Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Armstrong blasts the mail order rifle “evidence”


Recommended Posts

Here is what allegedly happened:. At first, all the FBI had to go on was the rifle's model and serial number, and a date range in which the rifle could have been sold. The FBI spent seven hours manually looking through thousands of Internal Invoices till they found the one that had the matching serial number printed on it. From the Internal Invoice they got the order amount, $21.45, and the method of payment, money order.

[....]

Ah, but as usual, we can't even get past Step 1 of the Official Story before discovering that the FBI is just making EVERYTHING up. After “seven hours manually looking through thousands of internal invoices” the three FBI agents had clearly failed to find ANYTHING about the sixth floor rifle!

What they apparently DID find was a rifle that sold for $21.95 paid for with a postal money order issued on March 20, 1963. This $21.95 rifle was the second incorrect price dreamed up by the FBI, after already telling Curry that Oswald's handwriting was on an order for a $12.78 rifle. It would take the FBI A WEEK to announce that a $21.45 rifle from Kleins had been paid for with a postal money order dated March 12, 1963.

Here's a page from a January 1964 document (CD296) sent by the Chief Postal Inspector of the USPS to J. Lee Rankin of the W.C.

cd296.jpg

The unnamed Dallas postal inspector mentioned in this report, by the way, was none other than Postal Inspector/FBI informant Harry Holmes, who was extremely helpful in the prosecution of “Lee Harvey Oswald.” Among his many heroic actions, Harry Holmes was the only human being on earth who heard “Oswald” tell Dallas police he had traveled to Mexico City. What a guy, that Harry Holmes!

Edited by Jim Hargrove
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 424
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Howdy, Jim

Those following the Stephen King TV mini-series 11.22.63 should also be keenly focused on what's being presented in this startling research. Obviously, LHO couldn't take a shot at General Walker & then later, JFK with a surplus rifle he didn't order & possess. Someone other than LHO could have.

Last weeks' King episode 5 (Jake & his helper Bill mission to catch LHO in the act of firing his alleged MC at Gen. Walker was thwarted by Sadie being attacked & disfigured by her deranged ex & helper Bill was distracted by a woman coming out of church services that resembled his murdered sister). The TV viewer hears the rifle shot but no visual of who fired it. Pretty slick way of worming out of the premise that LHO shot JFK with the same MC (using the same bullets, Jake tells us) that LHO shot & missed Gen Walker with. No allegedly, it's constantly presented as a fact.

FWIW, I suspect that Stephen's King's 11.22.63 TV mini-series is an attempt by Dulles' boys to deflect attention away from the research in this thread. The acting & vintage cars make it enticing to watch but unlike King, I am not convinced LHO had anything to do with JFK's ambush & horrific death. Attention deflection has not worked on me, thus far.

Perhaps someone who knows Stephen King personally might enlighten the man by making him aware of the research contained in this thread & the related work of such noted researchers John Armstrong, Jim DiEugenio, Len Osanic, Jim Hargrove & others who have broken through the wall of deceit Hoover's FBI constructed the weekend of JFK's murder all those years ago. Clearly, this research invalidates the conclusions of both the WC & HSCA, plus the constant MSM brainwashing that LHO shot at & missed General Walker & later shot at & killed JFK by showing the global public evidence that LHO had never purchased the kill weapon in the first place. No MC rifle = no case against LHO. Well done, folks!

I do believe (because of Marina's testimony) that LHO posed with some sort of weapon (in his backyard photos) that was substituted for the MC. LHO could have been holding a pellet/bb gun for all we know. Marina admitted she didn't know one gun from another.

Brad

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Brad!

It took a while, but we can finally pretty much understand what actually happened to JFK and the so-called investigation. One of the things that happened is that a whole lot of evidence was faked in the effort to blame the crime on a deranged loner.

A CIA guy once said something roughly like, “the beauty of a disinformation campaign is that it can be reinstated whenever it is needed.” If the information in this thread was sent to Steven King or the producers of 11.22.63, the response, if any, would probably involve the same disinformation produced during the initial cover-up.

Assuming the 11.22.63 people were knowledgeable enough, or knew someone knowledgeable enough to help them, they would probably produce reports about people like Kleins' VP William Waldman that seem to indicate support for certain elements of the Official Story. I haven't counted them, but the number of FBI reports about the mail order rifle that are demonstrably fake may be approaching a dozen or so.

Anyone interested in showing the true facts behind JFK's assassination simply has to show that much of the evidence in this case is phony. In the case of the rifle the FBI wrote phony reports, including altered statements by people involved at places like Kleins, and then back dated those reports to invent a chronology of alleged events that never really existed. The mother lode of proof that the so-called “evidence” about the rifle has been falsified is John Armstrong's new article that prompted this thread:

READ THE MAIL ORDER RIFLE ARTICLE BY CLICKING HERE.

John's article is long and detailed, and even a careful reader will need to go through it two or three times just to understand the full scope of the FBI's treachery. Many people just won't have the time or interest to do that, and for them we can simply point to the basics:

1. Contemporary newspaper and media reports indicate that the FBI said it was “Oswald's” handwriting on an order for a rifle that cost $12.78 (including a scope) and was paid for with a postal money order dated March 20, 1963. (The “evidence” now says the gun cost $21.45 and was paid for with a postal money order dated March 12, 1963.)

2. The postal money order now in evidence was never endorsed or date stamped by any bank or financial institution, despite requirements to do so.

3. According to the evidence offered by the Warren Commission, the money order was deposited by a bank a month before the bank received it.

4. A copper jacketed bullet (Commission Exhibit 573) that “Oswald” allegedly used to shoot at Gen. Edwin Walker seems to match a copper jacketed bullet (CE 399) that allegedly did all that damage to JFK and Gov. Connally in Dealey Plaza. But the original Dallas police report indicated that the Walker bullet was steel jacketed. Now we have two magic bullets, all allegedly fired from the same magic rifle which was paid for with the same magic money order!

There is, of course, much more, and we now have exhibits showing how both the FBI and the Warren Commission altered testimony and statements of witnesses to this case that can be comprehended in just a few minutes.

It's all coming undone! And there's nothing the Steven Kings of the world or any other Warren Commission apologists can do about it except embarrass themselves even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The importance of this research cannot be overstated, Jim; it clearly demonstrates that the 'LHO did it' official line kool aid is wrong & a lie. JFK's violent death is still unsolved IMHO.

For others like me that are presently monitoring & picking apart Stephen King's TV mini-series, 11.22.63, that are consistently asking themselves how LHO is supposed to be shooting at General Edwin A. Walker with a weapon he didn't order nor receive via the mail, how is LHO later sneaking the same weapon into his work & using it to kill JFK with if the evidence demonstrates he never had it to begin with, the research is a constant safety shelter to seek answers the TV-series does not offer.

I was disappointed with Episode 5 of the King series because not only did King not show us LHO firing at Gen. Walker (both primary series characters were dealing with a personal crisis that drew them away from the ambush), but he failed to show us LHO allegedly boarding a city bus and making past the bus driver & passengers on the bus with the weapon hidden in a raincoat. That acrobatic act I really wanted to see! (lol). I bet Ed Sullivan would have wanted to see it too...he might have even headlined an act like that ahead of the Beatles.

How potent is this research? It's so strong Stephen King omits all of it from his new mini series 11.22.63. The subject of just how LHO is alleged to taken possession of the MC has not been addressed as of Episode 5. Apparently, monitoring LHO making his alleged rifle purchase money order and leaving work to allegedly mail it was too costly for King to include in his series or it leads the viewer to the conclusion that there is no proof LHO purchased his alleged MC. Ever. How LHO allegedly got his hands on it has not been brought up nor explored in the series. This leaves the viewer to wonder if LHO was born with the rifle? Maybe Marina slipped in in his Easter basket? What's up with the omissions of how LHO obtained his alleged MC, Mr. King?

I suspect that when John Armstrong's work on the MC bogus paperwork first began appearing on the Internet the go ahead to put the mini-series into production began as a vehicle to derail that evidence. I can't prove that, but I highly suspect that's the case. Just think, Jim, thanks to all the researchers' efforts to get the truth out to the global public concerning the genealogy of the MC, a small army of actors, TV production people & marketing folks now have some TV work & food on their tables!

When the media uses its best tools to fight you, it often means you are having an effect that is causing sleeping problems for some really big, lunker fish.

Keep on keeping on, Jim, and the others who contributed to presenting the global public truthful information contained in all the many pages of this very important topic thread...

Brad

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to post
Share on other sites

How potent is this research? It's so strong Stephen King omits all of it from his new mini series 11.22.63. The subject of just how LHO is alleged to taken possession of the MC has not been addressed as of Episode 5. [....]

I suspect that when John Armstrong's work on the MC bogus paperwork first began appearing on the Internet the go ahead to put the mini-series into production began as a vehicle to derail that evidence. [....]

Wait. You can't blame that whole tv fiasco on John's research and my website. <g> I first put the Harvey and Lee site up in 1999, and it got really good after John began paying attention to it and rewriting everything three or four years ago.

The magic money order has been up for some years, though I can't remember quite when it premiered. Plus, even if you can't bring yourself to accept the whole Harvey and Lee scenario, you have to admit there's a trainload of problems with the official biography of LHO.

I'd like to think HarveyandLee.net has been pissing off the right people since the last millennium, not just recently!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, Jim. JFK researchers know all too well that when they hit a nerve deep enough, the main stream media ignores them as if they are invisible. No interviews, no sitting next to Megyn Kelly or Poppy Harlow on TV. Tell the MSM what it wants to hear & it's Larry Sabato & Gerald Posner, etc. sitting at the interview table. No focus on the new evidence the JFK researchers have to offer. It's an old, familiar formula for those of us who have been around the block for a lot of years.

My first impression upon finishing Episode 5 of the 8 part 11.22.63 mini-series was that King is after John Armstrong & his peers because he repeatedly puts LHO with the MC when the new evidence clearly demonstrates the paper trail for the weapon's purchase is bogus, causing an interested reader to wonder how could LHO take possession of a weapon he did not order through the mail? I suppose someone may argue that LHO was given the weapon by someone who ordered it for him, but my thought's don't go in that direction at the moment. The series isn't over yet (3 episodes to go); King left a lot out of Episode 5: his time traveler doesn't watch LHO purchase his alleged money order & mail it when time cards indicate LHO was at work with not enough time to walk or be driven to the Post Office that the money order was supposedly mailed from. King doesn't take us to the Post Office & show us LHO picking up the rifle that was addressed to someone else (A. Hidell). LHO's alleged pistol isn't mentioned.

Stephen King has a perfect time travel vehicle to address the questions 'Harvey & Lee' & John Armstrong's (among others) research ask the reader to consider & answer obvious questions, yet King doesn't use it to address those considerations & questions; instead he waterboards us with 'LHO did it' kool aid. That is not surprising if one reads King's letter to the New York Times in 2011. Stephen King believes LHO did it. LHO is depicted photographed by Marina holding the MC rifle & field stripping it at a table in prior episode scenes. How LHO obtained the rifle is not addressed. LHO just has it. That's all King shows us. King avoids showing us LHO firing the MC at Gen. Walker. We hear the shot, but no visual on the shooter. King fails to show us LHO allegedly boarding a bus with the MC hidden in his raincoat, not alarming the bus driver or his passengers, departing the bus & walking to a spot near Gen. Walker's house to bury the weapon in some brush prior to the actual shooting. We don't see LHO allegedly photographing Walker's home prior to the murder attempt. No mention of the two men seen by a neighbor of Walker's scoping out the General's home a couple of days prior to the shooting.

King can do better than that & still sell his kool aid, IMHO. He can take us anywhere & everywhere LHO is supposed to have been & done things. Let's see if King takes us to Mexico City, Sylvia Odio's house or meets with Phillips in the remaining episodes. I'm not holding my breath.

This may sound strange from a fellow that's been following the case since he was an 11 year-old kid playing marbles at recess in the 5th grade on Nov 22, 1963, but I actually forgot about Harvey & Lee when I made those prior comments in this thread. That's not unusual for me, at 63, I'm lost if I enter a Wal-Mart without a list of items reminding me why I went there in the first place. I've lost track of the mornings I've awoken & my 1st conscious thought was, "Damn, I'm still here!" I'm old & my brain's memory banks tend to get crowded from time to time; my battery has a tendency to run low at times when I really need it fully charged. Generally speaking, I can remember back to just about all the research that's been done on the case in addition to the original news reports, TV coverage & government investigations & reports since the get go. If I mess up & forget something that happened along the way from then until now, I've always got Pat Speer's spectacular website to reference back to. It was not my intention to offend you, Jim.

This case has had so many twists & turns to it that it shouldn't be a surprise that important info gets misplaced or lost in the shuffle. I do humbly & sincerely apologize, good Sir, if I gave you the impression that 'Harvey & Lee' was behind some other researcher's work in the JFK saga timeline. I remember following your work when 'Harvey & Lee' first appeared on the Internet & noticing LNer website staff writers mocking & otherwise trying to rip it apart. It left an indelible impression on me that the public really doesn't know who LHO really was & how many of us 'regular guy' type folks might have imposters running around the globe pretending to be us without our knowledge. It's all essential to understanding the events that lead to & followed JFK's mysterious public ambush & death. It all matters.

I do expect the number of visitors to rise in this thread (and those of 'Harvey & Lee') as 'newbies' to the JFK quagmire view Stephen King's mini-series on their computers, buy the DVD & come to the thread to fact check King's work. Regardless if they start at the end of the thread and work back to page 1, or start at the beginning & reach this spot, there's critical information in this thread that forces the Government's conclusions about LHO to vaporize into thin air. That's my humble opinion.

I do encourage others to go back & take a look again at Harvey & Lee (especially if they skimmed over it before). I promise to do the same & refresh my memory. After the JFK 50 mass 'LHO did it' blitzkrieg, I've lost faith in the MSM when it comes to the JFK assassination & eyeball anything marketed & broadcast from them about the JFK case suspiciously. If this sounds a bit paranoid to some, my defense is the MSM did this to me. It made me this way (lol).

Best always, Jim

Brad

PS to Jim DiEugenio: I have admired you & your work for well over a decade now, Jim. I have a folder where anything that mentions you on the Internet catches the mentions, so I can keep up with your latest efforts & endeavors. I have all your critiques, reviews & books too. No serious JFK student should be missing anything you have educated the global public with & I can't wait for you to tear into Stephen King's mini-series at CTKA. When you are on a roll, I usually learn about 12 new words I didn't know existed each analysis/critique you publish online (I learned more new words in your 'Unsolved History' critiques & reviews than I ever did in college & I had some pretty good professors).

I do my best to stick to you like glue, great Sir! I only wish someone would ask me who do I think would make a great Supreme Court Judge, POTUS, deserves a Pulitzer or Nobel peace prize. I'd immediately nominate you each & every opportunity that came my way, Jim.

Best wishes always,

Sincerely,

Brad

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember following your work when 'Harvey & Lee' first appeared on the Internet & noticing LNer website staff writers mocking & otherwise trying to rip it apart. It left an indelible impression on me that the public really doesn't know who LHO really was & how many of us 'regular guy' type folks might have imposters running around the globe pretending to be us without our knowledge. It's all essential to understanding the events that lead to & followed JFK's mysterious public ambush & death. It all matters.

I was arguing online with a guy once who said something like, "Well, this Harvey and Lee business is impossible to believe, though it is true that Oswald had a couple of doppelgangers running around imitating him at various times." And I had to wonder, how many times does someone have to believe in doppelgangers running around before you start to look for a more reasonable explanation?
I'd try to think about it some more, but one of my doppelgangers wants to do lunch. Back later.
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem I have with Stephen King's TV mini-series thus far, Jim. King has had 5 episodes for main character, Jake, & his assistant, Bill, to spy on both LHO and Harvey during the 3 year time frame portrayed thus far in the 5 TV mini-series episodes. The TV viewer not familiar with 'Harvey & Lee' won't have any idea what Harvey is all about in King's TV mini-series. How a science fiction mystery writer like Stephen King could resist exploring the mysteries of LHO's exact imitation twin (doppelganger Harvey) in a science fiction mystery mini-series, supposedly based on historical 'facts', boggles my mind.

Episode 5 ended with Gen. Edwin A. Walker arriving at Parkland hospital wounded by bullet shrapnel in his arm. Prior to this, King skips over LHO's time in Russia & most of his return to the USA. We miss LHO's debriefing. We miss LHO paying back his State department loan. I've already mentioned earlier a lot of critical issues King skips over. Stephen King very easily could have had his fictional main characters exploring a heck of a lot more than they did thus far. This is what aggravates me about vocal LNer's like Mr. King: it's either their way or the highway. Nothing else exists for them. I simply don't buy that stance from folks with a 'LHO did it' viewpoint, regardless of the JFK productions they offer the public.

While I'm here at the moment, I'd like to mention that Stephen King has possession of a visual literary device/vehicle in 11.22.63 that very easily could incorporate much, if not all of the JFK researchers work in the last decade plus. His characters can be placed anywhere that LHO is alleged to have visited & done things just as easily as they can tag along with actors who are the subjects in many JFK research printed & visual media. For example, in the final three episodes, Jake could visit New Orleans, be out on the street when LHO hands out the 'hands off Cuba' leaflets, watch him get into a verbal altercation with anti-Castro Cubans & arrested, be at the radio station with LHO being interviewed, hang out with Allen Dulles, ZR-RIFLE folks, the Joint Chiefs, J. Edgar Hoover, dance the twist with Jackie at the White House, smoke cigars with Fidel Castro, slug down vodka with Nikita Khrushchev, going golfing & sailing with JFK, etc. In addition to murdering two persons from the past (thus far), Jake could be anywhere Stephen King's pen places him.

At the conclusion of the final episode, if main character Jake avoids the motorcade's frantic journey to Parkland hospital with the alleged extra stop West of Dealey Plaza, misses the mystery of the discovery of the stretcher that the magic bullet was found on, omits how JFK appeared to the doctors & nurses that did their best to save his life, doesn't include David Lifton & Doug Horne's JFK's body shell game on AF-1 & the additional casket shell game at Bethesda, omits Bill Kelly's AF-1 edited radio broadcasts research & a ton of other JFK researcher's efforts in the last decade, it will only go to strengthen in my mind what I have already surmised about Mr. King & his TV entertainment mini-series, namely, those subjects aren't present because Mr. King doesn't want them visible to the public in his production. Sound familiar?

To tantalize my mind, as a mystery writer, I expect Stephen King to visually present those very subjects the global public has questions about, not hide them off camera. In the movie 'Carrie', Sissy Spacek's hand flying upwards out of the ground startled me badly (ask me about spilled drive-in theatre popcorn & soft drink). In 11.22.63, waterboarding me with 'LHO did it' kool aid not only startles me, it makes me choke. Choking is not good entertainment in my book.

That in itself is why I find the Education Forum a national treasure. The Internet gives it global treasure status. One can get a glimpse here of what those in positions of censorship wouldn't hesitate to apply blindfolds to or ignore completely (as if it didn't exist).

Best always, Jim

Brad

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to post
Share on other sites

To focus back on the Magic Money Order and the Magic Rifle, here are some of the highlights of the cover-up so far:

Newspaper and electronic media reports throughout the week immediately following the assassination indicated that the FBI claimed “Oswald's” handwriting was on an order form for a $12.78 rifle with scope paid for with a postal money order dated March 20, 1963. Hoover couldn't change these reports, so he could only hope all of us would forget them when the final “evidence” the bureau fabricated showed the rifle cost $21.45 and the money order was dated March 12, 1963.

The final version of the postal money order for $21.45, now in evidence, was never endorsed or date stamped by a single bank or financial institution, indicating it was never cashed. Why? Because Dallas postal inspector/FBI informant Harry Holmes, who probably helped fabricate the document, had the ability to fake postal documents, but didn't have the ability to fake evidence from private banks. A bank deposit slip, offered by the Warren Commission as evidence the money order was cashed, is dated a month before the money order was issued by the post office.

Oswald's Magic Rifle supposedly fired a copper jacketed bullet found in the home of Edwin Walker, but Dallas police originally reported that a steel jacketed bullet was retrieved from Walker's home.

If the FBI faked all the evidence about Oswald's ownership of the Magic Rifle, what else did the FBI fake? Is it unreasonable to assume the FBI faked all the evidence against Oswald?

Researchers may have the best chance to break through our Orwellian news coverage of JFK's assassination by proving that ALL THE EVIDENCE AGAINST “LEE HARVEY OSWALD” IS FAKE.

Here are some ways to prove the evidence is phony:

1. Hoover had the power to alter, fabricate, or destroy every document and item of evidence in his possession, but he couldn't change contemporaneously published news reports about them. (Example: the $12.78 rifle allegedly purchased with a 3/20/63 money order)

2. Phony documentation fabricated by the FBI was sometimes sloppy and can be shown to be false. (Examples: the uncashed money order; “Oswald” W-2 forms from different employers typed on the same typewriter.)

3. By analyzing holes in the FBI “cover story,” the sheer absurdity of the whole story can be shown. (This is accomplished time after time in John Armstrong's Mail Order Rifle Writeup.)

Using these and other techniques, I hope researchers continue proving that the so-called evidence in the case against Lee Harvey Oswald is as bogus and treacherous as the conclusions of the Warren Commission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BM: PS to Jim DiEugenio: I have admired you & your work for well over a decade now, Jim. I have a folder where anything that mentions you on the Internet catches the mentions, so I can keep up with your latest efforts & endeavors. I have all your critiques, reviews & books too. No serious JFK student should be missing anything you have educated the global public with & I can't wait for you to tear into Stephen King's mini-series at CTKA. When you are on a roll, I usually learn about 12 new words I didn't know existed each analysis/critique you publish online (I learned more new words in your 'Unsolved History' critiques & reviews than I ever did in college & I had some pretty good professors).

I do my best to stick to you like glue, great Sir! I only wish someone would ask me who do I think would make a great Supreme Court Judge, POTUS, deserves a Pulitzer or Nobel peace prize. I'd immediately nominate you each & every opportunity that came my way, Jim.

Thanks so much Brad. Things like this must drive DVP mad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my college Professors was convinced that the 'Mexico City Charade' concerning LHO is the answer to the JFK assassination, Jim D. & Jim H. When discussing the JFK assassination, I remember him remarking to his class that 'the first lie the government considers telling the public will usually be closer to the truth than the BS they later bombard the public with via their MSM'. For him, Hoover & LBJ's 29 Nov 1963 phone call about the 'story' of LHO receiving $6,500 at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City to kill JFK is closer to the truth, especially if LHO was not in MC & someone impersonating him was (Jim Hargrove's LHO doppelganger). Recalling the early stories of LHO allegedly in the market to purchase a new car in Dallas & telling the car dealer he was 'coming into some money soon' convinced the good professor that 'story' & the alleged LHO Mexico City Cuban embassy 'payoff' was what was originally intended for public consumption after the shooting that got its plug pulled. He believed both stories were floated in the press by either Hoover or the CIA of 1963; possibly both. That JFK was murdered by an assassin paid by the Cuban government would have made a highly believable story for the global public considering the paranoia about the Cold War & Fidel Castro that existed at the time, reasoned my former Professor.

As for DVP, I can't prove it, but I highly suspect he's been repeatedly watching Stephen King's BS portrayal of LHO slow dancing with his mother in King's episode 6 of 11.22.63; possibly kicking himself for not thinking that BS up himself & scoring big bucks as King's TV mini-series consultant. I expect the 'LHO did it' crowd to follow Stephen King's 11.22.63 TV mini-series' example to vividly portray LHO as harshly & mean as they can make him in future media works, books & Internet propaganda. King deals with the research efforts of Jim Hargrove, John Armstrong & other noted JFK researchers by simply ignoring it all & posing LHO handling the alleged murder weapon as often as possible in his TV mini-series. In episode 6, King even had LHO dry firing the weapon with Jake's assistant on the porch of LHO's rental house apartment. Fight the research evidence with bogus TV scenes seems to be the implied Stephen King message. Sheesh!

I believe Dan Rather & Walter Cronkite sucked most of the big bucks out of the 'LHO did it' baloney casserole already, but I have to admire DVP & others like him for trying to hit the big time like their predecessors both did peddling the same Federal BS. Scoring big bucks doesn't always pay off; Vincent Bugliosi was forced to leave his 'LHO did it' earnings here on Earth when he passed on. Vince didn't complete 10 years of life after publishing 'Reclaiming History'. Vince left with what he came with: nothing.

I often wonder how well Vince is doing in his debate with our Creator somewhere in the Heavens that He doesn't exist. I don't expect Mr. Bugliosi to ever win that debate, anymore than I expect the 'LHO did it' crowd to ever convince the global public, armed with the knowledge of the case provided to us all by dedicated JFK researchers like Jim DiEugenio, John Armstrong, Jim Hargrove and many, many others, that LHO did it.

Brad

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the kind words, Brad.

That alleged $6500 payoff at the Cuban Consulate fits in beautifully with a discussion of the rifle because it shows how desperate some people, including veteran CIA officer David Atlee Phillips, were to blame the assassination on Fidel Castro and thus provoke an invasion of Cuba. This might well have happened had the plotters succeeded in having “Lee Oswald” purchase four rifles from Castro's friend and gun supplier Robert McKeown during the Labor Day weekend prior to the assassination. When that attempt failed, other measures were taken to tie the hit to Castro and Oswald, including promotion of the story of the $6500 and the “negro with red hair.”

From Harvey and Lee:

On November 25 David Phillips' associate, Gilberta Alvarado Ugarte, walked

into the US Embassy in Mexico City and claimed he had been in the Cuban Embassy

in Mexico City on September 18, 1963. He told officials that he witnessed Oswald re­-

ceive $6500 in cash from a "negro with red hair" inside the Cuban consulate to kill Presi­-

dent Kennedy. Alvarado said that Oswald appeared to be "completely at home" in the

Cuban Consulate. 156

NOTE: Oswald allegedly visited the Cuban Consulate (not the Cuban Embassy) on

September 27 (not on September 18 because he was in New Orleans)

Embassy employees turned Alvarado over to CIA officer David Atlee Phillips

for further questioning. Alvarado allegedly told Phillips about a pretty girl at the consu­-

late (an obvious reference to Silvia Duran) whose manners reminded him of a prosti-­

tute. He said the girl embraced Oswald and gave him her home address where she could

be reached.

NOTE: Readers should keep in mind the DFS questioned Duran about a sexual rela-­

tionship with Oswald two days before Alvarado made this allegation to the US Embassy.

The only way the DF S could have known to ask these questions was from David Phillips,

who told Alvarado what to say. Alvarado was a Nicaraguan double agent who the

Warren Commission later identified as FBI informant "T-32."

After completing his first interview with Alvadaro, Phillips (using the pseud­-

onym "M.C. Choaden") sent a cable to CIA headquarters in which he described

Alvarado as, "A well known Nicaraguan Communist underground member."157 In a

second cable Phillips (using the pseudonym "L.F. Barker") wrote that Alvarado, "Ad­-

mitted he was on a penetration mission for the Nicaraguan Secret Service" and de­-

scribed him as, "A quiet, very serious person, who speaks with conviction." 158

NOTE: The Nicaraguan Secret Service, like other Mexican and Central American in­

telligence agencies, was heavily involved in drug trafficking and worked closely with the

CIA. Alvarado reported to Intelligence Chief General Gustavo Montiel, who was later

described in CIA cables as "the kingpin of narcotics traffickers in Nicaragua." He was

also involved in a massive car theft ring in the 1970s that was run by Norwin Meneses

Canterero, who later became a key figure in the Nicaraguan Contra-drug connection and

was able to enter and leave the US with impunity as a result of CIA protection.

In a third cable Phillips called Alvarado "completely cooperative."159 In a fourth

cable Ambassador Thomas Mann reported, "This officer (Phillips) was impressed by

Alvarado ..... the wealth of detail Alvarado gives was striking."160 In a fifth cable Phillips

described Alvarado as "very intelligent" and said, "Alvarado telling truth in general

outline."161 The Alvarado story, as reported by propaganda expert David Atlee Phillips, re­-

ceived the full support of Mexican Ambassador Thomas Mann, FBI Legal Attache Clark

Anderson, and Station Chief Winston Scott, who were probably unaware that Phillips had

fabricated the entire story.

NOTES:

156 WC Exhibit 2121, p. 122.

157 WC Exhibit 2121, pp. 154-156.

157 WCD 1OOOA.

158 WCD 1OOOB, p. 4.

159 WCD 1OOOC, p. 2.

160 National Archives, SSCIA 157-10004-10180, Cable p-8593 CITE MEXI 7104.

161 CIA document #260-670; MEXI 7156.

--From Harvey and Lee, pp 674-675

Copyright © 2003 by John Armstrong

. . . . . . . . . .

Cuban Consulate employee Silvia Duran was beaten and tortured by the Mexi­-

can Police, at the request of the CIA, in an attempt to extract testimony from her that linked

Oswald to the Cubans and to an alleged communist conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.

CIA career officer David Atlee Phillips ordered an FBI informant/CIA asset to tell the

American Embassy he saw a "negro with red hair" give Oswald $6500 in the Cuban Con­-

sulate to kill the President. Phillips was also the source of numerous stories before,

during, and after Oswald's alleged visit to Mexico City that attempted to link Oswald to

Cuba and communists.

--Ibid., p. 690

. . . . . . . . . . .

On November 25 Gilberta Alvarado Ugarte (a Nicaraguan double agent and

FBI informant "T-32") told the US Embassy in Mexico City that he observed

a negro with red hair inside the Cuban Consulate pay Oswald $6500 to kill

President Kennedy. Ugarte also said he saw Sylvia Duran and Oswald embrace

each other inside the Consulate. This story had the enthusiastic support of David

Atlee Phillips and Mexican Ambassador Thomas Mann. In cables sent to CIA head­-

quarters after Phillips interviewed Alvarado he wrote, "This officer was impressed by

Alvarado ..... wealth of detail Alvarado gives is striking. "50 In another cable Phillips

wrote that Alvarado was "quiet, very serious person, who speaks with conviction. "51

Alvardo retracted his story a few days later and David Phillips admitted his involve-

ment in the fabrication, but was not reprimanded in any way.­

NOTES:

50 National Archives, HSCA 180-10 I 08-10328, Numbered Files 002960; Memorandum by Coleman-Slawson, 4/2/64.

51 CIA document #174-616; 11/27/63.

--Ibid., pp. 887-888

Edited by Jim Hargrove
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

Wow. Is that all documented fact? Or is there some speculation or connecting the dots? Because if it is documented fact, then it proves the motive for the assassination. And that the CIA was involved. If it's documented fact, then why are there still some WC critics with other theories?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

Wow. Is that all documented fact? Or is there some speculation or connecting the dots? Because if it is documented fact, then it proves the motive for the assassination. And that the CIA was involved. If it's documented fact, then why are there still some WC critics with other theories?

A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:

Gus Russo On Bugliosi: "He did a horrendous job." [End Russo quote.] .... In reference to his own work, you know what that means Von Pein? That means as bad a job as you can do.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Gus was only referring to what he believes was a "horrendous job" by Vince of debunking the awful 2006 Wilfried Huismann documentary film "Rendezvous With Death".

Here is the full Russo quote:

"Vince attempted to debunk the film, but in fact did a horrendous job -- as I think you will agree when you read the book." -- Gus Russo; October 29, 2008

The "Rendezvous" film plays a very large part in Mr. Russo's 2008 book "Brothers In Arms", wherein Russo tries desperately to link Cuban "G2" agents with Lee Harvey Oswald in a plot to kill JFK.

In his 2007 book, "Reclaiming History", author Vincent Bugliosi uses up 10-plus pages of endnotes to dismantle (in a good bit of detail) Huismann's "Rendezvous" documentary and, hence, along the way also largely discredits Russo's identical (or nearly identical) theory about supposed Cuban "G2" involvement.

Far from doing a "horrendous job", Bugliosi does a pretty good job (IMO) of ripping apart the "G2/Oswald" theory that is alleged to be the absolute truth in Huismann's film.

Here's a sampling of Vince Bugliosi's comments on the subject:

"Unbelievably, out of all these fabricated statements and nothingness, a reportedly well-credentialed German filmmaker, one Wilfried Huismann, directed a one-hour documentary, titled..."Rendezvous with Death", that was shown for the first time in Berlin on January 4, 2006.

The entire thrust of Huismann’s documentary is that Castro’s Cuban intelligence people (G-2) used Oswald to kill Kennedy once he made the offer at the Cuban consulate to kill Kennedy, and the person who paid Oswald to do so was the black man with the reddish hair, who is identified in the program as a top Cuban G-2 agent in Mexico named Cesar Morales Mesa. Using Gilberto Alvarado Ugarte’s original fabrication that the black man (Morales) paid Oswald $6,500 to kill Kennedy (Huismann does not mention Alvarado by name in the documentary), Huismann proceeds to build his entire show on this nonexistent foundation.

Huismann isn’t troubled by the fact that the basis for the alleged offer was Oswald’s supposedly saying, “I’m going to kill Kennedy for this” as he headed out of the Cuban consulate office after his request for an in-transit visa to Cuba was turned down, and that the only two people who we know were in the office at the time, Silvia Duran and Eusebio Azcue, have said they never heard Oswald say any such thing. Huismann, of course, doesn’t tell his audience this.

Huismann is also not troubled by the fact that Oswald would have had no reason to say he was going to kill Kennedy “for this,” that is, for being turned down by the Cuban consulate for his in-transit visa. And he sees nothing preposterous about the discussion to murder the president of the United States and the payment to Oswald taking place right outside the Cuban embassy, when Cuban intelligence (the G-2 agent, Morales, who supposedly made the payment) had to know that the lenses of CIA cameras were focused on that area.

Nor does he apparently feel that Alvarado’s claim to have actually seen (and apparently diligently counted out) precisely $6,500 in American bills ($1,500 for expense money, Alvarado says) being paid to Oswald is preposterous on its face.

Further, Huismann is not bothered by the fact that if a Cuban G-2 agent gave Oswald $6,500 (at least the equivalent of $20,000 today) to kill Kennedy, what happened to all this money? Why was Oswald virtually broke at the time of his death, he and Marina having a grand total of $183.87 to their name? How did Oswald go through the equivalent of $20,000 (or even $6,500) in less than two months? What did he splurge this amount of money on?

In addition, Huismann isn’t concerned by the fact that Alvarado said he saw this alleged payoff to Oswald on September 18, 1963, when we know Oswald wasn’t even in Mexico City, being present and accounted for in New Orleans. Nor is Huismann troubled by the fact that Alvarado took a CIA polygraph test in which the polygraph examiner concluded he was probably lying, and that Alvarado said, “I must be mistaken.” Huismann, naturally, doesn’t tell his audience any of this.

[...]

None of these things troubled Huismann. Nothing was going to stand in his way in his attempt to push his ridiculous story on as many unsuspecting people as he could.

Since, at its source, there was no basis for this TV documentary, what did Huismann do to beef up a story worthless at its core? He does what nearly all conspiracy authors, documentarians, and motion picture directors do: embellish the story from the original nut (in this case, Alvarado) with stories from other nuts or frauds, and in this case with two former American public servants who should be ashamed of themselves [former FBI agent Laurence Keenan and former Secretary of State Alexander Haig].

[...]

Remarkably, Huismann, for all his labors, was able to come up with only one new “face” to justify this “documentary,” an alleged former Cuban G-2 agent who is the clear star of Huismann’s flick. He is also a joke. I say “face” because for supposed fear of retaliation, the man’s face is bathed in shadows on the screen. And his name, Oscar Marino, is not his real name (Telephone interview of Gus Russo by author on January 15, 2006), though Huismann isn’t kind enough to tell his audience (or researchers who want to check out Marino’s background) this.

So we have a faceless, nameless person as the star of Huismann’s shameless “documentary.” That itself would be bad enough, but Marino has absolutely nothing to say. “Oswald volunteered to kill Kennedy,” Marino tells the audience. When I asked Gus Russo if Marino was basing this on something other than Alvarado’s original allegation, he said he was not, that Alvarado was Marino’s source for this (Telephone interview of Gus Russo by author on January 15, 2006). Since we know that Oswald never made the threat to kill Kennedy that Alvarado claims (but later retracted) he made, we thereby know at this point that everything Marino says thereafter has to be a fabrication.

[...]

So we learn from Marino that with or without Castro, Cuban G-2 agents planned to murder Kennedy (and thereby ensure their deaths at U.S. hands, or if Castro never approved of the operation, at his hands if he found out what they did or attempted to do without his authorization), and Oswald simply “adopted” G-2’s “plans.” Since we know that Oswald himself bought the murder weapon (Cuban G-2 apparently wanted Oswald to have the absolute cheapest, most inexpensive rifle that could be found) and, through Ruth Paine’s suggestion, got himself the job at the Book Depository Building, one wonders what “plans” of the G-2 Oswald “adopted,” and how G-2 helped Oswald in “carrying out the assassination.”

Just as Marino could tell Huismann with “complete certainty” that Kennedy’s death was a G-2 agency operation, I can tell Huismann with even more “complete certainty” that even though Marino, in effect, confessed to complicity with other G-2 members in Kennedy’s murder, he actually knows (even if Huismann doesn’t) that he has absolutely nothing to fear.

Marino certainly would realize that if Cuban G-2 and Castro were vindictive enough and powerful enough to wipe out the president of the United States in the United States, they would be vindictive and powerful enough to wipe out non-entities like himself in Mexico for squealing on them.

If Huismann could find the supposedly ailing Marino, surely they could. But Marino knows he doesn’t have to worry a whit since he knows his story is fabricated nonsense that only nonsensical conspiracy theorists would have any interest in, not very serious people like Castro and his G-2. You can’t squeal on someone when there is nothing to squeal on.

[...]

And even though there is no statute of limitation for murder in the United States, Marino also knows he doesn’t have to worry about FBI agents knocking on Huismann’s door to obtain Marino’s identity and whereabouts (by court order if necessary) so they could arrest him and extradite him back to the United States for prosecution for Kennedy’s murder. Why? Because Marino, I, and virtually all other sensible people know that no one in authority would take him seriously. The authorities, including Castro, only deal harshly with real people telling real stories, not humbugs like Marino. Huismann is either pathetically gullible or a fraud.

[...]

So what we have here with Huismann’s "Rendezvous with Death" is a very trite rendezvous with a foundationless base (Alvarado’s recanted allegation), old witnesses whose stories have already been discredited, a star witness without a name or face and nothing to say other than to make a naked declaration, and two former American public servants, tossed in for cachet purposes, who made fools of themselves.

The question is how did Huismann convince his Japanese and German benefactors to part with close to $1 million on something as patently worthless as this “documentary”? A related question is why would Gus Russo, a respected assassination researcher, lend his name to a project as insubstantial and sophistical as this?

In defense of Russo, he pointed out to me that he felt the Cubans in the documentary had credibility because they had to be pressured (some for months) to participate in the program, so they weren’t seeking notoriety. Also, he says, they got no pay, and wanted their names changed. And they spoke in a way, he added, that was believable to him. (Telephone interview of Gus Russo by author on February 8, 2006)"

-- VINCENT T. BUGLIOSI; Pages 731-733, 735-737, and 741 of Endnotes in "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy" (c.2007)

David Von Pein

December 16, 2008

Edited by David Von Pein
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...