Jump to content
The Education Forum

James Jarman Jr.

Mike Regan

Recommended Posts

Welcome to the forum Mike. I am sorry that your excellent posting has been hijacked. Hopefully we can get it back to the original topic.

You raise a lot of interesting points. For example, you write:

Though it is a proven fact that five of the Depository's employees moved the boxes into position and which formed a shield in front of the south-east corner window of the building's sixth floor, not a single one of their finger prints was found on these boxes when analyzed by the FBI. The suggestion is strong that special care was taken by at least some of these employees to eliminate detection of the fact that they had handled the boxes.

The lack of finger-prints on these boxes has always puzzled me. Has anyone done a study of this aspect of the case? Then there is the claim that Mac Wallace's fingerprint was found on one of these boxes. I would have thought this could have all been sorted out by now.

Your theory about Jarman wanting to buy the rifle is interesting. If Oswald was a patsy, as most of us agree he was, then it would have been important to have first got Oswald to obtain the rifle and then to have brought it in to work on the morning of the assassination.

The FBI discovered that the rifle had been purchased from Klein's sporting goods in Chicago on 12th March, 1963, by a man using the name, A. J. Hiddell. When Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested he was carrying a forged identity card bearing the name Alek J. Hiddell. At the time it was possible for him to buy the weapon without it being traced back to him. On the surface, the evidence appears to point towards Oswald as being the gunman.

As Matthew Smith (JFK: The Second Plot) has pointed out:

It was during the month of March 1963 that Oswald obtained a rifle and a handgun, if we can rely on Marina's testimony. Not that it is greatly to be relied upon, as we saw earlier in discussion relating to an incriminating photograph in which both weapons were flaunted. Curiously, the weapons were bought, separately, under the name of A. J. Hidell, an alias which counted for little with Oswald other than in connection with the orders for the firearms. There was no reason whatever why Oswald should not have simply walked into a shop and bought what he wanted, obtaining the advantage and satisfaction of seeing what he was buying. Texas law imposed no control over the purchase of such weapons. There would have been very little - in fact virtually no - chance of Oswald being identified as the purchaser of the firearms had he bought them over the counter. So why did he buy them by mail order under this assumed name? There is strong evidence that the name was meaningful to those involved in intelligence. Army Intelligence, for instance, was known to have had a file on A. J. Hidell, the contents of which, significantly, were destroyed before it could be acquired by investigators. A. J. Hidell may not have been the only name on intelligence files which stood for Lee Harvey Oswald, either. Harvey Lee Oswald as Oswald Lee Harvey are but two other possibilities which would have allowed the CIA and FBI, when asked, to say they had no such person as Lee Harvey Oswald working for them. If Oswald bought the rifle and handgun, there is every reason to believe he would buy them at the behest of his CIA masters and was told to buy those specific weapons, told to buy them by mail order, and told to buy them under the name A. J. Hidell.

Maybe there is another way of explaining these events. Someone else purchased the Mannlicher-Carcano and this was this sold to Oswald. Then someone working at the Texas Book Depository (maybe, James Jarman) offered to buy the rifle at a higher price than he paid for it. He then took the rifle into work on the morning of the assassination. This person then fires the rifle from the 6th Floor of the TBD.

By the way, I have changed the name of this thread to James Jarman and added it to the main index.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Mark wrote:

Fidel wasn't a friend of JFK either, and he wasn't in the TSBD...just thought I'd point that out as well.

[This is an attempt at humor; please regard it as such, no matter how lame you find it to be.]

Mark, I understand it as an attempt at humour and regarding finding it lame, far be it from me to judge someone else's humour!

You have it a bit wrong, however.

I said Jarman was a better suspect than Dillon because Dillon was a friend od JFK and he was not in the TSBD. The fact that Fidel was not a friend of JFK (called him a "cretin" and all that) made him closer to Jarman than to Dillon.

But you are certainly correct that Castro was no more a shooter than Lee Harvey Oswald was.

But we need to stop this interchange since we are being accused of "hijacking" it and I do agree with John that Mike's theory is entitled to serious consideration (even though I think it is way out there in the blue).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Mike Regan.

Delighted to see you here - very interesting theory that you have. I would like very much to wrestle through some of these inconsistencies and bizarre twists and changes to the stories of these 3 individuals with you? However, what I would first like to know is if you are aware of the whereabouts of any of these three today? Would you know if anyone has ever contacted them in the years following 1964 to gather additional information? I have a list of questions I'd like to ask, personally.

e.g. Mr. Williams, you weren't really on the 6th floor eating your lunch, were you --Isn't it true that you were you outside on the street, as you initially indicated, with Norman and Jarman, prior to the arrival of the Motorcade?

I ran a thread on the Dillard photo - and found that there were a large number of disturbing inconsistencies concerning these 3 individuals - you have captured the majority of them, but there are even a few more [stopping off on the 4th floor for example, or Williams identifying himself as Jarman in one of the Dillard photos]. Why would Jarman recommend that Williams not brush out the debris from his hair? And why is it that everyone is so quick to label the white debris as plaster? The references made in the accounts of these individuals does not clearly spell out plaster as being the cause of the white debris in Williams hair. Also, IMO, Williams is continously manufacturing his story up on the fly, following Ball's lead.

Mr. BALL. When the cement fell on your head, did either one of the men notice it and say anything about it?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. I believe Harold was the first one.

Mr. BALL. That is Hank Norman?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I believe he was the first one. He said "Man, I know it came from there. It even shook the building." He said, "You got something on your head." And then James Jarman said, "Yes, man, don't you brush it out." By that time I just forgot about it. But after I got downstairs I think I brushed it out anyway.

Mr. JARMAN - Hank said, Harold Norman, rather, said that he thought the shots had came from above us, and I noticed that Bonnie Ray had a few debris in his head. It was sort of white stuff, or something, and I told him not to brush it out, but he did anyway.

Mr. BALL - He had some white what, like plaster?

Mr. JARMAN - Like some come off a brick or plaster or something.

I know that it sounds ridiculous, but I see no reason why this may not have been old pigeon excrement, disturbed by their sudden flight from the ledge above, due to the gunshots being fired. The only reason I think this may be significant is that the 'plaster' has been associated with the new floor work on the sixth floor, and that this has been used as circumstantial evidence [along with cartridges hitting the floor, which only Norman can hear] to place the shooter in the 6th floor east window.

From Texas Monthly, 1998

Rosemary: As they made the turn from Houston to Elm Street, they'd just gone a few feet when the first shot rang out, and upon hearing the sound, my normal body reaction was to look up and follow the sound that I heard, it was so abrupt. I didn't know what it was, but I was looking for what I heard. And the pigeons immediately ascended off that roof of the school book depository building and that's what caught my eye. My eyes were searching for what I heard and I see the pigeons, you know, they're scared to death, and take off in abrupt flight....

Another question - Would you happen to have these other reports, referenced by Ball?

Mr. BALL. The document that I have here shows the date 4th of December 1963. Do you remember having made a statement to Mr. Carter, Special Agent of the Secret Service, on that day?
Mr. BALL. I have one question.

On the 26th of November, an FBI agent named Kreutzer advises us in a report that he talked to you. Do you remember that?

Mr. NORMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. You remember?

Mr. NORMAN. Yes; I remember talking to him. I don't know his name.

Mr. BALL. He reports that you told him that you heard a shot and that you stuck your head from the window and looked upward toward the roof but could see nothing because small particles of dirt were falling from above you. Did you tell him that?

Mr. NORMAN. I don't recall telling him that.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever put your head out the window?

Mr. NORMAN. No, sir; I don't remember ever putting my head out the window.

Mr. BALL. And he reports that you stated that two additional shots were fired after you pulled your head back in from the window. Do you remember telling him that?

I realize that this is Norman, but apparently his original 'story' has dirt falling from above when he had his head out the window.

Speaking for me personally, in my opinion, in the case of all of the witnesses, it's their original accounts which holds the most substance and credibility - before Ball, Ford, Dulles and others had the chance to work them over and twist and warp the truth. I'd like to see the original FBI and SS reports - the references at NARA only appear to be one and two pagers - and I can't identify either of these 2 referenced by Ball.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lee, I'm not sure what became of Williams and Jarman, but Norman has been interviewed on TV several times since 64. He probably wouldn't be hard to find. I'm not sure to what end, however. I believe the testimony of the three men is fairly consistent. It suggests that at least two shots were fired from the sniper's nest, which confirms the testimony of a number of other witnesses, including Euins, Brennan, Worrell, Jackson, etc. Their testimony is also VERY STRONG evidence against Oswald being a lone nut, as the missed shot in their testimony came after the neck shot, and even after the head shot, and was by no means the first shot. Bonnie Ray thought the last shots came very close together, which would rule out Oswald. His acknowledgement that he was on the sixth floor after 1 and saw NO ONE and heard NOTHING, is also an argument that Oswald at least had help, as the construction of the sniper's nest and the piecing together of the rifle would have taken some time. Did Oswald have enough time? Perhaps. Would Oswald wait around for Williams to leave before beginning his work? Doubtful. How would he have known that Williams was going to leave? I believe the testimony of these three men, particularly Williams', is problematic for lone-nutters. I believe they told the truth.

The one depository employee who should be found is Givens. As Sylvia Meagher pointed out 30 years ago, Givens appears to have changed his story to implicate Oswald, suddenly remembering that he went back upstairs, after coming down for lunch, to get his jacket, and that he saw Oswald on the 6th floor. His testimony is the only testimony that places Oswald on the 6th floor any time after lunch. The problem is that at least three witnesses--Piper, Shelley, and Arnold-- record that Oswald DID come down for lunch a few minutes after the others and that their Oswald sightings almost assuredly occurred AFTER Givens saw Oswald on the 6th floor. Consequently, Givens' testimony has very little bearing on Oswald's guilt, in my opinion. And is actually an argument against his guilt...Givens said that when he went back up Oswald was still walking around with a clipboard, not exactly the behavior of a man with limited time who needs to build a rifle and prepare a sniper's nest within a half hour or so. That the clipboard was found near the gun is also interesting. This would indicate that Oswald stashed the gun where he'd picked it up (and where he'd stashed it early that morning.) This means that, unless one is to assume that Oswald walked around with the clipboard after he'd already retrieved the rifle, he had not yet retrieved the rifle when Givens supposedly saw him. Once again, not exactly the behavior of a man who needs to prepare for some killin'. If Givens' story is true, then I think his testimony at the very least suggests that Oswald was acting as a lookout for someone else, and was not the actual trigger-man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Pat.

Norman isn't the one I would chase after - first Williams, then Jarman, in that order. I see your point about how their various accounts would make the LN theory tenuous, however there are inconsistencies - and these appear, IMO, to have been 'made' consistent. What do we know about Ball? Was he not connected with one of the wealthiest families in America?

It's mainly Williams and Jarman whose 'stories' I firmly doubt. Williams established a presence on the 6th floor prior to the shooting...in his later account - why? Jarman has to be corrected when he states that he went outside to join the throng - with Williams. 'Is that what you remember?' Wouldn't it be nice to view a film of that questioning, so we could get the body language? I'd like to see for myself if there was any nodding of the head, finger wagging, etc. I can't credit Ball with not having deliberately assisted in choreographing a 'consistent' and rehearsed story which would fill-in the details to support the SBT. And, we're missing an exhibit - where is it?

Good point concerning Givens - I need to read more about his account. However, if Givens changed his story, why not Williams and Jarman as well?

I would like very much to see the reports cited by Ball.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point concerning Givens - I need to read more about his account.  However, if Givens changed his story, why not Williams and Jarman as well?

I would like very much to see the reports cited by Ball.

- lee

A little bit of background that might help explain Ball's questioning of Williams. There were all sorts of rumors that the assassin (Oswald) coldly ate some chicken and drank some Dr. Pepper while waiting for the motorcade. When they tested the bottle for fingerprints though they didn't find Oswald's fingerprints but Williams'. The WC rightly thought it important to clear this up.

Givens may have come under extra pressure for two reasons: he was one of the few employees to not return after lunch; he was also the lone TSBD employee with a criminal record. These circumstances may have been used against him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little bit of background that might help explain Ball's questioning of Williams.  There were all sorts of rumors that the assassin (Oswald) coldly ate some chicken and drank some Dr. Pepper while waiting for the motorcade.  When they tested the bottle for fingerprints though they didn't find Oswald's fingerprints but Williams'.  The WC rightly thought it important to clear this up.

Givens may have come under extra pressure for two reasons:  he was one of the few employees to not return after lunch; he was also the lone TSBD employee with a criminal record.  These circumstances may have been used against him.

Hi Pat,

Fetzer's new Assassination Research bulletin has a nice section by Chauncey Holt [and Karen Holt Harcourt] entitled "CHAUNCEY HOLT / Case Closed: Stampede of the Apologists" which underscores my point concerning Williams - see pages 4 and 5. He also covers the issues you've pointed out with Givens on page 3.


The reason I am interested in the accounts of these individuals is tied into accounts provided by other witnesses, documents, etc., which suggest that the [east side] TSBD shooter may have been on the 5th floor. There are other witness accounts [at least one I believe] that has the [east side] shooter on the 7th, or 'top' floor. And again, I was strongly moved by Richard Sprague's account, where he clearly states that he realized a conspiracy was afoot following a close examination of all of the photographic references [available], in which he determined that there was no one in the easternmost 6th floor window of the TSBD at the time shots were fired. Curious.

Of course - this is all academic - what's needed are some very pointed questions to Mr. Williams, if he can be found, concerning what really happened between 12:00 and 12:30pm that day, IMO.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I am interested in the accounts of these individuals is tied into accounts provided by other witnesses, documents, etc., which suggest that the [east side] TSBD shooter may have been on the 5th floor. 

Were you aware that in their early phone calls J. Edgar Hoover and Lyndon Johnson talked about the gunman firing from the 5th Floor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I am interested in the accounts of these individuals is tied into accounts provided by other witnesses, documents, etc., which suggest that the [east side] TSBD shooter may have been on the 5th floor. 

Were you aware that in their early phone calls J. Edgar Hoover and Lyndon Johnson talked about the gunman firing from the 5th Floor?

Yes John - thanks. Robin posted one document from Hoover on the Dillard thread.

Here is part of the transcript again - thanks to Robin.

I'm going to go back to the thread James started about the 5th floor also. Mike raises a lot of interesting ideas here - although I'm still convinced that there was a combination of office building shooters working in tandem with ground troops.

I don't know where all this is going, but again find the concept of a 'simulated' assassination attempt interesting. Euins claimed to have seen the entire weapon - lock, stock and barrel. Isn't that a bit peculiar?

Mr. SPECTER. How far was it sticking out of the window would you say then, Amos?

Mr. EUINS. I would say it was about something like that.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 3 feet?

Mr. EUINS. You know--the trigger housing and stock and receiver group out the window.

Mr. SPECTER. I can't understand you, Amos.

Mr. EUINS. It was enough to get the stock and receiving house and the trigger housing to stick out the window.

Mr. SPECTER. The stock and receiving house?

There's another piece of Euins account which is interesting. He talks about a bald spot to Ball - the man firing had a bald spot.

Mr. EUINS. The Book Depository Building.

Then he called some more cars. They got all the way around the building. And then after that, well, he seen another man. Another man told him he seen a man run out the back.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out the back?

Mr. EUINS. No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.

Mr. SPECTER. Were you there when the man talked about somebody running out the back?

Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. He said the man had--he said he had kind of bald spot on his head. And he said the man come back there.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you know what the name of the man was who told the police that someone had run out the back?

Bizarre. Sounds as if the man Euins saw firing was clearly not Williams, but possibly someone that ran out of the back of the building.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jarman was reportedly sitting over a few windows from Williams and Norman, which explains why he wasn't in Dillard's photo.


As per the Dillard thread - he took 2 consecutive photos within ~10 seconds of each other. All three individuals should be visible in both. I believe that Exhibit D, the 'close-up,' was supposed to have been a crop? Jarman appears to be visible in this version?

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Telephone conversation between Lyndon B. Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover (10.01 am, 23rd November, 1963)

J. Edgar Hoover: I just wanted to let you know of a development which I think is very important in connection with this case - this man in Dallas (Lee Harvey Oswald). We, of course, charged him with the murder of the President. The evidence that they have at the present time is not very, very strong. We have just discovered the place where the gun was purchased and the shipment of the gun from Chicago to Dallas, to a post office box in Dallas, to a man - no, to a woman by the name of "A. Hidell."... We had it flown up last night, and our laboratory here is making an examination of it.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Yes, I told the Secret Service to see that that got taken care of.

J. Edgar Hoover: That's right. We have the gun and we have the bullet. There was only one full bullet that was found. That was on the stretcher that the President was on. It apparently had fallen out when they massaged his heart, and we have that one. We have what we call slivers, which are not very valuable in the identification. As soon as we finish the testing of the gun for fingerprints ... we will then be able to test the one bullet we have with the gun. But the important thing is that this gun was bought in Chicago on a money order. Cost twenty-one dollars, and it seems almost impossible to think that for twenty-one dollars you could kill the President of the United States.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Now, who is A. Hidell?

J. Edgar Hoover: A. Hidell is an alias that this man has used on other occasions, and according to the information we have from the house in which he was living - his mother - he kept a rifle like this wrapped up in a blanket which he kept in

the house. On the morning that this incident occurred down there - yesterday - the man who drove him to the building where they work, the building from where the shots came, said that he had a package wrapped up in pape... But the important thing at the time is that the location of the purchase of the gun by a money order apparently to the Klein Gun Company in Chicago - we were able to establish that last night.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet embassy in Mexico in September?

J. Edgar Hoover: No, that's one angle that's very confusing, for this reason - we have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet embassy, using Oswald's name. That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet embassy down there. We do have a copy of a letter which was written by Oswald to the Soviet embassy here in Washington, inquiring as well as complaining about the harassment of his wife and the questioning of his wife by the FBI. Now, of course, that letter information - we process all mail that goes to the Soviet embassy. It's a very secret operation. No mail is delivered to the embassy without being examined and opened by us, so that we know what they receive... The case, as it stands now, isn't strong enough to be able to get a conviction... Now if we can identify this man who was at the... Soviet embassy in Mexico City... This man Oswald has still denied everything. He doesn't know anything about anything, but the gun thing, of course, is a definite trend.

Lyndon B. Johnson: It definitely established that he - the same gun killed the policeman?

J. Edgar Hoover: That is an entirely different gun. We also have that gun...

Lyndon B. Johnson: You think he might have two ?

J. Edgar Hoover: Yes, yes, he had two guns... The one that killed the President was found on the sixth floor in the building from which it had been fired. I think that the bullets were fired from the fifth floor, and the three shells that were found were found on the fifth floor. But he apparently went upstairs to have fired the gun and throw the gun away and then went out. He went down to this theater. There at the theater was where he had the gun battle with the police officer.

Lyndon B. Johnson: I wonder if you will get me a little synopsis and let me have what developments come your way during the day and try to get to me before we close up for the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Telephone conversation between Lyndon B. Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover (1.40 pm, 29th November, 1963)

Lyndon B. Johnson: How many shots were fired? Three?

J. Edgar Hoover: Three.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Any of them fired at me?

J. Edgar Hoover: No.

Lyndon B. Johnson: All three at the President?

J. Edgar Hoover: All three at the president and we have them. Two of the shots fired at the President were splintered but they had characteristics on them so that our ballistics expert was able to prove that they were fired by this gun. The President - he was hit by the first and third. The second shot hit the Governor the third shot is a complete bullet and that rolled out of the President's head It tore a large part of the President's head off and, in trying to massage his heart at the hospital on the way to the hospital, they apparently loosened that and it fell off onto the stretcher. And we recovered that... And we have the gun here also.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Were they aiming at the President?

J. Edgar Hoover: They were aiming directly at the President. There is no question about that. This telescopic lens, which I've looked through-it brings a person as close to you as if they were sitting right beside you. And we also have tested the fact that you could fire those three shots... within three seconds. There had been some stories going around... that there must have been more than one man because no one man could fire those shots in the time that they were fired...

Lyndon B. Johnson: How did it happen they hit Connally?

J. Edgar Hoover: Connally turned to the President when the first shot was fired and I think in that turning, it was where he got hit.

Lyndon B. Johnson: If he hadn't turned, he probably wouldn't have got hit?

J. Edgar Hoover: I think that is very likely.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Would the President've got hit with the second one?

J. Edgar Hoover: No, the President wasn't hit with the second one.

Lyndon B. Johnson: I say, if Connally hadn't been in his way?

J. Edgar Hoover: Oh, yes, yes, the President would no doubt have been hit.

Lyndon B. Johnson: He would have been hit three times.

J. Edgar Hoover: He would have been hit three times from the fifth floor of that building where we found the gun and the wrapping paper in which the gun was wrapped... and upon which we found the full fingerprints of this man Oswald. On that floor we found the three empty shells that had been fired and one shell that had not been fired... He then threw the gun aside and came down. At the entrance of the building, he was stopped by a police officer and some manager in the building told the police officer, "Well, he's all right. He works there. You needn't hold him." They let him go... And then he got on a bus... He went out to his home and got ahold of a jacket.... and he came back downtown... and the police officer who was killed stopped him, not knowing'who he was and not knowing whether he was the man, but just on suspicion. And he fired, of course, and killed the police officer. Then he walked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Thanks for an excellent post, with special regard to the "so-called" Dillard photo. I have to agree, however, with the skepticism you rightfully displayed in your previous topic titled "Dillard Photo VS Re-enactment" where you question the authenticity of some of these photographs that have been floating around over the last few years.

Obviously, you read my essay over at the "Conspiritorium" site and it is there that you will find the actual two Dillard photographs. Only one, though, depicts the window in question....., the 4th from the S/E corner and the window in which Jarman says he watched the motorcade from. I spent hours attempting to enhance the photo with hope of dis-proving my own theory and could find absolutely no evidence of Jarman's presence in that 4th window. The other photo, depicting only Williams & Norman, is the one I feel was cropped.

Like yourself, I wish it were possible to contact either Jarman, Norman or Williams and confirm that photographs were taken from OUTSIDE the Texas School Book Depository that day of the re-enactment in March of 1964. And that those pictures were used to distract future researchers from the truth.

Perhaps, one day, the Dallas Morning News will re-open their safe and allow researchers to decipher the true content of those two negatives. Would'nt be suprised, though, if the safe is empty. And that the Dillard photographs, long ago, were destroyed...

My own final thoughts are that this fine country has been "Jived" out of it's innocence.....


Mike Regan


PS Letter To A Detractor, John Dolva, From My Previous Topic ("Gettin' A Kick Out Of Truth")...


It's quite difficult, John, to explain to a fellow who owes his life's experience to that of being a resident of the fine continent of Australia what it has has been like for those of us Americans who experienced our lives both during the wonderful & peaceful decades prior to the assassination of President Kennedy and the turbulent, violent and despicable decades old behavior to follow. Behavior attributed to many blacks, beginning with the murder of JFK, and for the 45 years to follow that malevolent and malicious act...

Rather than for me to resort to redundancy, and for the sake of the readers, I can only guide you toward page #3, post #32 of this topic with a hope that you read my response to another fine fellow such as yourself, and a fellow Aussie, Greg Parker... Pretty much spells out my "Overall Hypothesis"... "Minus" any racist attitudes you seem to infer...

It is equally difficult to explain the frustration (And, yes, even the hurt...), especially with regard to those of us who had relatives who served in the American Civil War, but also to many generations of American whites for the absolute, total and complete lack of appreciation extended to this fine Nation by the blacks for the sacrifices made to right a devious wrong... Slavery... A wrong perpetuated by the collaboration of both the Tribal leaders of Africa and Jewish merchants of an era beginning prior to the American Revolution. Allowing ourselves to give credit to a young and fledging Nation we now know of as the United States of America, and it's difficult years following the win over Britain, the fact that it took us only about a decade less than 100 years to gather (From scratch) the resources' to tackle this wrong is testament to an incredible Nation that, without any doubt, had it's wonderful heart in the right place...

And the additional fact that, in the close to 15 decades (144 years...) since the end of the American Civil War, not one single black (Including your precious Barack Obama) has ever acknowledged, "Thanked" or even come close to showing any level of appreciation or respect toward the "359,528" Union soldiers who died on so many battlefields to insure a better life for the black man... Sacrifices which caused much suffering to family members of those incredible Union Soldiers that, surely, must have amounted in the millions... It's appropriate to add here that "275,175" Union Soldiers were wounded... Most severely.

It was a time in American History for the black man to embrace the love, the support and the "Blood, Sweat & Tears" provided to them by the awesome people of the United States. Not only to express it, but to pass that expression onto succeeding generations... In this, their failure has been entire...

The only reward received by those Union soldiers, their families and this great Nation is "Contempt" by the black psyche that continues to ferment within their own family lives and, much to the woe of the predominantly European American populace here in the USA, propagate itself into the American mainstream...

Regarding your question, "Are U.S. voters at large, stupid...?". No, John... The ancestral blood-line of those Jewish slave merchants of the 17th Century, through todays Jewish hate-merchants, now control the American media and have manipulated, guided and duped, much through the entertainment medium, the American people into a passive suppression of an incredible level of "White Guilt"... A suppression that I, too, fell victim to until 1987 when, "Thanks" to a fine father's advice (As indicated in my biography.), simply followed the bouncing ball for over twenty years until it led me to the truth... That a black man, James Jarman, Jr., assassinated President John Fitzgerald Kennedy...

Concerning your suggestion that President Kennedy was a "benevolent dictator...??? Sorry, John... That statement isn't even worthy of a response...

Sincere regards,



Further Thoughts:

Hi all,

Was going through some archives moments ago and ran across this exchange over at Mr. John Masland's site, "The Nook", between a fine fellow named Tony and myself back in March of 2001. The subject matter concerns exhibits C-399 (The infamous "Magic Bullet") and C-567/C-569 (Bullet fragments taken out of Governor Connolly's thigh)...Thought you might fine it of interest... Thanks

Catch ya' later,


PS I delve much more into this subject over at a topic begun here at this fine forum on the date 7/22/'08 titled, "R.J. Jimison Plants The Magic Bullet"

Mike, welcome aboard,

I enjoyed reading your posting. It certainly represents, at least for me, a new angle on who shot the President. I'm impressed with your construction of the testimony found within the Commission volumes and their respective sourcing. I'm equally impressed with your ability to read into actual testimony and make a case for your theory. I'm sure some from this forum will have a view or two, may offer an opinion, or even ask some questions as I am about to do. Since there is so much that was put forth by you, I'd like to start out slow and ask you for an opinion or response to a few items. An obvious observation is that from all that you stated it seems apparent that you are a proponent of the 'SBT' (Single Bullet Theory- CE 399). Am I correct in that assessment? Do you believe that fragments CE 567 and CE 569 were the result of the last shot, the head shot?

Best regards,



Thanks for both the welcome & the kind words regarding my post. Concerning your question about both CE-567 & CE-569...? Though I believe both that these bullet fragments, indeed, were removed from Governor Connelly's thigh and, that as small as these fragments were, their weight "exceeded" that of fragments missing from C-399, I've little else to offer. My own efforts have been concentrated on what was taking place within the TSBD, not only on Nov. 22nd, but the two days prior. Concerning CE-399, however, I've got a good bit of thought to share.

Though I do believe in the "Single Bullet Theory", I've no doubt that the wounds caused to both President Kennedy and Governor Connelly were caused by an entirely different bullet which, having exausted itself, left mere fragments in the Governor's thigh. The bullet found on the stretcher, I believe, was planted and I do not think it was CE-399. Darrell Tomlinson, being Parkland Hospital's chief engineer at the time which, in itself, would suggest a highly responsible man has stated that CE-399 is no where near in comparison to the bullet he handed over to Federal authorities later in the day.

Switching gears here for a moment, if I may,to my own area of concentrated research (the TSBD) it seems worthy to note that James Jarman, Jr. was previously employed by Parkland Hospital. Not only was he aware of how to move about the hospital's corridors, but it's fair to suggest that he remained aquainted with some of it's employees. Specifically, and I've got to admit to much of the same speculation we've all been forced into from time to time concerning the whole sorry mess, my own attention turns toward an orderly named R.J. Jimison. Both Jane Wester, a registered nurse assisting doctors working on the Governor and Henrietta Ross, an Operating Room Tech also assisting have both testified that Jimison took immediate charge of the strecher after Connelly was placed on the operating table (Jimison also assisted in this procedure).

From this point on, Jimison was alone with the stretcher (actually a solid structure with a lower shelf & made of tubular steel) until Darrell Tomlinson received it onto the elevator, rode it down to the 1st floor and pushed it against a corridor wall. Tomlinson would later observe an intern brush it aside as he entered a rest room. As Tomlinson pushed the stretcher back toward the wall, the "Magic Bullet" fell to the ground. A bullet, I feel, which was planted. In strong likelyhood, by R.J. Jimison. Now I know much of this reads as a bit of a stretch (no pun intended), but the scenario has been rollin' around in my head for quite some time. Jimison's testimony to the WC, with special regard to his final words of extreme paranoi, are well worth the read. It appeared to me that the man had a lot more he wanted to tell. The testimony of Jane Wester & Henrietta Ross is also a suggested read.

Returning to the TSBD, and with hope toward resolving curiosity as to how the "Magic Bullet" made it's journey to Parkland, an employee named Charles Douglas Givens was absent from the police head-count just after the shooting. Contrary to the popular belief that Oswald, alone, was missing from the Depository, Givens claims he watched the motorcade from the corner of Record & Main with a pair of buddies not associated with the TSBD, heard the shots and ran back to the building only to be denied entry. Even after explaining to police that he was an employee. Dubious, indeed. Could possibly be that the guy, along with a previous arrest record involving drugs, was making a quick dash through the back streets of Dallas on his way to Parkland Hospital. With the ole' "Magic Bullet" stashed in a hip pocket.

As an ex-infantryman, I can assure you that a projectile can easily be removed from it's casing (we used the gunpowder and a match to initial the stocks of our M-16s). Why would the FBI switch the "Magic Bullet"?? Which, for whatever it's worth, should be more aptly named the "Obscure Bullet" because nobody outside the two sets of conspiritors (with exception, of course, of Tomlinson) have ever seen the damn thing. Because the initial bullet planted on the stretcher, though removed from it's casing, had yet to be fired. It was truly pristine. Planted, incidently, by whatever the the connection to Jarman's crowd, to simply confuse the issue and to guide authorities further toward Oswald. Thus, the birth of CE-399. It's only damage being a slight dent at the base and a minute lack of metal from the same area. Probably a bit water-logged, though, after having been fired into the barrel.

Again, why would the FBI do such a thing?? People like yourself and I, and I'm sure the numbers run in the millions, would not be pre-occupied with the whole matter if not for the fact that two crimes resulted from that afternoon in Dallas. I, for one, and at this very moment, would rather be enjoying my family's laughter as I throw gutter-balls down at the local bowling alley. But we've all been had by our own government and it tears at the soul. And few of us got to thank that fine man for guiding us all away from nuclear annihilation.

So there's a second crime. In my view, the first being performed by those clowns over at the Depository. And then, there is J. Edgar Hoover. With ABSOLUTELY no reflection upon today's FBI, it is important to fully grasp the evil of which this man fully represented. From the early days of FDR to the latter days of DDE, this man had full control. An Attorney General, nor any other chain of command meant nothing to this guy. Every President, if he valued his career, picked up the phone when he called. Any minute,any hour of any day. Until President Kennedy came along and laid down the law and did all he could to guide this man into utilizing appropriate channels within both law enforcement and government.

Simply put, Hoover's crimes included tampering of evidence, with his introduction of CE-399 probably being among the minor offenses, obstuction of justice and, more than likely, witness intimidation and tampering. It is also worthy to note at this point that Hoover and his FBI had ABSOLUTELY NO JURISDICTION that day in Dallas. Assassination of a US President would not become a federal offense until after the fact. Bearing in mind that statutes of limitation do not exist for the crime of murder, jurisdiction still, as it did then, lies upon the shoulders of the Dallas Police Department. As for Hoover's motives? Pure, sheer, unadulterated hate. And to deny justice for a man that simply put him in his place.

There remains little doubt, at least in this guy's mind, that both Hoover and the man who glamourized his FBI Report (along with it's conclusion of Oswald's guilt)which became the solidified guide book for the Warren Commission, were well aware of the actual events that took place in Dealey Plaza. About all I can add is that my reflections of the "when & then" of Hoovers FBI have no bearing on the "here & now" of today's FBI. Frankly, I don't think they're doing such a bad job. Pardon, Tony, that I went on for a bit longer then intended and thanks again for the response.

Keep the faith,

Mike Regan


Bear in mind both that the assassination amounted to nothing less than a "Coup D'etat " by blacks and that the truth behind this material has been picking up momentum among supporters, people might want to re-consider supporting Michael Steele as Chairman & Conservative spokesman for the Republican National Committee

"Kinda Like Putting The Fox In Charge Of The Hen House"

Hopefully, those 11 words above will assist toward a realization as to

why the Conservative/Republican movement is in such dis-array.

On a similar note, so fellow Conservatives do not feel so bad,

Congress committed the exact same error when it appointed another fox,

Luis Stokes, as Chairman Of the House Select Committee On Assassinations

beginning in 1976...

And to help understand why American life has deteriorated to such an immense degree

these past forty-six years (Though blacks represent about 12% of our Nation's population, they represent over 70% of our prison population), you might want to take a gander at some recent stats with concern to Johannesburg, S.A. since the whites were ousted, under the guise of apartheid... 14,487 murders, 36,190 rapes & 14,202 car-jackings. And these figures relate to 2007/2008 alone... 50 murders are committed on a daily basis.

Travel Agencies world-wide routinely guide interested tourists elsewhere

Catch ya' later


"Semper Fidelis",

(Always Faithful)

Mike Regan



"Interesting "Old Testament"


And Insight Regarding The Caliber Of A Culture

Of Which Has Taken Control Of American Media,


("Please Say A Prayer For Good 'Ole Uncle Sam")

Genesis 34:1-17

Offered an alliance of marriage with the royal family of the Hivites, Jacob's sons convince the men of a town to get circumcised. While the men are recovering, Jacob's sons slaughter them, loot the town of goods and cattle, and carry off all the women and children as slaves...

Numbers 33:50-56

LORD God orders depopulation and destruction of civilization in the Promised Land. Religious imagery and art work must also be destroyed...

Deuteronomy 7:1-6

LORD God commands the Hebrews to "utterly destroy" the seven nations that are in the Promised Land, "nor shew mercy unto them." In addition, the Hebrews must "destroy" everything of those cultures...

Deuteronomy 13:1-5

LORD God orders death for the prophet, the dreamer of dreams, and he who performs miracles if he tries to convert Hebrews to a new faith...

2 Kings 15:14-17

Menahem butchers Tiphsahites and rips open stomachs of pregnant women Menahem is bad, but LORD God allows him to rule Israel for ten years without opening up the earth and swallowing him. Ripping open the bellies of pregnant woman is not as offensive to LORD God as murmuring against Moses...

Joshua 6:1-2, 20-24

LORD God orders Hebrews to exterminate the people of Jericho "And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword."...

Joshua 8:12, 18:29

LORD God orders extermination the inhabitants of Ai and their king. Twelve thousand killed. "And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it a heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day."...

Joshua 10:28-43

LORD God orders the Hebrews to attack and utterly destroy a multitude of cities, and kill all the inhabitants.

Chronicles 20-1-3

Characterized as a seasonal sport ("at the time that kings go out to battle"), King David and Joab conquer the cities of the Ammon. King David dismembers the captives with blunt instruments "And he cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes"...

"And Here's A Nice Little Gem From The Jewish Talmud"

According to Talmud Jewish tradition, "idolatry" does not necessarily entail worshipping idols, "Old Testament" Believers Labeled Idolaters". And Christians are certainly considered idolaters. And the reference below of a "Seduced City" refers to residents who have been seduced into "Any" other religion other than Judaism...Very much including the Christian Faith...

The theme of annihilating the residents of a seduced city is picked up in the "Babylonian Talmud", Appendix B: Mishnah of Sanhedrin 111b Sanhedrin 111b...

Here is a key excerpt:


Babylonian Talmud

Soncino 1961 Edition, page 765

President George Washington's

Farewell Address


September 17, 1796



george_washington.gif"A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one nation the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens who devote themselves to the favorite nation, facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, "

Edited by Mike Regan
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

  • Create New...