Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Real Ruth and Michael Paine


Recommended Posts

Tommy :sun

Let us be clear, Ok. And candid.

You are the one who started a petition against Trejo. You had people sign up for it. You could not figure out what value his comments had on this forum.

Please do not tell me you forgot about that?

You then did a 180, for whatever reason, and you justified his coming back in the sense that you and he had an interest in Morales.

I commented that the only way Trejo is interested in Morales is to fit him into his radical right/Walker scenario. Did that fit in with what you postulated? If it did, then OK. If not, then I did not understand how your interests coincided.

I don't ever recall commenting on the Hemming/Oswald story.

But if Weberman was the conduit for Hemming then it should be taken with about a pound or two of salt. Unless you also buy into the Hemmimg/Lorenz assassination caravan story led by Howard Hunt. Sorry I do not. As Fonzi so accurately stated in his fine book (which Caufield calls The Least Investigation) the whole Interpen crew was font of disinformation. Eddie Lopez said the same to me also.

I mean Hemming was good pals with Gordon Winslow. Don't get me started on that.

There, I have articulated myself on these issues. In a non emotional way. It seems to me you are the one who over reacted.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 651
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tommy :sun

Let us be clear, Ok. And candid.

You are the one who started a petition against Trejo. You had people sign up for it. You could not figure out what value his comments had on this forum.

Please do not tell me you forgot about that?

You then did a 180, for whatever reason, and you justified his coming back in the sense that you and he had an interest in Morales.

I commented that the only way Trejo is interested in Morales is to fit him into his radical right/Walker scenario. Did that fit in with what you postulated? If it did, then OK. If not, then I did not understand how your interests coincided.

I don't ever recall commenting on the Hemming/Oswald story.

But if Weberman was the conduit for Hemming then it should be taken with about a pound or two of salt. Unless you also buy into the Hemmimg/Lorenz assassination caravan story led by Howard Hunt. Sorry I do not. As Fonzi so accurately stated in his fine book (which Caufield calls The Least Investigation) the whole Interpen crew was font of disinformation. Eddie Lopez said the same to me also.

I mean Hemming was good pals with Gordon Winslow. Don't get me started on that.

There, I have articulated myself on these issues. In a non emotional way. It seems to me you are the one who over reacted.

Jimbo,

It wasn't a petition for cryin' out loud. I wasn't trying to get him on some ballot or kicked off the forum.

It was a poll. I wanted to see what other members thought of him, and why. All done with the realistic expectation that most of us would reply negatively, and the naive hope that we could motivate him to tone it down a bit; to post less often, to post shorter posts, and to become less pedantic.

I never made a "180" regarding Trejo, i.e., a radical change in my thinking about him, his theory, and his irritating way of lecturing us about Walker ad nauseum.

If I remember correctly (and that's a big "if"), Trejo contacted me by PM after we had, on the "threads," expressed a common interest in the possibility that Morales monitored Oswald in New Orleans on August 9, 1963, and politely asked me to forward a question to a moderator as to what he had to do to get reinstated. I figured he asked me to help him this way because he and I had recently experienced a minor thawing in our cold relationship (i.e., he finally seemed to agree with me that I'd spotted "El Indio" in the Jim Doyle film), and he couldn't think of anyone else to turn to. The ironic thing is that Trejo could have sent a PM to a moderator himself, if he had known which "link" / page to go to. In no way did he ask me to Intercede (with a capital "I") for him or to plead his case to a moderator. And I didn't volunteer to do so.

Nice guy that I am, I forwarded his desperate question to a moderator, and when she sent me one back with instructions for Trejo, I forwarded said instructions to him. Wouldn't you have done the same, Jimbo? Or aren't you a nice guy?

It's all very suspicious, isn't it, Jimbo?

Sorry to be so ... emotional ... there at the very end, but not for calling you "Jimbo," James, because I mean that's just a term of endearment. Right?

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to inject myself between James and Tommy too much, both of whom I appreciate as members of this forum. My hope was to open any wounds and clean them out. Tommy - only you know whether Jimbo is a term of endearment or derision, so if it is the latter please refrain from using it.

James - Tommy's explanation for his dealings with Trejo and for his poll on him is accurate. I take him at his word that it wasn't a petition. And in a way his position and yours are very close. His language is nuanced, but it is clear that he admits to being annoyed with Trejo's posting style and was 'naively' hoping it might change. We all agree with that I am sure, and repeating it here is perhaps giving Trejo another chance to view himself through a different lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

It would be very easy to take his so called poll on Trejo as a petition would it not?

Further, if the above was the reason for his dust up with me, then what is the cause of him accusing me of being allied with every single nutty conspiracy theory around, like ISIS being a False Flag front etc. What does one have to do with the other?

And further, that smear does not even hold true for the JFK case. Since no one reviews more books or films than CTKA does and the vast majority are found wanting.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I noticed that too. I don't personally get how you could be accused of never meeting a conspiracy theory you didn't like. Petition/poll was nuanced, and I have no problem with your use of language.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I noticed that too. I don't personally get how you could be accused of never meeting a conspiracy theory you didn't like. Petition/poll was nuanced, and I have no problem with your use of language.

Paul B.,

My bad.

I should have said, "He never met a weak, unsubstantiated, un-fact-checked, CIA-Did-It-JFK-Conspiracy-Theory he didn't like."

And no, I'm not saying that the CIA didn't do it.

LOL How ironic? Or just ... hypocritical ?

--Tommy :sun

PS It's interesting that Mr. James DiEugenio seems to think I was trying, through the vehicle of my poll, to get Word Twister Trejo kicked off the forum. I mean ... in this context, that's the only thing a damn petition could have been good for, right?

I mean, it sounds like a serious case of wishful thinking on Mr. James DiEugenio's part, right?

The funny thing is that, looking back at it, I wish it had been a petition, because I'm sick and tired of Word Twister Trejo. (Until, of course, he agrees with something I post or comes up with some "evidence" that appeals to me. In which case I'll try to twist his words and force them to accommodate my theories-in-progress.

I mean, turn about is fair play, right?

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul Trejo - You have quoted Hemming's 'confession' to Weberman over and over for years on numerous threads that he offered LHO double for his rifle if he would bring it to work. Now you decide that there is no good evidence that LHO entered the TSBD with a rifle that day. Rather than accept the obvious choice that Hemming, a known falsifier, was lying, you simply make up a story to account for the discrepancy. And then you want the readers to take your criticisms of the work of other researchers - Hewitt, DiEugenio, Peter Dale Scott and others seriously.

Paul Brancato -- once again you got it wrong.

This is because of your extreme prejudice against my theory.

What Gerry Patrick Hemming told A.J. Weberman was that he called LHO from Miami and offered LHO double the price of his Manlicher-Carcano rifle if he would bring it to the TSBD on the morning of 11/22/1963 -- to be received by one of Hemming's confederates.

A rumor later spread that LHO had hid it on the 6th floor, for that confederate to find.

But Gerry Patrick Hemming didn't add that part. He only said "to the TSBD".

That's why I clarified the theory yesterday for Tommy. LHO evidently handed it to somebody outside the TSBD.

We don't know who this was -- but it was obviously somebody that LHO trusted because of his known connection to Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Larry Howard, David Ferrie, Carlos Bringuier, Guy Banister and Clay Shaw.

Was it Roscoe White? This seems plausible since (1) Roscoe White was seen in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 around Guy Banister's operation; and (2) Roscoe was *was* seen on the Grassy Knoll moments after the JFK shooting by the Babushka Lady.

Now, I grant you that Gerry Patrick Hemming was also a fountain of disinformation -- yet he knew so much about the JFK assassination that it seems to me quite foolish to just dismiss everything he ever said.

And yes, I think that we have more than enough evidence to link David Morales with Guy Banister in NOLA during the summer of 1963. Neck Scratcher is only a part of that evidence.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Paul, you try over and over to put words in my mouth and mis characterize me. It is what bothers me about you. You are intellectually dishonest. Show me where I demonstrated extreme prejudice against your 'theory'. No Paul, not your theory, your method of argument is what I am extremely prejudiced against. And just take a look at your last response. I did not mis state your oft repeated Weberman snippet. You can say I did, but anyone reading this thread knows I did not. Then you choose, by way of that bs, to ignore my point - Hemming was a known falsifier. So rather than consider that this story that he called Oswald from Miami yadayada etc was a fabrication, you make up your own story about how Oswald must have met Hemming's confederate outside the TSBD and handed off the rifle. On what basis other than Hemming's statement to Weberman to you conclude this? None. No one has ever come forward having seen this hand off, Hemming never named his confederate. Hence, you offer nothing even remotely resembling truth.

Paul - you are the one who loves to demand 'facts' when other people state their theories. Hold yourself to the same standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Paul, you try over and over to put words in my mouth and mis characterize me. It is what bothers me about you. You are intellectually dishonest. Show me where I demonstrated extreme prejudice against your 'theory'. No Paul, not your theory, your method of argument is what I am extremely prejudiced against. And just take a look at your last response. I did not mis state your oft repeated Weberman snippet. You can say I did, but anyone reading this thread knows I did not. Then you choose, by way of that bs, to ignore my point - Hemming was a known falsifier. So rather than consider that this story that he called Oswald from Miami yadayada etc was a fabrication, you make up your own story about how Oswald must have met Hemming's confederate outside the TSBD and handed off the rifle. On what basis other than Hemming's statement to Weberman to you conclude this? None. No one has ever come forward having seen this hand off, Hemming never named his confederate. Hence, you offer nothing even remotely resembling truth.

Paul - you are the one who loves to demand 'facts' when other people state their theories. Hold yourself to the same standard.

Well, Paul B., actually, the only thing you seem to write to me about is resentment that I have the mettle to criticize some of the sacred cows of the CT community, like Peter Dale Scott and James DiEugenio.

You believe in the CIA-did-it CT so much that you've had playing cards printed, haven't you? These show the various roles that you have come to believe the various CIA high-command played in the JFK murder, don't they? All based on writers like Scott and DiEugenio.

You claim that it's not my Walker-did-it theory that you object to, but only my "methods". But actually, if Walker-did-it, then the CIA didn't -- and that's what really galls you, isn't it? Well, I feel sure that a lot of people are in your boat.

As for Gerry Patrick Hemming being a known L-I-A-R for a full 50% of the time -- I've already answered that. But your point -- like that of many others -- is that we should therefore accept NOTHING that he said.

That, according to A.J. Weberman, would be a MAJOR MISTAKE. Gerry Patrick Hemming played a direct role in the JFK murder, and he knew ALL of the principal players. He also explained why he lied so much -- to protect his own life.

As for my theory about LHO handing his rifle to one of Hemming's confederates outside of the TSBD, I'm not making ANY of that up -- I am simply putting one and two and three together:

(1) Gerry Patrick Hemming (not me) told A.J. Weberman that he called LHO on 11/21/1963 and offered him double the price of his rifle to bring it to the TSBD the next morning; and

(2) Serious JFK researchers have confirmed that NOBODY saw LHO take a package inside the TSBD, and

(3) Linnie Mae Randle and Wesley Buell Frazier both testified that they saw LHO carrying a long package on the morning of 11/22/1963; and Wesley said he saw LHO bolt out of his car with the package, hurrying 50 paces past Wesley, which he never did before.

When I add these OBJECTIVE REPORTS together: 1, 2, 3 -- I make NOTHING up when I say that the logical conclusion is that LHO obviously handed that package to one of Hemming's confederates outside of the TSBD. It makes perfect sense, and it uses entirely objective reports of OTHERS.

This is the BEST THEORY I've ever read to explain how the JFK Plotters got ahold of LHO's rifle. LHO didn't shoot his rifle on 11/23/1963 -- but J. Edgar Hoover knew before the day was over exactly WHO DID.

The FACTS just keep adding up.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Paul, you try over and over to put words in my mouth and mis characterize me. It is what bothers me about you. You are intellectually dishonest. Show me where I demonstrated extreme prejudice against your 'theory'. No Paul, not your theory, your method of argument is what I am extremely prejudiced against. And just take a look at your last response. I did not mis state your oft repeated Weberman snippet. You can say I did, but anyone reading this thread knows I did not. Then you choose, by way of that bs, to ignore my point - Hemming was a known falsifier. So rather than consider that this story that he called Oswald from Miami yadayada etc was a fabrication, you make up your own story about how Oswald must have met Hemming's confederate outside the TSBD and handed off the rifle. On what basis other than Hemming's statement to Weberman to you conclude this? None. No one has ever come forward having seen this hand off, Hemming never named his confederate. Hence, you offer nothing even remotely resembling truth.

Paul - you are the one who loves to demand 'facts' when other people state their theories. Hold yourself to the same standard.

Well, Paul B., actually, the only thing you seem to write to me about is resentment that I have the mettle to criticize some of the sacred cows of the CT community, like Peter Dale Scott and James DiEugenio.

You believe in the CIA-did-it CT so much that you've had playing cards printed, haven't you? These show the various roles that you have come to believe the various CIA high-command played in the JFK murder, don't they? All based on writers like Scott and DiEugenio.

You claim that it's not my Walker-did-it theory that you object to, but only my "methods". But actually, if Walker-did-it, then the CIA didn't -- and that's what really galls you, isn't it? Well, I feel sure that a lot of people are in your boat.

As for Gerry Patrick Hemming being a known L-I-A-R for a full 50% of the time -- I've already answered that. But your point -- like that of many others -- is that we should therefore accept NOTHING that he said.

That, according to A.J. Weberman, would be a MAJOR MISTAKE. Gerry Patrick Hemming played a direct role in the JFK murder, and he knew ALL of the principal players. He also explained why he lied so much -- to protect his own life.

As for my theory about LHO handing his rifle to one of Hemming's confederates outside of the TSBD, I'm not making ANY of that up -- I am simply putting one and two and three together:

(1) Gerry Patrick Hemming (not me) told A.J. Weberman that he called LHO on 11/21/1963 and offered him double the price of his rifle to bring it to the TSBD the next morning; and

(2) Serious JFK researchers have confirmed that NOBODY saw LHO take a package inside the TSBD, and

(3) Linnie Mae Randle and Wesley Buell Frazier both testified that they saw LHO carrying a long package on the morning of 11/22/1963; and Wesley said he saw LHO bolt out of his car with the package, hurrying 50 paces past Wesley, which he never did before.

When I add these OBJECTIVE REPORTS together: 1, 2, 3 -- I make NOTHING up when I say that the logical conclusion is that LHO obviously handed that package to one of Hemming's confederates outside of the TSBD. It makes perfect sense, and it uses entirely objective reports of OTHERS.

This is the BEST THEORY I've ever read to explain how the JFK Plotters got ahold of LHO's rifle. LHO didn't shoot his rifle on 11/23/1963 -- but J. Edgar Hoover knew before the day was over exactly WHO DID.

The FACTS just keep adding up.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Trejo,

You're twisting words, again.

1 ) Only a couple of people were asked it they saw Oswald carrying a package near or inside the TSBD. "Emotional" Jack Dougherty was one of them.

2 ) Buell Frazier said the package Oswald was carrying was too short to have been the broken-down carbine.

3 ) Frazier didn't say Oswald "bolted" out of the car and appeared to intentionally try to get way ahead of him. He said that Oswald simply didn't wait around for him while he revved up his old car's engine for five or ten minutes to recharge the battery.

Please do try to get small details like these straight in the future.

You're getting just as bad as Mr. You-Know-Who.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Trejo - you have obviously not read my JFK cards, but you have no problem telling me what's in them. Your response to me is so full of wrong assumptions that I am discouraged from engaging further. Maybe tomorrow I'll find the fortitude.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2017 is approaching. Many documents will be released.

It does not take a rocket scientist to ASSUME, there are some here who are taking the JFK assassination research community temperature.

Trial balloons, rehashing research past, claimed alphabet agency participants-operatives... what better place for that kind of digging-rooting, than here.... what-a-game!

The 1964 Warren Commission Report is trash... get over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trejo,

You're twisting words, again.

1 ) Only a couple of people were asked it they saw Oswald carrying a package near or inside the TSBD. "Emotional" Jack Dougherty was one of them.

2 ) Buell Frazier said the package Oswald was carrying was too short to have been the broken-down carbine.

3 ) Frazier didn't say Oswald "bolted" out of the car and appeared to intentionally try to get way ahead of him. He said that Oswald simply didn't wait around for him while he revved up his old car's engine for five or ten minutes to recharge the battery.

Please do try to get small details like these straight in the future.

You're getting just as bad as Mr. You-Know-Who.

--Tommy :sun

Well, Tommy, you're the one jumping to conclusions now, aren't you?

(1) Of those people who WERE asked if they saw LHO take a package into the TSBD, all said NO.

(2) Wesley Buell Frazier said that the long package could fit between Oswald's palm and armpit; but you neglect to mention that Wesley and his sister couldn't AGREE on how long the package was.

(2.1) You also neglect the book by Robert D. Morrow, "First Hand Knowledge" (1992) in which he claims to have designed and produced three versions of the JFK murder weapon -- a modified Manlicher-Carcano -- to fit inside a common tool box.

(3) You're actually leaving out what Wesley actually said. Let's look at his ACTUAL testimony in the Warren Commission, shall we?

---------- BEGIN EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?

...

Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in. So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks. One day you go across one track and maybe there would be some cars sitting there and there would be another diesel coming there, so you have to watch when you cross the tracks, I just walked along and I just like to watch them switch the cars, so eventually he kept getting a little further ahead of me and by that time we got down there pretty close to the Depository Building there, I say, he would be as much as, I would say, roughly 50 feet in front of me but I didn't try to catch up with him because I knew I had plenty of time so I just took my time walking up there.

---------- END EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

So, you were wrong on two main counts, Tommy.

(A) LHO didn't leave Wesley revving up his car to recharge his battery -- you made that up.

(B ) LHO did indeed walk way ahead of Wesley, up to 50 feet ahead he said, until Wesley didn't bother to catch up.

So, Tommy, if you want to check facts, remember that I like to check facts, too.

People who live in tin houses shouldn't throw can-openers.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

---------- BEGIN EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?

...

Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in. So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks. One day you go across one track and maybe there would be some cars sitting there and there would be another diesel coming there, so you have to watch when you cross the tracks, I just walked along and I just like to watch them switch the cars, so eventually he kept getting a little further ahead of me and by that time we got down there pretty close to the Depository Building there, I say, he would be as much as, I would say, roughly 50 feet in front of me but I didn't try to catch up with him because I knew I had plenty of time so I just took my time walking up there.

---------- END EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

Where in that testimony did Frazer say that he saw Oswald 'bolt" ahead of him?

All he said was that he walked slower than Oswald because he was watching the freight trains. "so I just took my time walking up there."

You do read things into what people say that aren't there. Paul.

Edited by Ray Mitcham
Link to post
Share on other sites

---------- BEGIN EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?

...

Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in. So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks. One day you go across one track and maybe there would be some cars sitting there and there would be another diesel coming there, so you have to watch when you cross the tracks, I just walked along and I just like to watch them switch the cars, so eventually he kept getting a little further ahead of me and by that time we got down there pretty close to the Depository Building there, I say, he would be as much as, I would say, roughly 50 feet in front of me but I didn't try to catch up with him because I knew I had plenty of time so I just took my time walking up there.

---------- END EXTRACT OF W.B. FRAZIER TESTIMONY TO WC -------------

Where in that testimony did Frazer say that he saw Oswald 'bolt" ahead of him?

All he said was that he walked slower than Oswald because he was watching the freight trains. "so I just took my time walking up there."

You do read things into what people say that aren't there. Paul.

Yes, Ray, you're right, and I was agreeing with Tommy, to a point, that is, I wasn't originally trying to be literal but to illustrate the point.

Yet Tommy wished to hold me to the literal text -- and so I agree. I could be more literal.

Yet if I'm going to be held to a standard of LITERALISM, then I will also hold OTHERS to the same standard. That's why I showed the flaws in Tommy's complaint to me.

OK -- all that said -- let's get back to the issues.

It seems obvious to me that Wesley Frazier was being scrutinized as a possible ACCOMPLICE of LHO for the murder of JFK. We recall that the DPD gave Wesley a lie-detector test on 11/22/1963, because, after all, Wesley drove LHO to the shooting site, and also delivered LHO's rifle to the shooting site.

So, Wesley was sensitive to that. If the DPD suspected him, then so would the WC and the whole world. It seems to me that we can also detect in Wesley Frazier's testimony a tendency to "distance" himself from LHO, and to be as innocent (and as blind) as possible, so that nobody would suspect him of a Plot to murder JFK.

After all, Wesley Frazier lived only a few houses away from Ruth Paine -- in whose garage the gun was stored -- according to Marina Oswald!

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...