Paul Jolliffe
-
Posts
760 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Paul Jolliffe
-
-
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:
Not the same person Paul.
I know. I thought I made that clear. But the only person who might reasonably be referred to as "a literary agent" is Thomas Thompson, thus my post differentiating the two men.
-
On 7/24/2019 at 10:28 AM, John Kowalski said:
Does anyone know of a connection between Harold Keith Thompson and Marguerite Oswald? It was claimed that he was her literary agent and that he was a Nazi sympathizer.
Thomas Thompson was granted extraordinary access to Marina the night of the assassination, right in Ruth Paine's home - even before Marina went into the "protective custody" of the Secret Service! He interviewed her at length then and again ten years later for People Magazine.
Only someone connected and approved by the Deep State could have been spoken with Marina BEFORE her husband was even charged with JFK's murder! Yet he was, and he admitted it!
His purpose could have none other than to shape the official "narrative", still emerging on that hectic, harrowing night. He was still at it, ten years later. Here is a link to that 1974 People Magazine story:
https://people.com/archive/marina-oswald-a-casualty-of-history-recovers-vol-1-no-1/
This guy - Thomas Thompson, the writer who knew Marina - appears to be a different person than Harold Keith Thompson, Jr.
HKT jr. was subject to a FBI investigation because (among other things) of his 6/23/52 letter to Time Magazine in which he defended several former high-ranking German military officials. HKT, Jr called himself the:
"Executive Secretary,
Committee for International Justice
Committee for the Freedom of Major General Remer
Chatham, N.J."
This Thompson, HKT, Jr., had been court-martialed and convicted in 1949:
T-3 further advised that. HAROLD KEITH THOMPSON, Jr. was tried by a general Court-Martial on 2/14/49 on the di arges of Scandalous Conduct Tending to the Destruction of Gc od Morals and Mai— treatment of a. Person Subject to his orders. On 5, 25/ 49 the findings of the general C ourt Martial were approved by the I .S. Marine Corps, Quantico, Va., and on 6 / 22/50 the findings were approved by the Secretary of the Navy and the sentence of dismissal was approved* According to T-3 THOMPSON g-fcrsmiouslv the General Court martial and was represented by attorney
So yes, this Thompson, HKT, Jr., had a history of appearing to be a Nazi-sympathizer.
But I can't find any connection to Marina or Marguerite, at the moment.
Your source probably confused HKT, Jr. with Thomas Thompson, who certainly could be loosely identified as a literary agent for Marina.
https://archive.org/stream/H.KeithThompsonJr./Thompson Jr.%2C H. Keith-WFO-1_djvu.txt
-
On 7/24/2019 at 7:54 AM, Jim Hargrove said:
John,
You’ve really put your finger on several key issues John A. and I have been discussing for years. On the Murder of J.D. Tippit page on our website, John wrote:
According to researcher Leo Sauvage (who interviewed Dallas Assistant District Attorney Jim Bowie), "there were over a half-dozen anonymous phone calls made to the Dallas Police advising that a suspicious man had gone into the Texas Theater." I'll bet one of these phone calls was made by Tommy Rowe, a very close friend of Jack Ruby's.
For several reasons, I doubt it was Westbrook or Croy who made any of the calls, but your point remains. My belief is that this was an elaborately conceived and executed plot, both to kill JFK and to set up “Oswald” as the patsy, which included murdering Tippit. My bet is there were plans and backup plans.
The planned murder of Tippit had several goals. First was to provide an excuse to link the Oswald/Hidell wallet allegedly found at 10th and Patton (but probably provided by Tippit’s killer to Westbrook) to Classic Oswald®. The second was to link the bullet’s that killed Tippit to “Oswald’s” pistol, which was probably switched when it stayed by Westbrook in DPD headquarters for more than an hour. And lastly, the plan was to lead Dallas cops, angered by the killing of Tippit, to the Texas Theater. If the Sauvage/Bowie account is correct about the multiple calls, then this was just done as a complement to it, sort of proving the point.
What the plotters could never get quite right (because they were juggling two Oswalds) was the minute-by-minute timing. That’s why the police radio timestamps had to be altered, why Tippit had to be shot at 10th and Patton at the exact same time he was pronounced dead at Methodist Hospital, and why the identifications of the theater patrons had to disappear.
Jim,
As to the matter of those mysterious multiple calls to the DPD from the Texas Theater from at least one anonymous source, there is highly significant corroboration on tape from the afternoon of 11/22/63! Listen to the audio portion of Ron Reiland's short film here as he states live on the air that the DPD officers, filmed at the Tippit scene, race to their squad cars in response to the call that a suspicious man, armed with a shotgun, was seen entering the Texas Theater. ("Everybody broke and ran!")
I need not remind anyone here that the initial suspect description in the Kennedy shooting was of a man, about 30, armed with a rifle, maybe a .30/30 or a Winchester. That some anonymous caller - NOT JULIA POSTAL - told the DPD about the suspect walking into the Texas Theater with a shotgun (!!!!!!) is not a coincidence. The DPD rushed to the Texas Theater NOT IN RESPONSE TO MOUSY JULIA POSTAL'S CALL TO THEM (only at the repeated urging of the phony Johnny Brewer), but as the result of the repeated calls from someone else inside the theater!
As we know, no one, NO ONE, walked into the Texas Theater with a shotgun or a rifle before the arrival of the DPD.
That anonymous caller was a conspirator, setting up the patsy.
No wonder the dispatch tapes of the calls to the DPD from the Texas Theater had to disappear - they contained an audio record of a conspirator's voice!
The entire four minute Ron Reiland footage is well worth watching, but the most relevant part begins at the 1:10 mark - be sure to turn on your speakers!
-
23 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:
Paul,
I know I am going to catch a lot of flak for this, but, for right now, I believe that it was Marina who ordered the rifle.
I say this for the following reasons: I can provide citations for these if you'd like.
-
Oswald admitted he had the Alek James Hidell Selective Service card in his possession, bur either “denied” or “declined to admit” that the signature was his, and then refused to discuss it further. I think the SS card and the rifle order form were signed by the same person.
-
Marina admitted to signing the name “Hidell” to “two or three cards” with the name “Hidell” that were not pamphlets and which were not the FPCC membersship card.
-
Marina said on at least three occasions that they were living on Neely St. in January, and initially, that she had seen Lee cleaning the rifle in January (which she later corrected to mean she saw it for the first time in March).
-
The handwriting experts commissioned by the HSCA were not asked to analyze the signature on the Hidell Selective Service card, or to compare the signature on the rifle order form with the signature on the DeMohrenschildt rifle photo.
-
The troubling instances of evidence in this case in Marina Oswald's possession, appearing after the Oswald's belongings had previously been seized and searched by the Dallas Police.
SS card on top, rifle order form below.
Steve Thomas
Steve,
Those signatures do look suspiciously similar.
If (IF!) Marina ordered a rifle, and if (IF!) it was delivered somewhere, and if (IF!) what was ordered was, in fact, the infamous 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano (CE 139), then where in the world was it between the time it was ordered (whenever that was) and November 22, 1963?
Why would Marina order a rifle - who told her to do so? If the assumption is that her husband commanded her, well, why would he do that? If he had been told to order it as part of something run by his handler/contact, why wouldn't "Oswald" just order it himself? Why get his wife mixed up in whatever it was of which he was a part? Nobody has suggested that Marina was part of a husband/wife team secretly being jointly run/handled by American Intelligence operatives, have they?
Steve, as you know from having read Joachim Joesten's "Marina Oswald", Joesten speculated about Marina's complicity in setting up her husband. While unlikely, it is not impossible, and therefore, it is not inconceivable that she was a conscious part of the assassination plot.
Unlikely, but not impossible.
If those really are Marina's signatures on the examples you attached above, then I'd say Joachim Joesten made a pretty shrewd guess more than 50 years ago.
-
-
On 7/17/2019 at 3:18 PM, Steve Thomas said:
Jim,
Mr. Tobias was interviewed by FBI Agents, Allan Bray and Raymond Yalchak on January 28, 1964 at which time he showed them rent receipts which were examined, but there is no indication they took the receipts with them.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57771&search=Tobias#relPageId=27&tab=page
The Tobiases were interviewed by the WC on April 2, 1964 at which time pages from the rent receipt book were read into the record, but the books themselves were returned to the Tobiases.
Mr. Tobias said,
"Mr. JENNER. I appreciate your cooperation. These are your original receipt books and we have recited them in the record and now return them to you and thank you very much for bringing them.
Mr. TOBIAS. I have one of these I keep ever since I been in that apartment and I been there for 3 years and a half and I have got every receipt I ever wrote and I keep it on records and lots of times I have to go back to them and there's only one person that doesn't get into them and that's the credit department."Mrs. Tobias said,
"Mr. JENNER. Excuse me--may I ask you a few questions about that--you keep a record of all receipts?
Mrs. TOBIAS. Oh, yes; we have one--they get one and the owner gets one.
Mr. JENNER. When a rent payment is made, you make an entry in the book you have before you of having received a certain amount of money. It's in duplicate or triplicate--the tenant gets a copy of the receipt, you retain one in your book and you send one of the owners of the building?
Mrs. TOBIAS. Well, she gets the name of it..."I do not remember ever seeing any Elsbeth St. rent receipts in the inventory of items seized at 2515 W. Fifth or 1026 N. Beckley.
I'm not aware of any of the earlier researchers from the early 1960's ever going back and asking to see them.
Steve Thomas
Steve,
First of all, thanks for the link to the Joachim Joesten book about Marina Oswald. I just finished reading it in its entirety. Joesten's condemnation of the view of Marina as a "poor, innocent victim" is shattered in his telling. She lied to and about "Oswald", both before and after the assassination. (She was subject to deportation for lying on her State Dept. application for entry to the U.S. in 1962 - she claimed she had never been a member of the Komsomol in the USSR, when, in fact, she indeed had been a member as she herself later admitted!)
Harold Weisberg compared Marina to Scheherazade, the legendary Persian storyteller who so beguiled a king with her fantastic tales for 1,001 nights that he not only spared her life, but fell in love with her and married her. As Weisberg dryly noted more than 50 years ago, all, ALL of what Marina/Scheherazade had to say about "Oswald" was only possible because the Dallas Police allowed "Oswald" to be murdered in their custody.
If not for that murder, everything that Marina (wife) might have had to say about a living"Oswald" (husband) would have been privileged communication and thus exempt from examination in court. The prosecution could not have called her to say one syllable about "Oswald."
Second, I have even further doubts about whether the "Oswald" family as we know them really lived at 214 W. Neely in the spring of 1963. The FBI interviewed two witnesses, Mr. and Mrs. Marvin Friddle who stated: "a young man, his wife and their two small children resided at the upstairs apartment at 214 West Neeley (sic) fro a very short time around April and May of 1963. The only reason they would know this was because they would see him, his wife and children around this house and on the upstairs balcony."
As others have pointed out in years past on this forum, Baby Rachel was not born until October of 1963, so whomever the Friddles spotted occasionally at 214 W. Neely, it could not have been the classic, intact "Oswald" family as we know it.
Marguerite may have been right: Marina and June may have been living there with a man and another child briefly in the spring of 1963. All of which lends credence to "Oswald's" vehement denials that HE ever lived there!
Mr. BALL. What about the rifle?
Mr. FRITZ. I asked him about the Neely Street address and he denied that address. He denied having a picture made over there and he even denied living there. I told him he had people who visited him over there and he said they were just wrong about visiting. -
On 7/14/2019 at 12:49 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:
Steve,
That bit from Mrs. Marguerite Oswald is fascinating and corroborates what I have long suspected: Marina lived there with someone else! Marina was seen with someone at the Irving Furniture Mart in the first week of November (on a weekday, while our LHO was at work.) There are a number of "Oswald", Marina and baby sightings in the two months before the assassination that don't fit because our "Oswald" could not have been there.
But Marina . . .
BTW, from which Joachim Joesten book was that excerpt from?
Also, the essay "The Georges of Neely Street" was written by Gayle Nix Jackson, granddaughter of Orville.
Steve,
I just read "Marina Oswald" by Joachim Joesten in its entirety. Fascinating - Joesten's emphasis on Marina's lies and duplicitous behavior, before and after the assassination, is very well done.
Harold Weisberg referred to Marina as "Scheherezade" , the legendary Persian storyteller who spared her own life by telling tales so fantastic for 1,001 nights that the beguiled king fell in love with her and married her.
Anyway, thanks for the link. Now I am reading Joesten's "Oswald: Assassin or Fall Guy?" which is also available for free here:
https://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/Oswald_Assassin_Or_Fall_Guy.pdf
-
17 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
Paul:
I don't know if you understand DVP's psychology.
I most recently swore him off when he said M. Baker's first day affidavit was fine except for the floor: everything else was consistent with the second floor lunch room.
No honest, objective, normal person could say something like that.
So, I am just trying to give you a heads up if you are not aware of just how averse to evidence and logic the (retired) Indiana chicken retailer is.
I have come to the conclusion it is better to starve the xxxxx. The only reason Simkin let him back on is DVP begged him to do so when I came on, and he gave him strict rules to adhere to. Simkin said he liked watching me beat the daylights out of him.
Personally, it gets boring after awhile since he is like Zeb Jadah facing Kosta Tszyu: he does not know when he is knocked out.
Thanks, Jim. I'll heed your advice next time. Personally, I don't really care what motivates guys like DVP. The government does indeed pay shills to xxxxx sites like this - as to whether DVP is a paid shill, well I have absolutely no evidence for that. I suspect that some people just enjoy being contrarians, and perhaps that fits David. Or perhaps, David genuinely believes that his writing here corrects errors. I don't know.
I suppose I could ask, so here goes: David, what in the world motivates you to write what you write?
-
11 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
That'll be the day.
It couldn't be more obvious that Lee Oswald purchased (and possessed) Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 in 1963. In order for him to have NOT purchased and possessed that rifle, we'd actually have to be silly enough to believe a whole bunch of people "lied their eyes out" in 1963 (and continued to lie about it for the rest of their lives).
But to CTers, of course, the more people they can accuse of being bald-faced l-i-a-r-s in this case, the better.
Right, Paul?
David,
No one was able to place the 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano (WC Exhibit 139) in "Oswald's" possession before the assassination. No one. Whatever the thing MAY have been in the closet on Neely Street in April of 1963, no one can identify it as CE 139.
For that matter, no one on Friday afternoon, 11/22/63, could say that the rifle recovered by the DPD in the TSBD was, in fact, CE139. Certainly not the DPD, nor the Dallas Sheriff's Dept., nor the media.
It was not until late Friday night/early Saturday morning that the rifle was identified as a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano - not until it was in the hands of the FBI, secure in Washington, D.C., far away from anyone who could look at it.
Was CE139 the same rifle recovered in the TSBD?
Not according to the man who found it, Deputy Eugene Boone (watch from 11:35 to 12:35)
-
6 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
And that would mean that Jeanne DeMohrenschildt lied her eyes out too....
JEANNE DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "And I believe from what I remember George sat down on the sofa and started talking to Lee, and Marina was showing me the house that is why I said it looks like it was the first time, because why would she show me the house if I had been there before? Then we went to another room, and she opens the closet, and I see the gun standing there. I said, what is the gun doing over there?"
MR. JENNER -- "You say..."
MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "A rifle."
MR. JENNER -- "A rifle, in the closet?"
MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "In the closet, right in the beginning. It wasn't hidden or anything."
MR. JENNER -- "Standing up on its butt?"
MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "Yes."
MR. JENNER -- "I show you Commission Exhibit 139. Is that the rifle that you saw?"
MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "It looks very much like it."
We agree!
Jeanne DeMohrenschildt lied!
-
On 7/15/2019 at 6:04 PM, David Andrews said:
Well, it's a Fort Worth, TX, arrest photo, presumably after the assassination, or the day before, or that weekend, so that might tend to let Shelley off. Check the back threads, I think Fort Worth arrests have been discussed.
You are right David. Duke Lane covered it pretty thoroughly in his article "The Cowtown Connection". I don't believe there is any connection between the two arrested men (Donald Wayne House and Kenneth Wilson) and the JFK assassination. Duke explained it all in his article long ago. They were picked up, interrogated, and released within 90 minutes in Fort Worth. They didn't have anything to do with anything, and Robert Morrow's assertion that the pictured man was David Atlee Phillips was nonsense.
Here is the link to Dixie Dea's 2005 thread on this forum:
-
4 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
One would think that Marina would have a better recollection of when she first realized Lee had purchased a rifle and when see first saw Lee with it.
Why?
Several universally young mother shared reasons including family need diverting cost.
If Lee had just produced a previously unannounced purchase camera, radio or fishing pole one could see Marina perhaps not remembering even a general time period of first seeing such innocuous items, but even something that innocent would probably still initiate a "where'd you get the money for that when Junie needs shoes or doesn't have a crib?"
But instantly seeing a high powered rifle in your small living space midst would be at least a little scary shocking and surely elicit a much more concerned response from a young mother imo.
More concern than just the frivolous diversion of family need funds.
"Uh, Lee , why do you need a gun...and such a big gun?"
And "why did you not consult me about this?"
And knowing Marina's at times sarcastic wit - "What are you going to do with this ...shoot us some rabbits to help with our food needs?" "
"This is not a toy." "Why did you buy this?'
You'd think Marina would feel very uncomfortable with such a potentially dangerous weapon anywhere near her baby.
And to see her husband cleaning and mock aiming of his new gun in his spare home time must have made Marina at least wonder where this previously unseen interest of Lee's came from if he had never shown this in the years she had known Lee previously?
I think Marina was purposely very vague about her first awareness of the rifle and her reactions to Lee's acquiring it to protect herself from any potential self incrimination and culpability on her part.
How much did Marina personally protest Lee's frivolous purchase of such a potentially deadly weapon or asked Lee about his motivations in acquiring something so scary and illogically unnecessary relative to their family's basic and normal needs?
And when Lee first told Marina of his using this rifle to actually shoot at and trying to kill someone, even understanding Marina's unique situation of knowing no one who she could trust to reveal such craziness and her fear of what might happen to her and June if she went to the authorities, any half way intelligent young mother ( and Marina was very intelligent ) would have freaked out at such an action by her husband and been in huge fear of the consequences if Lee was caught.
They would instantly start thinking of ways to get away from such a violent person...in my opinion anyway.
Maybe Marina was doing and thinking all of these things. Her situation was impossibly compromised by her isolation from anyone she could trust enough to really help her in any significant way.
Maybe she went to bed every night hoping that this craziness on Lee's part was just a one time thing? We do know that Marina was experiencing deep level depression that culminated in her trying to kill herself during her time with Lee in Texas, no matter how feeble this attempt was.
Joe,
Here is the Occam's Razor answer:
Marina lied her eyes out about the rifle.
"Oswald" neither owned nor possessed any rifle.
He never ordered one, he never bought one, he never paid for one, he never handled one after the Marine Corps and he never had one of his own.
He was framed.
-
3 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
Greg Parker on Mr Reed:
Visited Robin Unger's collection to see the pictures. To me it looks like a photo assignment for contextual documentation feeding the official story line. Photos to fact check and build a story by. Better be sure there was a bus where and when it should have been before you put a patsy on it.
I'm struck by the framing of the photos. The bus is center frame (random chance not likely) with nice wide shots to pick up all the available surrounding information. Same over at the theater. Taken from across the street. Circumspect. Not some bystander caught up in the events. At the theater he's standing back, getting the wide shots again, including the street scenes next door and nearby to the theater. Shoe stores and such.
If there's going to be a story line, use information that is absolutely accurate, as taken from photographic documentation. Get the times. Avoid all screw-ups. Makes me wonder what other photo assignments maybe were active that day that we'll never see. Shots of the cab by the bus stop, or activity around Beckley. Tippit even. Not to mention Dealy.
As for the wider interrelationships of the various entities involved, I don't have the background to speculate. Sliding in from NO, dropping the film, then sliding out on a slow boat to Panama all looks spooky enough to me, that's all. Plus the odds of getting those shots without anything for him to go on but the emerging circumstances of the day? Yeah right.
Also the surfacing of the pics themselves seems operational. These are the pics they wanted put out for the public since they bolstered the official story, so do a little song and dance about granting permission and get them into the record. Didn't have to happen otherwise. Could have buried them just as easily. A little risky I'd say given Reed's sketchy background but sliding by on thin ice was the order of the day. Someone must have thought it was important to get those pictures out there.Jim,
I agree completely with the above. Reed's photos were to document the "official" story.
So why were some of them buried?
Because they revealed a foreknowledge that just could not be explained away easily to a curious public. Too many people might notice just how "coincidental" it all seemed.
So, most of them never saw the light of day.
-
3 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
I think most of us know the problem that the WC had with the timeline.
As illustrated above, there was one with the bus/cab ride, and there was another with the alleged walk from the rooming house to 10th and Patton.(I dealt with the latter at length in my essay, "The Tippit Case in the new Millenium" https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-tippit-case-in-the-new-millennium)
As we have seen, the WC and FBI understood both of these problems and worked assiduously to, shall we say, "correct them".
But in addition, even if one accepts the official story, there are still problems. As I noted above, the FBI had to get Whaley to change his story about which way Oswald went after he got out of the cab. Also, the landlady at Beckley said she peered through her window and saw LHO at a bus stop which would have taken him the wrong way. Further, the Dallas police made out his identification affidavit for Whaley. He then signed it. Talk about a cooperative witness. (Joe McBride, Into the Nightmare, p. 444) . But its worse than that. He signed the affidavit before he saw the line up. (Lane, RTJ, p. 166)
In addition to that there is the other problem about Whaley misrepresenting the so called 15 minute intervals in which he recorded his rides. As many commentators have noted, that is simply not the case. (Lane, RTJ, p. 164) Now, why did the WC have to distort this? Because in his log Whaley said he picked up LHO at 12:30. Which, of course, is not possible.(ibid, Lane.) Then, of course, there is Whaley and the two jackets.Whaley said that Oswald had a jacket on that did not match either one the WC had in evidence. So when he misidentified the color, he then seemed to say that Oswald wore two jackets that day, one over the other. The WR said he was wrong about both of them. (Lane, p. 166)
The point is dual. First, to me, this aspect of the case is not central. To me, the medical and ballistics evidence is--and we know all the problems there. But yet, even with something that is not central, you have all of these problems when you press ever so lightly. Secondly, I have always thought that what Thompson wrote near the end of Six Seconds in Dallas was one of the most compelling passages in the first generation of literature on the case. This of course is the Robinson/Craig matching testimony about the guy coming down the embankment and entering the Nash station wagon. (Thompson, pp. 242-43) Further, the guy driving the car was described as being dark complected with dark short hair. When the archives opened up in 1993, Anna Maria Kuhns Walko found a photo of a man who resembled Oswald in the place where Craig described him. At the old Lancer forum, there were photos of a man resembling Oswald in the crowd in that area.
(I won't got into all the problems with the bus ride. Sylvia Meagher did a sterling job on that. AAF, pp. 76-82. About the unbelievable Mary Bledsoe, click here https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/deeper-into-dave-perry)
So, from measuring the totality of the evidence, and factoring in the alterations performed on it by the FBI and the WC, there seems to be two alternatives. The bus ride/cab ride WC option, and the Thompson Nash Rambler option. But to be as honest as I can be, there is really a third option. Thompson mentions it in his book as the RIchard Popkin, Second Oswald alternative. He says that the guy Robinson and Craig saw was most likely the guy described by Popkin in his book, The Second Oswald, the guy seen so often where and when the real Oswald could not have been there.
The Commission, predictably, ran away from this alternative faster than a racehorse. They did not give it the time of day. In my view, as with everything the WC did, the alacrity with which they ran indicates the credibility of the evidence. I always though that Popkin's book was one of the most underrated of the early volumes on the case. And I think his thesis is solidly supported: there was a guy impersonating Oswald prior to the murder of Kennedy. And by overlooking that, the WC was able to dismiss Thompson's third option. Is it the right one? Thanks to the hapless clowns on the WC we will never know.
Jim D.
Yes, I agree with you that the LHO-like figure seen by Craig and Robinson was almost certainly a look-a-like for our "Oswald." Yes, I agree (and wrote) that Mary Bledsoe's identification of "Oswald" on the 1213 McWatters bus was worthless. I agree (and wrote) that William Whaley was a very compliant witness, willing to say whatever the authorities wanted him to say.
But all of that does not mean that no one was on the McWatters bus, nor that no one rode (somewhere) to Oak Cliff in Whaley's cab.
No, a man (vaguely) fitting "Oswald's" description really did board the McWatters bus in the manner described by both McWatters and Roy Milton Jones, and that man really did leave the bus as they described.
Further, a man (vaguely) fitting "Oswald's" description really did ride with Whaley to Oak Cliff (although the exact drop-off point remains murky.)
To me, the "Two Oswald's" theory is the simplest, most logical explanation for this. If our "Oswald" was never on the McWatters bus, then the bus search (with weapons drawn!) by the unnamed Dallas cops makes no sense. Remember, Jones detailed the DPD search of the bus and told us that it occurred within moments of "Oswald's" departure. Since that DPD search went completely unreported in the "official" narrative, it is safe to conclude that the DPD did not want that search to become public knowledge.
Why not?
Because that DPD search of McWatters bus around 12:45-50 (just like the Stuart Reed photos) smacked of foreknowledge and conspiracy. And that was a path down which the authorities would do everything to avoid (unless it led directly to Fidel Castro, which it did not.)
-
Steve asked "Did the apartment house at 214. Neely have mailboxes?"
As of June of 2014, it sure did. Also, it appears that these mailboxes (vertical and black to the left of the doors to 212 and 214 W. Neely) in 2014 are identical to the mailboxes in this picture from (1963?)
https://srhistorical.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/neely-house-oswald-20141.jpg
-
17 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:
Jim,
Here are the photos Reed took:
Jim Hargrove and Jim DiEugenio,
Reed's photos are even more conspiratorial than those above - check this out: Reed took a photo of the front of Hardy's Shoes, site of the infamous (nonexistent) Johnny Brewer/"Oswald" encounter! This was BEFORE Brewer had emerged in the public eye!
Reed took one of the sidewalk from Hardy's Shoes to the Texas Theater. (The route "Oswald" would have walked.)
Reed took one looking east to the TSBD while riding past the Triple Underpass - it shows the route the limo took to Parkland, but notice, Reed centered the TSBD. Reed took this while riding out to Oak Cliff. This was waaaaaay before anyone knew anything!
No wonder the FBI had a cow when they saw these! These were proof positive of prior knowledge of the "official" version of the assassination. Robert Groden told me that Stuart Reed told him that Reed was on a cruise ship in the Gulf of Mexico within two days of the assassination, but the FBI chartered a helicopter to fly directly to the cruise ship to get the above affidavit. The FBI then buried those photos.
This link takes you to the entire Stuart Reed photo montage (I know it is from the Prayer Man site, and I am not going down that road right now, but just look at the photos!)
-
32 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
I think it's pretty obvious why he had to change his story.
It's the timeline. And BTW, the whole thing about keeping the quarter hour slots in his records is also false and proven so by Lane again.
Just remember, the WC needed to come up with an alternative to the Marvin Robinson/ Roger Craig story about the Rambler picking up someone in the Plaza who resembles Oswald.
Therefore they put together the Bus/Cab drive story.
You know, Jim, if it were not for the Stuart Reed photos of the bus on Elm, east of the TSBD, plus all of Reed's photo montage, I'd wonder much more about the bus ride story myself as a way to discredit Roger Craig.
But the Reed photos do exist, they were taken on the afternoon of the 22nd, and they were a perfect photo montage of the "escape route" that "Oswald" took. Had those photos not been so conspiratorial (they could only have been taken by someone tipped off in advance to photograph particular locations, including the front of Hardy's Shoes! The FBI went ballistic when they saw them, according to Robert Groden!) then undoubtedly they would have been used for their intended purpose: to show the American public the route of the "assassin." (But because the whole sequence was so over the top, they never saw the light of day for decades!)
Also, while Mary Bledsoe may well be full of it (she was prompted/urged/commanded by the Secret Service to solidify the presence of "Oswald" on McWatters' bus because no one else could identify him with certainty) there is no doubt some man did board McWatters bus in a fashion described by both Cecil McWatters and Roy Milton Jones, did (vaguely) fit "Oswald's" description, and did exit in a manner described by those men. In addition, "Oswald" (apparently) really did have a bus transfer on him when he was searched later. Whalley's passenger was not conjured out of thin air: Whalley did drive someone whom he believed to be "Oswald" to some location in Oak Cliff.
Was Whalley later willing to go along with whatever was most convenient for the FBI?
Of course.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't drive anyone ("Oswald") in a manner roughly consistent with what he wrote in his first day affidavit.
-
21 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:
Jim,
You might be thinking of this essay:
I'm sorry. I don't know who the author is.
I have about 12 pages of Neely St. notes and discrepancies I'v e found over the years if you're interested. For example:
http://www.aarclibra...Vol17_0054a.htm
Marina stated that they moved (From Elsbeth to Neely) by pushing their belongings around the corner in a baby stroller but Mr. George B. Gray stated they were moved in by a woman driving a white station wagon. If this was Ruth Paine, then why would Marina have to send her directions in a letter?From Joachim Joesten's book p. 47:
Steve Thomas
Steve,
That bit from Mrs. Marguerite Oswald is fascinating and corroborates what I have long suspected: Marina lived there with someone else! Marina was seen with someone at the Irving Furniture Mart in the first week of November (on a weekday, while our LHO was at work.) There are a number of "Oswald", Marina and baby sightings in the two months before the assassination that don't fit because our "Oswald" could not have been there.
But Marina . . .
BTW, from which Joachim Joesten book was that excerpt from?
Also, the essay "The Georges of Neely Street" was written by Gayle Nix Jackson, granddaughter of Orville.
-
On 7/12/2019 at 10:38 AM, Don Jeffries said:
To understand just how far from the truth the Fox News article linked above is, one has to have researched this case in some depth, as I have. The "friend" who maintained JFK, Jr. didn't talk about the subject contradicts what I found out from two of his very close friends, including one who was an inner member of his circle throughout his adulthood. They told me it was something he talked about all the time behind the scenes.
Wayne Madsen was scheduled to meet with JFK, Jr. the week he died, to discuss a new position with George magazine. Madsen's main assignment was to research and write about the JFK assassination. It really is incredible what kind of lies and disinformation our state-run mainstream media disseminates to the public.
I agree, Don. The headline "John F. Kennedy Jr. didn't understand why people were fascinated with his father's death, says pal" implies that JFK jr. had no interest. The article does not explicitly state that, but most people won't get beyond the headline.
IF JFK jr. truly did not discuss his father's assassination with guys like Steven M. Gillon, it's probably because he wasn't that close to Gillon.
On the other hand, guys like Gillon don't get to be the "Resident Historian for the History Channel" (specializing in Modern U.S. History) by writing that the Warren Commission and the entire mainstream media has been dead wrong about 11/22/63.
No, Gillon got to be where he is today by toeing the "official" line on everything, especially the Kennedy Assassination.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130324052538/http://www.ou.edu/cas/history/fac-staff-gillon.html
-
6 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:
Paul,
Here are some notes I have about Castorr. He is one of those Reserve Colonels that have made this case so interesting to me:
Merrill's Marauders, China/Burma connection, oil and gas industry, anti-Castro Cubans... the list goes on.
Thanks Steve. So Castorr was an Army Reserve intelligence spook who spent a lot of time in the 50's in Vietnam. His job in Dallas - to keep the anti-Castro Cubans stirred up - probably didn't require a whole lot of work on his part: they hated Castro anyway. I bet he was more of a liaison, reporting back to Army Intelligence than a provocateur.
I mentioned Castorr earlier not as a particularly promising path to the conspirators, but instead as an example of the failure of both the FBI and the Secret Service to do any real digging. They didn't know about Castorr because they didn't want to know.
As to the main point of this thread - was CE 399 planted? - well, we now know that the HSCA had very strong suspicions that an unidentified Secret Service agent planted the bullet!
"Further development of Pool's testimony may confirm that a Secret Service agent was for a significant period of time close enough to the elevator to plant a bullet; may lead to an identification of that agent; and will reveal the superficiality of the Warren Commission's approach (N.B. 6 H 131, where Tomlinson switches briefly from I to we; no one asked him what he meant by we)."
All five pages of this document from the Weisberg Archives are worth reading in full:
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/P Disk/Pool Nathan/Item 01.pdf
-
9 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:
I agree with this. Good analysis. I wonder if there is more information about this "anti-Castro Cuban activist" supposedly working at Parkland that day. I also wonder if the bullet first found was intended to match up with the Mauser apparently first found on the sixth floor before it transformed into the Mannlicher-Carcano.
Here is Harold Weisberg's testimony to the Grand Jury in New Orleans on April 28, 1967 (as part of the Clay Shaw case.) On page 58 of the attachment (page 56 of the printed pages) Weisberg talks about Walter McChann, a Catholic priest and spiritual adviser to the Cuban community in Dallas, and a friend to Sylvia Odio. Weisberg testified that McChann gave the name of the anti-Castro Cuban who worked as an orderly at Parkland to the FBI, but they buried it.
According to Weisberg, this Cuban "of very bad character who is blackmailing other Cubans, extorting money from them, threatening them, and you know the story of this bullet - and couldn't possibly have the history - it was found in the hospital - by an orderly at the hospital - and Liebeler didn't even ask for the man's name. Father McChann was never called as a witness. Nobody ever said give us the payroll list of Parkland Hospital and Father McChann was given this list of names. . . . Mrs. Castorr - said oh yes, I think I remember something about that, I think they had to get rid of him and ship him back to Miami . . ."
(Weisberg hints that this unidentified Cuban was probably Sergio Arcacha Smith, and I agree with him.)
Denny, Weisberg's testimony was recorded verbatim, so it reads a little incoherently, as does any literal written transcription of a conversation. But if you go through it, you will find some gems.
For example, Weisberg highlights the role played by the uninvestigated "Col. Caster", a man who was "keeping the Cuban people stirred up", according to L.C. Connell, a social worker in Dallas who was well - acquainted with Sylvia Odio and Father McChann. (As usual, neither the FBI nor the Secret Service was able to identify, locate and interview this man. After all, they were only investigating the murder of the president - they couldn't be expected to use the phone book, could they? No, instead an ordinary housewife from Oklahoma, Mrs. Shirley Martin, was able to do what neither the FBI nor the Secret Service could accomplish: find the mysterious "Col. Caster.")
At the end of his book "Oswald in New Orleans" (another gem well worth slogging through) Weisberg actually interviewed L. Robert Castorr in Washington D.C. Castorr denied having anything to do with the above, and left open the possibility that his name had been used by others. Weisberg did not reach any firm conclusions in print. One of my regrets is that in my phone conversations with him in his final decade, I did not ask Weisberg about Castorr.
I am hopeful (but not optimistic) that in his papers at Hood College - now somewhat accessible at the Harold Weisberg Archive - he left behind some written clue.
https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/garr/grandjury/pdf/Weisberg.pdf
-
On 2/27/2017 at 7:13 PM, David Josephs said:
KD -
Taking it a step further, for that bullet to match C2766's barrel, it was fired from C2766 at some point.
When and where?
The "bullet(s)" brought to Frazier could have been place-holders for the rifle that would arrive later, from which they could fire a shot and retrieve the bullet... although that does fell a bit too thought out at this point. CE399 would already have to be in Rowley's possession to insure a connection between the rifle, the shot and the man.
C2766 was used to create this bullet in the weeks/months prior. Would C2766 have shown up in Vallee's arsonal?
And if the bullet in Parkland was not ce399 as we know it, the bullet described either fell out of the men or their clothes... or it was wrongly planted.
The SBT had not yet been created. If we agree a bullet existed at Parkland, we also must agree that bullet is gone.
If that bullet was pointed as remembered it would suggest a 2nd shooter, the Castro-backed conspiracy... Phase 1 of Peter Scott's explanation. When that was so quickly changed to the Lone shooter... we see the remnants in the evidence of them removing the 2nd of who knows how many shooters... by removing the bullet evidence as well as the shot from the front evidence in the autopsy we cleanly and neatly have ALL the evidence pointing to our man Oswald.
btw.. Chief Rowley with CE399 given to Todd for the FBI also has an 8mm "film" taken by Zapruder before anyone else in DC does. This is a full 20 hours before the NPIC has it Saturday with Dino B. and 2 days before SA Bill Smith delivers a 16mm version to the NPIC, again, but this time to Homer and team.
If they would look us in the eye and tell us CE399 did what it did, what could be done to the film with 20 extra hours?
Oh, The Evidence...
David,
I agree that the bullet found by Darrell Tomlinson at Parkland was NOT CE 399. As to whether the original bullet was planted, well remember that Tomlinson found it on a stretcher that could not reasonably be associated with either Connally or Kennedy. It was likely on the stretcher of a small boy who was admitted to the ER shortly before the limo arrived. This little boy had suffered a pretty bloody injury from a playground accident, as I recall. In any event, the way Tomlinson described it, the bullet he found was tucked under the mattress and emerged only after he bumped that stretcher with another stretcher.
It seems impossible that the Tomlinson bullet could have wound up tucked under the stretcher of either man if it just fell out of their clothes or their bodies.
No, I think it is safe to say that bullet, whatever it was, was planted.
While we all focus on Jack Ruby's probable presence at Parkland at that moment, Harold Weisberg wrote long ago that an anti-Castro Cuban activist, one of the most vehement anti-JFK Cubans in Dallas, was working as an orderly at Parkland. Predictably, the FBI did nothing to identify this man, let alone question him.
Someone planted that bullet, and it was switched later by the FBI for CE 399. (The fact that no one in Dallas identified the TSBD rifle on Friday afternoon as the infamous 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano is relevant. That rifle was not identified as the MC until after it was in the hands of the FBI, late Friday night/early Saturday morning. Was it switched too? Oh, you betcha!)
-
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:
I thought it was four blocks from the rooming house?
Also, did not someone write an essay on the whole Neely street mystery?
Well, writing about it and solving it are two different things: no one has ever come up with a coherent explanation for why Fritz reported that "Oswald' strenuously denied ever living at 214 W. Neely. "Oswald" freely admitted all kinds of things, but said he didn't live there. So where was he (presumably with Marina and June) living in March and April of 1963, if not there? If they really did live there for two months, why in the world did he deny it?
Remember, the landlord for 214 W. Neely (M. Waldo George) had only two face-to-face contacts with the family that rented the upper half of the duplex. Nowhere in M. Waldo George's affidavit does he write that the man with whom he dealt was indeed our Lee Harvey Oswald. Instead, he makes a rather strange statement: "Later that day I met the individual who identified himself as Lee H. Oswald."
George was not called as a witness by the WC so we do not know whether he believed the man and his wife were, in fact, "Oswald" and Marina.
Jim, on a different note, I suspect Jack Tatum's belated appearance into the witness record was to provide an explanation for the head shot to Tippit. Although the witness statements are somewhat fuzzy, it is certainly plausible that Tippit actually shot by two different gunmen. That is what the Winchester-Western and Remington Peters evidence would strongly suggest. Further, the shells bullets mismatch would suggest that at least one of the shots missed Tippit. If, in fact, the second man at the scene rode in the DPD cop car parked in the drive between the two houses, then he may well have been the one who fired the coup de grace into Tippit's skull.
Joseph McBride and John Armstrong have written extensively about the second cop car at the the scene. It came from the alley running parallel with 10th Street, which is still there to this day. The alley runs between Patton and Denver. (See the Google Map below the link to the George affidavit.)
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/pdf/WH11_George_aff.pdf
Here is the alley at ground level, looking east from Patton. The Tippit murder scene one half block north and through the trees. If you look down Patton to the left, you can see a yellow crosswalk sign. That is where William Scoggins was parked in his cab. Helen Markham was on the opposite corner.
-
17 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
There's more than one interesting thing in this article. The possibility of the fight is mentioned in Nightmare but not detailed in depth. Two guy's and a woman jumped another man, stabbed him and threw him in the back of a car? Nightmare said it was four blocks from where Tippitt was killed a few minutes before he was, this says it was actually only two blocks away. No record of it being called in, or broadcast about, with multiple witnesses to it, in the DPD records? This doesn't align with what Tippit's dad told Mr. McBride about being told his son was hunting for Oswald although it's very interesting. I wonder what he thinks about this as his book is used as a source.
I'd never read Whaley dropped Oswald off several blocks past his rooming house (near the El Chico where the mechanic saw Oswald in a red ford falcon (?- Mathers?) in the parking lot After he had been arrested in the TexasTheater). I thought it was A block past his rooming house. This would mean Oswald changing clothes, picking up his pistol, and Earlene Roberts story were all hooey. Not time to walk several blocks back for this to happen, then walk to where Tippit was shot (which can't be done by it's self, it's been attempted to be duplicated by more than one researcher, unsuccessfully), much less walk on to the Texas Theater.
Tippitt picked up Oswald several blocks past his rooming house, near the El Chico (how did he know to go there?), dropped him off near the Texas Theatre, then went to investigate a fight, that does seem to have happened but was never reported, a couple of blocks from where he was killed? All interesting food for thought in a great article which fleshes out other things I've read about the subject. I need to re read it and look at a map of Oak Cliff again even after riding through the area 10-12 years ago with a friend (plus memories of going to Aunt Kate house in Oak Cliff when she lived there in 60/61 at about 5 years old).
Mr. McBride, Help! I'm no expert on the subject. Your thought's would be greatly appreciated.
Tatum was definitely full of crap as a Christmas turkey.
Well, "several blocks" is really about three long blocks. "Oswald" was dropped off (according to Whalley) at the intersection of Beckley and Neely. It appears to be about a 7-8 minute fast walk south of 1026 N. Beckley. We don't know exactly what time Whalley dropped "Oswald" off because Whalley only recorded his fares in 15 minute intervals. (He logged his pick-up of "Oswald" as 12:30!)
I don't think we can conclude with any certainty that Tippit picked up "Oswald", either at 1026 N. Beckley or anywhere else. (He may have, but Jack Meyers assertion is one of the weaker points of the article.)
Of interest to me is that Whalley dropped his fare (presumably "Oswald") off only a three minute walk from that mysterious residence, 214 W. Neely. That place, allegedly, was the site of the infamous backyard photo's. And don't forget, "Oswald" vehemently denied ever living there in his interrogations with Captain Fritz!
There was/is something very odd about that address and the conventional narrative (the "Oswald's" lived there as man, wife and child for two months in the early spring of 1963) is highly suspect.
I agree that Tatum's belated appearance as an eyewitness is worthless.
Ron, if you hold your control key down while you move your mouse on the map below, you can zoom/hover/flyover all of the relevant places here on this Google Map.
-
On 7/9/2019 at 7:31 AM, James DiEugenio said:
Ford was more than just a stooge I think. He was a willing pawn in the game.
We know this from the deal he did with Nixon, and I really do not think anyone can misconstrue that. On top of the pardon he let Nixon take all those papers and tapes with him when he left. Congress had to pass a law to try and get them back. Which Nixon fought with a fleet of lawyers for decades.
Then there was his loading up the Rockefeller Commission because, as he blurted out, they had to cover up state secrets. When someone asked, what secrets, he said, like assassinations.
Then there was his maneuvering to end the Church Committee around the Welch funeral. On that one he cooperated with Kissinger and David Phillips.
And there was his disclosure to d'Estang, about knowing there was some kind of organization behind the JFK case, but he could not figure out what it was.
Ford was one of these guys who did not think Americans could handle the facts of what was really going in with the republic. Only guys like himself could do that.
Nice one Jerry.
Jim,
What kind of leverage did Nelson Rockefeller have on Jerry Ford to compel him to appoint Rockefeller as his VP? Since Ford himself was almost assassinated twice in 1975, should we wonder if these were examples of the Rockefeller/Deep State attempts to control/threaten/dispose of Ford?
I recently learned that the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 made the third person in line (after the P and the VP) the Speaker of the House, not the Secretary of State. President Truman did not have a VP until January of 1949. He believed that the VP ought to be elected and since the Secretary of State was appointed by the President, Truman wanted the third in line to be someone who represented as many people as possible - the Speaker of the House, not the Secretary of State.
Thus the Act of 1947.
Interestingly, Truman fired his Secretary of State, James Byrnes, in 1947.
Nelson Rockefeller himself had served as Assistant Secretary of State for American Republic Affairs until fired by President Truman in 1945. So, under the old system, NR was only a short step away from being the third in line to the presidency. 30 years later, NR was only a mis-fired Colt 45 away.
Dorothy Kilgallen - Ruby, Tippitt, and Wiseman Meeting
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Michael,
It's been awhile since I looked at Kilgallen, but my hazy memory is that her meeting with Ruby was only a few minutes long. So, what could he have said - that he murdered "Oswald" on (????)'s orders, I suppose. But whoever gave Ruby the order to shoot "Oswald" was surely a cut-out, several layers removed from the ultimate sponsors of the JFK assassination. I find it hard to believe that Ruby knew exactly on whose behalf he was acting that Sunday morning in Dallas.
This is not to suggest that Kilgallen was not murdered - I think there is a good chance she was. Merely that whatever tidbits Ruby may dangled in front of her, it surely could not have been the whole story. There was no way that Jack Ruby knew the whole story of the assassination.