Paul Jolliffe
-
Posts
760 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Paul Jolliffe
-
-
On 8/8/2023 at 7:38 PM, Pat Speer said:
FWIW, from studying the films, witness statements and testimony, it's clear to me that Lovelady and Shelley made a brisk walk around the outside of the building and entered through the west roll-up door while en route to a phone. They were then spotted by Adams, who quickly ran outside. They were then approached by Baker and Truly, who asked Shelley to guard the front elevator and stairs. This lasted but a minute or two. When Sawyer came in, Shelley took him up to the fourth floor. In any event, this puts Shelley at the bottom of the front stairs when Oswald is purported to have come down those stairs and exited the building.
As a result, I suspect Oswald was telling the truth when he said he went outside with Shelley. I mean, they could have been chatting as they walked for a sec. So...did Shelley lie about this? I suspect so. Oswald was dead. The authorities said he was guilty. If Shelley were to have admitted he'd let Oswald pass or even said he could go home his life would have been severely disrupted, perhaps even ruined.
Pat,
Have you actually made the Shelley/Lovelady walk (at a brisk pace) yourself? Is it possible to leave the front steps of the TSBD, head west down the Elm Street extension, dip into the parking lot, turn back and head into the roll-up doors on the west side of the TSBD in time to intercept a "running" Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles as they headed west towards the parking lot?
I honestly don't know if the timing works - does it?
If so, then your explanation of Shelley and Lovelady's movements makes sense. I've always been under the impression that they were likely the two white men near the back elevators seen by Baker before he headed up the back stairs:
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone else while you were in the building, other than this man you have identified later as Oswald, and Mr. Truly?
Mr. BAKER - On the first floor there were two men. As we came through the main doorway to the elevators, I remember as we tried to get on the elevators I remember two men, one was sitting on this side and another one between 20 or 30 feet away from us looking at us.
Mr. DULLES - Were they white men?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.However, for Baker to have seen Shelley and Lovelady either implies that Shelley and Lovelady flew around the outside of the TSBD, or that Baker and Truly did not start up the back stairs nearly as soon as the conventional narrative states.
Personally, I've long suspected that Baker and Truly only headed up the back stairs a few (or more) minutes after the assassination, and NOT in the immediate aftermath.
If I'm right, then that alone would explain the Warren Commission's determination to crush Victoria Adams' testimony: her timing not only destroyed their claim that "Oswald" immediately descended the stairs, but also undermined the claim that Truly and Baker flew up the stairs in time to intercept a descending "Oswald" in the 2nd floor lunchroom.
-
16 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
Ruby had ample time to drive from the DMN building to Parkland. Go in and see and converse with Kantor...and then leave again to make the 13 to 14 minute drive back to his club.
JFK was shot at 12:30 pm. He was pronounced dead at 1:PM.
Armstrong testified that Ruby came back at the club at about 1:30 pm or 1:45 PM.
I'll have another look at Armstrong's WC testimony...but I think Armstrong wasn't 100% sure about Ruby's exact arrival times.
I'll copy and past Armstrong's relevant WC testimony.
Joe,
It seems very likely that Andrew Armstrong's timing about when Ruby called him was not very precise, but he got the general sequence right.
Armstrong told the FBI that he arrived at the Carousel Club around 12:30 and very shortly heard multiple police sirens some blocks west. He turned the radio to KLIF and listened to the initial confused reports about the shooting in Dealey Plaza. He tried to awaken the sleeping Crafard, and only succeeded later when the reports of the presidential party's travel at Parkland Hospital were broadcast.
Jack Ruby called Armstrong "five to fifteen minutes" after Crafard got up, which was some minutes after the initial new of the shooting on the radio.
Prior to the announcement of the president's death, Armstrong said he heard several announcements about a Dallas Police Officer being shot. As far as I can recall, no radio reports about the Tippit shooting happened much before 1:30.
We know that Walter Cronkite announced the president's death at 1:38, and this is widely considered to be the first official announcement on television. I don't know what time KLIF aired that news, but it couldn't have been before then: nobody at Parkland had announced the news until about 1:35 or so.
Armstrong estimated that Ruby arrived at the Carousel Club "fifteen or twenty minutes" after he'd heard the news of the president's death on the radio. That would put Ruby's arrival at the Carousel a little before 2 pm.
Armstrong told the FBI that he thought Ruby arrived around "1:45 or 1:50", which is more or less accurate. Armstrong also made a point of telling the FBI that his timing might have been off by a little bit, but "are accurate to within a few minutes."
What's particularly interesting about this FBI interview on January 23, 1964, is the FBI's concern that Ruby might have mentioned going to Parkland Hospital to Armstrong. The FBI questioned Armstrong about his knowledge of Ruby's movements before Ruby arrived at the Carousel.
Armstrong denied any knowledge and said Ruby had mentioned nothing to him about going to Parkland Hospital.
This means the FBI knew they had a "Ruby at Parkland Hospital" problem: Armstrong's timeline did NOT rule out a Ruby to Parkland trip. Seth Kantor's story was almost certainly true, and the FBI knew it.
-
23 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:
Greg Parker on the ROKC site says he smells a rat and this may be a setup by someone associated with the RFK Jr campaign or the security for it. Suggests Aispiro was set up. Suggests someone found his crazy social media comments and decided he would be the perfect “nut” patsy to phone and tell to show up for a “security job”. Time and place perfect for national media attention.
I think there are some bad persons internal to the RFK Jr campaign. I refer to whoever wrote that post of RFK Jr about Secret Service protection not being provided after 88 days, when “88” has a known and verified neo-n azi code meaning and use in Europe and the US, preceding RFK Jr’s social media post making unnecessary reference to that particular count of days.
After that was brought out and RFK Jr did not acknowledge and denounce that “88” dog whistle and announce that someone or ones had been fired for ghost-writing that for him, I concluded RFK Jr may not be in control of his campaign.
Not that RFK Jr would trade on his father’s horrible assassination that way, or play with fire that way. But what of some people around RFK Jr?
Finding out if there was a call to Aspuiro offering a job, if so from who and where that goes, and exactly why an armed Aspuiro requested to see RFK jr personally (if that report is true), is essential.
I don’t think it would be entirely irrelevant also to get to the bottom of who wrote the first draft of that RFK Jr tweet with “88” in it, and find out what else that individual, upon identification, has been up to.
Greg,
I agree that there is a rat somewhere, and that rat might ("might") be inside the campaign.
However, I personally think it is more likely that Aispiro was directed/entice/lured to show up at the Wilshire Theater by someone outside who recognized a patsy/useful idiot when they saw one. After all, a conspirator/s inside the campaign who contacted Aispiro might have left a trail which might eventually lead back to him/them.
Aispiro apparently did not know whose name to drop once he arrived at the Wilshire Theater and began talking with Kennedy people. That tells me his handler/manipulator was careful. If Aispiro had asked for a specific name, then later investigators might have been able to ferret out who might have given it to him, and thus track the conspirators.
But all in all, you and I and Greg Parker are on the same page: this guy was to be used as the designated patsy/useful idiot, a decoy to distract security while the real hit team went to work.
-
1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:
Armstrong's timeline for Jack Ruby's appearance at the club on the afternoon of 11,22,1963 was confounding relative to high credibility news reporter Seth Kantor's WC testimony where he clearly states he saw Jack Ruby hanging around inside Parkland hospital and actually had a verbal exchange with him during the time of JFK's ER treatment there.
I of course believe Seth Kantor's story.
The WC could not allow Kantor's Jack Ruby Parkland hospital meetup story to be accepted as true in their report. Their published conclusion was that Kantor was hyper-ventilating from all the excitement of the day and simply imagined the Ruby encounter.
Armstrong's timeline testimony regards the exact time of Ruby's appearance at the Carousel has been accepted as fact ... but not so imo.
I will give Armstrong credit for honesty regards his back and forth runs to the toilet in his efforts to awaken Craford from his deep sleep at 12:30 PM on 11,22,1963.
Joe,
You are right that Seth Kantor's belief that he interacted with Jack Ruby at Parkland is credible, and I believe him. Kantor believed that he talked with Ruby during the emergency treatment of the president. In other words, before 1 p.m. Even if Kantor was off by a few minutes, that still times his meeting Ruby by 1:15 or so.
However, I'm not sure Kantor's and Armstrong's accounts of Ruby's movements that afternoon are necessarily exclusive. It's only a ten-minute drive from Dealey Plaza (near where the Dallas Morning New building where Armstrong believed that Ruby called him from) and Parkland Hospital.
From Parkland back to the Carousel Club was only about a 13- or 14-minute drive.
So, could Ruby have called Armstrong from the DMN building (as Armstrong believed), driven to Parkland Hospital where he talked with Seth Kantor (presumably in an effort to find out the president's condition so he could make a decision about closing the Carousel Club) and then driven back to the Carousel Club sometime after 2 pm?
Armstrong testified that Ruby arrived at the Carousel Club within about "five minutes" of the announcement that President Kennedy was dead. If Armstrong was accurate (a big "IF"), then Walter Cronkite's televised announcement at 1:38 would put Ruby at the Carousel around 1:45.
Even if Armstrong was somewhat off about the timing, then it seems reasonable to me that Ruby could have driven from the DMN to Parkland, interacted with Kantor, and then returned to the Carousel in time for Armstrong's testimony to be fairly accurate, but hardly precise.
Was Armstrong 100% accurate in his reconstructed timing? Probably not.
Was he lying, and more importantly, did his testimony exclude the Kantor version of events (which itself may not have been exact in its timing)?
No, at least, not in my opinion.
-
39 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:
Another question I have about Landis's story regards the timeline of it.
Did Landis find the bullet/fragment after Connolly and JFK were removed from the limo and both had been placed on stretchers and rushed into the ER trauma rooms 1 and 2?
If so, at what point was he able to get close enough to either of their stretchers that had been used to get them into their treatment rooms to leave any such found bullet?
Was JFK lifted off his initial ER entrance stretcher and placed on another existing table or gurney more permanently stationed in the trauma room?
If so, I assume JFK's entrance stretcher was then wheeled out into some area of the ER hallways and left unattended enough that Landis was able to find it and place the bullet on it unnoticed?
I guess I am also asking what was the movement record of JFK's entrance stretcher?
When and where did it go if it was removed from trauma room 1 seconds after JFK was lifted off of it?
Same with Governor Connally's initial entrance stretcher.
Landis was obviously among the many Secret Service agents who stationed themselves throughout the ER area during the treatment of JFK and Connally.
And many other people were in that area as well. Hospital personnel, JFK entourage, LBJ and his wife, and who knows who else. Mayor Cabell and his wife were also there.
The entire scene was reported as a super high anxiety and at times confusing one.
I imagine Landis will be asked to provide much more detail about his story from when he first arrived at Parkland...to the second he claims he placed a bullet on any stretcher.
How did he know any stretcher he saw was Kennedy's versus Connally's?
Where was the stretcher when he discovered it?
I read that Landis may be appearing at some type of conference soon?
He is over 80 years old.
I don't think he will actually make that appearance.
The questions presented to him would be so numerous and specific and high energy charged.
But what else would he expect when he publishes his story that claims to totally disrupt the lone gunman finding of the Warren Report?
And if true, would be one of the most major secret truth exposing events in America's history?
Is his "new and improved" version of events meant to explode and thus discredit any and all (legitimate) questions about the provenance of CE 399? What else could explain the MSM's sudden interest in his (inherently implausible) story?
That's what I am thinking for now.
-
3 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:
One thing that is amazing me about Landis is the utter irresponsibility of his attitude and actions. The SS spent at least 5 hours pouring over the limo when it reached the White House Garage in the evening of 11.22.63. But here we have someone blithely claiming they just reached into the limo and took evidence for themself. And nobody seems to care? There's something wrong with this picture...
I agree.
There is something else going on here.
-
11 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:
Interesting.
Aispiro may be just another lost soul in Los Angeles.
But...that is true, as such he would have made a good patsy, ala Sirhan.
My guess is the Deep State does not conduct domestic assassinations anymore.
They can wreck candidates or office holders through media smears, weaponized prosecutorial agencies, show-trial congressional hearings, groups of women alleging sex abuse, and so on.
The RFK2 campaign, and his position on the JFK Records Act, will be a fascinating string of events to follow.
I hope for a peaceful election in all regards.
Ben,
Well, assassination may not be the "first choice" of the Deep State, but I wouldn't rule that tactic out as a last resort for the Deep State.
The bizarre and still unexplained death in 2018 of President Trump's Health and Human Services Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Drug Pricing Reform, Daniel Best, was quickly ruled a "suicide."
Daniel Best, a former drug company executive, "was in the nation’s capital leading the U.S. Health and Human Services Department’s efforts to reduce prescription drug prices".
Best’s violent death came one week after President Donald Trump announced a new drug pricing initiative which would allow Medicare to determine how much it pays for drugs based on what those pharmaceuticals sell for other countries, according to Cleveland.com.
“At long last, the drug companies and foreign countries will be held accountable for how they rigged the system against American consumers,” President Trump said.
Trump Announces Plan to Lower 'Unfair' Prescription Drug Prices | RealClearPolitics
Huh.
So just as the president announced a policy that would have reduced the profits of American pharmaceutical companies by billions of dollars, his point man somehow jumped out a 16th story window at 5 in the morning of a major apartment building in Washington.
Why?
Well, don't married 49-year-old husbands and fathers of three kids (with no known history of depression or anxiety or anything else) always fall victim to the "sads", and just throw themselves out of windows in Washington? Happens all the time, right?
But what is truly mind-blowing is that Best's death received exactly zero, as in none, as in "nothing at all to say or see here, folks" coverage from the following mainstream organizations:
The Washington Post, CBS, NBC, ABC, NPR, Fox News, CNN and the New York Times.
A complete blackout on the suspicious, violent death of a major Trump official in Washington, D.C. by the entire MSM!
That is the surest sign that this man was assassinated by some very powerful Deep State forces.
-
10 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
Is this guy being smoothed over, like another security guard in 1968, Thad Eugene Cesar. In spite of RFK jerking his tie off. Ignored, it didn't do Sirhan any good.
Ron,
Just my guess, but I doubt that Adrian Paul Aispiro would have been the actual shooter, had there been an actual shooting at a RFK event.
I bet his job, whether he knew it or not, was to draw the attention of the security detail. After all, he is a big guy, openly carrying handguns in holsters, prominent tatoos, he's got a strange video from July 31 in which he spells out his (incoherent) political beliefs, he had a federal ID badge prominently displayed on a lanyard (also visible in the July 31 video), etc.
Aispiro comes across as a useful idiot, not as an actual assassin. The real hit team would have been much more sophisticated and almost impossible to detect in advance.
I believe it's more likely that Aispiro's role (again, with or without his knowledge), was to provide a distraction during the shooting, and then to be the designated patsy afterwards.
AS I mentioned to Lori Spencer a couple of days ago, we need to know much more about this guy's recent background - with whom has he been in touch? Who has he corresponded with, especially online?
His brother said that Aispiro told him he "had a private security job" at the RFK appearance. Who told Aispiro that there was a "private security job" for him at that event? As of this moment, there is exactly zero evidence that Aispiro had any contact with anyone associated with the RFK, Jr. campaign.
So, who told him there was a "private security job" for him at that event?
Find the answer to that question, and we'll be well on our way to solving this thing.
-
13 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:
I haven't read his book but just the other day I listened to a long interview of him that the lone gunman podcast posted and, according to him anyway, him and his wife would see Marina with bruises ever so often and sometimes even see Lee with scratches or cuts where she fought him. And he says that he would have conversations with Lee about how he shouldn't be hitting her. But he also talks pretty bad about Marina and how she constantly belittled and nagged Lee openly and how she had been writing letters to an ex boyfriend in Russia and Lee found out about that and was not thrilled to say the least. I don't think Lee was necessarily a violent man but I think Marina was one of those women who can push a man to violence when he's had enough and unfortunately that was a way of life back then. People tended to look the other way when women came up with bruises. If GDM is to be believed on the matter, then they both fought with each other on occasion and when she pushed him hard enough he would lay hands on her some. I get the impression that he never "beat her up", but would maybe slap her or wrestle around with her. I could be wrong about all of that but it's just my own gut instinct. I don't think he ever loved her, but he was a spy and it was probably part of his mission to marry her. Then she constantly badgers him and belittles him. I'm not justifying it if he did lay hands on her, but I don't think she helped matters in that regard either.
That's probably a pretty fair summation of the state of the "Oswald" marriage. In any event, we're not likely to find out any further details, and I doubt it would add to our understanding of the assassination conspiracy.
-
1 hour ago, Jamey Flanagan said:
It's just an educated guess, but I feel like he probably did lay hands on her from time to time. I don't think he beat her regularly but I feel like she provoked him quite a bit and at some point he would break and slap her or lay hands on her. I do not believe in hitting a woman no matter what, so when I say she provoked him I'm not saying she deserved to get hit. But I think she did know that he would eventually snap and hit her at some point from her constant badgering and belittling of him. Mostly this impression comes from George DeMorherndshield (or ever how you spell that, lol!). Not that I believe everything he said but he seemed fairly credible to me on common things like that. He didn't try to bury Lee. If anything he tried to paint him in a better light than most. Not to say he that he didn't say things that contributed to the image of an angry lone nut, but I don't feel like he would just make up LHO beating on Marina.
James,
It's been a while since I read de Mohrenschildt's "I'm Just a Patsy", but if I recall correctly, I don't believe de Mohrenschildt ever claimed to have been an eyewitness to "Oswald" beating his wife. My vague recollection is that Marina complained to de Mohrenschildt (and/or his wife Jeanne) that "Oswald" had hit her, and they tended to believe her.
It's possible "Oswald" really had laid hands on her, but I wouldn't trust anything that Marina said on face value. We just don't know.
-
59 minutes ago, Adam Johnson said:
Anyone here truly believe LHO beat Marina?
The woman packed up and left what little family she had, with a new born baby, no money and a husband that had defected from his home country and agreed to follow him back to that same country not fully knowing what her husbands fate would be, fair chance he could of been imprisoned on arrival back on US soil and she was on her own... Oh and she couldn't speak English....Marina was in her early 20's.
The woman was strong as fkkk in my opinion and nothing I've read her say or heard her say post Nov 22nd 1963 has ever led me to believe she would of allowed LHO to beat her...maybe he tried once? But my guess was she would have taken Lee down and he wouldn't have made that mistake again.
I think she is an impressive woman, but i wouldn't turn my back on her if i felt she thought i could harm her or her family. With that said....
Imagine if she had a lawyer read out a letter upon her passing that stated she was "FSB or KGB if you like" and was tasked with honey trapping LHO then tasked with going to the US and regularly reporting back to Russia and did so for 20/30 years...wouldn't the dooky hit the fan?????
A.J
The basic problem with any theoretical "new" disclosure now by MOP is that even the Warren Commission lawyers recognized 59 years ago that she would and did change her story at will.
As Norman Redlich wrote in 1964: "there is a strong probability that Marina Oswald is in fact a very different person - cold, calculating, avaricious, scornful of generosity, and capable of an extreme lack of sympathy in personal relationships . . . We cannot ignore, however, that Marina Oswald has repeatedly lied on to the Service, the FBI and this Commission on matters which are of vital concern to the people of this country and the world."
HSCA Report, Volume XI (maryferrell.org)
Harold Weisberg called her a "Scheherazade" in his first "Whitewash" book in 1965.
Anything she might say now simply could not be trusted.
-
Just now, Paul Jolliffe said:
Thanks, Joe, for posting that fascinating link.
If she is correct (and she comes across as completely credible), then there was a whole bullet on the president's stretcher beside his head as soon as he was wheeled into Trauma Room 1. She saw the president's party "burst through the doors" of the emergency entrance and then saw the stretchers wheeled down the hallway.
So, either that whole bullet fell out of a head wound on the president (maybe), or someone placed it there almost immediately after the president was loaded onto the stretcher.
Therefore, if the new Landis story is true, then Landis had to have rushed to the limousine as soon as it stopped at Parkland, found the bullet atop the back seat, and then, without thinking, (and without being noticed by anyone) immediately placed that whole bullet on the president's stretcher beside JFK's head even before the stretcher was wheeled through the emergency room entrance.
Yeah, I just don't buy the new and improved Landis version of events.
I'm with Sandy on this: the new Landis story is some kind of "limited hangout" or something designed to be exploded later as patently false, thus silencing questions about the validity of CE399 among the vast majority of the American public.
-
On 9/12/2023 at 2:29 PM, Joe Bauer said:
I remember viewing an interview of one of the Parkland Hospital ER nurses where she mentions seeing a bullet on JFK's stretcher ( gurney? ) next to his head.
Her name was Phyllis Hall.
If her story is true, some may say it bolsters Landis's claim of placing the bullet he found there.
Here is a link to Nurse Hall's recollection statements.
The bullet next to JFK's head part starts a little after the 2 minute mark of the video.
Thanks, Joe, for posting that fascinating link.
If she is correct (and she comes across as completely credible), then there was a whole bullet on the president's stretcher beside his head as soon as he was wheeled into Trauma Room 1. She saw the president's party "burst through the doors" of the emergency entrance and then saw the stretchers wheeled down the hallway.
So, either tha
-
On 9/11/2023 at 11:21 PM, Vince Palamara said:
I am just going to say it: did Landis see/hear this and...you know...
Vince,
When did you first post this interview? Was it right around 11/22/2013?
If so, your reputation as an expert on the Secret Service may well have been known to Paul Landis at that time, and he may have watched your interview with Sam Kinney's friend.
So yes, I agree that your (tacit) thesis is certainly worth consideration - Landis' story today is based on this interview from ten years ago.
-
1 hour ago, Lori Spencer said:
It’s rather an interesting coincidence (?) that the night before a heavily armed man was arrested at RFK’s Los Angeles speech, Kennedy gave a major TV interview about the Paul Landis revelations, called for a real investigation of the JFK Assassination and the release of all JFK Records Act files.
Lori,
Has there been any further information (from any source) in the last couple of days about the suspect's (alleged) possession of a federal officer's ID badge and lanyard?
Has there been any further clarification about the suspect's (alleged) demand that night to be taken to see RFK, Jr, or about the suspect's biography or anything else?
I have seen nothing in the national mainstream media, but that doesn't mean anything. In Los Angeles, is there any further scuttlebutt (no matter how far removed) about the suspect since you and I corresponded a couple of days ago?
Thanks.
-
5 minutes ago, Norman T. Field said:
There are credible stories in Chicago that the MM murder was done by Tony Spilotro and Frank Schweihs due to a request made of Sam Giancana by Joe Kennedy. Frank was then ordered to kill his girl friend after he told her what he had done and she started telling others. Her body was found floating in the Chicago river.
It has also been alleged that MM's house was bugged by Fred Otash and a recording of the event was shared with Giancana.
Since Joe Kennedy, the senior patriarch of the Kennedy family, had suffered a massive stroke on December 19, 1961 which left him paralyzed on the right side and cognitively impaired (he could only articulate the simplest words for years - even as late as May 1964, Time Magazine delicately described his ability to speak as "showing improvement"), it's ludicrous to credit any allegation that Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. had somehow "requested" Giancana to murder Marilyn Monroe in August of 1962.
People: May 22, 1964 - TIME (archive.org)
-
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:
Here is a link to Don McGovern's demolition of Rothmiller.
https://marilynfromthe22ndrow.com/wp/bombshell-the-night-rfk-killed-marilyn/
Thanks for the link, Jim.
I just read the entire piece by Don McGovern.
So, all of the Rothmiller's claims are based on "evidence" that is either contradictory or nonexistent.
No thanks, Michael Griffith.
Rothmiller claimed to have heard Lawford's confession in 1982 yet made no mention of such a confession for four decades and produced exactly zero evidence that any such confession was actually made.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but Rothmiller has produced no evidence at all.
Extreme skepticism if not outright rejection is warranted here.
-
9 hours ago, David Josephs said:
Exactly why, instead, facts are presented in the linked paper... and those same "facts" undo her stories each time.
Anna Lewis... Jan-Apr 1962. or '63 for that matter. Oooops.
David,
1. Do you have any theories as to why the HSCA accepted "Oswald's" trip to Mexico City as a given (and therefore not worthy of checking)?
Your work has clearly demonstrated that the bus trip scenario was fabricated by the FBI after the fact, possibly to conceal a more dangerous fabrication: the CIA's plan to implicate a car-riding "Oswald" and others in a commie-inspired plot to murder the president. But why did the HSCA accept the "Oswald really did travel to Mexico City" scenario without digging into it?
One other question:
2. We all (almost) agree that our Dallas patsy "Oswald" never set foot inside the Cuban diplomatic compound in Mexico City.
But if I've followed you correctly (a big "if"), you believe no one even remotely "Oswaldesque" set foot in either the Cuban Embassy on September 26 or the Cuban Consulate on the 27th.
If I understand your argument, you believe the entire "Oswald" in Mexico City scenario was created after the fact by CIA officials led by David Atlee Phillips.
Is it your belief then that there was not even one deliberate "Oswald" impersonator at either the Embassy on the 26th or the Consulate on the 27th? Or have I misread your position? (I personally suspect there were two different impersonators, possibly for different reasons.)
I mean, Theresa Proenza at the Embassy, and Sylvia Duran and Eusebio Azcue at the Consulate did talk with someone in a memorable fashion on the 26th and the 27th, right? Surely, they were not lying about interacting with someone who claimed to be "Oswald", right?
If the CIA created the entire "Oswald was in Mexico City" scenario after the fact (in early October, say) and no one even remotely "Oswaldesque" ever set foot in either the Embassy or the Consulate, then how do we explain the adamant, persistent beliefs of both Proenza at the Embassy on the 26th and Duran and Azcue at the Consulate on the 27th that they had to deal with someone claiming to be "Oswald"?
(Again, I do not believe our Dallas patsy "Oswald" ever set foot in Mexico City or its environs in 1963.)
David, your clarification of either or both questions would be very helpful to me.
Thanks.
-
Just now, Gerry Down said:
Any word from Lopez as to why there was no map of the Cuban compound in the Lopez report?
No.
I asked Jim DiEugenio if he would ask Lopez. Jim said he would, but apparently has received no answer.
Jim, if you are reading this, could you ask Ed Lopez again, two things:
1. Did the Lopez Report originally have a map of the Cuban Diplomatic Compound in Mexico City?
2. If it did, who removed it and why? If it did not, why not?
-
28 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:
If the CIA controlled Win Scott, then you wouldn't have Angleton heading down to Mexico after Wins death to grab his writings to block them from being published.
That's true. I need to think more about exactly what Win Scott did and did not suspect and/or know about what happened under his nose in Mexico City.
I just over-reacted to your (sloppy) wording.
Your map of the Cuban diplomatic compound in Mexico City seems about right to me.
-
On 8/11/2023 at 1:51 PM, Gerry Down said:
I was simply pointing out fact. The HSCA report or the Lopez report do not make the conclusion that Oswald did not go to Mexico City. Its important that we state facts clearly so as to not confuse newcomers that might be on here. Lopez and Hardiway might have thought Oswald had not been to Mexico City, but their report does not state that conclusion. Its much like how some people to this day think the HSCA report concluded that the Mafia were the prime suspect in the JFK assassination. While Blakely in a personal capacity might think that, the HSCA report itself does not make that conclusion.
Most of your points are valid but do not definitively mean LHO was not in Mexico City. Win Scott says LHO was in Mexico City and they even got a photo of him. Duran says LHO was there. These were people the CIA didn't have control over, especially Duran.
If LHO was not in Mexico city, then that means he lied to Marina about being there. If we establish that LHO was telling lies in this regard, then what else did he lie about?
"Most of your points are valid but do not definitively mean LHO was not in Mexico City. Win Scott says LHO was in Mexico City and they even got a photo of him. Duran says LHO was there. These were people the CIA didn't have control over, especially Duran."
Say what?
"Win Scott" was someone "the CIA didn't have control over"?
He was the CIA Station Chief in Mexico City! He retired as a CIA legend!
Sylvia Duran was tortured to get the "acceptable" version of events inside the Cuban Consulate at the express direction of Win Scott, CIA Station Chief!
They had direct control over her - the CIA told their Mexican goons to physically torture her!
Did you read what you wrote or is it just reflexive with you guys - if anyone points a finger at the CIA, certain guys just come out of the woodwork to deny, obfuscate and mislead, even if what they write is just stupid.
Don't be one of them.
-
8 hours ago, Lori Spencer said:
Lisa Pease and I spent the weekend researching the suspect, Adrian Paul Aispuro.
Here’s what we know so far.
He’s a weird one!
Lori,
So did this guy actually have a fake U.S. Marshall's badge and lanyard, plus a federal ID belt clip, or not?
If he did have a U.S. Marshall's badge and lanyard, were they authentic? If counterfeit, were they professionally done?
We need to see this guy's entire employment history and his recent spending habits, plus his travel history since RFK, Jr. announced his candidacy.
Is this guy some kind of asset for some federal agency?
This is so reminiscent of Mark Lane's assertion that the CIA was responsible for printing Secret Service identification badges in 1963 (and of course, the infamous "Secret Service agent" on the grassy knoll immediately after the shots were fired.)
-
2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
Henry Wade himself went through the front entrance and up the stairs to pop into Ruby's club while it was open.
This according to former Carousel employee Nancy Hamilton.
Wade put on a lousy act of pretending he didn't personally know Jack Ruby during his Dallas PD building news conference late 11,22,1963 and two nights later after Ruby shot Oswald.
To the world press regards the suspect who shot Oswald the late evening of 11,24,1963:
"I believe his name is a "Jack Rubenstein?"
A reporter who observed Ruby interacting with Wade the late evening of 11,22,1963 said to Wade..."It looked like you two ( Ruby and Wade) were good friends.
To which Wade just smiled with a sheepish "hand caught in the cookie jar" guilty grin. He didn't deny the reporter's suggestion.
Come on Wade...you knew Ruby well.
See the video beginning at the 14:30 mark for Wade's disavowal of his acquaintance with Jack Ruby. The smirk is at the 15:52 mark:
-
23 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:
Paul, I agree the Louisiana plates on the car driven by "Nick" could be inconclusive, but the accent detail as from either New Orleans or Boston supports a New Orleans origin for "Nick" consistent with those Louisiana plates.
A check of US dialect maps (e.g. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/597712181777277236/) shows you are right that east Texas is the same as Louisiana dialect--except for New Orleans which is distinctive from the rest of Louisiana/east Texas. You can see on most of the dialect maps the area of New Orleans has a marked dialect of its own.
I see a lot written on New Orleans' distinctive dialect and the history and reasons for that. Check this article: "How New Orleans got its accent", https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2005/09/how-new-orleans-got-its-accent.html.
"If you’ve been listening to coverage of Katrina’s devastation on the radio, you’ve no doubt heard the distinctive New Orleans accents of victims, officials, and rescue workers alike. Some of them speak with a familiar, Southern drawl; others sound almost like they’re from Brooklyn. Why do people in New Orleans talk that way? ..."
So the reference by Estes to a "New Orleans" (not Louisiana but "New Orleans") accent, and that he somehow thought it sounded like someone who could be from "Boston", is not imaginary but has a basis in reality. He pointed out the accent of "Nick", unlike any of his other characters, because it was memorable or stood out to him, differing from how most people in Dallas were talking.
Meanwhile, here are Joe Turman's books including the one about his boxer brother Buddy: https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AJOE+GARNER+TURMAN.
Greg,
Thanks for the dialect map. While not definitive, "Nick's" apparent New Orleans accent (according to Estes, himself a native of Tennessee and a recent transplant to Texas) calls for more investigation.
In any event, the reason you and I are even discussing this minor point 59 years later is solely the fault of the FBI: they compiled the list of Ruby's phone contacts, including those so important to him that he carried those names and numbers about with him on his person. They knew of one "Nick Turman". They interviewed "Buddy" Turman, who had a brother named "Nickie Turman."
Now, in an honest investigation, the FBI might have asked "Buddy" a few simple questions about (Ie. Why did Jack Ruby have the name of "Buddy's" brother and a phone number? Did Buddy Turman's brother have anything to do with Jack Ruby? etc.)
Maybe one of the other Turman brothers was also employed or known to Jack Ruby.
We don't know because the FBI did not ask even the simplest questions of Buddy Turman.
There is only one reasonable conclusion: the FBI didn't ask because they didn't want to know the answer.
No one can say for certain who "Nick Turman" was and thanks to the FBI's total failure to investigate even the simplest question (Who is this guy on Ruby's list?), none of us can ever be sure.
Maybe "Nick" was some mob-connected gangster from New Orleans. Or maybe not. We do know that Estes witnessed some kind of payoff/bribe to newly elected governor John Connally (escorted by Jim Leavelle) in August of 1963 upstairs in the office of Jack Ruby's nightclub.
Whoever "Nick" was, he was physically handling the money delivered to Connally.
Prayer Man More Than A Fuzzy Picture
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Gerry,
As I mentioned earlier, the whole "Truly and Baker raced up the back stairs within a minute or so of the shots" narrative is extremely suspect, in my opinion.
What Lovelady stated to the HSCA (that he saw Truly and Baker race up the back stairs) would be correct if Baker and Truly did not start their ascent for three or four minutes or so after the assassination.
If I'm right, then neither Adams or Lovelady or Shelley were consciously lying - but Baker and Truly sure were!