Jump to content
The Education Forum

Paul Jolliffe

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Paul Jolliffe

  1. Of course the ex-director (fired by JFK) was at The Farm at the very moment of JFK's assassination! Why, don't you know that ex-directors hang out at secure CIA facilities at crucial moments in American history all the time, and it's always a coincidence, unworthy of investigation or even speculation? Only a commie or a mental defective would possibly even wonder about that . . . Next I suppose you'll tell me that you find it bizarre that Allen Dulles was not only named to but was also the most active member of the Warren Commission. Why, just because JFK refused to take the CIA's bait at
  2. I'd never seen that footage before. Very moving. Thanks, Joseph, for posting it.
  3. David, When I was re-reading the FBI's Sibert/O'Neill Report on the autopsy, I was struck (yet again) about the bizarre language in this particular passage: "Also during the latter stages of the autopsy, a piece of the skull measuring 10 x 6.5 centimeters was brought to Dr. HUMES who was instructed that this had been removed from the President’s skull. Immediately this section of skull was X-Rayed . . ." http://22november1963.org.uk/sibert-and-oneill-report#sibert-oneill-report A piece of the president's skull was "brought to Dr. Humes"? Where had it been if it wasn't alrea
  4. Well, I just found a pretty helpful article with not one, not two, but three sketches of the Bethesda morgue: http://dealeyplazauk.com/research/collections/barry-keane/harold-skip-rydberg/ The three artists are Harold Rydberg, Paul K. O'Connor, and Lee Waske. O'Connor's sketch from 1992, and Waske's sketch from 1968 appear to depict the morgue in a near-similar manner, albeit from two different angles. These two sketches seem to match the general background layout of the autopsy photos. Rydberg's 2003 sketch may be the same room , but the phone is off, the sink(s) is a litt
  5. Joe, The Bethesda Navy Hospital in 1963 is now part of the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. This is the complex where the official autopsy was performed. This gets confusing because in 1963 there was also the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. This facility (below) closed in 2011: Attached below are photos (including the TILE FLOOR, not concrete) from Walter Reed Army Hospital's morgue. If you blow up the image, the floor is tile, but not the pattern seen on the floor of the room from the official autopsy pho
  6. David, Walt Brown's interview with Aubrey Rike about the autopsy photos raises (yet again) the intriguing possibility (probability?) that those photos were NOT taken in the Bethesda morgue: "Postscript: I recontacted Rike to clear up the last rites question, and he insisted that he was present, along with only one priest, when the sacraments were given, and that the shroud on the President's head was not removed. In our Dallas talk, he had seemed to place a great deal of faith in the theories advanced in 1980 by David Lifton, and I asked him in this postscript if he gave any consider
  7. Ron, While that scenario seems a tempting possibility, it is contradicted by first-day witnesses everyone concedes had no reason to lie: Aubrey Rike and Dennis McGuire from the O'Neal Ambulance Service. These men claimed on Friday afternoon to have physically placed the president's body into the bronze ceremonial casket from the funeral home and then put that casket into the hearse, which they then drove to the airport. https://youtu.be/YjhCbt5X4hA http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/rike.html Note that in the second interview, Aubrey Rike specifically endorses Lift
  8. David, You and I agree that Aubrey Rike's statement proves that the casket with the president's unaltered body at Parkland remained sealed until it arrived at Air Force One. No body alterations occurred at Parkland. However, you seem to be implying that you believe that a number of people, including SS Agent Roy Kellerman, knew of the need to hide evidence of frontal shots in advance of the assassination, and thus the need to remove (forcibly and quickly) the body from Dallas. Yet Kellerman's own testimony before the Warren Commission belies that (apparent) assumption: "Mr
  9. Joseph, I read your fine book some years ago. Thanks for all the incredible effort and information. Truly, your book is a "must read." I wonder how much of the wound-alteration procedure was actually planned in advance. Was it, perhaps, a hasty, desperate improvisation by the conspirators, necessitated by the news that a very-much-alive "Oswald" had been arrested in Dallas? I have long suspected (and argued) that the conspirators intended to frame not only "Oswald" but also, very possibly, Buell Wesley Frazier (and maybe unnamed others!) I've long wondered if the original plan w
  10. Joe, It's long been recognized that John J. McCloy was the nsider's insider on the Warren Commission. Donald Gibson, in his outstanding book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover-up" argued that the Warren Commission should more properly have been called the McCloy/Dulles commission because they controlled proceedings. A great example was Dulles and McCloy's ability to override Earl Warren and his choice for general counsel for the commission. Warren wanted his longtime associate and friend, Warren Olney III from California, but Dulles and McCloy wanted J. Lee Rankin. Guess who won.
  11. All of these points are valid, but really isn't it just a simple matter that studying the JFK assassination is hard, and for most people, it is too intellectually demanding for them? Most ordinary people trust the mainstream media at least a little on most issues. So when the MSM presents its universal, monolithic "Oswald did it, Oswald did it alone, and Oswald did it because he was a nut" theory, well then most folks assume that must have some veneer of truth to it. I realize that lots of people still have doubts about the Warren Commission's basic conclusions, but most people just
  12. W. Niederhut, I can't speak for others on this thread, but my point in citing the extended quote from work of Howard Jones above was to lend support to your claim that Prouty (and Krulak) had a key hand in drafting the Taylor/McNamara Report. Howard Jones, in his seminal "Death of a Generation: How the Assassinations of Diem and JFK Prolonged the Vietnam War", did not mention either Prouty or Krulak by name in that passage. However, the Michael Forrestal material confirms that the basics of that report - not merely the outline, but the guts of it - was written in advance, in Washin
  13. "JFK was not sold on the recommendations from the Krulak/Mendenhall Mission so he sent McNamara and Taylor a week later for a second opinion." Rob, there was no single clear-cut recommendation from Krulak and Mendenhall. President Kennedy was so taken aback by the completely differing accounts from his two men - men whose mission was to provide support for the president's position that American training of and logistical and technical support for the ARVN could now begin to be scaled back on a major scale - that Kennedy infamously asked of Krulak and Mendenhall "You two did visit th
  14. Jim, James Galbraith asked two decades ago "Was Nhu in discussions with intermediaries for Ho Chi Minh, with the possibility that there might have been a deal between North and South to boot the Americans from Vietnam? It appears that he was. And had he succeeded, it would have saved infinite trouble." https://bostonreview.net/archives/BR28.5/galbraith.html Any deal between Diem and Ho which ended America's military involvement in Vietnam meant no later, wider Vietnam War. This, of course, was completely unacceptable to the hawks in both Saigon and Washington. The removal of Die
  15. Fascinating as it is to look at these documents, I still want to know more about the last-minute talks in which Diem was (allegedly) willing to engage with Ho Chi MInh. James Galbraith asked two decades ago "Was Nhu in discussions with intermediaries for Ho Chi Minh, with the possibility that there might have been a deal between North and South to boot the Americans from Vietnam? It appears that he was. And had he succeeded, it would have saved infinite trouble." https://bostonreview.net/archives/BR28.5/galbraith.html We need to discover exactly who knew about this approach, both in
  16. Jim, Is it a coincidence that Ed Lansdale "retired" within hours of the Diem brothers' assassinations? If, as many believe, there was plenty of CIA foreknowledge/involvement with the fate of the Diem brothers on November 1, 1963, then certainly Lansdale must have known. James Galbraith wrote two decades ago that there were last minute indications that Ngo Dinh Diem was actually trying to cut a last-second deal with Ho Chi Minh, one that would have led to prompt American Military withdrawal. If true, then I can easily see why ruthless officers within the CIA, hellbent on an
  17. "Nixon continued the war unnecessarily for four years, after he knew it was lost. " Jim, I've written before that I never believed that Oliver Stone got Nixon quite right - Stone was sure that Nixon's policy of governance (cards close to the vest, no leaks, don't use the regular government channels, such as the State Department, etc.) was a function of RMN's personality. Stone even invented dialogue between Pat and Richard Nixon in which she wailed that he wouldn't let anyone in, not even her. That is the conventional view to explain why Nixon was so secretive and "p
  18. Yes, that's how read it too, Sandy. It is just barely conceivable to me that Angleton might (might) have been telling the literal truth: he did not KNOW who did it. However, there is no possibility that he could not have strongly SUSPECTED who did it, and with a little digging, he could have found out. If James Angleton truly did not know "who struck John", well that's because he didn't want to know. Angleton had to have aware of the "Oswald" file for years before 1963. The manipulation of the "Oswald" file at CIA HQ and the false cables to and from Mexico City about "Oswal
  19. Thanks, Chris. Since I've never been up there, it was useful for me to see extensive continuous footage. Very helpful in providing perspective.
  20. As I look at the close-up photos of the limo's windshield outside Parkland, I am not convinced there was really a through-and-through hole in it. There might have been, but I can't see it. I know there are witnesses who insist the windshield was a hole and not a spidery crack, and maybe they are correct. But . . . I guess I am on the fence on this: I can't really believe a high-powered rifle shot through the windshield would leave such (relatively) little damage to the windshield. Does anyone have any photographic evidence of rifle shots penetrating any other vehicle's windshiel
  21. "2.) The FBI removed a portion of curb stone from the location where James Tague stood on the day of the assassination. There was clear evidence of a bullet strike to this piece of concrete. Their laboratory results indicated the presence of lead in this defect, but no copper, thereby rendering the results "inconclusive". The whole FBI/James Tague curbstone removal thing is fascinating - the FBI did NOT want to have anything to do with a missed shot, and they certainly did not want to deal with Tague. The Warren Commission duly ignored the Tague shot until U.S. Attorney (for Da
  22. So I'm guessing that this photo was taken from the south side of the overpass, not the South Knoll, correct? There is no doubt that this would be (virtually) a straight on shot at the president. And it appears any shot would have to pass through the windshield. Of course, as I argued months ago, almost the same angle works back the other way too: the Dal-Tex building, especially the south side windows. (No back window to deflect either!) Which I suspect was indeed a firing point, behind not only the president, but also behind the crowds lining Houston Street. Everyone would be looki
  23. Yes, the Ruby hit is a possible pathway to the conspirators, but obviously the WC did not want to go down that path. I can't believe that was because Jack Ruby was only a function of the mob. I don't believe that's all he was. No, he was U.S. Intelligence - connected for years. We all know about his short-lived 1959 stint as a narc for the FBI, but clearly, anybody running guns to Cuba and high up in the Dallas drug trade for years before the assassination was no mere mob hitman. Jack Ruby was an asset/source for law enforcement at the local, state and federal levels. Jack Revill all
  24. Ron, Did you take a picture from behind that last pillar on the southern part of the overpass? You crouched down beside that pillar - it's that very view back up Elm Street that I'd like to see. If you did take a picture, will you post it?
  • Create New...