A Name?

[Ron Ecker]

James,

It is certainly easy to get carried away with photos. I'm not impressed by many of the Dealey Plaza lookalikes seen in photos. McCord, for example, and I don't buy the Estes lookalike for a second. But Robertson and Conein are dead on, and both are in the same photo, showing a limited number of people. Yes, it could conceivably be chance, but the odds of that must be astronomical.

Ron

[Tim Gratz]

James makes a very good point that the photographic evidence is best used in conjunction with other evidence that would put the person in Dealey Plaza. The photo can be used to verify the verbal statements and vice-versa. Of course, one needs to carefully consider the accuracy of the person who is making the verbal statement placing the person in Dealey Plaza.

[Ron Ecker]

Tim,

We must add an additional factor to the strong resemblance in the photo of two known CIA agents. Namely the factor that agents of the CIA ("rogue agents" as they're usually called) are among the prime suspects in the assassination.

If Robertson and Conein had been, say, State Farm Insurance agents on their lunch break, the resemblances in the photo wouldn't be quite as significant. But they were CIA.

Ron

[James Richards]

James,

It is certainly easy to get carried away with photos. I'm not impressed by many of the Dealey Plaza lookalikes seen in photos. McCord, for example, and I don't buy the Estes lookalike for a second. But Robertson and Conein are dead on, and both are in the same photo, showing a limited number of people. Yes, it could conceivably be chance, but the odds of that must be astronomical.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron,

Personally, I do believe Rip Robertson watched the assassination from the corner of Main and Houston. Conein I have at 95%.

Ironically, the odds of both these men being just look-a-like spectators is greater than them actually being Robertson and Conein given that the assassination happened in that particular location. That important variable should not be discounted lightly. Different odds if the assassination happened at say Love Field and these guys were located at Main and Houston.

As far as Tim's point about the accuracy of the person giving the verbal statement, in this case we are talking people. Several men who say the same thing.

James

[Jim Root]

When Mr Hemming speaks of Korean War era Rangers, is he refering to those "Rangers" that were trained by Edwin Anderson Walker?

The more I read Hemming's words the greater my interest!

Jim Root

[Ron Ecker]

Different odds if the assassination happened at say Love Field and these guys were located at Main and Houston.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

James,

I agree. That makes two factors that have to be added to the lookalike equation, namely that the lookalikes are at that particular location, and that they look like members of a suspect group (the CIA) in the killing, and not of some other known group or profession.

Ron

[Pat Speer]

Pat wrote:

When one takes into account Oswald's involvement, this scenario becomes LUDICROUS; why would the GRU pick a shooter (or a patsy) who would immediately be linked back to Russia and Cuba?

May not be ludicrous, may indeed be brilliant if in fact Oswald was, as many believe, an agent or asset of U.S. intelligence.  To frame such an individual for the operation would surely generate a cover-up.  The plotters were not concerned with what the public knew but rather with what the government knew.

If Oswald was indeed a CIA operative, I think that clears anyone in the CIA.  It would be ludicrous to use someone who could be traced to you when there were certainly other potential patsies not linked to the US government

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim, you're engaging in wishful thinking here. If the CIA engaged in a cover-up, as SURELY they would, that would mean they would deny their involvement with him, which would leave him exposed to the world as a communist, and make Russia look responsible. By the same token, your argument for the CIA's innocence is completely backwards, as Oswald was under deep cover with no obvious links to the CIA, and the CIA would have little to fear from his being the patsy, AS LONG AS HE WAS KILLED AND COULDN'T TALK. Since the Russians were undoubtedly aware that JFK was the most restrained member of the Government, for them to kill him and expect a calm, reasoned response, by LBJ, the CIA, and the military, well that would be wishful thinking on their part.

[Tim Gratz]

Pat, as you know I have high respect for your opinions (and have from the very first post of yours that I read). But do you really think the CIA would kill one of its own operatives as part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy? If in fact the CIA was behind it why not use a patsy that had no possible connection to the CIA, to eliminate any risk. As you know, there were CIA employees (or former CIA employees) who claimed knowledge of a CIA relationship with Oswald.

I also think that IF (and I admit it is an "if") part of the Russians did it, they did not have to worry that a crazed LBJ would go to war to avenge the death of a man for whom he reportedly had no respect anyway. Same thing could probaby be said for the US military.

The other point to be recognized is that no one here is arguing that "the Russians" did it. It was certainly not sanctioned by the Soviet state. It is Hemming's position (as I understand it) that the Russian military (or part thereof) was behind it and the KGB was desperately trying to stop in part because they feared the consequences. This is consistent with Nagell's story that the KGB had given him a mission to stop the assassination even if it meant killing Oswald.

If--again I qualify it as "if" --there was a connection between the removal of Kennedy and Khruschev within one year, then the two events were certainly not the handiwork of a faction of US intelligence. Arguably, either American or Soviet intelligence could have shot Kennedy but only Soviet intelligence, or a group thereof, could arrange for the deposure of Khruschev.

I will ask Mr Hemming if he is able or willing to provide the affidavits he mentioned in his post. My point is the scenario he advances can be considered consistent with BOTH the Nagell story and what Trento states in "The Secret History of the CIA" so we may not want to dismiss it without a very careful evaluation of it.

[Ron Ecker]

Tim,

If the KGB tried to stop the assassination as Nagell said, it could be because they learned of the plan from Castro, who learned of it through his spies in the exile community. And why would the KGB not then warn JFK instead of trying to stop it? An obvious reason would be to protect the KGB's and Cuban security's methods and resources.

Ron

[Larry Hancock]

I think we need to be a bit more specific about what Nagell said....

He said that that while in Mexico City, during his involvement in contacts with

both U.S. intelligence (and after threatening to defect and hand over sensitive information to foreign powers ala Oswald in Russia) and Soviet intelligence he was approached by the KGB to do two tasks. One was to monitor an Lee Oswald, someone the KGB knew he had been in contact with in Japan and an individual

they felt that might be in the process of being maneuvered in a manner

that would cause severe embarassment if not worse to the Soviets due to

his prior time in Russia. This was shortly after Oswald's return to the U.S. and

at a time in which we now know he was working on a manuscript which

was extremely critical of the Russian system.

The second task was to establish contact with Cuban exiles whom the

Russians had heard were beginning to discuss plans to attack either JFK or

RFK or both and blame it on Castro (and possibly the Soviets as well).

Nagell followed up on both assignments, spending most of his time

on the exiles. He also did only minor contact and monitoring of Oswald.

However it was not until he went from Florida to New Oreleans in August

of 1963 that the two tasks came together - and there is some reason to

think that Nagell may even have pointed out Oswald to these initial exile

conspirators to help maintain his contact with them, in the same fashion he

had pointed them at Vaughn Marlowe (ex Marine, FPCC member, etc)

in Los Angeles.

Nagell also said the first use of Oswald was going to be in September in

the Washington/Baltimore area.....which tallies directly to a series of letters

Oswald wrote in late August about a move to the northeast and which nobody

has ever explained at all - except Nagell.

[Pat Speer]

Pat, as you know I have high respect for your opinions (and have from the very first post of yours that I read).  But do you really think the CIA would kill one of its own operatives as part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy? If in fact the CIA was behind it why not use a patsy that had no possible connection to the CIA, to eliminate any risk.  As you know, there were CIA employees (or former CIA employees) who claimed knowledge of a CIA relationship with Oswald. 

I also think that IF (and I admit it is an "if") part of the Russians did it, they did not have to worry that a crazed LBJ would go to war to avenge the death of a man for whom he reportedly had no respect anyway.  Same thing could probaby be said for the US military.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's a number of scenarios which are possible.

1. Oswald was working for CIA, and could be shown to be working for them, and some conspirators set him up, believing that their use of Oswald would force the CIA to back off. This seems to be what you're proposing. I think this is possible, but the combo of Russian military and anti-Castro Cubans makes no sense to me.

2. Oswald was working for CIA, had infiltrated a conspiracy, and was set up by those he'd infiltrated. I tend to go for this one; I think it's possible Phillips covered-up because he suspected someone within the intelligence community had stabbed Oswald in the back.

3. Oswald was working for CIA, was part of a conspiracy, and was set up by a faction of the agency itself. While you seem to think the CIA wouldn't sell out its own, if they're gonna kill their President, what does Oswald matter? The only flaw in this theory is that they would have needed to make sure Oswald never had a chance to talk. I think there's a possibility Oswald was supposed to go out the back door to make his escape and he fooled them by going out the front, right out into the scene of the crime. Possible, particularly if Robertson was in the Plaza.

4. Oswald wasn't working for CIA, and was just a com/symp who got framed by the likes of Walker.

5. Oswald had accomplices without ties to CIA.

5. Oswald did it alone.

I really doubt the last one.

[Gerry Hemming]

Thanks, Gerry.

That certainly fills in some blanks regarding Ron Von Klassen.

BTW, I take it the Stanley White you mention is the same guy as the one who popped up in the film 'JFK' - the big guy who is seen in Banister's office and on the 6th floor during the shooting?

Cheers,

James

-----------------------

Stan White portrayed the DalTex shooter, and Davy was replaced with a Black Extra when Oliver re-checked the files.

GPH

____________________________

[Gerry Hemming]

James,

It is certainly easy to get carried away with photos. I'm not impressed by many of the Dealey Plaza lookalikes seen in photos. McCord, for example, and I don't buy the Estes lookalike for a second. But Robertson and Conein are dead on, and both are in the same photo, showing a limited number of people. Yes, it could conceivably be chance, but the odds of that must be astronomical.

Ron

----------------------

As Angleton commented during 1967, quite a large number of suckers/probable "Patsies" were lured to Dallas the weel of November 19th thru 25th, 1963 !!

Keep on "Trucking"

GPH

_________________________________

[Gerry Hemming]

Tim,

We must add an additional factor to the strong resemblance in the photo of two known CIA agents. Namely the factor that agents of the CIA ("rogue agents" as they're usually called) are among the prime suspects in the assassination.

If Robertson and Conein had been, say, State Farm Insurance agents on their lunch break, the resemblances in the photo wouldn't be quite as significant. But they were CIA.

Ron

---------------------

It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how these Intel & contract agents were set-up -- just WHO do you think would "BURN" all of these "Company & Military figures ?? -- The PTA or the Girls Scouts ??

Wake up and smell the "Disinformation Roses" folks !!

GPH

_____________________________-

[Gerry Hemming]

Tim,

We must add an additional factor to the strong resemblance in the photo of two known CIA agents. Namely the factor that agents of the CIA ("rogue agents" as they're usually called) are among the prime suspects in the assassination.

If Robertson and Conein had been, say, State Farm Insurance agents on their lunch break, the resemblances in the photo wouldn't be quite as significant. But they were CIA.

Ron

-----------------------

"Rogue Agents [Officers]?? My large aching arse !!

GPH

_______________________________