Jump to content
The Education Forum

Wesley Frazier--there was no gun


Recommended Posts

Thanks so much for this Andrej.  And the HSCA did transcripts? 

Where the heck are they?

So if two tape recorders were used, then Frazier has one of the interviews.

So let us summarize:

1. Frazier had a lawyer there

2. The lawyer had his own recorder, which means Frazier got a copy.

3.  There was a transcript, which no one has found.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jim:

The HSCA (Moriarty and someone who could be his assistant) arranged for two tape recorders to be used. After the interview was over, Moriarty would take one tape to Washington, DC, for transcript to be made. Frazier was then to receive both a copy of the transcript and one tape. He may still have both these documents. 

I do believe that the copies of the tapes which Denis Morissette obtained from the NARA can be cleaned, and we should be able to listen and make own transcripts from some important parts. I am actually not listening to the tapes, rather trying to clean them up. The small part was at the transition between two large sections (sessions?) and this was when I could hear that bit.

 

 

 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is notable that the DPD did have curtain rods in their possession and they lifted fingerprints from the curtain rods.

These fingerprints are part of the Dallas police evidence and can be viewed online:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49551/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49812/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49811/

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49815/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49813/

 

Without much context it's hard to know more about the curtain rods these fingerprints were taken from and where those rods were found.  

Regarding this video, I noticed that Frazier talks about how the WC were dishonest, they wanted him to testify in a certain way. He also talks about how ever since the JFK assassination he has a hard time trusting people or the government. Aynesworth then redirects Frazier to talk about something else, asking him to talk about Oswald and his relationship to Oswald. 

The look on Ayensworth's face when Frazier starts talking about how Tink Thompson had a MC rifle and took it apart, and showed that you can't fit it in a paper bag like he saw:

image.png.d28b2e15bc9662be9b0ee82cbeb06abd.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

It is notable that the DPD did have curtain rods in their possession and they lifted fingerprints from the curtain rods.

These fingerprints are part of the Dallas police evidence and can be viewed online:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49551/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49812/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49811/

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49815/

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49813/

 

Without much context it's hard to know more about the curtain rods these fingerprints were taken from and where those rods were found.  

Regarding this video, I noticed that Frazier talks about how the WC were dishonest, they wanted him to testify in a certain way. He also talks about how ever since the JFK assassination he has a hard time trusting people or the government. Aynesworth then redirects Frazier to talk about something else, asking him to talk about Oswald and his relationship to Oswald. 

The look on Ayensworth's face when Frazier starts talking about how Tink Thompson had a MC rifle and took it apart, and showed that you can't fit it in a paper bag like he saw:

image.png.d28b2e15bc9662be9b0ee82cbeb06abd.png

 

 

Funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

The look on Ayensworth's face when Frazier starts talking about how Tink Thompson had a MC rifle and took it apart, and showed that you can't fit it in a paper bag like he saw:

image.png.d28b2e15bc9662be9b0ee82cbeb06abd.png

 

 

I didn't know who Hugh Aynesworth is, so I looked him up on Spartacus Educational. Having read that, and in particular what he said about Mark Lane, I've come to the conclusion that he's a first-class [now imagine me holding my tongue with my fingers and saying the word "apple."]

(I discovered that he's still alive and I didn't want the forum to get into trouble.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

I didn't know who Hugh Aynesworth is, so I looked him up on Spartacus Educational. Having read that, and in particular what he said about Mark Lane, I've come to the conclusion that he's a first-class [now imagine me holding my tongue with my fingers and saying the word "apple."]

(I discovered that he's still alive and I didn't want the forum to get into trouble.)

 

The article Jim linked to is a good explanation of who he is and what he is all about. In this field you have people like Posner and Bugliosi who mount dishonest defenses of the official lie. But then you have more crafty people like Aynesworth, Walter Sheridan, and James Phelan. These people are ostensibly "journalists" but as you can see from Jim's article our side has documentation which shows they are assets, something we don't quite have on Posner and his ilk but we can readily intuit from how they talk about this case.

It's particularly gross because Aynesworth has this veneer of respectability -- and that's all it is, a veneer. Below the surface you find a man motivated by greed and this gross sycophant-to-the-deep-state motivation. I am reminded of the scene from Nixon where young Richard Nixon makes an agreement with his momma: she won't tell dad about his lie, and in return he says "I'll be your loyal dog."

At the very heart of it is a lack of integrity coupled with an immense interest in maintaining a carefully constructed house of cards: in order to advance his own career, and also because, sickly, he thinks he is someone acting in defense of this deep state whom he clearly wants to be a part of. He is their lap dog.

So, naturally, when Frazier mentions things in the video such as Tink Thompson proving that the bag couldn't hold the rifle, or that the WC were jerks who pressured him, or how the JFK assassination has caused Frazier to lose faith in government, you must view Aynesworth's reactions to that through this lens. Now you see why he likely diverts the discussion when it enters those areas. Or gets that "god dammit" look on his face when Frazier mentions a real journalist who knows it's all a lie. Even then, though, we're talking about Tink Thompson who I guess Vince Salandria accused of being a CIA agent because he didn't go too far in his book. I tend to be more forgiving and I know that Thompson was working a balancing act with his book, on the one hand he wants to illustrate aspects of conspiracy and on the other hand he wants to have his mainstream credibility intact.

I strongly suggest ya read Jim DiEugenio's book Destiny Betrayed 2nd edition. It covers Aynesworth, Sheridan, and Phelan all very well. That the government would go to such great lengths as to employ mainstream journalists to write hit pieces and act as go-betweens in a campaign to destroy Jim Garrison should tell you all you need to know about Garrison, too: he was obviously on the right track if THAT was the response he got.

Edited by Richard Booth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for Jim:

You mentioned on a much older thread that you had written about Frazier (Buell Wesley) in Destiny Betrayed, a few pages. I was curious so I pulled up my electronic copy and searched it for Frazier: he's not in there. Only Robert Frazier. 

I checked the index and there is no entry for Buell Wesley Frazier.

Did you maybe write about Buell in an article and were mistaken about writing about him in Destiny Betrayed?  I have the Kindle copy. Now I'm worried my Kindle copy isn't actually second edition (though the cover clearly says second edition) and I suspect that maybe you are just mistaken and wrote about him elsewhere. In that case I am curious to read your comments on him because I am also on the fence about Buell. So, I look to those whose opinions I find most eloquent and reasonable: yours, among many others here whose thoughts on this case are so very valuable if you want to discern the truth.

From here:

image.png.2b345ca27e725c2812904ef9fc46c6c0.png

Edited by Richard Booth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

Thanks Jim.

 

Oh yeah, I know Aynesworth... he's the guy who was everywhere on 11/22/63... at the TSBD building when Kennedy was shot, at the Tippit site right after he was shot, at the theater when LHO was arrested, and in the DPD basement when Oswald was shot! What an amazing guy... not.

I just have trouble remembering names.

(BTW Richard, I have read Destiny Betrayed... great book! Just forgot the Aynesworth name. I do remember Sheridan's name though and the role he played in falsely discrediting Jim Garrison. Another [apple].)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Oh yeah, I know Aynesworth... he's the guy who was everywhere on 11/22/63... at the TSBD building when Kennedy was shot, at the Tippit site right after he was shot, at the theater when LHO was arrested, and in the DPD basement when Oswald was shot! What an amazing guy... not.

I just have trouble remembering names.

(BTW Richard, I have read Destiny Betrayed... great book! Just forgot the Aynesworth name. I do remember Sheridan's name though and the role he played in falsely discrediting Jim Garrison. Another [apple].)

I won't hold it against you... I forget names all the time. There are many figures to keep track of here and I'm not getting any younger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The place where I wrote about Frazier was in The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today, beginning on p. 206.

A real puzzler.

 

Fantastic, thanks Jim.  I've read that book -- and recommend it to others -- looks like some details have slipped my mind. Time for a re-visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...