Jump to content
The Education Forum

Harvey and Lee: John Armstrong


Recommended Posts

Steve,

One major error in that article:

6. The new autopsy appeared to answer all the doubts that it was Oswald in the

grave. But, incredibly, this has now come into question. The skull shows no

signs of the original 1963 autopsy. Switched heads? It's all getting too crazy!

This probably comes from Jack White/Groody, but it is easy to see the craniotomy incision just to the left of the ID tag. Unless you are postulating something bogus with the 1981 examination:

http://wtracyparnell.com/jack-white-and-the-lho-exhumation-photos/

Correction back. That is a ref note and should be looked at in context (below)

PLEASE SEE POST # 1134 above. ,

If Eddowes is acting like an intelligent asset said hypothesis of Oswald acted alone is false. , gaal

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Eddowes' book, November 22nd: How They Killed Kennedy (3) suggested that Lee

Harvey Oswald had been replaced by a look-a-like KGB agent when he went to the

Soviet Union. (4) Following this to its logical conclusion, Eddowes reportedly spent

over $10,000 in October 1981 on legal fees and exhumation costs involved in reopening

Oswald's grave. (5) He arranged for a new autopsy with the consent of Marina

Porter (Oswald) to see if the grave contained Oswald or a double. (6) Inevitably such

ideas have meant that Eddowes has been portrayed as an 'assassination loony'. But he

had at one time been a respected solicitor; obtained a Royal Pardon for Timothy Evans

who was mistakenly hanged for the Christie murders; and wrote a best-selling book on

the case, A Man On Your Conscience.

Was Eddowes just muddying the water with disinformation on the assassination, or

had he really uncovered evidence to confirm his theories?

========================================================

Sexual Blackmail http://kkooporation.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html

Judging from Washington's perennial sex scandals, power truly is the ultimate aphrodisiac - to paraphrase that seventies-epoch Casanova, Henry Kissinger, in a slightly different context. For young wonks and old goats alike, political prowess tends to breed hubris and hormones.

Not surprisingly, then, in the nation's pulsing capital, the fine art of sexual blackmail has what you might call "a history."

The pioneering figure of Washington "sexmail" was that creepiest of peeping G-men, J. Edgar Hoover. Thanks to his infamous sex files, which contained dirt on just about everyone in Washington short of his shoeshine boy, Hoover managed to dominate the capital (and eight presidents) for nearly half a century.

Not surprisingly, Hoover's busiest period came while John F. Kennedy occupied the White House and its many bedrooms. By several accounts, when rumors were rampant that Kennedy was going to pinkslip the aging, annoying FBI chief, Hoover put his plenary Kennedy files to work, thereby saving his own hide. With an obsession more than verging on the pathological, Hoover had bugged JFK's legion love nests and tapped the princess phones of assorted Kennedy playmates, including mob moll Judith Campbell Exner and superstarlet Marilyn Monroe - whose bedroom was purportedly heavily trafficked by both Kennedy brothers.

The bug-eyed Hoover also glommed onto in-flight tapes of Jack and actress Angie Dickinson summiting in the boudoir of a chartered aircraft. Typically playing both sides against the middle, Hoover leaked info to the tabloid press about an old Kennedy affair with a senate secretary and about Kennedy's rumored former marriage, and then "put Kennedy in his debt by supplying background for the Newsweek rebuttal," according to journalist Anthony Summers.

When it came to recording Jack and Bobby's compromising positions, Hoover had company. The Mafia and Jimmy Hoffa also managed to plant electronic bedroom ears in Marilyn Monroe's inner sanctum, especially at roue actor and Kennedy in-law Peter Lawford's beach house.

Hoover used the same tactics in his vendetta against Martin Luther King, Jr., bugging the civil rights leader's tryst spots with assorted paramours, spreading untrue gossip that King was a "switch-hitter," even marshaling surveillance photographs of King in the same room as a known - GASP - homosexual. Transcripts were leaked to the press, but the media didn't bite.

Hoover even had a bimbo file on Richard Nixon, of all the unlikely party animals. As Anthony Simmers reports in his revisionist Hoover biography, Official and Confidential, while Nison was vice president, he met a young Hong Kong travel guide named Marianna Liu. Convinced that Liu was a spy for communist China (a "Chicom"), the CIA had British intelligence train its infrared camera lenses on Nixon's bedroom window during his visits to Hong Kong. Liu and Nixon swore to Summers that there was never any sex, but Hoover was described as reading the Nixon-Chicom file "gleefully" and showing it to Dick before be became president.

Never one to let "evidence" get in the way of salacious innuendo, Hoover later came up with a report claiming that future Watergate boys H. R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, and Dwight Chapin were homosexual lovers. This was in 1969, before Watergate, and Hoover's source, an unidentified bartender, was claiming that the three were whooping it up at homosexual parties in the Watergate hotel. Of course, it wasn't true, and as Ehrlichman told Summers, "I came to think that Hoover did this to show his claws, or ingratiate himself to Nixon - probably both."

In Washington, what going around come around, and Hoover's actual homosexuality was hardly a secret among his numerous enemies. Mob boss Meyer Lansky liked to boast that he "fixed that son of a bitch" Hoover, purportedly by acquiring graphic photos of Hoover fellating his lifelong companion, Clyde Tolson. According to Summers, by the late 1940s there were also pictures of Hoover vamping as a closet drag queen. Even that quintessential CIA garbologist, counterspy catcher James Jesus Angleton was in on the act, purportedly having his mits on incriminating Hoover sex pics.

Blackmail or not, the mob's sway over Hoover was enormous: Publicly, the all-American, morally unimpeachable lingerie-wearing FBI director refused to admit that the Mafia even existed.

Hoover went to his grave more than two decades ago, taking his voluminous "personal and confidential" sex files with him. Of course they mysteriously vanished, giving rise to assorted conspiracy theories, including the possibility that Hoover loyalists destroyed them, that the CIA snatched them up, and even that Nixon's Watergate Plumbers made a bungled attempts to get their hot little mits on the explosive cache.

So, with Hoover out of the picture, is sexual extortion in Washington merely a historical idiosyncrasy, like Hoover, and the Kennedys, the product of a more reckless era?

Well, sexual blackmail may have a more enduring place in Washington politics than we ten to suspect. More than one vice investigator in Washington believes that mob-controlled call girls, intelligence operatives, and even Washington lobbyists have long run an underground racket aimed at sexually compromising Congress and the administration. Conspiracy researcher Peter Dale Scott calls it "an ongoing, highly organized, and protected operation." Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and professor of English at the University of California, Berkeley, goes so far as to suggest that Washington's sex syndicate, exploited by intelligence spooks and the mob, has "driven the major scandals of Washington since at least the beginning of the Cold War."

Apparently, behind every good political scandal is a prostitute. Scott isn't alone in this thinking. According to Scott, "a retired Washington detective, one who played a small but important role in Watergate," believes that mob pimps and bigwig lobbyists use pricey call girls to put the squeeze on key officials. This is apparently a reference to Carl Shoffler, incidentally the arresting police officer who slapped cuffs on the Watergate burglars.

During a 1982 investigation into the use of "drugs and sexual activity to lobby congressmen," Shoffler did indeed advise congressional investigators to look into a male prostitution ring that serviced Capitol Hill. The veteran police detective believed that the sex ring might be linked to a high-flying Washington lobbyist, Robert Keith Cray, who had more than a few connections to CIA folk. According to Peter Dale Scott, some Washington investigators also suspected that the gay sex ring was connected to D.C. crime boss Joe "the Possum" Nesline.

Unfortunately, the congressional probe petered out before it got anywhere. Summing up the untested Libido-gate hypothesis, however, one of the congressional investigators put it this way to author Susan Trento: "If a lobbyist wants to use hookers to influence legislation, there's a pool of talent he draws from. There are certain madams in town that they make connections with. By simple logic, if you're in the business of influencing people with male prostitutes of kids, there has to be that supply chain…. [if] we start to identify some of the clients, it's possible we could find the suppliers for intelligence, organized crime, and lobbyists." In other words, follow the honey.

Former (and fugitive) CIA officer Frank Terpil had no compunction about identifying one such client, his former employer. Terpil told investigative author Jim Hougan that CIA-run sexual blackmail setups were common in Washington during the Watergate years. Terpil fingered his former partner, Ed Wilson, as the facilitator of one such CIA operation. Terpil claimed that Wilson ran the CIA mantrap from Korean agent Tong Sun Park's George Town Club, the Korean intelligence front that figured in the 1970s Koreagate scandal.

"Historically," Terpil explained, "one of Wilson's agency jobs was to subvert members of both houses [of Congress] by any means necessary…. Certain people could be easily coerced by living out their sexual fantasy in the flesh…. A remembrance of these occasions [was] permanently recorded via selected cameras."

Of course, we should note the Terpil hasn't offered any proof to back up that claim, and ex-CIA officers - not least of all, ones who have been convicted in absentia for terrorist activities - aren't celebrated for their candor. On the other hand, sexual blackmail was indeed a favorite CIA method of "turning" foreign agents or otherwise compromising them to do Uncle Sam's bidding. Considering all of the Agency's illegal doings on domestic soil during the last four decades, Terpil's story certainly seems plausible. Interestingly, Robert Keith Gray, the omnipresent superlobbyist whose name came up during the 1982 gay sex ring investigation, also pops into the George Town Club-Terpil milieu. Gray, who (coincidentally or not) gravitates toward spy nests, was the club's first overseer and also a director at Terpil's firm, Consultants International, a notorious CIA proprietary front.

And speaking of strange coincidences, it might be nothing more than evidence that networking is key in D.C., but Terpil's and Korean lobbyist Park's names turned up a few years earlier in the trick book of a cathouse madam linked to yet another famous scandal, the biggest scandal of all: Watergate.

The theory that the Watergate affair sprang, unintentionally, from the bosom of a political sex ring was first proposed by journalist Jim Hougan in his book, Secret Agenda.

The madam, Heidi Rikan, worked out of the Washington's posh Columbia Plaza apartment building, located across the street from the Watergate office complex. Hougan suggests that Rikan's call-girl ring may have been "either a CIA operation or the target of a CIA operation."

Briefly, Hougan's hypothesis is this: The Columbia Plaza girls were servicing a very interesting political clientele: Democratic muckamucks who placed their orders for companionship from a phone inside the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate building. Discovering this fruitful setup, Nixon's henchmen decided to target the Democratic fornicators. But in doing so, they stood a good chance of exposing the heavy breather already bugging the phone lines: the CIA. Ergo, the CIA's moles in the White House (allegedly superpatriotic conspirators James McCord and E. Howard Hunt) were forced to sabotage the Watergate break-ins in order to protect the CIA's highly illegal sex sting from Nixon's overeager burglars.

An illegal CIA sexpionage gambit unintentionally triggering the downfall of Richard Nixon? Say it ain't so!

Does the sexpionage industry go back even further in history than the babes of Watergate? Conspiracy theorist-emeritus Peter Dale Scott is game enough to hazard an affirmative. Employing the semiotics of conspiracy research - wherein names connect to other names, dates, and misdeeds, creating a tableau of suspicion that is usually intriguing, if not always conclusive - Scott has connected the dots.

Most interestingly, the Watergate madam, Heidi Rikan, was a girlfriend of mobster Joe "the Possum" Nesline, whose alleged connection to the Capitol Hill gay sex scandal a decade late aroused the suspicions of Washington detectives.

Assorted boyfriends and former husbands of both Rikan and her sometime roommate, Mo Biner (who married key Watergate figure John Dean, which makes Mo a pivotal character, according to scandal revisionists), were associated with the Quorum, an early 1960s "swingles" club run by Bobby Baker, a former aide to Lyndon Johnson. Scott surmises that all roads led to Baker's club for a reason: the Quorum functioned a lot like the mob-and-intelligence-infested sex traps of the 1970s.

It was Bobby Baker who introduced President Kennedy to an East German bombshell named Ellen Rometsh, whom JFK, true to form, promptly bedded. Scott speculates that J. Edgar Hoover leaked word of this international indiscretion to the press. Whether or not Hoover was behind the leaks, they nearly ignited a global scandal. That's because JFK's nubile Valkyrie also happened to be sleeping with a Soviet diplomat, a coincidence that, if revealed, wouldn't have served Kennedy well at the height of the Cold War. The threat of a "bimbo eruption" with international implications forced Bobby Kennedy into scandal-kibosh mode.

Scott notes that the JFK-Rometsch peccadillo paralleled the scandalous 1962 affair that toppled British war minister John Profumo. Profumo publicly confessed to romping with Christine Keller, a party doll/prostitute working for sexual procurer Stephen Ward. That scandal proved doubly damaging to Profumo because Keller was simultaneously servicing, yes, a Soviet diplomat. And more recent revelations have disclosed that the British intelligence agency MI5 "had been using the Stephen Ward sex ring for some time to compromise the Soviet agent." Scott wonders, did MI5 set out to compromise Profumo as well? Did the hyperlibidinous JFK blunder into a similar sex trap?

Interestingly, there is a more direct connection between JFK's peccadilloes and the MI5-manipulated Profumo affair. During the summer of 1963, Hoover's porous sex files began leaking again, resulting in press reports that a high U.S. official had slept with two members of Britain's Ward-Keeler sex ring, the very ring that toppled Profumo. That high U.S. official, no surprise, was the prodigious JFK. Scott observes that "MI5, as Britain's counterintelligence agency, maintained direct relations with both Hoover in the FBI" and the CIA. Did the Brits help Hoover set up Kennedy for a fall?

Bobby Baker, catalyst of the JFK-Rometsch affair, later boasted that he had in his possession letters from the east Germain woman that could prove embarrassing to the Kennedys, which per Scott, "strengthens the impression of an ongoing, sophisticated blackmail operation" in this nation's carnal capital.

Perhaps. Or maybe it just proves that in Washington eventually everyone gets screwed.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You'll love volume 2, David. I promise.

I'll love ripping it a new one :up

Great rebuttal. Tells me you got nada.

You being an expert on "NADA" ... I'm sure the work will be extraordinary...

and well done Tommy... :clapping Can always count on you for that elevated wit, and nose in the arsenal replies...

nice view for ya buddy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll love volume 2, David. I promise.

I'll love ripping it a new one :up

Great rebuttal. Tells me you got nada.

You being an expert on "NADA" ... I'm sure the work will be extraordinary...

and well done Tommy... :clapping Can always count on you for that elevated wit, and nose in the arsenal replies...

nice view for ya buddy?

I'm an expert on RECOGNIZING when someone has nada.

I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.

You would Greg. Knowing what the other person's intentions are comes with your faith in Radionics and Witchcraft...

You KNOW cause you can read minds, right mate?

Tell you what Greg... since you are so good at playing with yourself, how about you post both sides of the discussion and save us all some valuable time? I've been to ROKC and know from experience that's how your threads usually go... 50 posts by you and a few back slap posts by the minions...

Hoorah!!

Shouldn't you been working on that book already... or will it be another few years of "coming attractions" that are neither coming or attractions...

Perfect :up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.

You would Greg. Knowing what the other person's intentions are comes with your faith in Radionics and Witchcraft...

You KNOW cause you can read minds, right mate?

Tell you what Greg... since you are so good at playing with yourself, how about you post both sides of the discussion and save us all some valuable time? I've been to ROKC and know from experience that's how your threads usually go... 50 posts by you and a few back slap posts by the minions...

Hoorah!!

Shouldn't you been working on that book already... or will it be another few years of "coming attractions" that are neither coming or attractions...

Perfect :up

Why you are allowed to continue here remains one of life's little mysteries.

You have no answer so you attack the messenger. You are a disgrace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When and if you ever get around to asking a real question instead of posting what you THINK I am "admitting" or not

we can proceed.

"I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.", believe it or not is you making assumptions again that have no basis in fact.

You know, like the rest of your work.

I've been to ROKC, I know exactly what a "disgrace" looks like as does anyone else who'se ever been there and left covered in muck.

So, Mr. Kettle, before you call everything around you black... look in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harvey and Lee

Commission members doubt their conclusions

After leaving office, the man who created the Warren Commission, President Lyndon Johnson, expressed doubts about the Commission's conclusion for the remain der of his life. On one occasion he told Presidential aide Marvin Watson that he was convinced there was a plot in connection with the assassination and "felt the CIA had something to do with the plot."Nov 24-33

On January 27, 1964, less than 2 months after the Warren Commission was created, Senator Richard Russell said, "They (the FBI) have tried the case and reached a verdict on every count." Three weeks later Russell wrote a two-page letter of resignation to Lyndon Johnson, which the President refused to accept.

In 1964 the New York times quoted Chief Justice Earl Warren who said, "Full disclosure was not possible for reasons of national security" (Warren's statement was originally made to Dallas Morning News reporter Clint Richmond at Love Field, the day Warren arrived in Dallas to interview Jack Ruby).

On September 16, 1964 Senator Richard Russell disagreed with the Commission's conclusion of "no conspiracy" and wrote a dissenting statement. He said the insufficiency of the evidence gathered against Oswald precluded the conclusive determination that Oswald and Oswald alone, without the knowledge, encouragement or insistance of any other person, planned and perpetrated the assassination. Russell insisted that his statement be published in the 26 Volumes, and was extremely annoyed to learn it was not included. In an interview with W SB-TV in February 1970, less than a year before his death, Russell continued to voice doubts about the Warren Report.

In January 1967, columnist Drew Pearson told Earl Warren about a conspiratorial lead involving CIA-Mafia assassination plots. Warren, instead of standing by the Commission's conclusions, referred the information to Secret Service Director James J. Rowley. He then said, " ..... he thought this was serious enough ..... and that the Warren Commission was finished."

W.C. member Hale Boggs (D-L A), in a letter to JFK researcher Harold Weisberg, wrote, "We have not been told the truth about Oswald." By 1971 Boggs was reportedly preparing to make a public statement that said Richard Nixon was complicit in the assassination of President Kennedy. Thirty days before Nixon was re-elected esident Boggs and Alaska Senator Nick Begich vanished when their small plane disappeared in the Alaska wilderness during a routine flight from Anchorage to Juneau. W.C. member John I. McCloy (former President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) told the HSCA in 1978, "I no longer feel we had no credible evidence or reliable evidence in regard to a conspiracy ..... "

W.C. member Senator John Sherman Cooper (R-KY ) never agreed with the "single bullet theory," upon which the Commission based it's conclusion of "no conspiracy," and expressed doubts to fellow members. The two Commission members who remained committed to the conclusions of the Warren Report, not surprisingly, were former CIA Director Allen Dulles, and Gerald Ford (R-MI), a man described by Newsweek the "CIA's best friend in Congress." It is little wonder that the Warren Report has failed to withstand the test of time, as even the majority of Commission members didn't believe it.

J. Edgar Hoover's investigation

After the Warren Commission was formed, and evidence of "two Oswald's" continued to mount, Hoover had to control and limit the FBI's investigation into Oswald's background. He began on the afternoon of the assassination, by issuing instrucyions for SA James Hosty not to attend any more of Oswald's interrogation sessions and not to conduct any investigation into Oswalds background. T he following morning FBI agents were dispatched to Stripling Junior High in Fort Worth to obtain Oswald's school records, to the Pfisterer Dental Lab in New Orleans to obtain Oswald's employment records, the Texas Department of Public Safety in Austin to obtain Oswald's drivers lcense file, and other locations to secure sensitive information which threatened to expose the two Oswald's.

Hoover received much needed assistance on limiting the investigation intom Oswald's background when Allen Dulles was appointed to the Warren Commission. Dulles acted as the Warren Commission's contact with the CIA, and worked directly for his his close friend Jim Angleton and his deputy, Ray Rocca, from the Counterintelligence section. W hen the Warren Commission requested information from the CIA, it was Dulles who reviewed and approved the few insignificant CIA documents that were finally shown to Commission members. And it was Dulles who met secretly with Angleton to help prepare answers to questions that he thought the Commission might ask CIA Director John McCone and Richard Helms. Nov24-34

As Director of the FBI, and the investigative arm of the Warren Commission, Hoover had the power to decide which documents and evidence were sent to the Commission. As William Sullivan told the HSCA, "If there were documents that possibly he didn't want to come to the light of the public, then those documents no longer exist, and the truth will never be known." Sullivans comments explain the disappearance of Oswalds original school records, employment records, tax returns, records from Klein s Sporting Goods, the US Post Office, FBI interviews of people whose statements placed Oswald in two locations at the same time, the names of FBI informants who knew and associated with Harvey Oswald in New Orleans, etc. It also explains why the FBI failed to provide a list of Oswalds childhood friends to the Warren Commission, which prompted staff member John Hart Ely to write, "Once again let me urge that we should not have to rely upon Life MaWJzine for such a list. The FBI should un dertake a systematic investigation and interview of Oswalds closest school friends. " Nov 24-35

NOTE: Ely apparently investigated Oswalds background too well, which caused Albert

Jenner to write, "There are details in Mr. Ely s memoranda which will require material

alteration and, in some instances, omission." Nov 24-32

Sullivan also told the HSCA, "When an enormous organization like the FBI with tremendous power still can sit back and shuffle the deck of cards and pick up the card they want to show you it may be you're not going to get the entire picture as fully as you Nov 24-36

This simply means that the FBI gave the Warren Commission onlythose records which helped to frame Oswald or show that he was capable of assassinating the President. Records which suggested there were two Oswalds (Stripling Junior High records, Pfisterer employment records in 1957-58, FBI interviews of Marines who served with Harvey Oswald in Memphis or Taiwan, medical records, FBI reports of Lee Oswald in the US from 1959-1962, etc., FBI reports of people who came in contact with Lee Oswald in the weeks and days preceding the assassination, etc.), were suppressed or destroyed. would otherwise."

NOTE: In 1975 Warren Commission co-counsel Burt W. Griffin said, "All of the records

were in the hands of the two agencies (FBI and CIA) and, if they so desired, any infor­

mation or files could have been destroyed or laundered prior to the time the Commission

could get them. "45 In addition to manipulating physical evidence, witness testimony, and FBI reports, the Bureau convinced the Warren Commission to accept Nov 24-37

This gave the FBI the opportunity to alter original evidence, such as Oswalds school transcripts, the Minox camera, photographs in lieu of physical evidence. 962Klein s Sporting Goods records, etc., and provide the Commission with photographs, while the original evidence disappeared. The FBI was also able to convince the Warren Commission to allow FBI agents and officials to review. and correct. Transcripts of their testimony before the Commission Nov 24-38 The "correcting" of James Cadigan s testimony resulted in concealing the fact that Oswalds possessions were secretly sent to the FBI on November 23, 1963, without an inventory,and then returned to the Dallas Police after numerous items had been altered. modified. Substituted. or added to the evidence. Sion.

Researchers have speculated for years that the FBI covered up, distorted, and fabricated evidence and testimony of witnesses in an attempt to frame Oswald and now we have the proof! With the abundance of fabricated evidence 'that has surfaced, there is little doubt that such a massive cover-up could have occurred without the knowledge and active participation of j. Edgar Hoover. In fact, Hoover was one of the few people in the world who understood and grasped the significance of "Lee Harvey Oswald's"

participation in the assassination, and the involvement of his CIA sponsors.

I we Decker Exhibit 5323.

2 WC Exhibit 2013; FBI interview ofVernon Glossup, 11/24/63.

3 WC testimony of Forrest V. Sorrels, 13 H 62.

4 WC Frazier Exhibit 5086; FBI interview ofW.B. Frazier by SA George W.H. Carlsonm 12/6/63.

5 WC Exhibit 2002; letter from William B. Frazier to Jesse Curry, 12/6/63.

6 WC Smart Exhibit 5021.

7 we Exhibit 2002.

8 WC Smith Exhibit 5317; FBI interview of John A. Smith by SA Robley D. Madland, 12/4/63.

9 WC Exhibit 2002; letter from C.C. Wallace to Jesse Curry, 12/18/63.

1 0 WC Report p. 629, Memorandum from Inspector Kelley to Chief, Secret Service, 11129/63.

II Ibid.

12 WC Exhibit 2003 p. 138C; WC Report, p. 609.

13 WC Report, p. 635, Memorandum of interview by Harry Holmes, 12/17/63.

14 WC Report, p. 630.

15 Ibid. at 609.

16 WC Exhibit 2003 p. 138C; WC Report, p. 609.

17 WC Report, p. 634, Memorandum of interview by Harry Holmes, 12/17/63.

18 WC testimony of Harry Holmes, 7 H 299.

19 WC testimony of Jim Leavelle, 7 H 267-268.

20 National Archives, USPS 169-10001-10143, Headquarters Files 157807-CC, USPS memo H.B. Montague to SI&I, 12/2/63.

21 WC Report, p. 633, Memorandum of interview by Harry Holmes, 12/17/63.

22 WC testimony of Jim Leavelle, 7 H 269.

23 Summers, p. 98.

.

24 WC Report, p. 630, Memorandum from Inspector Kelley to Chief, US Secret Service, 11/29/63 ..

25 National Archives, HSCA 180-10103-10379, Numbered Files 013438, HSCA interview of George Butler, 5/11/78.

26 National Archives, HSCA 180-10089-10078, Numbered Files 001056, Notes of Ronald Dugger, by Andrew Purdy, 3/28/77.

27 Sneed, p. 488.

28 WC Wilcox Exhibit 3016.

29 CE 2003, p. 327.

30 WC Daniels Exhibit 5325.

31 Seth Kantor, p. 56.

32 AR 157.

33 AR 158.

34 WC Bieberdorf Exhibit 5123.

35 WC Document 735, pp. 410-411. FBI interview of Dr. Earl Rose by SA Arthur Carter and Manning Clements, 2/25/64.

36 WC Document 1066, p. 388, FBI interview of Dr. Earl Rose by SA Robert Gemberling, 5/20/64.

37 "The Exhumation and Identification of Lee Harvey Oswald", Journal of Forensic Science, January 1984.

38 WC testimony of Forrest Sorrels, 13 H 70.

39 WC memorandum from Leon Hubert and Burt Griffin to J. Lee Rankin, 5114/64, pp. 3-4.

40 WC Report, p. 345.

41 HSCA, Volume 5, p. 325.

42 AP story-9:22 pm, 6/27/98, by Angela Charlton quoting Feklisov on Russian Television.

43 Wall Street Journal, 10118/93, A16.

44 LBJ-transcripts of telephone conversation at 16:55, 11129/63.

45 Houston Chronicle, 9/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Jim Hargrove, you're right to point out that perhaps most of the members of the Warren Commission doubted their conclusion. Senator Richard Russell himself (encouraged by Senator John Cooper and Congressman Hale Boggs) insisted that his doubts about the SBT be printed in the Warren Report before he would sign it. This was agreed, but after he signed it, his doubts were removed from the Warren Report!

The fact that the SBT still makes people laugh should have been a clue -- but they had no choice. The "Lone Nut" theory was a matter of National Security. The Truth about the JFK murder must be withheld from the American People for "a lifetime."

Or, at least until the end of the Cold War. President GHW Bush gave us a new date for the ARRB deadline -- Thursday 26 October 2017.

J. Edgar Hoover personally controlled the data that the Warren Commission members viewed -- and the autopsy X-rays and photographs were totally off the table, because they would have shown conclusively that multiple shooters were involved. Drawings (with arrows) were substituted.

No intelligent persons ever fully accepted the Warren Commission findings -- but the majority of Americans accepted them because of "National Security" as the LBJ Administration continually repeated.

That said -- and even though most JFK Conspiracy Theorists blame the CIA for the JFK murder -- I think that the Harvey & Lee theory takes the CIA-did-it theory too far, by exaggerating every "mistaken identity" report of Oswald and transforming it into a CIA plot going back to the childhood of Lee Harvey Oswald.

The resulting portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald is a caricature, and the portrait of the CIA is that of super-geniuses who control world history. It's too pat.

Yes, the Warren Commission lied (for our own good, they said). Yes, Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy of a larger conspiracy. But after those two facts, the Harvey & Lee theory goes wild with half-truths and skullduggery fiction, IMHO.

IMHO, to solve the JFK murder (before the 26 October 2017 deadline) researchers must dig deeper into Dallas; into the personnel, the politics and the evidence tampering in Dallas. The JFK Cover-up began at Bethesda. But the JFK Murder was planned in Dallas.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Jim Hargrove, you're right to point out that perhaps most of the members of the Warren Commission doubted their conclusion. Senator Richard Russell himself (encouraged by Senator John Cooper and Congressman Hale Boggs) insisted that his doubts about the SBT be printed in the Warren Report before he would sign it. This was agreed, but after he signed it, his doubts were removed from the Warren Report!

The fact that the SBT still makes people laugh should have been a clue -- but they had no choice. The "Lone Nut" theory was a matter of National Security. The Truth about the JFK murder must be withheld from the American People for "a lifetime."

Or, at least until the end of the Cold War. President GHW Bush gave us a new date for the ARRB deadline -- Thursday 26 October 2017.

J. Edgar Hoover personally controlled the data that the Warren Commission members viewed -- and the autopsy X-rays and photographs were totally off the table, because they would have shown conclusively that multiple shooters were involved. Drawings (with arrows) were substituted.

No intelligent persons ever accepted the Warren Commission findings -- but the majority of Americans accepted them because of "National Security" as the LBJ Administration continually repeated.

That said -- and even though most JFK Conspiracy Theorists blame the CIA for the JFK murder -- I think that the Harvey & Lee theory takes the CIA-did-it theory too far, by exaggerating every "mistaken identity" report of Oswald and transforming it into a CIA plot going back to the childhood of Lee Harvey Oswald.

The resulting portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald is a caricature, and the portrait of the CIA is that of super-geniuses who control world history. It's too pat.

Yes, the Warren Commission lied (for our own good, they said). Yes, Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy of a larger conspiracy. But after those two facts, the Harvey & Lee theory goes wild with half-truths and skullduggery fiction, IMHO.

IMHO, to solve the JFK murder (before the 26 October 2017 deadline) researchers must dig deeper into Dallas; into the personnel, the politics and the evidence tampering in Dallas. The JFK Cover-up began at Bethesda. But the JFK Murder was planned in Dallas.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Although I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that the assassination was planned in Dallas, I do like your "take" here on the H & L theory.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the Warren Commission lied (for our own good, they said). Yes, Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy of a larger conspiracy. But after those two facts, the Harvey & Lee theory goes wild with half-truths and skullduggery fiction, IMHO.

When "IMHO" becomes - "after I read the book, followed the sources and learned a thing or two about the evidence involved" you can be taken seriously..

Until then you remain grouped with the others who think that reading a few paragraphs and the reviews of others who also did not read the book or do the work to understand what happened...

Ascribing the FBI to a merry band of idiots who just happen to stumble across evidence which only incriminated Oswald and were honest and truthful in their securing and relaying of all the evidence is naive and pedantic at best. Hoover was calculating and extremely controlling. If evidence was needed which said a certain thing, it was found - regardless - or simply written that way while the lie of it was dealt with later.

Furthermore, belief that there exists evidence which desribes what happened in DP that day, and it's just sitting there waiting for the light of day is unbelieveably optomistic. If you've noticed, the information that makes its way piecemeal to the world, including the ARRB, has all shown what happened in the conspiracy. There was more than enough info released thru the ARRB about the conspiracy in DP and Bethesda to try and reconstruct what happened, but it's not evidence of what happened itself, only how it was covered up.

H&L is a detailed account of how the FBI manipulated evidence from consideration which repeatedly illustrated the existance of both these men... they simply could not get to all of it - so they marginalize that which they couldn't and buried the rest. Why else would Blakey need to ask the DoD about the conflicts in their records and in turn the DoD lying about what happened?

(f) No direct or indirect relationship between Lee Harvey

Oswald and Jack Ruby has been discovered by the Commission,

nor has it been able to find any credible evidence that either knew

the other, although a thorough investigation was made of the

many rumors and speculations of such a relationship

The Secret Service also concluded that Oswald had no connection to 544 Camp.

Until Authenticated, nothing in evidence can be accepted at face value... and in fact, in the black is white world, it usually is 180 degrees from what reality actually was...

SS%20says%20FPCC%20never%20at%20544%20Ca

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would Greg. Knowing what the other person's intentions are comes with your faith in Radionics and Witchcraft...
You KNOW cause you can read minds, right mate?

Since you have been told before that writing something about what others believe is not the same as believing it yourself, so the fact that you keep raising it in this manner should be a warning to everyone how low you are willing to go to avoid actually addressing the issues raised.

You might, btw, want to ponder that Albert Einstein was so open-minded about telepathy, he wrote a preface to a major (positive) book on the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Radio

Like Einstein, I am open-minded, tho tempered by a dash of skepticism. As I have said all along about the Oxnard call... I believe she was being fed information via radio - not telepathy. You should be banned for your pathetic attempt at smears.

When and if you ever get around to asking a real question instead of posting what you THINK I am "admitting" or not
we can proceed.
"I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.", believe it or not is you making assumptions again that have no basis in fact.
You know, like the rest of your work.
I've been to ROKC, I know exactly what a "disgrace" looks like as does anyone else who'se ever been there and left covered in muck.

So, Mr. Kettle, before you call everything around you black... look in the mirror.

There was nothing stopping you from "proceeding" in your first post after I quoted the passage from my book. You simply went straight on the attack against me. Now you say we can proceed if I stop posting that your lack of response is an admission of having no rebuttal? You are too funny for words.

Anyone covered in muck at ROKC mostly had it coming. Have we made mistakes? Possibly. But then, we also know how to apologize, as in the case of David H, on the off-chance we got it wrong.

ROKC remains the only forum dedicated to making itself redundant by getting the case reopened. Anyone going there will soon see the amount of new research - found nowhere else on the web - dedicated to that singular cause. You and everyone else can keep spinning wheels till the cows come home.

Your dishonesty about what people will find at my forum is no surprise. You won't talk about the research which makes up 90% of posts there, because your sole purpose is to smear me and the forum.

Here it is again, folks. The sneak peak at a passage from my upcoming book that David refuses to address, but instead would rather attack the messenger. If this was happening the other way around, my ass would be sidelined here (again).

Creating Mayhem with Historical Records
Proponents of the “Two Oswalds” theory (Harvey & Lee: how the CIA framed Oswald by John Armstrong, Quasar Books, 2003) have completely misunderstood the Beauregard school records of Oswald.
In fairness, they have been aided and abetted in this misunderstanding by the contradictory advice given to the FBI by the Assistant Principal of Warren Easton High, Wilfred Head, whose help they had sought in interpreting the records. In regard to attendance, Head stated that the abbreviation “Re Ad” usually represented “Re Admitted” and that the numbers listed opposite represented the total number of school days for a given school year.
The advice given above by Head is not entirely correct, but then he compounds the error by stating contradictorily that 180 days was the usual number of days in a school year and in any event, state law mandated that the total number of school days must not fall below 170. Given that the figure shown as “Re Ad” for 1954-55 was 168, Head surmised that the figure must represent the total number of days Oswald actually attended.
It is a little surprising that neither an educator, nor the author of Harvey & Lee (let alone any of his many acolytes and proselytizers) could not do the simple math involved.
The number 168 does indeed fall below the mandated 170 days. That tells us it cannot be the total number of days in the school year. What we need to do is add the number of days listed as “absent”. In the case of the 1954-55 school year, we see 168 + 12 = 180 days – the exact number of days Head claimed to be the “regular”! If we do the same for the previous school year, we get 184 – more than the “regular”, but the term does imply occasional variation. The important point is that nowhere in the record does it show Oswald’s total number of attendance days. To work that out, we need to also know the dates Oswald commenced and finished at the school, along with the start and end dates of the school years involved.
The Two Oswald theorists in short, need the “Re Ad” figures to indicate total number of days attended because this would mean overlap with New York school records and since Oswald cannot be in two places at once, it must denote a second boy using the same name.
At its core, this theory deploys the same unscrupulous manipulation of the evidence to achieve a desired outcome as demonstrated by the Warren Commission.
Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Creating Mayhem with Historical Records

Proponents of the “Two Oswalds” theory (Harvey & Lee: how the CIA framed Oswald by John Armstrong, Quasar Books, 2003) have completely misunderstood the Beauregard school records of Oswald.
In fairness, they have been aided and abetted in this misunderstanding by the contradictory advice given to the FBI by the Assistant Principal of Warren Easton High, Wilfred Head, whose help they had sought in interpreting the records. In regard to attendance, Head stated that the abbreviation “Re Ad” usually represented “Re Admitted” and that the numbers listed opposite represented the total number of school days for a given school year.
The advice given above by Head is not entirely correct, but then he compounds the error by stating contradictorily that 180 days was the usual number of days in a school year and in any event, state law mandated that the total number of school days must not fall below 170. Given that the figure shown as “Re Ad” for 1954-55 was 168, Head surmised that the figure must represent the total number of days Oswald actually attended.
It is a little surprising that neither an educator, nor the author of Harvey & Lee (let alone any of his many acolytes and proselytizers) could not do the simple math involved.
The number 168 does indeed fall below the mandated 170 days. That tells us it cannot be the total number of days in the school year. What we need to do is add the number of days listed as “absent”. In the case of the 1954-55 school year, we see 168 + 12 = 180 days – the exact number of days Head claimed to be the “regular”! If we do the same for the previous school year, we get 184 – more than the “regular”, but the term does imply occasional variation. The important point is that nowhere in the record does it show Oswald’s total number of attendance days. To work that out, we need to also know the dates Oswald commenced and finished at the school, along with the start and end dates of the school years involved.
The Two Oswald theorists in short, need the “Re Ad” figures to indicate total number of days attended because this would mean overlap with New York school records and since Oswald cannot be in two places at once, it must denote a second boy using the same name.
At its core, this theory deploys the same unscrupulous manipulation of the evidence to achieve a desired outcome as demonstrated by the Warren Commission.

I'd be glad to discuss these BJHS records with you Greg.... and not use your juvenile multi-syllabic generalizations in the process.

But I don't have the time right now so I'll just leave you with the actual records for 54-55... and those 12 absences and the actual grade cards.

12?

(That the Math Grades don't match is something we can talk about later... ok?)

Beauregard%201954-55%20grade%20cards%20d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do his maths grades have to to with you guys deliberately misinterpreting what "re-ad" means, and the process necessary to find the total number of school days that school year?

I know I know - like everyone else at the Bates Motel, you're very busy...

whatever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of all the data in that post you don't understand, your only concern is that you don't see the math grade problem...

Why don't the grade card absences match the 12 absences you claim adds to 180 days?

Why don't the math grades match at all?

Why does Re-Ad have 89 days next to the fall 53-54 semester if 168 + 12 is the total number of school days...89+1 is the total of attendance and absences for the fall semester?

There's a lot more to come Greg. This is the easy stuff...

I look forward to your reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that the SBT still makes people laugh should have been a clue -- but they had no choice. The "Lone Nut" theory was a matter of National Security. The Truth about the JFK murder must be withheld from the American People for "a lifetime."

Or, at least until the end of the Cold War. President GHW Bush gave us a new date for the ARRB deadline -- Thursday 26 October 2017.

Well, Paul, I may be wrong, but my guess is that when that day comes, you will be among the few researchers wondering why we waited so long for so little. How ironic that a former CIA director has set this date for “full disclosure.”
Poppy’s Secret
When Joseph McBride came upon the document about George H. W. Bush’s double life, he was not looking for it. It was 1985, and McBride, a former Daily Variety writer, was in the library of California State University San Bernardino, researching a book about the movie director Frank Capra. Like many good reporters, McBride took off on a “slight,” if time-consuming, tangent – spending day after day poring over reels of microfilmed documents related to the FBI and the JFK assassination. McBride had been a volunteer on Kennedy’s campaign, and since 1963 had been intrigued by the unanswered questions surrounding that most singular of American tragedies.
A particular memo caught his eye, and he leaned in for a closer look. Practically jumping off the screen was a memorandum from FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, dated November 29, 1963. Under the subject heading “Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” Hoover reported that, on the day after JFK’s murder, the bureau had provided two individuals with briefings. One was “Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency.” The other: “Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency.”
To:
Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State
[We have been] advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U.S. policy… [Our] sources know of no [such] plans… The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...