Anthony Frank

Golly Jack! If you actually do read EVERY word, you would see that the post did not say that long messages get NO attention. It said that long posts don't get much attention. And by that I meant that people don't respond much to long postings. But maybe you were just trying to be contentious with me, Jack.

Oswald was definitely not in Mexico as he was alleged to be in early October. On Monday, December 2, 1963, three days after the New York Times reportthat Oswald had taken a "mysterious trip to Mexico before returning to Dallas," the Washington Post reported that Mrs. Paine said Oswald phoned his wife on October 4, 1963, “and related that upon leaving New Orleans, he had scouted around Houston for a job without success and had been looking around in Dallas the last few days.” (Washington Post, 12-2-63, page 3) No one was ever inclined to think that Oswald had actually been in Houston when he was supposedly taking “a mysterious trip to Mexico.” Mrs. Paine’s statement that Oswald phoned his wife on October 4th and said that after leaving New Orleans he looked for a job in Houston before “looking around in Dallas the last few days,” was eclipsed by the intriguing allegation three days earlier that “Oswald returned to Dallas early in October after a mysterious trip to Mexico” and it was at that point that he allegedly “began looking for work.” The alleged mysterious trip before the alleged return to Dallas was attributed to “persons who saw him daily at that time,” but the fact is, persons who saw him daily at that time were planning to kill President Kennedy after having Oswald take a job at the Texas School Book Depository, after which they would blame Oswald and then kill him too. After Kennedy was assassinated, Federal interest in David Ferrie had “waned” when the FBI determined that he “had gone to Houston rather than Dallas.” (New York Times, 2-23-67, page 22) When Jim Garrison’s investigation became public on February 17, 1967, David Ferrie, identified as the focus of the investigation, stated, “Supposedly I have been pegged as the getaway pilot in an elaborate plot to kill Kennedy.” (New York Times, 2-23-67, page 22) Four days after Garrison’s investigation was publicized, David Ferrie was dead and Jim Garrison stated, “Evidence developed by our office had long since confirmed that he was involved in events culminating in the assassination of President Kennedy.” When Jim Garrison arrested New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw on March 1, 1967, he said that Shaw, Ferrie, and Oswald had been part of a plot to kill Kennedy. (New York Times, 3-3-67, page 22) Eighty-one days later, Jim Garrison stated categorically that Oswald did not kill President Kennedy and that the CIA knows who did. Ferrie and Oswald, who had both gone to Houston, were dead and they wouldn’t be giving anyone details that would show there was an elaborate plot to kill Kennedy. Neither of them would saying who else had played a role in the fact that they had each gone to Houston. Houston was a key part of the plan to kill Kennedy.

I've tried to paint clear pictures about who did it and why with lots of clear evidence, but the lengthy posts did not get much attention. And by the way, if you click "Edit," you can delete the information on the duplicate post.

Ron Brown's death is not part of this.

A word of advice, Lily. You should make your posts short and direct. Long posts don't get much attention. Be succinct and to the point. Rambling (or "rants") detracts from that. But welcome to the forum! Tony P. S. Johnson did not do it. If you think his caliber was such that he would arrange the assassination of the President he served under (even though he didn't like him) just so he could be President for 5 years, you are mistaken.

Thanks Ron.... The civil rights movement had grown through the 1950s and was reaching its height by 1963, but Barry Goldwater, as a segregationist, opposed it and Goldwater’s support was mainly in the South, where civil rights and integration were vehemently opposed. Exploiting the racial tension was the conspirator’s primary focus to incite the masses and cause turmoil in the United States. The fact that 100 years earlier the United States was embroiled in a civil war over the rights of African-Americans was undoubtedly not lost on them. As I pointed out more than once, if they had succeeded in killing Johnson on October 31, 1964, then Barry Goldwater would have won the election three days later. Before they killed Kennedy, Goldwater's supporters contended that he would "sweep the South." If they assassinated Johnson, liberal Representative John W. McCormack of Massachusetts would have become President and would not have taken one state in the South, nor would he have won the electoral prize of California, the state that was conservative enough in the mid-1960s to elect Ronald Reagan as its Governor. You made a very good point with regards to Kennedy, the South, and civil rights. Tony

Antti, The KGB infiltrated the CIA, not the FBI. I never said they infiltrated the FBI. There were 497 KGB officers in the CIA and over 800 double agents who were exposed in 1984 and it was never made public. I know because I tried to expose them for 7 years before everything fell into place in 1984. It was after the death of House Speaker Sam Rayburn in November 1961, and the subsequent election of liberal Representative John W. McCormack of Massachusetts to be Speaker of the House in January 1962, that they actually came up with the idea of killing President Kennedy and then killing President Johnson right before the election. The 25th Amendment to the Constitution, providing for Presidential succession and the appointment of a new Vice President, didn’t become part of the Constitution until February 1967. There was no Vice President on Saturday, October 31, 1964. The law of succession would have resulted in House Speaker John McCormack of Massachusetts becoming President had they succeeded in assassinating President Johnson on Saturday, October 31, 1964. The KGB officers had begun handling intelligence officers targeted for political office starting in the early 1950s, and Barry Goldwater was one of the intelligence officers. As I've stated before, their intention was to have far-right Senator Barry Goldwater elected so that they could exasperate the tense racial situation. They were also counting on Goldwater's support for right-wing dictatorships in third world countries, which would in turn foster communist insurgencies. If they succeeded in killing Johnson, Goldwater would have been elected President 3 days later. The KGB officers that were in the CIA killed President Kennedy. The actual shooters were two of the KGB officers and a double agent. Tony

Actually, there's a conspiracy not to persecute us so we won't know how important we are. lol

There's no political points in going after Castro. He's not committing any atrocities. Neither Bush Sr nor Clinton had any motive to get Castro. George W. Bush has no motive either. It would hurt George W. Bush, as people don't see Castro as a threat. Castro doesn't even get any press here in the states. The only news about Cuba is the possible relaxation of trade sanctions.

Quote (Terry Mauro on 7/05/04) It is true that Goldwater was very radical. The only states that went to Goldwater in 1964, besides his home state of Arizona, were five Southern segregationist states; Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina. But as I have cited many times, the people that killed President Kennedy were also planning on killing President Johnson on Saturday, October 31, 1964, so that Goldwater would win the election on Tuesday, November 3, 1964. What stopped them was the fact that the Suffolk County Police discovered their fall guy. On October 31, 1964, Suffolk County Police arrested Robert Babcock 300 yards from Republic Aviation Corporation in New York, where President Johnson stepped from his plane on the company’s airstrip eight minutes later. He was arrested because he had a telescopic rifle on the seat beside him and a loaded shotgun in his trunk. Detectives spotted him in a routine check and took him into custody twenty minutes before the President passed by. [see Dallas Morning News, 11/1/64, page 10, & New York Times, 11/1/64, page 78] “The President’s motorcade had been expected to make a number of stops along the motorcade route . . .” Robert Babcock was questioned by Suffolk County Police and the Secret Service, and “said first that he had been going on a hunting trip when he decided to stop and see the motorcade. He then said he made a bet with barroom acquaintances that he could do what he did without being detected.” “He was charged with disorderly conduct and jailed for the night.” There were no bullets for the telescopic rifle, which would have been conducive to persuading him to take this action, but that would be easily rectified, and Robert Babcock would have found it impossible to understand how the murder weapon could be alleged to have been in his possession, and why the loaded shotgun in his trunk made him look more guilty. The Suffolk County Police gave an alibi to a man who wasn’t supposed to have one, a man who was intrinsic to a Presidential assassination, and the “Secret Service” was so easily appeased because they knew their plans had gone awry and they wanted this to receive as little attention as possible. Where, when, why, and how he obtained the weapons, or if he owned them, was instantaneously of no significance, and the anonymous “barroom acquaintances” that persuaded him to take this action by making a bet with him remained anonymous, while he was simply charged with “disorderly conduct.” The easily duped Mr. Babcock could’ve simply driven to the area of the first scheduled stop after one or more of the “barroom acquaintances” told him where it was. They could have also told him that where he would park wasn’t actually near the first scheduled stop. Or he could have even been told to first park along the motorcade route, and then drive a certain distance behind the motorcade as it traveled to the area of the first scheduled stop as part of the bet. The “barroom acquaintances” were undoubtedly sure that he intended to carry out their plans as he left. As he embarked on his daring venture, his instigators could have also said, “We know nothing’s going to happen but if it does, just get in your car and get out of there,” which would have been very conducive to making it look like he was the assassin. Pulling out their money and saying, “We’ll see you when you get back, and we’ll know if you didn’t do it,” would have affirmed Robert Babcock’s idea that he was going to come into some easy money with a simplistic act. Whatever the exact details of this assassination plan were, one thing is certain; those who assassinated President Kennedy were going to assassinate President Johnson on October 31, 1964, and Robert Babcock was going to be the accused assassin. What is also crystal clear from the details given, is that a man can be paid money to sit along the motorcade route of the President of the United States with a telescopic rifle on the seat beside him and a loaded shotgun in the trunk, and the United States “Secret Service” will do nothing but charge him with disorderly conduct and jail him for the night. After Kennedy was assassinated the prevailing opinion from politicians of both parties and even among Goldwater’s own supporters, was that only a moderate Republican, not the ultra-conservative Barry Goldwater, could defeat President Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 election. Obviously, assassinating President Johnson on Saturday, October 31, 1964, would’ve easily rectified this problem and assured that Barry Goldwater would be elected President of the United States on Tuesday, November 3, 1964. The 25th Amendment to the Constitution, providing for Presidential succession and the appointment of a new Vice President, didn’t become part of the Constitution until February 1967. There was no Vice President on Saturday, October 31, 1964. Representative John W. McCormack of Massachusetts, elected Speaker of the House in January 1962 after House Speaker Sam Rayburn died, would have become President, and no state in the South, nor the state that would elect Ronald Reagan as Governor in 1966, conservative California, “the heart of Western conservatism” that flourished in the mountain states, would be going to the liberal Representative from Massachusetts, who would have two days to convince people that he should be President; two days to convince people that his thirty-four months as Speaker of the House made him more qualified to be President of the United States than the well-traveled high-profile Barry Goldwater. Liberal Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota, who was President Johnson’s running mate, certainly wouldn’t have fared much better in a race with Barry Goldwater, and there would have been mass confusion on November 3, 1964, as people voted in a contest between a dead President and Barry Goldwater. People who were determined to vote against Goldwater would have to figure out whether they were trying to elect President McCormack or, if when they voted for the Johnson-Humphrey ticket, they were trying to elect Hubert Humphrey to the Office of President. Were they trying to elect President McCormack while electing Hubert Humphrey to the Office of Vice President, or were they trying to elect one of them to the Office of President while not electing anyone to the Office of Vice President? If Senator Humphrey declared that he had a better chance of defeating Barry Goldwater, or if he declared that he was entitled to be the nominee, it certainly would have compounded the confusion during the two days that “President McCormack” would have had in which to announce his candidacy. Devout opponents of Barry Goldwater would have to tune in to the news, read the newspapers on Sunday and Monday, and try to find out from polling officials just who and what they were voting for as they futilely tried to prevent Barry Goldwater from being elected President. The “Secret Service” would have realized their goal of having Barry Goldwater elected President. Robert Babcock’s story about a bet with “barroom acquaintances” wouldn’t have helped him any more than a letter to “President Goldwater” stating, as a very upset Lee Harvey Oswald once said, “I emphatically deny these charges.” And let's not forget that the fall guy in Kennedy's assassination was encouraged too. On January 19, 1970, “Senator Richard B. Russell, Democrat of Georgia, said today he never believed Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy without at least some encouragement from others . . . The 72-year-old Senator made the statements to newsmen in response to questions prompted by an article in the Washington Post based on a series of taped interviews he recorded . . . Senator Russell said the Warren Commission was not able to investigate specifically the source of such possible encouragement, and he added he could not pinpoint it.” [see New York Times, 1/20/70, page 16] There you have it. They were going to kill Johnson right before the election to make sure Goldwater was elected President. Tony

As for McCone claiming that Oswald did not work for the CIA, declassified Warren Commission documents show that on January 27, 1964, less than two months after the cover-up team was established, Russell and Warren Commission member Allen W. Dulles, former Director of the CIA, discussed whether the directors of the FBI and the CIA “would truthfully answer questions on whether Lee Harvey Oswald had ever worked for either of their agencies.” (New York Times, 11-23-74, page 48) Dulles, the former CIA Director, said, “I think under any circumstances, I think Mr. Hoover would say certainly he didn’t have anything to do with this fellow . . . I would tell the President of the United States anything. Yes, I am under his control. I wouldn’t necessarily tell anybody else, unless the President authorized me to do it.” Russell stated, “If Oswald never had assassinated the President, or at least been charged with assassinating the President and had been in the employ of the FBI and somebody had gone to the FBI, they would have denied he was an agent,” to which Dulles responded, “Oh, yes.” Russell then said, “They would be the first to deny it. Your agents would have done exactly the same thing,” and Dulles replied, “Exactly.” Obviously, Russell and Dulles, of all people, decided that they couldn’t determine if Oswald worked for the CIA.

I couldn't even bring up the website yesterday. I think that's when they were redoing the website.

When I tried to login as Tony Frank I got an error message about vaidation email and I had to register a new user name. Anyone else ever had that problem? Tony

Quote (Jack White on July 3) Jack, Bernice, & Wim, Maybe you didn't read the last part of my post. It read: "Doesn't it make sense that the parties culpable in JFK's death were planning on killing Johnson right before the 1964 election so that far-right Senator Barry Goldwater would be elected President? The Military Industrial Complex would have been much better off with Barry Goldwater as President. Tony