Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lansdale in DP on 11/22/63?


Greg Wagner
 Share

Recommended Posts

Prouty's argument that the man walking past the tramps was Lansdale seems very odd to me because, as previously discussed on this forum, the man looks more like Maxwell Taylor. (The hair matches Taylor, not Lansdale, both men had a drooping right shoulder, Taylor had a similar big ring on his left hand, etc.).

Prouty knew both men, so it seems inconceivable to me that Prouty could look at that photo and not see who it looked more like. So I have this notion that Prouty, not wanting to ID Taylor, said it looked like Lansdale, so people would then look at the photo and see who it really looked like. But that's just a notion, I have no way of knowing what Prouty was thinking. I do know, as it's a matter of record, that Prouty proved not very reliable in a number of his statements. (His ARRB interview was a disaster.)

BTW I think the military officer who allegedly corroborated Prouty (as Prouty claimed) on the man looking like Lansdale denied doing so. As for Lansdale being in Dallas that day, there is no proof of that. We only know that he was in Texas, ostensibly on his way to visit his son in Arizona.

Taylor on 11/22 was allegedly in a Pentagon meeting with the other Joint Chiefs hosting some military guests from Germany. It has been established that AF chief Curtis LeMay, for one, was at no such meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Prouty's argument that the man walking past the tramps was Lansdale seems very odd to me because, as previously discussed on this forum, the man looks more like Maxwell Taylor. (The hair matches Taylor, not Lansdale, both men had a drooping right shoulder, Taylor had a similar big ring on his left hand, etc.).

Prouty knew both men, so it seems inconceivable to me that Prouty could look at that photo and not see who it looked more like. So I have this notion that Prouty, not wanting to ID Taylor, said it looked like Lansdale, so people would then look at the photo and see who it really looked like. But that's just a notion, I have no way of knowing what Prouty was thinking. I do know, as it's a matter of record, that Prouty proved not very reliable in a number of his statements. (His ARRB interview was a disaster.)

BTW I think the military officer who allegedly corroborated Prouty (as Prouty claimed) on the man looking like Lansdale denied doing so. As for Lansdale being in Dallas that day, there is no proof of that. We only know that he was in Texas, ostensibly on his way to visit his son in Arizona.

Taylor on 11/22 was allegedly in a Pentagon meeting with the other Joint Chiefs hosting some military guests from Germany. It has been established that AF chief Curtis LeMay, for one, was at no such meeting.

Thanks for you input , Ron.

But wasn't Prouty identifying Landsdale from his deformed hand?

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prouty's argument that the man walking past the tramps was Lansdale seems very odd to me because, as previously discussed on this forum, the man looks more like Maxwell Taylor. (The hair matches Taylor, not Lansdale, both men had a drooping right shoulder, Taylor had a similar big ring on his left hand, etc.).

Prouty knew both men, so it seems inconceivable to me that Prouty could look at that photo and not see who it looked more like. So I have this notion that Prouty, not wanting to ID Taylor, said it looked like Lansdale, so people would then look at the photo and see who it really looked like. But that's just a notion, I have no way of knowing what Prouty was thinking. I do know, as it's a matter of record, that Prouty proved not very reliable in a number of his statements. (His ARRB interview was a disaster.)

BTW I think the military officer who allegedly corroborated Prouty (as Prouty claimed) on the man looking like Lansdale denied doing so. As for Lansdale being in Dallas that day, there is no proof of that. We only know that he was in Texas, ostensibly on his way to visit his son in Arizona.

Taylor on 11/22 was allegedly in a Pentagon meeting with the other Joint Chiefs hosting some military guests from Germany. It has been established that AF chief Curtis LeMay, for one, was at no such meeting.

Thanks for you input , Ron.

But wasn't Prouty identifying Landsdale from his deformed hand?

Peter

_____________________________________________________

Ron,

Is this photo from the film JFK or was it actually taken in DP on 11/22/63? If not, who took it? It looks alot different from the other pics I've seen.

The "military officer" you're referring to is General Victor "Brute" Krulak, who is now 93 years old and just happens to be a close friend of my father. (They originally met in Korea during the Korean War.) My dad has lunch with him once a week, and asked him today (for me) what he thinks about Lansdale, Prouty, the "three tramps," etc. According to my dad, Krulak told him that he vaguely remembers writing the letter to Prouty in 1985 (in which he verifies Prouty's identification of the "suit" as Lansdale). Also according to my dad, Krulak told him today that Prouty was a "good guy" and Lansdale was a "bad guy."

FWIW, Thomas

____________________________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas,

That photo is from the movie.

It's great to hear that you have access to Krulak. Please ask your father to ask Krulak what he thinks of the man in the photo looking more like Taylor than Lansdale.

Ron

____________________________________

Hi Ron,

OK. Great idea. Keep in mind, however, that Krulak is 93 years old and that his memory probably isn't as sharp as it used to be...

--Thomas

P.S. I guess I'll try googling "Edward Lansdale" as well as "Maxwell Taylor" for pictures to give to my dad to show to Krulak in order to jog Krulak's memory, if necessary.

____________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas,

I'll post the photos I have of Taylor shortly.

Ron

Here's the "Lansdale" man on the left and Taylor on the right. Note the hair, and the drooping left shoulder, which is also noticeable in the photo below this one of Taylor at JFK's funeral:

taylor.jpg

taylor2.jpg

Note Taylor's ring, and the ring on "Lansdale":

taylorring.jpg

lansdalehand.jpg

I don't know what IPB Image means and why the images aren't showing. I'll try those two again:

taylor2.jpg

taylorring.jpg

Sorry, that's the best I can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the photos are showing! Anyway here's a link to them and some of Lansdale:

http://www.hobrad.com/taylor.htm

____________________________________

Thanks, Ron

Great pictures. I'll try to have my Dad show them to Krulak. (Interesting that Taylor isn't wearing his ring in the top photo of him wearing a suit...)

--Thomas

____________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I guess there are a lot of people then , not as rational and objective as you, including the experts. In short what you claim here, is provably untrue. I note you said the same about Charles Harrelson. Even Harrelson himself is on record as "amazed" with the resemblance. Jack White, of all people, has no doubts either. But fortunately we have Mark Valenti, with his superb eyes and his "knowledge". Tell me , Mark, how long have you been in the JFK research business? You're pretty new on the block, aren't you? What spiked your sudden interest in the case? Have you gathered so much in so little time, or do you in fact know very little? Obviously, you have a lot to learn about Holt.

A third-grader could look at the old tramp and judge that it's not Holt. How long does one have to be "in the JFK research business" to see the difference between orange and blue? It's not him, and shouting it from the roof won't make it so. Trot out tearful video interviews with the poor guy, cobble tangential facts together, but you can't transform that smelly old tramp into your guy.

Okay, fine, shouting from the roof it is not Holt , or "my guy"as you call him, won't make it so either. What make you think he was "smelly"? Did you read the cop's statement after all?

A classic! I was waiting for this smearing trick. It was only a matter of time.

It's worth noting that there are dozens of JFK related web sites in the world but you're the only one with the hubris to create one called "jfkmurdersolved." You may have balls the size of Indiana but that doesn't mean your theories are true. It's not a smear, Mr. Dankbaar. Since you've been allowed to begin posting here again you have directed traffic to your site many times. That's a fact. And I don't see anything wrong with that - but in the interest of full disclosure it's worth noting. Your site sells lots of JFK murder merchandise, that's your business. You're entitled to make a profit on your investments. But to call that reference a smear? Don't be ridiculous. It's commerce, plain and simple.

Mmm. So you condemn all researchers with a website, that have written a book. Fetzer, Marrs, Hancock, Waldron, Hartmann, even Epstein . Weird

You tell me. You said that the authorities mentioned the names of the tramps, so that is "close as we can get". That's like saying: With the Warren Commission we came as close as we can get. Since you seem to count yourself in the category of intelligent people, why did you not answer the question, whether your eyes tell you if Harold Doyle looks like the short tramp? Don't avoid the the question, just give me an intelligent answer, maybe you could add some details which facial features are consistent?

The mouth is similar and so are the ears. But decades of aging, who knows if he gained and lost weight, sun damage to skin, whatever, prevent a precise ID. You can't match the faces perfectly without incremental photos through the years. As I said before, you can make a judgement call, as many have done, but you won't know without more pictures. You could probably find pictures of yourself as a child that don't resemble yourself now - and that tramp is not Chauncey Holt no matter how many times you repeat it.

So you are inclined to support that the tramp is Doyle !

Sure. And Mark Valenti is right, because he has the FBI and Dallas police behind him. Well, Mark, most of us here agree that they are part of the problem , rather than the solution. Have you considered joining McAdams' newsgroup? He's still behind what they said right away. Osald killed Kenndey alone. You'll be welcomed there. Also , your theories about me pursuing hoaxes for monetary gain will fall into fertile ground there.

Are you saying I'm not welcome here? Weird.

You're welcome here I guess, but given your opinions you would also be welcome there. That's all. Just a tip

I did not avoid this question, look back and you'll know it. I gave you some homework to find the holes in their stories yourself. But it's no surprise you didn't want to take the trouble. But to answer once again: All of the "arresting" officers did, cause they were told so by the tramps. But they're not gonna tell you. They wanted to keep their job and pension. But since you want to rely on law enforcement so much, the FBI director himself said that Oswald killed Kennedy alone within two hours after it happened. You believed that too? Cause I don't know really where you are coming from regarding your take on the assassination. Why don't you tell us?

Actually you did avoid the question. You posted a brazen theory without citation. As any interested observer might, I asked you where you got the information. You basically told me to find out for myself where you got your information from. That's a neat trick. I can suggest that UFOs killed JFK, and if you ask me for proof, I can tell you to go find it yourself. Cool. Okay, UFO's killed Kennedy. Now you go prove it.

Naah, that's no comparison, and you know it. You don't have a confession of an alien that killed JFK. I can provide a confession from someone who claimed he was one of thee tramps, with his provable background that falls into place, plus expert opinions and photographic evidence to support it, plus documentary evidence that you're not aware of, but some day will :)

For what it's worth, based on the evidence I've studied for over twenty years, I believe:

20 years? That's a long time. You must know a lot then. But you kept your interest private and for yourself all that time? Cause the weird thing , at least to me, is that you didn't seem to display an urge to discuss your beliefs untill you joined this board a little while back. You appear to come out of nowhere. How come? I have many friends who can testify I have been interested in this case for years. The internet shows this too. Let's just take a random example for someone that has been interested in the case, but never published anything:

+"dawn meredith" +"jfk assassination"

Wow, a lot of matches on Google.

How about: +"mark valenti" +"jfk assassination" ?

Ah, you just discovered the Internet, right?

There was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yes, but not the one I present, right?

The Warren Report is, at times, criminally negligent and proactively full of disinformation.

LHO did not act alone.

There were at least two shooters.

But you have no opinion as to who they were, right?

LHO's background was full of espionage with one or more government agencies.

Some documents and some medical evidence may have been altered or fudged.

The Secret Service did not perform their duties that day, either by negligence or participation.

The FBI had foreknowledge of an assassination attempt.

But you still find the FBI and the DPD the best credible sources on the evidence? After all, you said that the DPD's and FBI's Identifications of the tramps, are "as close as we can get", remember?

Wim

etc. etc.

Have a lucky day.

MV

Edited by Wim Dankbaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas,

That photo is from the movie.

It's great to hear that you have access to Krulak. Please ask your father to ask Krulak what he thinks of the man in the photo looking more like Taylor than Lansdale.

Ron

Which photo is from the movie?

The one that clearly shows Landsdale's deformed hand?

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Okay, fine, shouting from the roof it is not Holt , or "my guy"as you call him, won't make it so either. What make you think he was "smelly"? Did you read the cop's statement after all?

Of course I read the statements. There was a mention of their odor.

Mmm. So you condemn all researchers with a website, that have written a book. Fetzer, Marrs, Hancock, Waldron, Hartmann, even Epstein . Weird

That's a bizarre leap. You keep punching your own straw men, leave me out of it.

So you are inclined to support that the tramp is Doyle !

That's another bizarre leap. Weirdo with a beardo.

You're welcome here I guess, but given your opinions you would also be welcome there. That's all. Just a tip

Kind of you. To return the favor, you might want to check out entrepeneur.com.

Naah, that's no comparison, and you know it. You don't have a confession of an alien that killed JFK. I can provide a confession from someone who claimed he was one of thee tramps, with his provable background that falls into place, plus expert opinions and photographic evidence to support it, plus documentary evidence that you're not aware of, but some day will :)

I look forward to seeing your documentary evidence.

20 years? That's a long time. You must know a lot then. But you kept your interest private and for yourself all that time? Cause the weird thing , at least to me, is that you didn't seem to display an urge to discuss your beliefs untill you joined this board a little while back. You appear to come out of nowhere. How come? I have many friends who can testify I have been interested in this case for years. The internet shows this too. Let's just take a random example for someone that has been interested in the case, but never published anything: +"dawn meredith" +"jfk assassination" Wow, a lot of matches on Google. How about: +"mark valenti" +"jfk assassination" ? Ah, you just discovered the Internet, right?

I realize there's a potent "we've been there for so long in the trenches our opinions mean more than you" kind of spirit involved in the JFK investigation. It's a little immature, but understandable. Kinda.

There was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yes, but not the one I present, right?

Correct.

But you have no opinion as to who they were, right?

I have opinions, yes.

But you still find the FBI and the DPD the best credible sources on the evidence? After all, you said that the DPD's and FBI's Identifications of the tramps, are "as close as we can get", remember?

Wim

You can't cherry-pick which official evidence you want to believe. Well, you can, but ultimately, it leaves you where you started. Why are some official records suspect and others not? If you've ever used an official historical document to bolster any of your claims, it's disingenuous to deny the accuracy of others in wholesale fashion.

I find the FBI and the DPD records a source to be examined, thought through, digested and extrapolated, the same as your evidence of Files' involvement, Holt, and whoever else you've uncovered or promoted on your web site and in your JFK murder merchandise.

It's no better or worse, but as I said, in the absence of incontrovertible evidence, which at this point is unlikely, we have the extant record to go by. What we do with it then becomes a question of the interpretation we as individuals bring to it. Same as I've done with your work.

And if I were to apply your standards of mistrusting arguable provenance for evidence, I might point out your icky relationship with Bob Vernon. I could make all kinds of assertions about you based on his behavior. But that would hardly be fair, would it?

Let me close by saying I hope your son had a great birthday.

MV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which photo is from the movie?

The one that clearly shows Landsdale's deformed hand?

The photo that you posted is from SOME movie. I said THE movie because I assumed it was Stone's movie, but it could be some other. Or the photo could be of a scene in a wax museum somewhere, I really don't know.

I'm not aware of Lansdale having a deformed left hand. But if he did, and the man in the photo has a deformed left hand, the movie maker (or wax dummy maker) obviously had an opinion of who the man was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the photos are showing! Anyway here's a link to them and some of Lansdale:

http://www.hobrad.com/taylor.htm

____________________________________

Thanks, Ron

Great pictures. I'll try to have my Dad show them to Krulak. (Interesting that Taylor isn't wearing his ring in the top photo of him wearing a suit...)

--Thomas

____________________________________

_______________________________________________

Ron,

I repeat: It's interesting that Maxwell Tayor isn't wearing his ring in the top photo.

(Obvious answer: "Yes Thomas, he had taken it off.")

--Thomas :)

_______________________________________________

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...