WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 9:58 PM, Jason Ward said:

Paul,

I've come across a few points to run by you.

1. IIRC, James Early Ray is a Bircher and his brother shows up at a Bannister-connected attorney asking for advice when Ray is arrested.   It seems to me the assassination era of political violence in the US was in service of one side only.   

2. Meanwhile, as I'm ploughing through the document dumps for the MFF, it's clear that the CIA is totally obsessed with dislodging Castro in 63, and little else.   They are ostentatiously hiring every Cuban they can find who says they are against Castro, which is just about all the Cubans once they hear about the CIA gravy train.   Nowhere is their hostility towards Kennedy in the records I see - from management nor hired operators.  

3.  Also, the anti-Castro aspect of the anti-Castro Cubans is clearly more about getting a CIA handout than it is about any desire to risk life and limb in a counter-revolution.  The Cubans talk a big game but deliver nothing, while constantly asking for money.  They take a lot of CIA cash but manage only comical theatrics and schoolboy adventures - for 8-10 years.  In my view the alleged "passion" against Castro is no passion at all, and highly confined to a few ex-Batista cronies.  It's much the same with the Vietnamese, Iraqis, Afghanis, Syrians, and all the others who show up yelling about freedom and democracy when Uncle Sam opens up his big fat wallet - but in reality these types neither care nor can they deliver anything they promise.  

None of these so-called anti-Castro Cubans actually want to go back to Cuba after they taste America - regardless of their rhetoric.  Miami presents more opportunity for Cubans before, during, and after all the Castro nonsense - they are anti-Castro mainly because the US pays them to be anti-Castro.

4. The FBI is growing more and more intense in their study of the Birchers, Hargis, Milteer, the Christian Crusade, etc. in the early 60s.  Someone above said these groups weren't penetrated - but that is very far from the case.  Hoover sent more and more agents and paid informants to infiltrate these groups from Little Rock on; the cable traffic reveals a serious fear in Hoover's mind.  The Ole Miss episode and aftermath saw a massive FBI domestic intelligence operation.

5. But for me to fully buy your Walker-did-it-CT, I'd need to see some clear evidence that Walker's on the top and giving orders.  Otherwise, for now it seems a justifiable conclusion is that the Right is the prime mover, but Walker as indisputable leader is not so obvious.   I can imagine that Walker may be a public and operational leader, but my sense is that hidden men like Hunt-Murchison give him the fuel to "succeed."

Jason

Jason,

By the numbers:

1)  Yes, the Radical Right in the USA is a fairly small world, with less than 1% of the population -- but far more activist than many people like to believe. 

2) I like that you're ploughing through the rich motherlode of the MFF (Mary Ferrell Foundation).  I agree that the CIA was totally obsessed with Cuba and any scheme to overthrow Castro.  The CIA lives by taking orders from the US President, and in JFK secretly told the CIA that Fidel must die -- and RFK oversaw Operation Mongoose -- all that was demonstrated to my satisfaction by Lamar Waldron (2005). 

2.1)  Most CIA-did-it CTers, and most CTers generally, tend to insist that the JFK Cover-up Team and the JFK Kill Team were ONE AND THE SAME.  They cannot seem to get the idea that these are two different groups -- and further, that these two different groups were OPPOSED to each other.

3) I like your idea that the anti-Castro Cubans were more interested in CIA fast-cash than in overthrowing Fidel Castro.  Also, they trusted the CIA to organize them when they should have organized themselves.  They didn't understand Democracy -- that was part of the problem.

4)  Your documentary verification that the FBI held an intense focus on the Radical Right in 1962-1963 is valuable. 

4.1)  In his book, Assignment Oswald (1996) former FBI agent James Hosty says that his main task in Dallas was monitoring "General Walker and his Minutemen."  So it's impossible that Walker was invisible to James Hosty. 

4.2)  Hosty told the Secret Service PRS that there was nobody in Dallas who was dangerous -- and also told them that he had no idea who published the WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK handbills.  Hosty knew damn well it was Robert Allen Surrey, his bridge partner for many years (Penn Jones, 1965).  So, I believe that is strong evidence that James Hosty converted to Walker's Minutemen-- opposing Hoover. 

4.3)  It's not that Hoover didn't share with JFK -- it's that Hoover himself was out of the loop.   It was a genuine Conspiracy in Dallas, with Walker in the lead, and Hosty right beside him, in my opinion.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited September 6, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[George Sawtelle]

 

Thanks for the note.   I will thumb through the Talbot book today so I can speak about it with more confidence.  I've reviewed the allegations about altering the Zapruder film and I'm not really convinced - mainly because if they altered it they could have just destroyed it.   That would have been much better and easier.   I also think Dulles-Hoover-Helms-whoever could neutralize Kennedy without the sloppy mess of assassination.

Jason

It couldn't be destroyed. There were copies made and Zapruder had some of the copies.

They did try to neutralize Kennedy. During the last days of his administration he trusted only his brother and a few others. But he was still writing laws like NSAM 269 to withdraw from Vietnam and sponsoring meetings with Castro to make peace with Cuba.

I'm not trying to convince you to believe the Dulles did it theory. Believe what you want. I don't think the radical right had anything to do with the assassination.

BTW if you have time read Horne's account on the alteration of the Zapruder film. 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2017 by George Sawtelle

[Jason Ward]

1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said:

...

It couldn't be destroyed. There were copies made and Zapruder had some of the copies.

...

Thanks George.

If you're saying they couldn't destroy the Z film because there were pristine copies with Z himself and elsewhere,  then altering only one of the copies makes matters worse.   They either have control of all versions of the film or the alteration narrative fails.   IIRC Z watched the film himself right away...then pitched a sales offer to potential buyers like Dan Rather by showing them the same film.  Then Life won the bidding, so they got a copy, the govt got a copy and Z kept his own copy.

Any alteration CT fails because there are always 1-2 unaltered copies available to surface at any time and fatally unmask the conspirators.   Of course I'd like to know why I'm wrong.

 

Jason

Edited September 6, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

..

 

2.1)  Most CIA-did-it CTers, and most CTers generally, tend to insist that the JFK Cover-up Team and the JFK Kill Team were ONE AND THE SAME.  They cannot seem to get the idea that these are two different groups -- and further, that these two different groups were OPPOSED to each other.

...

Paul,

Your point here is essential. 

I might say it a different way.   Any attempt to solve a difficult crime requires a competent understanding of how previously solved crimes were resolved. So IMO one must study criminology.  Read Robert Ressler's Mind Hunter.   Or The Anatomy of Motive by John Douglas.   Post-crime behavior is sometimes a fruitful place to look for clues but:

>>>A crime is only solved by exposing pre-crime behavior<<<

Almost all the major CTs depend on post crime events like the cover up or suspect behavior during the investigation.  This fails.   Only events prior to 1230 November 22 can prove guilt of the crime.

 

Jason

 

[George Sawtelle]

If you're saying they couldn't destroy the Z film because there were pristine copies with Z himself and elsewhere,  then altering only one of the copies makes matters worse.   They either have control of all versions of the film or the alteration narrative fails.   IIRC Z watched the film himself right away...then pitched a sales offer to potential buyers like Dan Rather by showing them the same film.  Then Life won the bidding, so they got a copy, the govt got a copy and Z kept his own copy.

Any alteration CT fails because there are always 1-2 unaltered copies available to surface at any time and fatally unmask the conspirators.   Of course I'd like to know why I'm wrong.

Jason 

You don't understand what transpired with the original and the copies. Douglas Horne's account is a good place to start if you have time. I'll try to help you as best I can.

Three copies were made of the original Zapruder film on the day of the assassination at Kodac in Dallas. Two copies were given to the SS and one to LIFE. The original stayed with Zapruder. Later LIFE told Zapruder they needed the original to make some still photos for their magazine so Zapruder loan the original to LIFE for a sum of cash and LIFE left their copy with Zapruder. Obviously after the original was altered at Hawkeye Works the three copies had to be destroyed.

LIFE took the altered original or a copy of the altered original back to Zapruder and Zapruder gave back the copy they had left with him. Now LIFE and the government had the copies and I believe they were destroyed leaving only the altered original or a copy of it with Zapruder. Not long after LIFE negotiated a settlement with Zapruder whereby Zapruder handed over the altered original to LIFE for a large amount of cash. As far as we know only Dan Rather and Brugioni of NPIC saw the original unaltered Zapruder film. Both said it was different from the extant Zapruder film.

[George Sawtelle]

Jason

It is very important to follow the timeline of the original Zapruder film and the copies. It gives you a pretty good idea that the cover-up started before LBJ said ... we need to cover this thing up or 40 million people will die in a nuclear exchange with Russia. So the excuse that a cover-up was necessary to preclude a nuclear war with Russia is hogwash. 

[Jason Ward]

George,

Thanks for your considered opinion.  You may or may not be right about the  Z film and LBJ in your posts above.  I appreciate that you're not trying to sell me nor insist I respect an opinion based on who's ivented it.   In any event all of this is part of the cover up so it says nothing about who produced the crime, in my view.

I certainly agree the govt deployed a cover up.   The govt is powerful.  But this doesn't say anything about who shot Kennedy or who paid the shooters.  IMO.

 

 

 

Jason

[George Sawtelle]

Thanks for your considered opinion.  You may or may not be right about the  Z film and LBJ in your posts above.  I appreciate that you're not trying to sell me nor insist I respect an opinion based on who's ivented it.   In any event all of this is part of the cover up so it says nothing about who produced the crime, in my view.

I certainly agree the govt deployed a cover up.   The govt is powerful.  But this doesn't say anything about who shot Kennedy or who paid the shooters.  IMO.

Jason

Douglas Horne wrote extensively on the Zapruder Film and the copies. I'm giving you information that he provided. It's not mine. 

On the weekend of the assassination the government did not alter the Zapruder film. The alteration could only have been done by those who killed Kennedy. If we can figure out who altered the Zapruder film we will know the identification of those who killed Kennedy.    

[Jason Ward]

George

Why exactly can any Z film alterations only come from those who caused the assassination?   Hoover et. al knew by 2pm there were shots from both front and rear.

 

Jason

[George Sawtelle]

.    Why exactly can any Z film alterations only come from those who caused the assassination?   Hoover et. al knew by 2pm there were shots from both front and rear.

Jason

Many people knew there were shots from the rear and from the front. But like Hoover they did not know precisely from where the shots came and where the bullets hit Kennedy.

To this day people don't know how many bullets hit Kennedy.

The people who altered the film knew from where the shots were fired, how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on Kennedy's body the bullets entered. Hoover did not have that information on the day of the assassination.

Edited September 6, 2017 by George Sawtelle

[Jason Ward]

George:

I'm impressed you have thought this through.  But why do you believe only the murderers "know how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on Kennedy's body the bullets entered?"

The Dallas doctors would know, the autopsy group would know, plus probably a few random guys like SS agents + ambulance drivers who may have seen the body would know.

There were several missed shots.   No one could know "how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on his body they entered" unless they saw the dead body.

Jason

[George Sawtelle]

I'm impressed you have thought this through.  But why do you believe only the murderers "know how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on Kennedy's body the bullets entered?"

The Dallas doctors would know, the autopsy group would know, plus probably a few random guys like SS agents + ambulance drivers who may have seen the body would know.

There were several missed shots.   No one could know "how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on his body they entered" unless they saw the dead body.

Jason

Only the shooters knew without looking at the dead body.

[Jason Ward]

1 minute ago, George Sawtelle said:

I'm impressed you have thought this through.  But why do you believe only the murderers "know how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on Kennedy's body the bullets entered?"

The Dallas doctors would know, the autopsy group would know, plus probably a few random guys like SS agents + ambulance drivers who may have seen the body would know.

There were several missed shots.   No one could know "how many bullets hit Kennedy and where on his body they entered" unless they saw the dead body.

Jason

Only the shooters knew without looking at the dead body.

George

So LBJ, Hoover, and others know before LBJ leaves Parkland how many bullets hit Kennedy and where.

But the shooters don't know because of the misses and because of the complicated Connally wounds.

Jason

 

 

[George Sawtelle]

So LBJ, Hoover, and others know before LBJ leaves Parkland how many bullets hit Kennedy and where.

But the shooters don't know because of the misses and because of the complicated Connally wounds.

Jason

Because of the trac, doctors were not sure if the throat wound was entrance or exit. Plus the doctors were puzzled about the back wound because they found no exit and no bullet. And the bullet only entered an inch or two into Kennedy's back. There was no definite conclusion on all the wounds.

If you are a shooter and you use a scope, you will know if you hit or miss your target. Even if you don't use a scope you'll know.

 

[Jason Ward]

44 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

So LBJ, Hoover, and others know before LBJ leaves Parkland how many bullets hit Kennedy and where.

But the shooters don't know because of the misses and because of the complicated Connally wounds.

Jason

Because of the trac, doctors were not sure if the throat wound was entrance or exit. Plus the doctors were puzzled about the back wound because they found no exit and no bullet. And the bullet only entered an inch or two into Kennedy's back. There was no definite conclusion on all the wounds.

If you are a shooter and you use a scope, you will know if you hit or miss your target. Even if you don't use a scope you'll know.

 

George

We'll just have to politely agree to disagree on this I guess.  I've shot at deer standing perfectly still with a modern scope and was certain I hit him,  only to see him run away.   I've also been with guys who thought they missed but found a wounded deer a short time later.   Granted we are not professionals, but we also are shooting at a stationary target with good overall conditions.

So with the known misses, with Connally's strange wounds, and the Dallas doctors near total certainty on Kennedy's wounds - I judge it unlikely that the murderers know with much confidence about the position and number of wounds.   So I just can't agree that revealing the alleged editors of the Z film will reveal the assassination CEO because IMO only those who see the body can know with certainty what could/should be covered up.    The cover up group is unaffiliated with the assassination group, the evidence suggests (to me).

 

Jason

Edited September 6, 2017 by Jason Ward