Jump to content

Smoking Gun memo


Lynne Foster
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dawn, yes, I totally sympathize with you. I certainly remember the long hours, etc. Hope you get well soon.

Although my standard of living was certainly higher as an attorney, I think my quality of life is now better, with the time to pursue independent reading (history in general, not just the JFK case) and the pleasure of the tropical climate (except for the hurricanes--now we have tropical storm Gamma breathing down our necks--unbelievable!!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I keep forgetting you sense of humor. I figured that perhaps she had uncovered something about Scaife that went back further than what we already know. NOT that Mellen had any ties HERSELF to Scaife.

My humor detector is not up to speed. Been ill with the flu and way overworked, with 17 hour work days for past two weeks. Remember when you were an atty how crazy it could get??? Or did you job give you the luxury your presently have? (Of being able to read many hours a day- I am sooo jealous).

Dawn

You never know, there may be a connection. I hear that the right wing makes a habit of purchasing "choice" books, like those by Anne coulter, for example, to make them "bestsellers".

And then, there are those that are supported or authored by the CIA.

I think there are all kinds of dishonest gimmicks in the publishing world, it would be naive to ignore them.

My choice is 'Bushworld' by Maureen Dowds, it is an incredible, independent voice... a real journalist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your "fascinating document" only shows that JEH couldn't either couldn't understand that Connally was sitting IN FRONT OF JFK, and not BETWEEN him and his alleged shooter who was on either the fifth floor or the sixth floor, or that JEH had found the rare Wile E. Coyote ACME direction-reversing bullet, to explain how the shooter in the TSBD would've hit JFK with the second shot if JBC hadn't gotten between Kennedy and the shooter.

Or, to summarize: "senility rears its ugly head."

The memo shockingly reveals that Hoover actually believed this malarkey, if the memo is to be taken at face value; otherwise, it shows that, a week after the assassination, Hoover didn't have any better clue as to what happened than an amoeba does quantum physics.

Or are you implying that Hoover was telling LBJ, "in code," that there had to be a shot from the front? If so, why was Hoover so adamant in the same memo that all the shots came from the TSBD, even if he couldn't decide which floor they came from?

To me, it sounda like the confused ramblings of a total fool. In THAT respect, it IS a "fascinating document." But other than the fact that it shows that Hoover himself "couldn't find a pubic hair in a whorehouse," let alone the flaws in his logic, the document is pretty UNremarkable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

It wasn't just Hoover. LBJ specifically asked Hoover how "they" happened to shoot Connally. and Hoover told him that Connally had gotten in the way of a bullet intended for JFK. LBJ knew damn well that Connally was sitting in front of JFK, whether Hoover knew it or not. LBJ allegedly even tried to have Connally switched with Yarborough in the motorcade (probably more with the hope of getting Yarborough shot than of saving Connally). LBJ and Hoover agree that the bullet that hit Connally might have killed JFK had Connally not been in the way. Thus LBJ's own words in their phone conversation prove that he knew that the lone gunman scenario was a lie, even as he and Hoover were discussing how they had the goods on Oswald.

It's amazing how America has managed to have such wonderful presidents, right down to the present day.

Ron

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron wrote:

Thus LBJ's own words in their phone conversation prove that he knew that the lone gunman scenario was a lie, even as he and Hoover were discussing how they had the goods on Oswald.

Ron, if you are referring to the use of the word "they" to describe the shooters, then Jackie herself must have had pre-assassination knowledge.

In writing, a careful person might write: "he or they" or "he, she or they" but I respectfully submit that it is not unusual to use the word "they" in speaking if one is not sure if he or she is referring to a male, a female, or more than one person.

In other words, I think too much is being read into the use of the term "they".

I do not, however, disagree with your major point. I think Johnson suspected a conspiracy from day one (or, as some believe, he had actual knowledge of such conspiracy).

Respectfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

I don't care if LBJ said they, them, or those. He and Hoover were talking about a shot from the front, intended for JFK, hitting Connally. LBJ never once hinted in the conversation that this was impossible ("I wuz there, Eddie, and yore plum full of it"), but rather accepted it from Hoover as if it were fact, because it was understood that lone nut was to be the name of the game.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THAT is the logical inconsistency I've been pointing out. Hoover contends that Oswald's his lone shooter, that he was firing from either the fifth or the sixth floor of the TSBD...but that the Connally bullet strike occurred because Connally was between JFK and the shooter. And LBJ goes along with that.

That would suggest that Hoover thought that Connally was shot from the front...or that he thought Connally and JFK were playing musical chairs in a moving car...yet Hoover's lone shooter was firing from behind the car.

Edited by Mark Knight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Connally was not shot from the front, but obviously LBJ and Hoover thought that he was at the time of their phone conversation. Yet LBJ and Hoover were already busy setting up Oswald as a lone gunman. They are therefore not exonerated by the fact that it was later determined that Connally was shot from behind. Their conversation is self-damning, as it was clearly their intent to set up Oswald even as they sat there and talked about a shot that Oswald could not have fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Connally was not shot from the front, but obviously LBJ and Hoover thought that he was at the time of their phone conversation. Yet LBJ and Hoover were already busy setting up Oswald as a lone gunman. They are therefore not exonerated by the fact that it was later determined that Connally was shot from behind. Their conversation is self-damning, as it was clearly their intent to set up Oswald even as they sat there and talked about a shot that Oswald could not have fired.

Ron: Great posts and I admire your efforts at setting our Mr Gratz straight. I think he just somet imes pretends to musinderstand. I agree that their conversation proves they knew in advance and all the other talk about nuclear war was for the dupes to record false "history."

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron wrote:

Thus LBJ's own words in their phone conversation prove that he knew that the lone gunman scenario was a lie, even as he and Hoover were discussing how they had the goods on Oswald.

Ron, if you are referring to the use of the word "they" to describe the shooters, then Jackie herself must have had pre-assassination knowledge.

In writing, a careful person might write: "he or they" or "he, she or they" but I respectfully submit that it is not unusual to use the word "they" in speaking if one is not sure if he or she is referring to a male, a female, or more than one person.

In other words, I think too much is being read into the use of the term "they".

I do not, however, disagree with your major point. I think Johnson suspected a conspiracy from day one (or, as some believe, he had actual knowledge of such conspiracy).

Respectfully.

__________________________________________________________

Tim,

So, when LBJ and Jackie used the pronoun "they," they could (theoretically at least) have been referring to an INDIVIDUAL (who just happened to be pro-Mafia and whose "boyfriend" was #2 "man" in the Bureau)! (You know, as in himself/herself?)

Thomas

__________________________________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner
You never know, there may be a connection. I hear that the right wing makes a habit of purchasing "choice" books, like those by Anne coulter, for example, to make them "bestsellers".

Ah, what staggering Lynnian logic,right wingers buy right wing books,well whoda thought it.

I have bought three Mike Moore books in the past, all of them became best sellers. In your topsy turvey World does this mean that I am in a conspiracy with Mr Moore. If it does I want some of his royalties

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron wrote:

Connally was not shot from the front, but obviously LBJ and Hoover thought that he was at the time of their phone conversation.

To Ron and Dawn: I agree I did misunderstand the salient point in Ron's post. I think I did so because I thought it rather clear that everyone knew from "Day One" that Connally was shot from the rear. Ron, do you have any information to indicate that LBJ and Hoover were not aware of this rather self-evident fact at the time of the conversation?

This does raise an interesting point, however. Could Connally have been shot from the rear and hit where he was only if the bullet did in fact first traverse JFK?

Gerry Hemming states he has information that there was a shooter in the west window of the TSBD shooting specifically at Connally. Others on this forum have agreed that Connally's wounds would be consistent with a shooter posed at the west window of the sixth floor of the TSBD.

Are the only logical explanations of Connally's wounds that: (1) if from the alleged shooter's nest, the bullet had first traversed JFK; or (2) that Connally's shooter was in fact in a different position, e.g. the west window?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron wrote:

Connally was not shot from the front, but obviously LBJ and Hoover thought that he was at the time of their phone conversation.

To Ron and Dawn: I agree I did misunderstand the salient point in Ron's post. I think I did so because I thought it rather clear that everyone knew from "Day One" that Connally was shot from the rear. Ron, do you have any information to indicate that LBJ and Hoover were not aware of this rather self-evident fact at the time of the conversation?

This does raise an interesting point, however. Could Connally have been shot from the rear and hit where he was only if the bullet did in fact first traverse JFK?

Gerry Hemming states he has information that there was a shooter in the west window of the TSBD shooting specifically at Connally. Others on this forum have agreed that Connally's wounds would be consistent with a shooter posed at the west window of the sixth floor of the TSBD.

Are the only logical explanations of Connally's wounds that: (1) if from the alleged shooter's nest, the bullet had first traversed JFK; or (2) that Connally's shooter was in fact in a different position, e.g. the west window?

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

Gratz, et al.:

If you had spent less time "bible-thumping" [on another forum] against women's [and raped little girl's] Constitutional "Right to an Abortion", you might have read what I have posted [more than ONCE] that stated:

[A] Connally's wounds WERE from the Front -- both LBJ and "Queen" Hoover knew this, because they had both been briefed on same by government agents & one CIA cover physician at Parkland !! [said physician held officer's rank in the US Army Reserve & had worked for the "Epedimiology Intelligence Service" which was then under the US Surgeon General];

LIFE Magazine's "very short-lived 1st edtion on the assassination showed artist's renditions [from the Zapruder frames] which showed "CLEARLY the impacting of bullets into the Governor's frontal torso whilst he turned to his right rear to look at JFK;

[C] That this edition of LIFE was pulled with 4 days and replaced by one with a somewhat different aspect, but with a removal of the "offensive" artist's "Zap-frames";

[D] That even the next edition was pulled because it cast doubts upon the LHO/LN theory already being propagated; and,

[E] The Connally hit was a "separate deal" and the west-end window shooter had no urgent intent at hitting either JFK, nor anybody else in the "J/Canoe" -- but if he had to complete his contract by switching the "Broom-Handle Mauser to full automatic ["spray & pray"] he would have unhesitatlingly done so !!

I have been corresponding with Dave Kaiser for years, and he was gracious enough to forward signed copies of his extremely well researched books, especially the one on the Vietnam failures.

With that said, I doubt that Lamar and Thom have reached the point where they have conclusively decided that the "Dagos & Wops" dood da deed ??!! Even our "alleged LNer DisInfo Agent" Gus Russo has never expounded fully on the "final proof" that "El Jefe Maximo Fidel" was holding LHO's purse for him on the 6th Floor !!

Chairs,

Gerry

______________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...