Scenario

[Tim Gratz]

Al wrote:

I will agree with you on one thing. It is ludicrous to believe that Greer and Kellerman had anything to do with this. Who would ever put themselves within the circle of fire in a moving vehicle with foresight of what was to take place? Nobody!!!

Yes, Al, we are in complete agreement with this. Plus: if Greer knew he was involving him in a conspiracy, would he not consider that the conspirators might want to get rid of him and his "guilty knowledge" during the ambush? For that matter, if Greer was part of the conspiracy, why would the conspirators NOT have taken him out? The Oswald murder cried conspiracy, of course, but had the limosine driver died in the shooting no one would have suspected he was part of the plot.

So Greer's survival also demonstrates, fairly conclusively I think, his innocence.

[Tim Gratz]

Al wrote:

Can you provide evidence of successful operations that were orchestrated by Rosselli?

Unless I am wrong, in order to be a "made" member of the Mafia, Rosselli must have committed at least one murder. The fact that Rosselli was never convicted of murder demonstrates that he successfully orchestrated it.

Al also wrote:

Can you provide any successful operations in the Cuban Project that involved the mafia and the anti-Castro Cubans?

No, proving my point that Trafficante was in fact on Castro's payroll. Otherwise, what is the probability that the Mafia could not accomplish the murder of the dictator of a small Caribbean island within three years? The only other reasonable explanation is that the Mafia was not the efficient killing machine it was reputed to be, but in my opinion there is plenty of evidence that indeed it was. (I reject, of course, any theory that Castro had a charmed life that allowed him to escape the plots.)

My question for you, Al, re your scenario of a military sniper operation: how does the Mafia fit into your scenario? Does not Ruby's involvement demonstrate Mafia involvement in the assassination?

[Tim Gratz]

Re Kellerman's possible involvement, a member of Lancer named Richard J. Smith recently posted this comment that I think is worth quoting in this thread:

Richard J. Smith posted on the Forum on "JFK Lancer":

What is also interesting to note is that Kellerman not only saw the large hole in the rear of the head, he said he saw a small hole in the hairline in the lower rear of the head. To my knowledge, he is the only one to have seen this small hole prior to the official autopsy report(presumably an entrance wound in the lower right rear). He indicated to the WC JFK was shot 4 times, JBC 3 times, so therefore there had to be more than one gunman(note to those who think Kellerman was in on the plot, why would he say this if he was in on it?).

Edited June 22, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Tim...please explain the role of Lyndon in your MAFIA DID IT scenario. Was he working for the Mafia?

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

Could you also delineate more clearly Oswald's exact 'role' - if any - in the assassination?

EBC

[Bernice Moore]

""My question for you, Al, re your scenario of a military sniper operation: how does the Mafia fit into your scenario? Does not Ruby's involvement demonstrate Mafia involvement in the assassination? ""

But Tim, by involving Ruby in your be all scenario,( that if one group doesn't fit, or you get tired of that group in say a week or two, you can throw them out and put in whomever and it still works ??......I think I have that correct??) any group will fit..and can work...??

Anyway, by involving Mr.Ruby you involve all....don't you...??

Now take one man for instance.....Frank Sturgis ..he worked at the Tropicana Hotel in Havana...and therefore has a Cuban connection...His real name was Fiorini, and not just his contact with the Tropicana but also with Jack Ruby's friend, Lewis McWillie (who also worked there ) gives these men connections to Trafficante..and the Mob...But Sturgis worked for E.Howard Hunt..and therefore had CIA.. Government connections....Hunt was that senior CIA fella, that worked for President Nixon, as a Watergate burglar ..both he and Sturgis were arrested......

So in the end, we can say that we can link Sturgis to Trafficante ,Nixon, the CIA, Government..... and so to Jack Ruby...?? and you have already stated that" Jack Ruby's involvement demonstrates Mafia involvement in the assassination."..

So the conclusion is, no one is left out ???

So aren't you saying that a person is suspicious because he knew someone who knew someone else who was implicated in the involvement in some wrong doing by a third party...?

No wonder your theory becomes so complex, and difficult ,to keep the facts and people in a proper perspective...and muddies the waters, so to speak....But then I forgot, we can throw out your group and install another, according to your scenario....??..

Thanks for this wonderful clear aspect of the assassination, I never realised it was so easily solved.....too easy, too clear, too muddied......

B

[Tim Gratz]

Bernice wrote:

Anyway, by involving Mr. Ruby you involve all....don't you...??

Sorry, Bernice, your post totally escapes me.

By involving Ruby I involve everyone? Do you dispute that Ruby was involved in the plot? I would think Ruby is the SINGLE person we can all state with certainty was involved, since we can probably debate until the cows come home whether LHO was somehow implicated or was nothing but a patsy.

But why does involving Ruby necessarily involve everyone with which he ever associated? Obviously, it does not.

If, as the evidence indicates, Ruby was mob-connected then logic compels the conclusion that the mob was involved in the assassination since, presumably, mob-connected people do not normally commit high-profile murders without the approval of their mob associates.

But it is not just logical analysis that compels a conclusion that if Ruby was involved so were his bosses in the mafia.

As you know, there is fairly strong evidence that both Marcello and Trafficante were involved (by their own "confessions") as well as by Ruby's phone calls leading up to the assassination.

But to say that because Ruby knew Sturgis (which is not clear to me) therefore Sturgis was involved, and since Sturgis knew Hunt, therefore Hunt was involved, etc. etc. there is no logic to this whatsoever. Ruby reportedly knew hundreds of members of the DPD as well. Not everyone whom Ruby knew was an assassin, obviously.

Bernice also wrote:

So aren't you saying that a person is suspicious because he knew someone who knew someone else who was implicated in the involvement in some wrong doing by a third party...?

Duh...No, I am not saying that. What in the world led you to that conclusion?

Edited June 23, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Bernice Moore]

Bernice wrote:

Anyway, by involving Mr. Ruby you involve all....don't you...??

Sorry, Bernice, your post totally escapes me.

By involving Ruby I involve everyone?  Do you dispute that Ruby was involved in the plot?  I would think Ruby is the SINGLE person we can all state with certainty was involved, since we can probably debate until the cows come home whether LHO was somehow implicated or was nothing but a patsy.

But why does involving Ruby necessarily involve everyone with which he ever associated?  Obviously, it does not.

If, as the evidence indicates, Ruby was mob-connected then logic compels the conclusion that the mob was involved in the assassination since, presumably, mob-connected people do not normally commit high-profile murders without the approval of their mob associates.

But it is not just logical analysis that compels a conclusion that if Ruby was involved so were his bosses in the mafia.

As you know, there is fairly strong evidence that both Marcello and Trafficante were involved (by their own "confessions") as well as by Ruby's phone calls leading up to the assassination.

But to say that because Ruby knew Sturgis (which is not clear to me) therefore Sturgis was involved, and since Sturgis knew Hunt, therefore Hunt was involved, etc. etc. there is no logic to this whatsoever.   Ruby reportedly knew hundreds of members of the DPD as well.  Not everyone whom Ruby knew was an assassin, obviously.

Bernice also wrote:

So aren't you saying that a person is suspicious because he knew someone who knew someone else who was implicated in the involvement in some wrong doing by a third party...?

Duh...No, I am not saying that.  What in the world led you to that conclusion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

***********************************

The Sturgis scenario was a simile....

But Duh !!!. ..you are the one who wrote....""Does not Ruby's involvement demonstrate Mafia involvement in the assassination? ""

So what you said is that because Ruby shot and killed LHO, the Mafia was involved...????

and therefore anyone could then lead to, another scenario, the way that you have, and bring about that whomever the Mafia were involved with could have been associated with the assassination.....capice??...That is how you have involved the Mafia bosses, here, through Ruby, and through phone calls...Ruby made zillions of phone calls to many people, were they connected also...??...and then you also connect Castro as a third party....in your scenario....

sooooo

""So aren't you saying that a person is suspicious because he knew someone who knew someone else who was implicated in the involvement in some wrong doing by a third party...?""

That is basically McCarthyism....which is an accusation that you have thrown at others here.....

Who disputed that Ruby was not involved, ??...He was guilty of shooting LHO....and ..there is evidence that connects him to the mob, but that is evidence...No logical analysis does not Compel that because he was involved his bosses were, that is your supposition...that does not hold water in a murder case....There are quite a few who have confessed to the assn, but that does not mean they did, it is the proof that is needed, not just presumptions..

If ? as you say that Castro and the Mob conspired to assassinate the President...then why choose a man like LHO..as the patsy? He makes no sense ....he is not a hit man..he may or may not have been at one time a sharpshooter in the Marines years before, but I have read where he only acquired that markmanship level once ,the rest of the time he was a "maggies drawers"...shot...

Wouldn't your Mafia and or Castro,Cubans have provided someone with more experience, and also equipped him with a much better rifle....and why LHO, he had stated on TV he was a Marxist, that meant he was a communist to Americans...he was connected to the FPFC, now why on earth would Castro, go along with someone who was to be the patsy, who was already connected to Communism and Cuba..therefore making him appear guilty??.... so the US could attack and take the country over...?? for whom, the Mafia ??..they didn't....Vietnam was the bigger pie...LHO was made to appear as a Communist and a Castro sympathizer, who had been passing out leaflets in support of Castro..in New Orleans...and how did Castro and the Mafia get him the job at the TSBD..?.....that connection is from the Paines and they connect to DeMohrenschidlt , who also worked for the CIA, who also knew LBJ, who also was a friend of Harold Bryd who owned the TSBD..they all regularly met at the Petroleum Club..with others....and also in the 70's ...10 Mafia figures were killed who were associated with the Kennedy assassination investigation...why would Castro or the Mafia kill them if they had been involved in the job for them..???...I know they were going to talk... that IMO was a clean up job, and not by Castro or Mafia.........there also is that document from the NA, that the Cuban Army and Navy were put on alert the evening of Nov. 23/63...If Castro had killed JFK, with any help, they would have surely been put on alert before not after the assassination..

So duh yourself....

Here have a cone and cool down..

B

Edited June 23, 2005 by Bernice Moore

[Al Carrier]

Al wrote:

Can you provide evidence of successful operations that were orchestrated by Rosselli?

Unless I am wrong, in order to be a "made" member of the Mafia, Rosselli must have committed at least one murder.  The fact that Rosselli was never convicted of murder demonstrates that he successfully orchestrated it.

Tim, I have no idea what that means. You have left me scratching my head so much on those two sentences that I should be in a Head and Shoulders commercial. Even if the two statements made any sense, then let me say this. What in the heck does a mafia hit and stuff in the trunk have to do with what happened in DP. There is no comparison to the MO and there are countless people out there who have committed murder who would not have began to understand what to do in such and assassination scenario, let alone succeed in it.

Al also wrote:

Can you provide any successful operations in the Cuban Project that involved the mafia and the anti-Castro Cubans?

No, proving my point that Trafficante was in fact on Castro's payroll.  Otherwise, what is the probability that the Mafia could not accomplish the murder of the dictator of a small Caribbean island within three years?  The only other reasonable explanation is that the Mafia was not the efficient killing machine it was reputed to be, but in my opinion there is plenty of evidence that indeed it was.  (I reject, of course, any theory that Castro had a charmed life that allowed him to escape the plots.)

The other explanation is that the mafia was out of their element and they were not the big bad boogeymen that hollywood has made them out to be. A hit on a urban street and an assassination of a head of state has no comparisons. Lets not confuse murder with assassination or military elimination.

My question for you, Al, re your scenario of a military sniper operation:  how does the Mafia fit into your scenario?  Does not Ruby's involvement demonstrate Mafia involvement in the assassination?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The mafia does not fit into the assassination scenario and Ruby killing Oswald does not demonstrate mafia involvement in the assassination. What I believe so many get confused on in their logic is to tie the assassination plot in with the cover-up. They are two totally different animals from what I can tell. I believe we all can agree that there were two previous plots to assassinate JFK in November of '63 and that both were thwarted due to intel coming in in time to stop it from happening. The intel did not come through in Dallas, but the officials were ready to pounce to cover up the plot and lay the blame on the patsy. Both Chicago and Miami had their own patsy's aligned so it was not tough to figure out that Dallas would as well, if not as a patsy to lay the blame, but to draw initial attention to and make the connections to the plot scenario that the plotters wanted uncovered.

Just because Ruby had mafia ties does not bring the mafia into the game. Ruby also had a sick sister as a business partner and was deep in debt to the IRS. Consider his motivation when approached by the officials who were covering it up to silence LHO.

This only gets confusing when one tries to look at too big a picture and lumps all in together. One must break it down and see what the initial motivation was to pull off the assassination, who is the only logical personnel to achieve this act and then how and why it was covered up.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

Thanks for the cone, Bernice! It hit the spot!

Bernice wrote:

Who disputed that Ruby was not involved, ??...He was guilty of shooting LHO....and ..there is evidence that connects him to the mob, but that is evidence...No logical analysis does not Compel that because he was involved his bosses were, that is your supposition...that does not hold water in a murder case....

Logic does compel the conclusion, Bernice. It is fundamental deductive reason. I'll be glad to diagram the syllogism for you:

MAJOR PREMISE: Associates of the Mafia do not commit murders without

the consent of their mob bosses.

MINOR PREMISE: Ruby was an associate of the Mafia.

CONCLUSION: When Ruby murdered Oswald, he had at least the consent

if not the orders of his mafia superiors.

If the major premise and the minor premise is true, the conclusion MUST be true.

And as I said before, there is plenty of evidence to connect Marcello and Trafficante to the assassination apart from Ruby. I could also add the reports that Ruby had met with Rosselli in Miami a month or two before the assassination.

And Castro is likely involved if Trafficante was, as reported, acting on his behalf. Castro involvement is also supported by many other items e.g the probable presence of DGI agents in Dealey Plaza, etc. But Cuban involvement is not NECESSARY to the scenario I proposed above.

More later (tempus fugit!) but let me just state that in my opinion the Paines point LEFT, not RIGHT. And it is also likely that Osborne also points LEFT.

Thanks again for the cone!

Edited June 23, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

Al, again I need time to fully comment on your post but briefly for now:

I agree that the cover-up in DC was not linked to the assassination.

But surely the murder of Oswald was.

And as Bernice and I discussed, normally a mafioso will not engage in a murder without the consent of his boss. Plus, there is more than other adequate evidence to link Marcello and Trafficante to the assassination.

Was the mafia smart enough to pull off the assassination? IMO, clearly Trafficante was. Any mafia chieftain who can stay out of jail all his life AND escape a violent end must have a pretty good head on his shoulders. Also IMO Trafficante was a genious, an evil genius to be sure, but a genious nonetheless.

[Al Carrier]

Al, again I need time to fully comment on your post but briefly for now:

I agree that the cover-up in DC was not linked to the assassination. 

But surely the murder of Oswald was.

And as Bernice and I discussed, normally a mafioso will not engage in a murder without the consent of his boss.  Plus, there is more than other adequate evidence to link Marcello and Trafficante to the assassination.

Was the mafia smart enough to pull off the assassination?  IMO, clearly Trafficante was.  Any mafia chieftain who can stay out of jail all his life AND escape a violent end must have a pretty good head on his shoulders.  Also IMO Trafficante was a genious, an evil genius to be sure, but a genious nonetheless.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

First of all, Ruby was a street thug at best who had aspirations of being a higher level player. To consider him inside the mafia is a bit of a stretch.

I am not arguing that Santo was not a major player in the mafia and was hands-off to the other crime families and competetors, but that is a far stretch to link him and the likes of Carlos to an operation such as the Kennedy assassination. The only link is simply motive and a few who have come forward and said they had planned on hitting him. Even comparmentalization within the government's intel organizations would not have allowed this old man to carry this out and live to reap the bennies.

The breakdown here is simple. So many put this thugs on a pedestral and believe they are capable of such things as we are discussing here. What most do not understand is how difficult this was to accomplish from planning to achieving to walking away from it. It is only the well connected within the intel community who could drag this out and still achieve success and by utilizing professionals. And please don't lable mafia hit men and anti-Castro Cubans as pros.

There are very frightening individuals out there capable of such acts and are able to do so very smoothly. The scariest part of all is that your tax dollars pay their salary.

I have spent some time in N.C. recently and have tied up enough loose ends that I am comfortable with the players. The stagers is pure speculation, but I am very confident they do not hail from the mafia or the isle of Cuba.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

To Al:

Don't think I am telling tales out of school but there are those who believe that Frank ("the German") Schweihs, currently under indictment in the "Operation Family Secrets" case, was involved in the murders of Richard Cain, Charles Nicolletti, Chuckie English and the Spilotro brothers. And perhaps Johnny Rosselli.

I would consider someone who could commit numerous murders over a twenty year period and never be arrested for them a "pro", not an amateur.

Why you think professional mafia killers could not organize an assassination of the president escapes me. It is obviously not their ability to act as a sniper. So what is it that is so hard? Their ability to make an effective getaway?

[Al Carrier]

To Al:

Don't think I am telling tales out of school but there are those who believe that Frank ("the German") Schweihs, currently under indictment in the "Operation Family Secrets" case, was involved in the murders of Richard Cain, Charles Nicolletti, Chuckie English and the Spilotro brothers.  And perhaps Johnny Rosselli.

I would consider someone who could commit numerous murders over a twenty year period and never be arrested for them a "pro", not an amateur.

Why you think professional mafia killers could not organize an assassination of the president escapes me.  It is obviously not their ability to act as a sniper.  So what is it that is so hard?  Their ability to make an effective getaway?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

A hit in the sense you are referring to is nothing in comparison to an assassination as to what we see in DP.

You are mixing apples and oranges here and it is common amongst those who believe in the boogey man mafia. I was once and apple so I laugh at the orange! Take some rifle lessons and we will start there. Then make some contacts with some scout snipers and play your theory through them.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

Do you dispute the markmanship that Ayers attributed to a Cuban practicing sniper shooting with Rosselli at Pt Mary?

Can't a person not wearing a uniform, through sufficient training learn to be proficient with a rifle, proficient at least enough to hit a person in a moving convertible from a sixth floor window? Why do you (appoarently) believe only a military sniper could accomplish that?

[Pat Speer]

Tim, your scenario is fairly solid. I do think if you read a little more on Trafficante you'll see that the man would never take orders from Castro; it's possible he told Castro of his plans, however, and expected favors in return. I also believe that the cover-up by LBJ was not just a coincidence.

I've often wondered if someone in the Gov., perhaps GHWB, perhaps someone representing Ted Kennedy, made a deal with Trafficante in 76 or so and told him if he took care of his collaborators then he wouldn't be prosecuted. Is it a coincidence that Giancana, Hoffa, and Rosselli were murdered in this short stretch? And that Pawley, Prio, and De Mohrenschildt killed themselves before their stories could be fully told? If you make a list of suspects who died mysteriously during the mid-seventies, they all seem to be involved in either the mob or in anti-Castro Cuban activities. These suspicious deaths are much more suspicious, with the characters much more centralized, than all the supposedly suspicious deaths of the sixties, outside the Oswald death and the Ferrie/Del Valle coinkydink..

And Al, Rosselli was not the simple-minded thug you might envision. For thirty years the man lived high on the hog without any noticeable means of support. His business card had one word--"Strategist." The book All American Mafioso gets into his background in labor realtions in Guatemala, etc. The death of Castillo-Armas in Guatemala could very well have been a CIA/Mafia joint venture. He was killed by one of his bodyguards, who was immediately killed and purported to be a communist. State department records show that Allen Dulles refused to believe it, which could very well indicate he was not in the loop. On the other hand it could simply indicate the CIA was not involved.

Ironically, Castro-did-it theorist and SBT defender Gus Russo believes the Mafia orchestrated the assassination of Chicago's mayor Cermak in 1932. They disguised the killing by making it look like the assassin was trying to kill Roosevelt. The man Russo believes orchestrated this event: Dave Yaras, Jack Ruby's long-time friend. There are reasons to believe Huey Long was killed by the mob as well.

Don't under-estimate these guys...they had the money. They had the scatch to buy an all-star team of hitters from the far corners of the Earth. It should be noted here that when the CIA decided to create an assassination capability, code named ZR/Rifle, they looked not to the military, not to Hathcock et al, but to organized crime. They get it done and they DO NOT TALK.

Edited June 25, 2005 by Pat Speer