59 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Getting into the JFKA truth mission research world late in life, I admit I have not read the huge majority of great books that have been written since 1964. 

That is one reason I not only access the many links such the one above which are video tapes of conferences like this 2002 COPA one led by John Judge but I watch them all the way through.

And this one ( Part 1 ) is 8 hours long!

There are scores and scores of video taped conferences available online here and elsewhere.

The JFKA research information their presenters share ( by the authors themselves ) is simply mind boggling in scope and thoroughness.

Watching this COPA conference video I once again am reminded of the vast amount of deep research and the incredible efforts of researchers regards the JFKA.

So many ( even many on this forum) have spent decades ( DECADES! ) of their lives in the pursuit of the JFKA truth. It's really is an heroic mission effort. 

Especially when you realize these people have had to dig out their findings on their own without the help of our official government backing and even their discouragement.

In total, the knowledge they possess and have made available to anyone inclined to actually read and hear it is a true National Treasure. A National Treasure of truth versus non-truth.

Love these conference videos.

Great to see all the JFKA researcher all-stars all in one gathering...John Judge, Lisa Pease, our own Jimmy D, Grodin, etc. 

Titans in the birth years of this JFKA truth seeking mission movement.

For all new members of the forum who feel they may be under read in the JFKA research area like me...check out as many of these conference videos as you can find.

And watch them all the way through. They are master class venues that will bring you up to snuff at least to a half-way decently informed degree. And they are all highly entertaining...and inspiring too.

Have you ever seen "The Searchers"? The idea of the film was fantastic and by large well done but I really think the film makers missed on it to a degree. I don't think they really landed the show as well as they could have. Much of what you're saying about these committed amateur sleuths was softer than it could have been in the film. Still a great idea.

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

It was the wrong rifle.

I should have used the sarcasm font. I don't understand how anyone could mistake a .30 caliber carbine with a bundle of curtain rods. If someone else put it there doesn't that establish a conspiracy?

6 hours ago, Mark Ulrik said:

You very well know that "steel-jacketed" was the misnomer that I referred to. Bedtime now.

If you're referring to the DPD identifying the bullet they found as "steel jacketed" being a misnomer or mistake you should know in the US this kind of identification of ammunition by ALMOST ANYONE at that time is kindergarten kind of stuff. Almost all of us were taught how to shoot and care for firearms by the time we were 12 and this identification is not likely to be a mistake. Especially by professional law enforcement officers doing an investigation.

Maybe in other countries that could be reasonable (I don't know about where you're at - and I don't mean to sound condescending) but guns were very much enculturated in the US, especially after WW2. We actually were allowed to have small caliber guns like .22s but weren't allowed to have BB or pellet guns because our parents were afraid we'd think of them as toys (which seems to be the prevailing attitude about guns now thanks to video games IMO).

Ben's ten to one really should be more like fifty to one - he's being conservative.

7 hours ago, Mark Ulrik said:

Well, someone got the rifle into the TSBD without raising eyebrows. 

Quite. Who was that? How was it done?

20 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Sorry, I still beg to differ.  LHO toting a gun on a bus, maybe wrapped in a raincoat per Marina?  LHO buried the gun on the way back?  With his hands?  Did he have a shovel under the raincoat too?

In a previous life I had an M1 carbine and an Uzi and there ain't no way I was wandering onto a bus OR into somebody's car without raising eyebrows. Even in Texas I imagine.

19 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

JC-

 

1. Actually, according to an FBI report, a DPD patrolman said he found the Walker Bullet after he lifted up one bundle of paper (see photograph at KandK) and the bullet was resting atop the bundle underneath it. That is evidence as provided by a police-witness who purported to have found the bullet. 

That sure seems odd to me. If the patrolman's account is an accurate statement, then a reasonable suspicion is the Walker Bullet was planted. 

2. Admittedly, it is speculative whether LHO acted alone, had confederates or handlers, or was even at the Walker residence on April 10, 1963. JD asked me if the Walker Bullet was in fact a steel-jacketed bullet (which probably it was), then does that exonerate LHO of the Walker shooting?

IMHO, LHO is still a suspect, due to the photographs found in his possession of the Walker home and approaches. The authenticity of the Walker letter is uncertain. 

The big take-away from the KandK article is that four DPD officers inscribed and initialed the Walker bullet, and described it as steel-jacketed, a relatively uncommon type of bullet (copper-jacketing by far being the standard). 

Chief Curry obviously believed the Walker Bullet to be steel-jacketed.

No evidence can be found that anyone ever thought the Walker Bullet was copper-jacketed---no police reports, photographs, lab reports. All the evidence we have says the Walker Bullet was steel-jacketed. Additionally, Lt. Day's mark on the CE573 cannot be found. 

The WC/FBI made no effort to interview the best witnesses on the Walker bullet, and accepted implausible explanations why the Walker Bullet was described by many official witnesses in official reports as steel-jacketed, and by nobody as copper-jacketed. 

You see the photos of CE573 and CE399 above. Which one looks steel-jacketed to you? 

To answer a question posed here, is CE573 the true Walker Bullet found on April 10, 1963?

I would bet 10-to-one odds it is not. 

 

 

Kudos to you and @Tom Gram for the excellent write up! Quite interesting.

I'll be looking for the response from the usual suspects to see what they have to say. From all appearances it certainly looks very much like the Keystone Kops bit found almost everywhere else.

Someday I plan on writing a transcript of a fictitious courtroom scene wherein the DPD is cross examined on their training on "How to close a door" since that seems to be beyond their skill set in innumerable instances in this case.

12 minutes ago, Joseph Backes said:

I just found out about this.  There's a lawsuit over the copyrighted material on this site that could result in the site being taken down which would be a disaster.

See - 

 

 

Yeah, I doubt a judge would shut this down en masse. The IA shouldn't be involved in distributing copyrighted material if a valid complaint is filed against it and should have its own enforcement guidelines to protect itself and the owners. At a minimum they should notify the owners of their intent and record permissions granted by all of the appropriate holders.

Creators have the right to distribute their works according to their terms and conditions and the reason why is that in order to create those works they have to invest time and money. They have a reasonable expectation that the users who benefit from that investment help to defer the cost of producing it. If this isn't done, creators will cease making their material available at an affordable rate and restrict access to it to only those able to afford it.

For instance I got into an argument with a video store owner years ago who would buy movies off the shelf for $9.99 and then put them out for rental at $3.99 or something. At the time video store owners were required to purchase movies for that type of consumption from a distributor for $29.99 (I believe) because the copyright holder's needed to protect against undercutting their product but wanted to make it available in that market. It was legally actionable for the copyright holder to sue the video store owner, but they could have just made it unavailable to them. The video stores would have no business. In that world everyone has to scratch each other's back.

In the music business now it's not possible to make money from record sales because of the theft and other economic reasons so you have to go pay $500 per ticket to see The Cure play.

I'm not really very sympathetic to most of these aggregator sites but IA is one I really like. They just need to mind their pints and quarts and not try to justify theft if they're partaking in that.

1 minute ago, Gerry Down said:

Oswald had been in the USSR for 2 and a half years. He had also been to Mexico City. It would have taken the expertise of the CIA to try and establish for the WC that LHO was not a foreign agent of some kind during these times abroad. So its only natural the CIA would be working closely with the WC in these matters. Other thinsg the CIA had to do was establish stuff such as how Oswald made it into the USSR for his defection, the route taken etc. and if there were any signs a foreign power was aiding him in this defection.

Would it be better if the WC had another body to double check the CIAs work? Yes that would be handy, but they were kind of stuck in that the CIA was the only real agency that could provide this knowledge to the WC. 

It was the FBIs job, i believe, to establish for the WC if LHO had been a foreign agent inside the US from May 1962 to Nov 1963. So the WC were again forced to rely on a body, the FBI, who were the only real ones qualified in the matter. The FBI would have had to liaise with the CIA in this matter, which again would mean the CIA would be working indirectly through the FBI for the WC. The FBI would also have had to liaise with the CIA on things such as trying to establish the identity of certain cuban exiles that LHO was alleged to have interacted with such as at the Odio incident etc. 

So its not unusual that the CIA would be working on a daily basis for the WC in one way or another. 

I think what you're saying is mostly true but it's the scale of the endeavor and the fact that participants have been kept secret for so long that is the rub. The FBI and the CIA as well as the press were fully aware of LHO's Soviet junket before the assassination and had people in place keeping tabs on him. The information was dumped by the Cuban exiles into the press that same day and as I'm sure you're aware they themselves were employed by the CIA.

I'm not knowledgeable enough on the topic to say the roster of agents and assets, only partially revealed by this list, weren't fully questioned by subsequent investigators for information related to their efforts, but I'm suspicious that lower-level employees were insulated, filtered and hidden to maintain a front to corroborate the WC findings.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

If LHO had nothing to do with the CIA (or US intel), and was nothing but an isolated leftie loser loner...and LHO acted alone...why the heavy, heavy CIA involvement with the WC?

Maybe they were just doing it on their lunch breaks? 

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Something doesn't add up....

Oh, it adds up all right. This is exactly why people reject the explanation. "Crazy mixed-up kid' requires the full might and authority of the federal government to solve the crime or cover it up?

Do the math again haha.

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The only lesson from the Papadopoulos indictments was to emphasize that one should never agree to an FBI interview without a lawyer.

This is always true of any LEO.

9 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

The only lesson from the Papadopoulos indictments was to emphasize that one should never agree to an FBI interview without a lawyer. One count consisted of a determination that one’s non-paid consultancy began at the moment one was told they were “hired”, rather than the day one showed up in person for “work” (that sounds crazy but read the indictment). Another consisted of P’s determination that Mifsud was a “nobody”, instead of being a vitally important Russian contact as insisted by Mueller’s charge. But Mifsud was a nobody, as can be determined by the investigation’s absolute non-interest in speaking to him beyond a brief session ahead of P’s interview. It is also a fact that the Female Russian National was not Putin’s niece or cousin or whoever Mifsud represented  her to be I.e. there was no meeting in London with Putin reps other than Mifsud’s false representations - but why he did that was never determined.

And why did Durham never bother to interview P? You'd think those conclusions would require explanation? Either way as a predicate the FBI was less informed prior to determining there was a vital need to open the investigation particularly under the circumstances surrounding the election.

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

Bob - you're a bit obtuse here. Are you suggesting that Papadopoulos' experience revealed the "collusion" or are you demonstrating the predicate?

There's nothing obtuse about it. I asked him if he read the declaration. How can that be obtuse? It's yes or no.

Papadopoulos lied to the FBI and Durham skipped the part (revealed in subsequent emails and phone data) about his own (GP) notes that Coffee Boy claimed not to able to read about a meeting in London with Putin reps arranged or proposed BEFORE the opening of Crossfire Hurricane. Just a slight oversight by Durham I'm sure.

36 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I do not think PBS is a "garbage" news site. Though obviously on the left side of the aisle, some good reporters there. 

The headline is garbage. Please read what Mueller said. I highlighted it for you. The reporter doesn't know what they're talking about and proved that with what was written. This is non-negotiable.

33 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Have you read Papadopoulos' book? 

I do not think PBS is a "garbage" news site. Though obviously on the left side of the aisle, some good reporters there. 

Did you read his declaration under oath?

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

As usual, we are world's apart in our views. 

I think you are mistaken in your take on the Russiagate Hoax.

But to each his own. 

I'm not mistaken. Here's the sentencing memo regarding the coffee boy. Read it and weep. If you can't read actual court documents maybe you should try to learn rather than posting garbage from news clowns that fits your bias. You say you respect the outcomes of court decisions so here's your chance:

gov.uscourts.dcd.189898.44.0_3.pdf (courtlistener.com)

And here's the coffee boy's own words:

gov.uscourts.dcd.189898.19.0_2.pdf (courtlistener.com)

You'll notice that neither of these is some random Googled headline that seems to be your primary source of information.

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Thanks for your comments.

I am not sure what you are referring to, regarding corrupt AGs and mutual defense agreements. If you wish, I encourage you to elaborate your views.

---30---

Even far-left East Coasty, PC-maxed out NPR said: 

Mueller Report Finds No Evidence Of Russian Collusion

March 24, 2019 5:14 PM ET

Heard on All Things Considered

 

Most like because the don't know their asses from a hole in the ground. This is Mueller's EXACT QUOTE

..."During the course of our investigation we charged more than 30 defendants with committing federal crimes, including 12 officers of the Russian military. Seven defendants have been convicted or plead guilty.

We did not address collusion, which is not a legal term; rather we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy, and there was not.     Third, our investigation of efforts to obstruct the investigation and lie to investigators was of critical importance. Obstruction of justice strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth and to hold wrongdoers accountable."...
 

2 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Thank you for your comments, and we are world's apart in our viewpoints. 

There are many serious journalists who say the same as I, regarding the Russiagate Hoax. 

I have the same right to post my views here as anyone else, as long as I am civil, and do not engage in hate speech, or violate forum rules. 

 

What you posted is factually untrue. That's not a "view" I have. Mueller NEVER said what you quoted him as saying.

Maybe there's a clue store or something in Thailand where you can purchase one. 

I find it interesting you are unable to respond to my other points about mutual defense agreements and corrupt AGs. Not many understand that but once pointed out it should be obvious. How many presidents in history have done that?

And btw that's also not a "view" I have. Those are facts.

On 5/20/2023 at 5:15 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

There is no evidence of collusion between the Trumpers and Moscow. Even deep-state apparatchik Mueller

I'm getting really tired of this BS. You clearly have no idea of what you're talking about as you go "bothsidering" down the defend Trump path. DON'T SAY YOU'RE AGNOSTIC YOU CLEARLY AREN'T.

Predicates for opening a CI investigation are minimal and Billy Barr's toady, Durham, while ignoring a possible serious problem in Italy, was unable to win a conviction over anyone for an investigation that netted something like 37 convictions. That was while the POTUS engaged in over thirty agreements with other defendents, including seven felons, to obstruct any and all investigations into that and other matters by bribing, promising pardons, and intimidating witnesses. He had the DoJ and Billy B drop convictions against Flynn for get this : Acting as an Agent of a Foreign Country which his campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was also doing while dropping polling info on a known Russian asset.

Mueller NEVER INVESTIGATED COLLUSION BECAUSE THAT IS NOT A CRIMINAL CHARGE THEY COULD BRING. THEY INVESTIGATED CONSPIRACY AND OBSTRUCTION BUT DEFERED BECAUSE OF THE DoJ POLICY N REGARDS TO SITTING PRESIDENTS.

You keep blithering Fox BS to cover for the worst piece of crap this country ever foisted on the world. You're apparently unaware that NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE US has it been possible for a person with pardon powers to engage in a mutual defense agreement with co-conspirators in a criminal investigation against that group and also HEAD THE INVESTIGATION through corrupt proxies like Durham and Barr.

Why that fails to register with you and some others here is beyond me. The entire episode will go down as the most corrupt time n our history unless of course idiots vote for the trash again. 

Get your facts straight. You have no right to make people here more stupid because they're nice and believe you wouldn't tell "untruths".

46 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

Could you cite where the presumed "Stone-Newman-Prouty" claim specifically maintains that "JFK was going to totally disengage from South Vietnam after the election regardless of the consequences". I think you have, yet again, used a straw man fallacy to advance an argument. 

I think he's arguing the opposite. Maybe I missed something. Something about we should have incinerated the Commies regardless of the consequences to farmers who couldn't care a less about Communism or Capitalism, and in fact only cared about whether they had food for their families. That's the lesson I got anyway.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

But what about ....

Stellar!! Hahaha!

On 5/18/2023 at 3:52 AM, John Cotter said:

If this is true, it's almost as bad as the genocide of indigenous Americans on which the USA is founded. The mistreatment of ethnic Russians by the Ukrainian government and the mistreatment of Russian speakers by the Latvian government, among other matters, all need to be investigated by the relevant commission(s) of enquiry.

Your "what-about" was swift and sure! Nicely done!

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

You know, I have never been able to decide about the John Judge story about his mother.

Since she had passed on and I did not get to question her.

But man, if that is true its prima facie evidence of a high level plot focused on Indochina.

Link or explanation?

1 hour ago, Charles Blackmon said:

The script supposedly fingers the Mob as being behind 11/22/63. Stars Pacino, Travolta, Courtney Love. Directed by David Mamet. 

Viggo Mortensen, Shia LaBeouf Board David Mamet's JFK Thriller - Variety

Hollywood can read public sentiment about the need for a better explanation than the WC work of fiction. 

I'm (not??) surprised at the cast. I've really liked Mamet's screenplays. This cast has the Avi Lerner stamp of approval. The Expendables 15. 

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

You have to understand that you are dealing with a community here that includes people who sometimes come across as downright paranoid. 

Oh yeah. Hit me wrong at the time. How many years do I have to be posting here before I'm real hahaha? Thanks.

12 hours ago, Joseph Backes said:

See RIF #104-10169-10123.  His name is in the From section on a small transmittal slip.  His name is what they were hiding for a long time. The first two letters of his last name are very hard to make out. Rednar? Fednar? Bednar? 

Aha! I think I've got it now. 

Joseph B Bednar.  This document from 1971 has his name - RIF#104-10119-10174. And signature

 RIF#104-10176-10004 on p. 171 of 241 pages his name appears with his signature.

He had something to do with The SIGNA Society which is a group of retired CIA Security careerists.  He is mentioned in this CIA document from the CIA's CREST site.  

Also here from CREST where he appears to have been a polygraph examiner. 

There's very little online about this guy. 

Joe

Must be one of the rank and file who kept his head down. I can't find anything on him either. I'm surprised you found anything.