What Are the Correct Questions to Ask About the JFK Assassination?

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff,

You pose this question:

"&The killers of JFK had nothing to do with Oswald whatsoever?"

Excellent question, I believe.

You then write:

"Two separate operations directed from the top. One to kill JFK. One to kill Oswald.

Highly compartmentalized.

Going after Oswald's handlers isn't the same as going after JFK's killers."

You provide an interesting, coherent way to think about the question you pose. How do you defend the three statements I've quoted?

Jon, intelligence operations are conducted on a "need to know" basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need_to_know

What did Oswald's handlers "need to know" about the JFK assassination other than time and location?

What did the JFK trigger men "need to know" about Oswald?

For Oswald to have been successfully presented as an agent of Fidel his handlers needed to kill him within an hour of the JFK ambush.

Somebody screwed up.

Brute Krulak's ID of Landsdale in Dealey Plaza in a tramp photo is intriguing. It doesn't make sense to me that Lansdale was directly involved in killing

Kennedy -- in which case he'd have been a long way from Dealey that afternoon.

If Lansdale were on the Kill Oswald detail, it makes sense that he'd be in the plaza insuring the back-up patsies got away clean.

Kill Kennedy. Kill Oswald, Two separate operations run by guys associated with the US Army Special Operations Division and the CIA -- but not subject to the hierarchies of either.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Robert Prudhomme @ post #73:

I've read that the Japanese used .25 caliber ammunition in WWII.

First question: Were there any .25 caliber rifles in use, perhaps even widely used, in the United States in 1963?

Second question: Who manufactured FMJ .25 caliber rifle ammunition available in the early 1960s?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hello Jon

This is precisely the misconception that got SA Robert A. Frazier into trouble with the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition.

The main Japanese infantry weapon of the Second World War was the 6.5x50mm Arisaka rifle. Being a 6.5mm calibre rifle, it had a bore diameter of .256" and a bullet (groove) diameter of .264".

In contrast, .25 calibre rifles have a bore dia. of .250", and a bullet (groove) dia. of .256".

Coincidentally, the .25 calibre bullet has the same bullet (groove) dia. as the bore diameter of the 6.5mm calibre rifle (.256"), and this is why you see uninformed people blabbing on the Internet about the two rifles being the same.

They are not, and Frazier, the great FBI expert, was not aware of this.

Some of the .25 calibre North American rifles include the .250-3000 Savage, the .257 Roberts, the .25-06 Remington and the .257 Weatherby Magnum. Notice how confusing North American designations are, with some of these models quoting the bore diameter, and others quoting the groove (bullet) diameter.

As to the availability of .25 calibre FMJ ammo in the early 60's, I really can't say how widely available it was.

[Mark Knight]

According to one source, the .257 Roberts, originally considered a "wildcat" round, was "legitimized" when Remington began regular production in 1934. "From then until the introduction of the hot .243 Winchester and .244/6mm Remington in 1955, the .257 was the top selling combination varmint/deer cartridge."

http://www.chuckhawks.com/257Rob.htm

That would imply that the .257 Roberts was readily available in April 1963. Not specifically FMJ ammo....

[David Josephs]

Yep, I sure wonder what our Man Hoover would be trying to hide related to himself or Oswald...
or what he's done to not have to worry about it so much...

Q1 - Was Oswald an FBI and/or CIA related asset used for any purpose - gather data, keep tabs, infultrate, disrupt... whatever. and

Q2 - Would his involvement with US intelligent be reason to use him as a patsy in this situation?

Actually - the question that most needs to be answered in my opinion is:

What evidence actually convicts Oswald and

Can any of this evidence representing Oswald's guilt be Authenticated to become Real Evidence as accepted by a court of law?

"The proponent of the evidence must also establish that the object, in relevant respects, has not changed or been altered between the events and the trial. This can sometimes be a tall order, or can require the testimony of several witnesses. If there is any time from the events in question to the day of trial during which the location of the item cannot be accounted for, the chain is broken. In that case, the evidence will be excluded unless another method of authentication can be used."

These are the 12 WCR conclusions related to Oswald's guilt which require Authinticated Evidence to prove:

1. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the sixth floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository.
(Oswald cannot be placed at that window at that time)

2. The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired.
(Has nothing to do with Oswald's guilt)

3. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot. hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same

bullet which pierced the President’s throat also caused Governor Connally’s wounds.
(Has nothing to do with Oswald's guilt)

4. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald

(a) The Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5-millimeter Italian rifle from which the shots were tired was owned by and in the possession of Oswald. (not proven)

( Oswald carried this rifle into the Depository Building on the morning of November 22,1963. (not proven)

© Oswald, at the time of the assassination, was present at the window from which the shots were fired. (not proven)

(d) Shortly after the assassination, the Mannlicher-Carcnno rifle belonging to Oswald was found partially hidden between some cartons on the sixth floor and the improvised paper bag in

which Oswald brought the rifle to the Depository was found close by the window from which the shots were fired. (not proven)

(e) Based on testimony of the experts and their analysis of films of the assassination, the Commission has concluded that a

rifleman of Lee Harvey Oswald’s capabilities could have fired the shots from the rifle used in the assassination within the

elapsed time of the shooting. The Commission has concluded further that Oswald possessed the capability with a rifle which

enabled him to commit the assassination.19 (not proven - in fact refuted directly)

(f) Oswald lied to the police after his arrest concerning important substantive matters. (Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

(g) Oswald had attempted to kill Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker (Resigned, U.S. Army) on April 10,1963, thereby demonstrating

his disposition to take human life (Has nothing to do with proving guilt - in fact the WCR claims that there is no identifiable motive and that he actually liked JFK)

5. Oswald killed Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes after the assassination (not proven)

6. Within 80 minutes of the assassination and 35 minutes of the Tippit killing Oswald resisted arrest at the theatre by attempting to shoot another Dallas police officer. (Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

7. The Commission has reached the following conclusions concerning Oswald’s interrogation and detention by the Dallas police : (Has nothing to do with proving guilt and the DPD opught to be chastized for not recording the interrogations - 12 hours worth of question and 5 pages of scribbled notes - what are we missing here?)

8. The Commission has reached the following conclusions concerning the killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963(Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

9. The Commission has found no evidence that either Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby was part of any conspiracy, domestic or foreign,

to assassinate President Kennedy (Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

10. In its entire investigation the Commission has found no evidence of conspiracy, subversion, or disloyalty to the U.S. Government by

any Federal, State, or local official (Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

11. On the basis of the evidence before the Commission it concludes that. Oswald acted alone (Has nothing to do with proving guilt)

12. (f) Within these limitations, however, the Commission finds

that the (SS) agents most immediately responsible for the President’s

safety reacted promptly at the time the shots were fired from the TSBD. (Has nothing to do with proving guilt - and is one of the fattest lies we are told)

here are these agents "reacting promptly" after JFK has been hit at least once)

[Jon G. Tidd]

David Josephs,

This is the question I ask: What would be admissible in a trial court, under rules of evidence, as evidence Oswald killed JFK?

-- nothing Marina would say (spousal immunity)

-- none of the physical items, such as the rifle, C.E. 399, bullet fragments (chain of custody -- lack of authentication)

-- witness statements, subject to cross examination

-- not the autopsy report (the report in the National Archives is not provably the original autopsy report)

-- the death certificate, once authenticated (official record)

-- not the rifle shells found in the TSBD (chain of custody)

-- etc.

The most remarkable thing to me as a lawyer is that no law enforcement agency behaved on November 22 or subsequently as if a trial of the accused assassin would ever occur. The DPD and FBI in particular behaved as if the rules of evidence didn't matter.

Edited January 21, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd

[Jon G. Tidd]

Question: From the plotters' standpoint, who had to be onboard?

[Thomas Graves]

Question: From the plotters' standpoint, who had to be onboard?

For one: Dallas Police Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer.

--Tommy

Edited January 26, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

It seems there was a persistent rumour in the beginning about an SS agent being killed, as this reporter is inquiring about. I wonder how that got started?

[Thomas Graves]

It seems there was a persistent rumour in the beginning about an SS agent being killed, as this reporter is inquiring about. I wonder how that got started?

Good question, Robert. But I think the important point I'm trying to make is that an unidentified "witness" allegedly told Sawyer that the assassin was 5'10" and 165 lbs, and that that description just happened to match perfectly the "biometrics" of Robert Webster when he and the 5'9", 140 lb. Oswald were both in Russia.

Mr. BELIN. Now the next time that No. 9 appears is at what time?

Mr. SAWYER. Immediately after 12:43 and before 12:45.

Mr. BELIN. What did you say then?

Mr. SAWYER. "The wanted person in this is a slender white male about 30, 5 feet 10, 165, carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester."

Mr. BELIN. Then the statement is made from the home office, "It was a rifle?"

Mr. SAWYER. I answered, "Yes, a rifle."

Mr. BELIN. Then the reply to you, "Any clothing description?"

Mr. SAWYER. "Current witness can't remember that."

Mr. BELIN. Then the statement is made sometime before 12:45 p.m., and after the 12:43 p.m., call, "Attention all squads, description was broadcast and no further information at this time."

Does that mean the description you made was rebroadcast?

Mr. SAWYER. I rebroadcast that description. That is what that means.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/sawyer_j.htm

--Tommy

Edited January 26, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Brancato]

Always wondered about 'carrying a rifle', Winchester or not. Also Thomas, the description matches the Oswald in Angleton's mole hunt dangle Oswald file. What would be the significance of matching Webster? Also, can you refresh my memory about whether Sawyer ever reveals who gave him the description, or if not who, then where this wanted individual with a rifle was spotted?

[Jon G. Tidd]

Julia Postal and Johnny Brewer were instrumental to Oswald's arrest.

Did either of them fare well financially following the assassination?

[Thomas Graves]

Always wondered about 'carrying a rifle', Winchester or not. Also Thomas, the description matches the Oswald in Angleton's mole hunt dangle Oswald file. What would be the significance of matching Webster? Also, can you refresh my memory about whether Sawyer ever reveals who gave him the description, or if not who, then where this wanted individual with a rifle was spotted?

Paul,

I'm certainly no expert on this and I hope that Larry Hancock or Bill Simpich will jump in here if I'm way off base, but it's my impression that several mole-hunting "marked cards" (bits of intentional misinformation) were introduced into CIA cables and other documents on Oswald when he "defected" to Russia. 20 year-old Oswald and 30 year-old Robert Webster were both "defectors" in Russia at the same time and resembled each other facially. In many of the documents, if not all, Oswald seems to have been given Webster's biometrics-- 5'10", 165 lbs.

I think the significance of the fact that Dallas Police Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer unwittingly broadcast Webster's height and weight (and age), plus the fact that it would have been impossible for anyone to accurately judge, from street level, the height and weight of a man standing (or kneeling) at a sixth floor window, suggests that Sawyer had been given incorrect information about Oswald from someone who had access to a "marked card" intelligence document about Oswald which had, unknown to the "witness", inaccurate biometric information on Oswald. I think that this incorrect, originally CIA or FBI, information might have been passed on to the DPD by someone in Army Intelligence at a base in Texas, or might have been given to it by the FBI. I think that whoever passed it on did not realize that it was not an accurate description of Oswald. (It's interesting to note that Sawyer's mystery "witness", whom Police Inspector Sawyer couldn't remember well enough to describe -- not even his clothing -- evidently didn't tell Sawyer where he had seen the assassin, so the "witness" couldn't have been Howard Brennan because Brennan said he saw the assassin at the sixth floor window.)

https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/State_Secret_Chapter6

I think it's fascinating that way back in May of 1960, FBI agent John Fain wrote that Oswald's own mother had described Oswald as being 5' 10", 165 lbs, with blue eyes. A perfect description of Robert Webster. I think Fain was lying. I think he incorporated the CIA's description Webster-like description of Oswald into his report and ascribed it to Marguerite Oswald instead of the CIA. Or maybe it was the other way around, and the CIA incorporated Fain's information in it own "marked card" documents.

https://www.maryferr...90&relPageId=12

Tracing the source of Sawyer's bad information could turn out for us not to be a "mole hunt", but an "assassination facilitator hunt".

--Tommy

Edited January 28, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

Tommy, I'm afraid I would have to leave the marked card discussion to Bill, not current enough on the subject to be accurate myself. However, it is quite suspicious that a "witness" gave a description gave a description that did not include the most common thing mentioned in witness descriptions of suspects - clothing. To me that suggests a degree of distance in the whole thing, someone had enough physical information to give a file type physical description (accurate or not) but were not even close enough to Oswald to have established what he was wearing on Nov. 22. As you say, the source of that profile is interesting and might reveal who had access to that specific description in which files. But to me it also suggests that those on the ground had limited contact with Oswald at best and had not even seen him that day.....which if you think about it is interesting, on the order of "well we are going to kill the President to day and we have a patsy but I wonder what's happening with him today, sure hope he made it to work."

[Paul Brancato]

Larry - very perceptive observation about the clothing. I think Thomas' memory is right, and I am pretty sure it was Peter Dale Scott who suggested that the source for the description was not really an eye witness but rather a so far anonymous source in a local military intelligence unit there, the 488th reserve, or the 112th. I can't locate the exact info right now.