asset.
Does the Veciana-CIA falling out prevent Phillips from working with LOH? No.
Even more....would a Veciana-CIA falling out mean Veciana would never meet again with Phillips (Bishop)? There are formal organization line-charts and rules, and then there are guys who still meet informally and talk.
Is there no connection between LOH and Phillips? Seems likely there was a connection, as both LOH and Phillips were so active in the same circles.
Actually, whether Veciana did, or did not meet, Phillips in Dallas in late August-early September is not so vital to my version of events.
For that matter, someone besides Phillips at the CIA could have put LOH up to a false-flag fake assassination attempt on JFK, which was then leaked and piggy-backed on by Cuban exiles, who fired in earnest (Del Valle). I suspect it was PR guru Phillips, from his final statement to Kevin Walsh (elements of the CIA did it), and his confessional, unpublished last manuscript.
John Newman is a titan among researchers. But he seemed almost peevish in his presentation in his vilification of Veciana. He accused Veciana of stealing from the CIA. Then, this turns out to be $600 of explosives, that Veciana may have used in other, non-CIA, anti-Castro missions.
As I say, we will have to wait for Newman's work to come out. I will repeat myself, and say I am leery of any assassination plot that has dozens of actors, and was carried out under the formal aegis of the CIA or the Pentagon.
After the fact, yes, many (all government employees, and most prominent members of the media) followed orders, and joined the "LOH is a leftie-loner-loser" story line, and "but we have to avoid WWIII."
Newman contends those story lines were planted by Angleton before the assassination.
My version holds water, yet has but two, and possibly three witting actors. It is more plausible.
That does not make my story line the truth---it just makes it more plausible.
-
From John Newman's 2008 book Oswald and the CIA :
"It is now apparent that the World War III pretext for a national security cover-up was built into the fabric of the plot to assassinate President Kennedy. The plot required that Oswald be maneuvered into place in Mexico City and his activities there carefully monitored, controlled, and, if necessary, embellished and choreographed. the plot required that, prior to 22 November, Oswald's profile at CIA HQS and the Mexico station be lowered; his 201 file had to be manipulated and restricted from incoming traffic on his Cuban activities. The plot required that, when the story from Mexico City arrived at HQS, its significance would not be understood by those responsible for reacting to it. Finally, the plot required that, on 22 November, Oswald's CIA files would establish his connection to Castro and the Kremlin.
The person who designed this plot had to have access to all of the information on Oswald at CIA HQS. The person who designed this plot had to have the authority to alter how information on Oswald was kept at CIA HQS. The person who designed this plot had the authority to alter how information on Oswald was kept at CIA HQS. The person who designed this plot had to have access to project TUMBLEWEED, the sensitive joint agency operation against the KGB assassin, Valery Kostikov. The person who designed this plot had the authority to instigate a counterintelligence operation in the Cuban affairs staff (SAS) at CIA HQS. In my view, there is only one person whose hands fit into these gloves: James Jesus Angleton, Chief of CIA's Counterintelligence Staff."
---30---
There is plenty more in that excellent book. I am not sure what direction Newman is going now, but he seems to be suggesting military intelligence, but perhaps not the CIA, assassinated JFK.
So...if we follow Newman...the CIA built up the LOH legend, used him as a dangle, an asset...but then military intelligence set LOH up as a patsy, and implemented a military-style ambush on JFK?
Is this jelling?
Well, we will see what Newman comes up with.
-
8 hours ago, David Boylan said:
I look forward to watching this. Thanks for posting.
-
5 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
Benjamin - I appreciate your thoughtful and serious presence here. Yes the nitrate test is not foolproof. But accounting for LHO in the sniper’s nest requires a lot of belief. Was the MC his rifle? How strong is the evidence that he brought it to work? How was he able to extricate himself from the building so quickly? I could keep going.
Two main points - Oswald doesn’t have to be involved in any way except as a convenient patsy in order for your theory to work. If you need another shooter missing on purpose fill in the blank. As for Phillips, you are aware that the evidence placing him with Oswald in Dallas rests on Veciana, who I think John Newman has proved was a prevaricator. Again, Phillips may have been involved, might even have been running Oswald, but that doesn’t prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor. I’d rather just look at Phillips on his own, rather than tying him to Oswald. Plenty to wonder about there. He was an excellent propagandist. Others here have tried to use his manuscript as proof of something. I think that’s a rabbit hole.
I also think that Oswald might have been a Soviet agent, or a double agent of some kind with unclear ties. But if Woolsey is right that does not implicate the Soviets in the assassination unless Oswald was the assassin, or at least one of them. He was a very poor choice of assassin, but an excellent choice as a patsy. i personally believe that Oswald himself is the ultimate rabbit hole, since so much JFK research history revolves around who he was and what part he may have played. It’s caused all of us to take our eyes off the ball. If he didn’t do it, and that is a widely held view here, whether he fired or not, then Who did? Very little attention is given to that most important question.
Paul--
Yes, thanks for your sentiments and comments, and I enjoy your presence as well. Conversation, and not contention, is the way to go.
OK, first let me say I am trying to get to the true story, regardless of whether it fits any particular narrative, be it left-wing, or right-wing, or anti-CIA, or pro-CIA, pro-globalist establishment, etc, etc.
Ponder this scenario: Yes, LOH was a CIA-intel agency asset, but then lost his mind and shot JFK. This "absolves" the CIA and the globalist-establishment in many regards, but also explains the long cover-up.
Reasonable scenario?
I don't buy it---the Zapruder film, I contend, shows separate shots hitting JFK, then Connally, and then JFK, in too-rapid succession for the rifle we are told LOH had. I see that with my own eyes. (In addition, as witnessed by Connally, his wife, and the three Secret service men in the follow-car).
OK---so at least two gunman, or one gunman with a different rifle from the one LOH had. The M-C rifle could not have done it.
Where was LOH when shots rang out?
About all we can say with a modicum of certainty is that no one saw LOH at the time of the shooting. That much seems clear. Beyond that, the witness accounts are so jumbled, and the FBI/WC so polluted affidavits and testimony, that we are left with ciphers.
IMHO, there was time for LOH to purposely shoot and miss, then stash his rifle in a pre-arranged hiding spot, and walk quickly down the stairs to encounter Officer Marion Baker. Was there another lady going down the stairs? Maybe, but the timing is not certain. Suppose LOH and the lady were but one floor apart? So what?
I suspect I share with you a belief that more important than who pulled the trigger is, "Who organized the shooting?"
Yes, my JFK assassination version comes down to relatively low-level Cuban CIA assets, who were leaked to by an unknown higher-up CIA figure, maybe intentionally and maliciously, maybe not.
There was no grand conspiracy by the establishment-globalist, multinational-military-intel blob (a group I detest, btw).
However, what is true is true. Some anti-Trumpers wanted to believe Brian Sicknick was murdered by a MAGA mob. That became the working narrative. I say, you can despise Trump, that is fine, but you still have to say what is true.
Add on: Even without the JFK assassination, the damage the multinational-globalist-military-intel blob has done to America (and parts of the world) is incalculable. First, they hid the truth on the JFK assassination, and that is that CIA assets did it.
Then, they got the US into Vietnam, followed by Iraq, Afghanistan and too many other ventures to recount. They created a mercenary military to do their bidding, when draftees no longer would. Prosperity for ordinary Americans counted much less than prosperity for the multinationals, let alone the horrible carnage wrought. They perverted modern media beyond recognition---and now are moving to silence all voices except their own, through copious de-platforming and so on.
PS. I do not know what to think on the Veciana-Phillips-LOH meeting. Veciana is on the record and taped, and said it happened. I tend to believe him.
The very intelligent Newman is working with paper records, that can be backdated, forged, or disappeared. Even in 1963, there were airplanes, and Phillips could spend part of a day in Dallas, no paper trail left today. CIA assets often worked through other entities, such as Army or Air Force, or private-sector. So Veciana was detailed to the Army but worked for the CIA.
One does not have to be Sherlock Holmes to suspect the CIA paper record is intentionally obfuscatory, when it is not intentionally misleading.
Anyways, in a couple of weeks I will (drum roll, then trumpets) present my article here. I think it holds water.
---Best regards
-
17 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:
But what good is it if it doesn't fit the facts?
Thanks for your comment.
I assume you mean there is no evidence LOH was in, or not in, the so-called sniper's nest. Yes, I assume he was in the nest, and fired twice, intentionally missing. The Tague shot comes to mind.
A bigger drawback to my theory is that LOH's cheek was famously clear of nitrates. But that test is a bit dicey, both false positives and negatives.
I have fashioned my explanation to fit the facts, at least as I know them.
I will in a couple of weeks post my article here. I think it withstands criticism, and holds water. I look forward to your comments.
No, I cannot say my views "proves" anything, anymore than saying "Dulles ordered the JFK hit," proves that version.
I will say my theory is more plausible than ones with a lot of actors and moving parts.
-
19 hours ago, Chuck Schwartz said:
Benjamin, on your pet theory, who was Del Valle and others working for? Who approved their hit(s)? The US military would have known of the CIA plot and maybe they took JFK out ( or approved it)?
Chuck-
Thanks for your question.
In my pet theory, LOH was run by DA Phillips, in a false flag fake assassination attempt. My guess is Phillips had to get tacit agreement from higher-ups and did so, no paper trail.
OK, someone inside CIA either intentionally or maliciously leaks details of the false-flag operation to CIA assets in the Cuban exile community.
The exiles show up in Dallas, perhaps drop names and convince LOH they are there to help him. Or maybe Del Valle just sneaks into the TSBD, while another colleague hides in/around Grassy Knoll. They wait for sound of gunfire, then commence shooting in earnest.
I suspect the exile on Grassy Knoll area was a diversion, and just had a snub-nose .38 to release a lot of smoke and noise. Just two guys in whole operation though---no large conspiracy.
So, in the whole world, only Phillips, LOH, and the two exiles (and the leaker) even had a clue to what happened. LOH correctly thought he was a patsy, and Phillips might have thought LOH shot in earnest, and the leaker might not know much either. Only that he leaked.
I will explain more fully in long post in a couple of weeks.
I like my explanation of events, as I prefer conspiracies with very few actors and moving parts.
The real conspiracy was after Nov. 22, the cover-up. Then, people fall in line with the official story.
-
3 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:
Really? “Going all in” was never part of the BOP planning, Bissell never exerted any pressure on JFK to commit US forces, Dean Rusk gave Cabell a chance to plead that case D-Day -1 and Cabell demurred.
Robert Lovett (Brown Brothers Harriman banker) and Joe Kennedy tried to get Ike to fire Dulles. Richard Bissell was brought into government service by Averell Harriman. Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy were recommended by Lovett.
Lovett, Harriman, Bundy were Skull & Bones, while Bissell was tapped but turned it down.
Joe Kennedy was on the phone with his son throughout the BOP fiasco.
Joe Kennedy soon after the BOP: . "I know that outfit, and I wouldn't pay them a hundred bucks a week. It's a lucky thing they were found out early."
https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/bay-of-pigs-invasion-kennedys-cuban-catastrophe/
<quote on>
That the United States had been behind the operation was soon reported by the press and revealed in the United Nations. Unaccustomed to setbacks in what had so far been a charmed political life, Kennedy was devastated by the Bay of Pigs disaster. An adviser who peeped into the White House bedroom as the operation was failing observed JFK crying in the arms of his wife Jackie. He called his father for advice every hour, yet did not receive the paternal support he had anticipated. “Oh hell,” Joseph Kennedy told his son,“if that’s the way you feel, give the job to Lyndon [Vice President Johnson].”
<quote off>
Sure looks to me like Old Joe and the Yalies sabotaged the BOP in order to get rid of Dulles.
Interesting interpretation.
Truth is the Only Client?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Thanks to James DiEugenio and Matt Douhthit, and the rest of the indefatigable band of earnest researchers who have actually tried to pry the JFK assassination truth from government hands, or unyielding circumstance.
There seems to be a spate of this JFKA-disinformation in the media lately, the Woolsey book and so on.
My guess is that the renewed (again) JFKA disinformation campaign is groundwork for October, when Biden must decide whether to open the remaining 15,834 JFK files or not.
https://jfkfacts.org/cia-director-bill-burns-will-advise-biden-on-secret-jfk-files/#more-30908
So, you see, since the WC was right, or the Russians did it, or the JFKA community is just a bunch of kooks, then it won't matter if Biden opens up the remaining JFK files.
The betting is, come October, Biden will keep the JFK files from the public eye. You know, why should the voters and taxpayers see these documents? Besides, national security will collapse if these half-century-old documents are released.
I can all but guarantee that the mainstream media will not make a cause celebre in October about opening up the JFK files.
My congrats to the JFKA community. It's easy to win, to own or work for the New York Times, Disney or CBS, and "go along to get along."
It is lot harder to get beaten every day in the mass media, and keep coming back.
I know who I admire.