Pat Speer Chats with Francois Carlier

[Kirk Gallaway]

 

16 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

Man,oh man.... I must admit that it is so disappointing to hear Pat talk now.

Pat,I have been a member on this forum since 2005,and I have put you up there on such a high pedestal.You are so admired.You are up there with David Lifton in my eyes as such prominent researchers.I don't know if it's the cancer or other illnesses that has corrupted your mind.

I just don't know what to say or how to say it.But it is so disappointing.

That is all.

 

 

Whew!

Geez Pat, now you're like the forum Michael Jackson, put up on a pedestal only to be ravaged. again!

You're obviously a survivor Pat, as I noticed 2 rather hostile titled  extended threads bearing your name here recently and I was thinking how many hours you probably had to expend reexplaining yourself. Anyway, glad you survived and were not shamed to death!

I knew Francois to be a LNer from his occasional stops on the forum, but you come off real well  as the interviewee.

Don't beat yourself up. I  certainly thought you were easily lucid enough to be President!

I don't agree with some of Pat's conclusions but I love his method. of putting evidence up to the test and if it doesn't cut it, in his mind, he looks for other answers.

If your journey into the JFKA has been very linear and you've largely accepted the story line you've been told. If you never read a JFKA  book, or an author that you first believed that you later called into question., or a super author  statement that you came to doubt., or put to test and resisted the newest forum groundswell theory.  Then you won't understand Pat.

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

55 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Whew!

Geez Pat, now you're like the forum Michael Jackson, put up on a pedestal only to be ravaged. again!

You're obviously a survivor Pat, as I noticed 2 rather hostile titled  extended threads bearing your name here recently and I was thinking how many hours you probably had to expend reexplaining yourself. Anyway, glad you survived and were not shamed to death!

I knew Francois to be a LNer from his occasional stops on the forum, but you come off real well  as the interviewee.

Don't beat yourself up. I  certainly thought you were easily lucid enough to be President!

I don't agree with some of Pat's conclusions but I love his method. of putting evidence up to the test and if it doesn't cut it, in his mind, he looks for other answers.

If your journey into the JFKA has been very linear and you've largely accepted the story line you've been told. If you never read a JFKA  book, or an author that you first believed that you later called into question., or a super author  statement that you came to doubt., or put to test and resisted the newest forum groundswell theory.  Then you won't understand Pat.

Yes. 

[Robert Morrow]

11 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Robert,

Baker's Affidavit matches perfectly with radio dispatches of 12:44 and 12:45. My question is, did Baker encounter someone before, or after these dispatches went out; or did he later write his affidavit to match the description contained in the dispatches? Or, like you postulate,  was the affidavit faked to match the dispatches - even down to his age.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/dpdtapes/

Channel 2
Dispatcher    Yes, 12:44 p.m.
               9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer)    The type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester.
               Dispatcher    9, it was a rifle?
               9    A rifle, yes.
               Dispatcher    9, any clothing description?
               9    About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds.

Channel 1
12:45    Dispatcher    Attention Elm and Houston is reported to be an unknown white male, all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting at approximately thirty, slender build, height five feet ten inches, weight one hundred sixty-five pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a 30 caliber rifle. Attention all squads. The suspect from Elm and Houston is reported to be an unknown white male about thirty, slender build, five feet ten inches tall, one hundred sixty-five pounds, armed with what is thought to be a 30-30 rifle. No further description at this time, or information. 12:45.

Steve Thomas

The Marrion Baker affidavit was faked to match the 12:44PM Dallas police radio dispatches there were sent out to immediately frame the "pre-selected patsy" for the JFK assassination. In the aftermath of the JFK assassination, the Dallas police went on a coordinated rampage of lying and faking and fabricating stuff to implicate patsy Oswald who called himself a "patsy" before he was murdered in police custody.

I have a blog post based on Bill Simpich's work:

Absolute Proof Lee Harvey Oswald was a *pre-selected patsy* for the JFK assassination: “5 feet 10 inches, 165 pounds” https://robertmorrowpoliticalresearchblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/5-feet-10-inches-165-pounds-is-absolute.html  Dallas Police Dispatcher was immediately using Marguerite Oswald’s description of Lee given to Dallas FBI in May, 1960.

One more thing, Steve, the Dallas police at the Tippit slaying did the same thing. One of them filed an affidavit saying that one of the witnesses saw the murderer of Tippit and he was about 5 feet 10 inches tall and 165 pounds. This was coordinated lying by the Dallas police to frame Oswald for the Tippit murder too, which was used to blame Oswald for the JFK assassination.

 

 

 

Edited March 24 by Robert Morrow

[Sandy Larsen]

19 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Marrion Baker did, of course, mention his encounter with Lee Oswald in his first-day affidavit. He merely got the floor number wrong.

 

Marrion Baker's account of the guy on the third or fourth floor doesn't at all match the supposed encounter he had with Oswald.

Wrong floor: Third or fourth vs. second floor.

Wrong physical description: 165 lb vs. 140 lb.

Wrong location: In the hallway vs. in the lunchroom.

Wrong description of event: Suspect is standing, drinking a coke vs. walking away.

 

How could Baker possibly have mistaken "I entered the vestibule and saw a man drinking a coke in the lunchroom" for "I saw a man in the hallway walking away from me; I called and he came back?"

 

This is what got me started searching for the truth. I ultimately found that all the evidence pointed to the second-floor encounter having never occurred. I also found that the evidence indicated Oswald's alibi was that he was outside with Bill Shelley during the motorcade. And from those two findings I postulated that the second-floor encounter was fabricated to bring Oswald further away from his alibi, the front steps... in order to cover up the alibi.

The official narrative is that Oswald's alibi was that he was INSIDE on the first floor during the shooting. The WC couldn't let Oswald's real alibi be known because otherwise critics would scrutinize photos and film, looking for Oswald outside.

That was my own investigation on this topic, and it backs up what Bart Kamp found in his investigation. Later, Bart discovered the Hosty note, which proved us right about Oswald's alibi of being outside watching the "P. Parade."

 

[David Von Pein]

56 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Marrion Baker's account of the guy on the third or fourth floor doesn't at all match the supposed encounter he had with Oswald.

And, as usual, you too are also going to ignore Roy Truly's "It Was Oswald" confirmation.

Tell us, Sandy: Why are you so convinced Roy S. Truly was a l-i-a-r and a CIA operative? What possible (good) reason could anyone have for treating Mr. Truly like a criminal?

BTW, Marrion Baker never said he saw anyone drinking a Coke in the TSBD on 11/22. The crossed-out "Coke" reference in his Sept. '64 statement has a perfectly logical explanation  --->  Oswald, Baker, Truly, And Coca-Cola.

 

Edited March 24 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

20 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Tell us, Sandy: Why are you so convinced Roy S. Truly was a l-i-a-r and a CIA operative? What possible (good) reason could anyone have for treating Mr. Truly like a criminal?

 

It's all very simple:

1. Most of us accept the Oswald was a pre-ordained patsy. (There are many good reasons to believe that... they are outside the scope of this post.)
2. It was necessary for Oswald to take a job at the TSBD in order for him to (unwittingly) play the roll of patsy.
3. In order to accomplish that, the perpetrators of the assassination necessarily had to have control over A) Oswald's actions, B ) Ruth Paine's actions, C) the actions of either Roy Truly or someone who could somehow control him.

Of all the possible suspects there were for the perpetrators (CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, Mafia, right-wing extremists, Castro, etc.), who could possibly have had control over Oswald, Ruth Paine, and Roy Truly?

The only reasonable answer is the CIA.

Therefore the CIA was controlling Oswald, Ruth Paine, and Truly. Truly might have been controlled indirectly.

Note that I never said anything about Truly (or anybody else) being a criminal.

But whenever a coverup occurs, people do illegal things. Coverups are illegal. I don't know if Truly was a witting part of the coverup.

 

[Steve Thomas]

Gerald Hill WC testimony
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/hill_gl.htm

"Mr. HILL. We were standing there with Inspector Sawyer and Assistant District Attorney Bill Alexander came up to us, and we had been standing there for a minute when we heard the strange voice on the police radio that said something to the effect that, if I remember right, either the first call that came out said that they were in the 400 block of East Jefferson, and that an officer had been shot, and the voice on the radio, whoever it was, said he thought he was dead.
At this point Sergeant Owens said something to the effect that this would have been one of his men. And prior, on our way to the location from the city hall, a description had been broadcast of a possible suspect in the assassination.
With the description, as I remember, it was a white male, 5'8" 160 pounds, wearing a jacket, a light shirt, dark trousers, and sort of bushy brown hair." 
That was not the description that was broadcast.
Go back and  re-read the descriptions I provided from 12:44 and 12:45. No clothing is ever mentioned.

"We went on to the scene of the shooting where we found a squad car parked against the right or the south curb on 10th Street, with a pool of blood on the left-hand side of it near the side of the car.
Tippit had already been removed. The first man that came up to me, he said, "The man that shot him was a white male about 5'10", weighing 160 to 170 pounds, had on a Jacket and a pair of dark trousers, and brown bushy hair.""
Mr. BELIN. Now, let me interrupt you here, sergeant. Do you remember the name of the person that gave you the description?
Mr. HILL. No. I turned him over to Poe, and I didn't even get his name.

At 1:22, we have this description from Officer 85:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/dpdtapes/tapes2.htm

"We have a description on this suspect over here on Jefferson. Last seen about 300 block of East Jefferson. He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, (siren) black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks. (Sirens"
At 1:24, Dispatch sends out this alert:
Wanted for investigation for assault to murder on a police officer: A white male; approximately thirty; about five foot eight; slender build; has black hair; a white jacket; a white shirt and dark trousers. 

Where does Hill keep getting this "bushy brown hair business"?

Steve Thomas

[Tom Gram]

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

Where does Hill keep getting this "bushy brown hair business"?

This reminded me a bit of the description Benavides gave to the WC. He said the killer’s hair was a bit curlier than his own, had a squared-off neckline, and that it looked like he needed a haircut for about two weeks. Could he have been the source? 

There’s also Markham. According to Mark Lane, reporters wrote that she described the killer’s hair as “bushy”. Markham denied it to Lane, but did say the killer’s hair was “a little bit bushy”: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=41#relPageId=511

Lane doesn’t mention his exact source, but I found a few candidates.  One is the DMN from Nov. 23. I don’t have the actual article, but the quote according to this FBI report is “witnesses to the shooting described a bushy-haired man about 30…wearing a white-cotton jacket…”. Markham was one of the witnesses interviewed for the article.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145526#relPageId=396

This one was probably Lane’s main source though. It provides a direct quote from Markham saying that the killer was “about 30, with bushy hair and a white coat”:

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=60418#relPageId=62

It’s not a great copy but it looks like the Detroit Free Press from at least Dec. 6th. The reporter was Gene Roberts. 

The way the WR dealt with this is a bit questionable. They just took Markham’s denial to Lane as gospel and didn’t attempt to interview Roberts, etc. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=676

Edited March 25 by Tom Gram

[Ron Ecker]

On 3/23/2024 at 6:59 PM, Pat Speer said:

Why thank you, Sandy. It sounds like you think there's a chance of my getting into heaven. 

I assume you've probably heard this joke, but perhaps some others here haven't. A JFK researcher dies and goes to heaven. He asks God, "Who killed JFK?" And God says, "I've got a theory about that."

 

 

[Gil Jesus]

On 3/24/2024 at 6:44 AM, David Von Pein said:

Why are you ignoring Roy Truly's observations? Mr. Truly was right there alongside Baker and Oswald.

Do you really think Truly lied when he said it was Oswald in the lunchroom?

 

Who said anything about Truly ? The subject here is Baker.

YOU said Baker mentioned his encounter with Oswald in his affidavit of 11/22.

He did not. He mentioned an encounter with a man whose description he gave did NOT match Oswald.

Baker gave his affidavit sometime between 3pm and 2am on the 23rd. We know that because it was Detective Marvin Johnson who took that affidavit. And Johnson wrote in his report that he didn't arrive at police headquarters that day until 3pm and stayed until 2 am. ( 24 H 307 )

Baker gave his affidavit AFTER Oswald was in police custody and police had in their possession "his tan jacket".

In his testimony, he admitted that he saw Oswald, "when I went to give the affidavit." ( 3 H 257 )

So why doesn't his affidavit say that he recognized the man he saw in the police station as the man he encountered in the building ?

Because the man he encountered on the "third or fourth floor" wearing a "light brown jacket" WASN'T Oswald.

Baker's description of the jacket matches that of JOHN POWELL, a prisoner in the county jail who claimed to see two men adjusting the scope of a rifle. They were darker skinned than whites and appeared to be wearing "brownish or duller clothes like work clothes." ( Dallas Norning News, 12/19/78 )

Baker encountered a man on the third or fourth floor wearing a light brown ( work ) jacket. And the Commission didn't ask him ONE QUESTION about his SWORN affidavit. Even though at the time of his testimony ( 3/25/64 ), he was still saying the man he encountered was wearing a light brown jacket. ( 3 H 257 )

**But since you wanna change the subject to Roy Truly, consider this:

If that man was one of the men John Powell saw and was involved in the shooting and Roy Truly vouched for him, then Roy Truly was involved in the President's assassination as well.

Oswald was one of two men Truly hired and it was Truly who assigned Oswald to the Depository building. The other man was sent to the warehouse down the street. ( FBI file # 105-82555, Sec A-3, pg. 58 ). It was Truly who put Oswald in the building. It was Truly who let Oswald leave the building ( James Jarman Testimony to HSCA, 9-25-77, pgs. 2-3 ). And it was Truly who then turned the police on to him. Consider also that it was Truly who allowed two rifles to be brought into the building the day after the motorcade route was publicized as going in front of the TSBD.

In addition, Truly "disapproved strongly" of Kennedy's policies abroad and considered him a "race-mixer" at home. ( Manchester, The Death of a President, pg. 49 )

For all we know, it was Truly who put that C2766 rifle in the building.

In a normal criminal investigation, your star witness Mr. Truly, would have been given closer scutiny.

But because he cooperated with the framing of Oswald and the subsequent coverup, he wasn't.

 

 

Edited March 25 by Gil Jesus

[Robert Morrow]

Now, Gil Jesus, those are some truly awful things to say about Roy Truly. I actually think Roy Truly and Marrion Baker saw Oswald (who said he was a patsy) on the second floor TSBD.

But having given my little opinion, is it true that Roy Truly worked for the man, D.H. Byrd (a close personal friend of Lyndon Johnson - a raging Kennedy-hater who knew in real time the Kennedys were out to utterly destroy him in November, 1963) whose wife Mrs. Byrd and business partner James Ling together through the Alpha Omega Corporation bought 132,000 shares of LTV stock in November, 1963 at about $16 per share and that stock later traded as high as $169 per share after LTV feasted off of the Vietnam War and LBJ's largesse?

LBJ insiders Dallas investors D.H. Byrd and James Ling bought 132,000 shares of LTV stock at $16/share in November, 1963. By 1967 the military contractor was trading at a whopping $169/share https://robertmorrowpoliticalresearchblog.blogspot.com/2024/03/lyndon-johnsons-dallas-tx-insider-pals.html

So is it really true that Roy Truly actually worked for D.H. Byrd, a man who actually kept the 6th floor TSBD so-called "sniper's window" as a trophy in his 16,000 sq. foot home located at 6909 Vassar Avenue (a home later owned by T. Boone Pickens and worth about $15 million in 2023) along with the heads of other animals that he had killed as a big game hunter?

 

Edited March 25 by Robert Morrow

[Steve Thomas]

13 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

This reminded me a bit of the description Benavides gave to the WC. He said the killer’s hair was a bit curlier than his own, had a squared-off neckline, and that it looked like he needed a haircut for about two weeks. Could he have been the source? 

 

Tom,

I think I might know where Hill was getting info about Oswald having bushy brown hair.

I think it came from Roy Truly.

Gerald Hill WC testimony
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/hill_gl.htm

"Mr. HILL. We were standing there with Inspector Sawyer and Assistant District Attorney Bill Alexander came up to us, and we had been standing there for a minute when we heard the strange voice on the police radio that said something to the effect that, if I remember right, either the first call that came out said that they were in the 400 block of East Jefferson, and that an officer had been shot, and the voice on the radio, whoever it was, said he thought he was dead.
At this point Sergeant Owens said something to the effect that this would have been one of his men. And prior, on our way to the location from the city hall, a description had been broadcast of a possible suspect in the assassination.
With the description, as I remember, it was a white male, 5'8" 160 pounds, wearing a jacket, a light shirt, dark trousers, and sort of bushy brown hair." 

That was not the description that was broadcast.

 

Roy Truly's WC testimony:

"Representative FORD. In your description of Oswald to Captain Fritz, did you describe the kind of clothes that Oswald had on that day?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know, sir. No, sir; I just told him his name and where he lived and his telephone number and his age, as 23, and I said 5 feet, 9, about 150 pounds, light brown hair--whatever I picked up off the description there. I did not try to depend on my memory to describe him. I just put down what was on this application blank. That's the reason I called Mr. Aiken, because I did not want to mislead anybody as to a description. I might call a man brown-halted, and he might be blonde."

The only problem is, is that Oswald's TSBD application does not say what color his hair is:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0118b.htm

 

Steve Thomas

[Martin Nee]

On 3/23/2024 at 8:32 PM, Pat Speer said:

For those with an interest, fellow Forum member Francois Carlier has recorded a discussion of ours and put it up on YouTube. 

This is not a research presentation. It is an informal discussion between two people with an interest in the Kennedy assassination. As proved by the video, age and cancer have taken a toll on me, and I am often forgetful.

But those who know me will see that my spirit remains intact, and that lone-nutters such as Francois and conspiracy theorists such as myself can have a friendly conversation.

And it is in that spirit that I bring this video to the attention of our fellow Forum members.

One viewing this should not take anything we say as gospel. Or start attack threads questioning our character or intelligence. This is not propaganda designed to fool anyone. It is simply a friendly chat that I hope will inspire more friendly chats. 

If you can accept it for what it is...Enjoy. 

 

Thank you for this Pat. I’m glad you are in good spirits. Its nice to see that good faith discussion is possible in pursuit of greater understanding. Wishing you the best in regards your health and continued work. 

[Steve Thomas]

5 hours ago, Robert Morrow said:

 

But having given my little opinion, is it true that Roy Truly worked for the man, D.H. Byrd

 

So is it really true that Roy Truly actually worked for D.H. Byrd,

 

Robert,

From Roy Truly's WC testimony:

Mr. BELIN. You have been superintendent of the Texas School Book Depository. And do you have any other positions with the company at this time?
Mr. TRULY. I am a director--I am a member of the board of directors of the Texas School Book Depository.
Mr. BELIN. Is that a state organization or a private company?
Mr. TRULY. It is a private corporation.

 

“Corsicana Daily Sun” from Corsicana, Texas March 31, 1970 Page 10

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/41268447/

 

“The building (the Texas School Book Depository) is owned by the Dallas Trust Corp. The majority stockholder of the firm, Col. D. Harold Byrd, 69, has decided to liquidate some of his holdings.”

 

1961 Dallas City Directory page 387

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth806907/m1/723/?q=Byrd

 

Steve Thomas

[Roger Odisio]

1 hour ago, Martin Nee said:

Thank you for this Pat. I’m glad you are in good spirits. Its nice to see that good faith discussion is possible in pursuit of greater understanding. Wishing you the best in regards your health and continued work. 

I found the interview to be an interesting look at Pat's research approach, and his thinking on several subjects.  I think it was more of an interview than a discussion by two people who disagreed.  Carlier spent most of the time nodding in apparent agreement and at the end praised Pat's answers, while saying he had learned a lot. That he says he had started as a disciple of David Lifton, but was now a LNer indicates a certain openminded on his part, if nothing else.

 

I want to focus on what you said about LBJ, Pat. You made an important point right off the bat. The others who wanted Kennedy whacked needed assurances from Johnson, before they could go ahead with the plan, that he wouldn't come after them afterwards. He would have authority over the coverup that protected them.

 

But logic tells me Johnson's involvement with the murder plan went beyond that one nod of the head.

 

The murder was not the work of a committee.  There had to have been a small set of people with decisionmaking authority.  It's likely Johnson was one of them, as I have said before.

 

There was a well known disagreement among the full group of Kennedy haters about how to use the Oswald story they had agreed upon.  After the murder Johnson quickly squelched the idea that Oswald did it for the commies.  He had lusted after the presidency too long to see it destroyed by a catastrophic war.

 

But there is no way the decisionmakers would have left that question to be decided on the fly after the murder, among the chaos that ensued. It seems clear that version was taken off the table before the murder was given the go ahead.  It is also clear that Johnson, who was to be the guy with authority over the investigation once Oswald was killed, would have been the guy who insisted on that. Johnson killed the other investigation starting up to centralize everything in the Warren Commission he created to make sure there was no real inquiry.

 

Which is not to say that those who wanted to go after Cuba and the SU all accepted no for an answer.  There were still attempts after the murder to bring in Cuba and the SU as the villains, that Johnson had to squelch.

 

There was a third element of Johnson's involvement.  He had to assure the others he would not stand in the way of their foreign policy plans, as Kennedy had done. Pax Americana would be implemented.  While stopping a war with the SU, and perhaps in return for it, he agreed to the Vietnam escalation.

 

Johnson's agreement to remove the foreign policy impediments Kennedy had constructed was absolutely necessary before the plan could go forward. Otherwise the murder would have lost its main purpose. It's not clear how explicit Johnson's agreement had to be in that regard, since the others knew Johnson pretty well. But it had to be understood by the others.