Steve Roe

Tom, Kennedy's policy towards Vietnam is a very complex issue. To understand it does require reading and studying if you really want to grasp what Kennedy was faced with. Selverstone's book outlines the emerging policy changes in the Kennedy administration. I'm now reading the book, about 1/3 of the way through. What I can say so far is that Selverstone carefully outlines this meticulously. Your 6 points of Michael's comments look correct. Although he has read the book in full, I'm sure I would agree with him on his points once I have finished reading. There was a plan by McNamara in place. It was a plan contingent on current circumstances that could be changed or adjusted in the volatile situation in South Vietnam under Diem. Was Kennedy going to cut and run out of Vietnam? Absolutely not, he remained committed to supporting the stop of communist aggression in that country. Here's what Oliver Stone apologists will not show you. Kennedy approved the overthrow of Diem, a coup. It went badly of course, resulting in Diem's and Nhu's death. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A503eoKwLhY&t=191s

Michael, I have not read the Selverstone book. However, I did watch a couple of videos of him today explaining his research and findings in the book. Here's one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVZKe68bwTk The key to his research is the actual Kennedy tapes. I believe Selverstone has merit in this case of Kennedy's handling of Vietnam. This is solid scholarship and not the Oliver Stone's bogus pop culture "JFK was killed because he was pulling out of Vietnam". Agreed on the phony Fletcher Prouty that was exposed in the ARRB findings. Don't get me started on the silly "Destiny Betrayed" film. There are other history scholars out there that make similar conclusions on Kennedy's management of Vietnam in the same vein. I think Mr. Selverstone puts it all into a clearer light based on solid grounding. Reading through some of the sophomoric comments directed at you regarding Selverstone, is just sad and unwarranted. Of course, this pulls the rug right out of Stone's nutty fantasy JFK films, and understandably there will be blowback from DiEugenio and his followers. FWIW, I agree with you and will buy the book, providing there is a Kindle version. Thank you for bringing this important body of work to our attention.

Yes, Nagell had a list of CIA men upon his arrest for the El Paso Bank robbery. It came to the CIA's attention in 1964. The CIA denied Nagell ever worked for the CIA, they were concerned about cover on these operatives if it became public knowledge. Nagell was in Army Intel in Japan, after his plane crash which he suffered brain damage. Nagell was dismissed from that position. See Dave Reitzes Nagell link under Jonathan Cohen's post. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=103975#relPageId=83&search=Nagell

Tom you are absolutely correct and good analysis. The other evidence is Silvia Duran. I'm running out of time today, but here's a document stating Oswald showed her his passport about his time in Russia, among other documents proving he was in Russia. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59595#relPageId=56&search=bus_manifest

Reading through Mr. Josephs' denial statements that Oswald never went to Mexico City, here's one of his many huge blunders. Mr. Josephs implies that the Aussie girls, Mumford in particular, were fed false information regarding Oswald's passport. If you recall the Aussie girls said Oswald showed them his passport that he travelled in Russia. Mr. Josephs takes issue with that. However, Oswald did show his 1959 passport, as well he had his 1963 new passport. Why/How? His original 1959 passport was cancelled and returned to him. This is nothing out of the ordinary. I have most of my cancelled passports over the years. Mr. Josephs has been debunked on this baseless claim trying to create another false mystery. Proof: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=197182#relPageId=14&search=Oswald_passport

Although I don't agree this violates forum rules Sandy, I did delete the comment (in red).

Do you want further proof Oswald was in Mexico? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=96924#relPageId=4&search="bus_ticket stub" How about this Mexico City map found in Oswald's possessions? (5:00 minute mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNJIpf6JWaw Time to get back into reality, Oswald went to Mexico City.

Well, shouldn't everyone here see the entire 4-page Nagell document or not? You said, "Maybe send this to (Dick) Russell to close the loop". No, send the entire document in full context to Dick Russell. It clearly states Nagell was mentally unstable. There's nothing conspiratorial about it. Harvey and Lee Reality? Are you kidding me?

Well congratulations David, your Nagell claim has been debunked. The document was found in the Malcolm Blunt archives.

The Prayer-Blob theory is just a wishful fantasy. A researcher friend of mine asked Buell Frazier (who was just a few feet away from Prayer-Blob) and said he didn't see Oswald on the steps. No one else saw Oswald on the steps.

Paul, if you are referring to Oswald writing Silvia Duran's name in his notebook while he was in Mexico City follow this link. He also wrote down the address of Cubana Airlines in MXC. He was there, absolutely no doubt. https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth346819/m1/45/?q=Oswald's book

1. No Ok, where was Oswald, or Harvey or Lee during the Mexico City episode? 2. Copies of Oswald's notebook provided by FBI... one does wonder, cause, like, the evidence is always authenticated in this case, right? Especially when the FBI is the source. One doesn't have to wonder David, surely you don't believe the FBI planted or wrote Ms. Duran's name in his notebook, do you? 3. Not a matter of belief Mr. Roe Ok, not a belief, but an undeniable fact in your mind, right? You aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know.... Pretty big assumption you make there. I'm giving you a chance to explain the alternative, and so far, it just doesn't add up.

David Josephs, bottom line. Was Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City? If not, how do you explain Silvia Duran's name in Oswald's notebook? Are you still believer in Harvey and Lee?

Lance, once again we catch DiEugenio spinning whoppers and trying to get his dwindling followers to go after you and DVP. Playing the silly forum parlor game of "ignore" on you, DVP, Tracy and myself, is embarrassing as everyone knows here, he reads these posts. I have no idea why he keeps insulting all the forum member's intelligence with these childish games of pretend. As I have stated many times on this forum, DiEugenio is engaged in the "Conspiracy Story Telling" business. I have serious doubts he actually believes a lot of what he promotes on this forum and his conspiracy theory site, K&K. Again, we see DiEugenio referring to the old debunked "Back of the Head" wound. The autopsy photos show otherwise, and the big leap of fanatical faith is to believe they were faked. Furthermore, DiEugenio goes into the Stringer issue and the extremely laughable "Invasion of the Brain Snatchers" theory substituting another brain for Kennedy's. Here's what DiEugenio will never show his dwindling supporters. Dr. Randy Robertson, a certified radiologist and longtime conspiracy believer, viewed the actual autopsy photos and x-rays with permission of the Kennedy family in 2015. You can read his article here: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/robertson.htm To highlight his conclusions: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #1. Autopsy photographers Stringer and Riebe, intentionally misled official governmental investigators about the true forensic nature of the images contained on the roll of exposed 120 film. Their motivation, as well as that for Kellerman’s early attempt to destroy these duplicative images, remains unknown. #2. Parkland physician Dr. Robert McClelland and many others were mistaken in their memories as to the exact size and nature of the wound to the back of the President’s head, as it appears in Dr. McClelland’s diagrammatic depiction. Both the original autopsy photographs and radiographs show the actual extent of the wounds. This does not impugn the veracity of any other observations that Dr. McClelland has made. #3. Again, the original photographs and radiographs provide a degree of fidelity unchallengeable by any eyewitness attempts to describe the wounds to the President’s head in any manner. There are no internal discrepancies between the original and newly available photographs taken at the same time during the autopsy, or between any of the individual photographs or radiographs. Two cameras were simultaneously recording the true condition of the President’s body at the start of the autopsy. I can attest with absolute conviction that all these materials are authentic and unchanged since they were taken the night of the autopsy. Randolph Robertson M.D. November 2015 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There was absolutely NO back of the head wound. The photos, x-rays were all legit and not doctored, faked or whatever. Naturally this is important information, but as usual, DiEugenio who is aware of this, will not address it. In fact, Dr. Randy Robertson was in the Stone/DiEugenio Destiny Betrayed cartoon film series. Do you think Stone/DiEugenio wanted to include this? Of course not, because it destroys a big majority of the silly claims, they make in the cartoon about Dr. Malcolm Perry, etc. This is the kind of chicanery that Stone/DiEugenio engaged in with the "Conspiracy Story Telling" money making fraud of Destiny Betrayed.

Lopez? Who are you referring to? Azcue, Duran?

Read Fred Litwin's article on the brain in Lance's post. That explains it in a logical and reasonable manner. But more importantly, as Lance as pointed out......what's the deal with Bethesda embedded cover up conspirators with a mundane brain weight? This gets to the heart and soul of just how far does this crazy conspiracy go? Do you really think there were secret cover-up artists at Bethesda? If you do believe that, then you have the biggest well-oiled conspiracy known to man. I don't think Cecil B. DeMille could imagine a "Cast of Thousands" like Stone/DiEugenio do. There must have been a Pre-Assassination meeting somewhere to get everyone in sync. Perhaps they held it at the Orange Bowl.

Lance, DiEugenio is fixated on this goofy brain business. He repeats it ad nauseam. It's all part of his "Conspiracy Story Telling" side-hustle business to promote conspiracy theories. Sadly, there are folks on this forum who actually believe him. If you go to his K&K website, he has a lot of "Harvey & Lee" authors, including one of his latest on Paul Gregory, James Norwood. Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee" book is pure crackpottery. No wonder Malcolm Blount split the sheets with Armstrong when he went off into this complete nonsensical fantasy.

His Cuban Visa application. Mirabal (Cuban Consulate in MXC) testified to the HSCA that he saw the application and it was legit. It was Oswald, no doubt.

Joe I'm surprised by your statement of not seeing credible evidence that Oswald went to Mexico City. I'm not sure where you were researching, but it's JFK 101 that everyone knows Silvia Duran's name is in Oswald's notebook. He was most certainly there in Mexico City, and there's other physical items of proof. https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth346819/m1/45/?q="Oswald book" It is true that outgoing Cuban Consulate Azcue said he believed it wasn't Oswald, however incoming Cuban Consulate Mirabal said it was Oswald, in HSCA testimony.

Oh boy......here comes the Big Brother stuff again. Gatekeepers, enemies for free speech, authoritarianism restricting free speech? Wow! Just wow!

DiEugenio, you really embarrassed yourself again with that comment. I know you are super busy spreading conspiracy nonsense all over the Education Forum, but at least read and understand her article. It sailed right over your head. If Ms. Long laid an egg, you took it and smashed it all over your face with your inability to comprehend what she said.

Agree that Oswald was in Mexico City. There's lots of evidence to support that he did. For example, Oswald had Silvia Duran's name and number is his notebook. But let's remember, Oswald went to the Cuban Consulate first. It was this phony story Oswald made up about going back to Russia via Cuba he told the Cubans. Oswald had no intention of going back to Russia, PERIOD! Oswald wanted to go to Cuba. It was then the Cubans told him that he needed a Transit Visa from Russia so he could make the stop in Cuba. Then you know the rest of the story, the Russians would not grant him a quick transit visa back to the place Oswald grew tired of. All of this crazy stuff that Oswald was an Intelligence operative and witting defector is complete fantasy.

Lance, is this the Ed Lopez article you were referring to in the AARC Quarterly? Page 6 of PDF Item 01.pdf (hood.edu)

DiEugenio is doing his usual ego boasting with 2,000 impressions on Twitter, yet only 1 person has responded, they wanted clarification on what he was referring to in the Lopez Report. DiEugenio is conflating his importance again. You might be curious about what does impressions mean on Twitter that's why you stumbled on this article. In the simplest terms, your Twitter impressions indicate how many times your tweet has been seen. To put it another way, 500 impressions mean your tweet was seen 500 times. Notably, your Twitter impressions figure does not account for how many people saw your tweet using third-party services (such as Hootsuite or Sprout Social) or how many people saw your tweet embedded on a website. But there's always a but! - This does not imply that your tweet has been seen by 500 people.

A perfect example of this is Mr. DiEugenio's "Destiny Betrayed" 2nd edition book. I had the misfortune to suffer reading through that book. Countless citations to other conspiracy book authors as if it were fact. Then all the sinister mysteries such as Rose Cheramie, the Cuban Doctor in Pennsylvania, on and on.... that Mr. DiEugenio never tries to relate to each other to make sense. Enough of Mr. DiEugenio today. I believe most reasonable people see the conspiracy story telling charade that he's engaged in.