VIDEO - Was it Johnson ? - Part 1

[Bill Charleston]

I'm going to have to read The Men on the Sixth Floor again. As I recall, Loy Factor said that Mac was a shooter. My impression after the first reading of the book was that Factor was credible in terms of what he somehow knew about the TSBD etc., but how he said they escaped (he and Ruth Ann went down the stairs, out the back, and drove off in a car) was completely at odds with the accounts of eyewitnesses who would have seen someone descending the stairs as well as anyone leaving the back of the building, on foot and particularly in a car.

I still think that the Federal Government altering evidence and if need be to lie to whatever extent necessary to hide the truth is the first smoking gun you need to really grasp to finally understand what actually happened and why; that this was just a simple coup by the Vice President, Lyndon Johnson. No one else in the world could have manipulated the system like was done in this case except the President of the United States, and he couldn't have done it without the active participation by J. Edgar Hoover.

The YOUTUBE video I posted earlier states beyond any doubt that the medical evidence was altered.

Probably the closest witness on the right side of the car says he sees a bullet hit JFK in the temple (probably fired from behind the witness)

1. Sixteen Parkland Doctors according to David Mantik say they do NOT recognize the autopsy photos as what they saw of the President's head

2. David Mantik shows that by looking at multiple photos, the 3D effect is lost just in the back of JFK's head, everywhere else it looks normal. He then says that means photographic forgery.

Any reasonable person looking at this knows beyond ANY DOUBT that the Federal Government altered evidence. Either we have witness after witness lying (or just plain incompetent) or we have a corrupt government caught red handed lying in what may be the biggest murder mystery in history. The ONLY CONCLUSION possible in my humble opinion is that someone important is involved and he (they) had enough power to alter even the simplest evidence when necessary.

If you look at the shot at Z=313 which hit JFK in the head, you see him driven back and to the left, which any person knows intuitively a shot from the right front. That's exactly what the witness said he saw in the youtube video, a bullet hit JFK in the temple, but almost a half century later, people are still wondering what it means.

History is going to laugh at this era, a society that is confused by the simplest of facts.

1. JFK was shot in the head from the front right side of the limo at Z=313. The back of his head was blown out.

2. The autopsy photos show the back of his head intact. The Zapruder film shows the side of his head blown away, something that no witness apparently described, they described the back of his head. The Zapruder film at Z314 shows movement forward, and then back movement one frame later. Simple physics says that didn't happen, just another mistake that shows 1960's technology wasn't all that good compared to what we see now. In a recent thread here on the Zapruder film, no one talked about the most obvious evidence of forgery, the back of JFK's head was blown out in reality but the autopsy photos and the Zapruder film were altered to show evidence of a shot from the rear to JFK's head, something that didn't happen.

Since any reasonable person knows beyond any doubt that the Federal Government altered critical evidence in this case, the first question is WHY, what was the motive?

With the additional clues that LBJ sealed the evidence until the next century, that the Zapruder film was locked up until 1975 from public scrutiny, that we see see example after example of witness after witness saying X but the evidence held by the government shows Y, then there is no doubt anymore, or at least there shouldn't be.

Barr McClellan shows motive, the Henry Marshall murder which according to Billy Sol Estes was ordered personally by Lyndon Johnson. Add in the financial corruption tied to the Bobby Baker scandal and the story is pretty clear. Johnson was in trouble and the assassination was his ticket to stay out of jail.

Vincent Bugliosi argues that there are over 5 million pages held at the National Archieves, much of it in fine print, the public just doesn't understand..... No, you can read all 5 million pages of documents held by the federal governmet and you still won't know what actually happened.

You can't possible understand what happened in the JFK murder until you understand how really simple this murder really was.

[Ron Ecker]

Bill,

Granted that LBJ played a major role, but he had plenty of help. It was not quite as "simple" as you seem to suggest. It was not LBJ sheep-dipping Lee Harvey Oswald, setting him up for months, it was the CIA. And I doubt that LBJ sent out invitations to a few lucky CIA agents like Robertson, Hunt, and Lansdale (or was that General Maxwell Taylor?) to be at Dealey Plaza if they wanted to see "the big event" pulled off by Mac Wallace and El Indio (Loy Factor, not David Morales).

Ron

[Herb White]

Instead of seeing all the discrepancies as confusing, look at them as confirmation that the GUILTY MEN were at the top and had the power to make lies into facts. Then and only then, it all makes sense.

You didn't address what doesn't make sense to me, the involvement of Wallace, a bungler who tried to kill Marshall four or five ways. Whose idea was that and why?

As already noted, a man who looked a lot like Wallace was seen leaving the TSBD. What if some ignorant cop trying to do his job had stopped this suspicious character? And then what if a couple of photographers, who were running around all over the place, took some good shots of Wallace being detained, like those three famous tramps, to go along with the gallery of lookalikes already on display from Dealey Plaza.

Why take such a chance? Wallace invited disaster in what was otherwise an obviously well planned plot. Unless he was an instrument of blackmail (but still one inviting disaster), what in the world did he have to offer the conspirators, other than a willingness to kill, no matter how long and by ever how many means it might take? Seems to me that any conspirators in their right minds would have told Wallace, "Don't call us, we'll call you."

One thing about LBJ, he didn't get where he was by being a fool. Why would he want Mac Wallace anywhere near

Dallas that day? With CIA and FBI and whoever else on board, he clearly did not need him.

Ron,

According to testimony from didn't Billy Sol Estes Wallace and LBJ were involved in at least seven murders over the years, including LBJ's sister. Maybe egomania, arrogance and power overuled prudence in LBJ's case.

[Herb White]

Instead of seeing all the discrepancies as confusing, look at them as confirmation that the GUILTY MEN were at the top and had the power to make lies into facts. Then and only then, it all makes sense.

You didn't address what doesn't make sense to me, the involvement of Wallace, a bungler who tried to kill Marshall four or five ways. Whose idea was that and why?

As already noted, a man who looked a lot like Wallace was seen leaving the TSBD. What if some ignorant cop trying to do his job had stopped this suspicious character? And then what if a couple of photographers, who were running around all over the place, took some good shots of Wallace being detained, like those three famous tramps, to go along with the gallery of lookalikes already on display from Dealey Plaza.

Why take such a chance? Wallace invited disaster in what was otherwise an obviously well planned plot. Unless he was an instrument of blackmail (but still one inviting disaster), what in the world did he have to offer the conspirators, other than a willingness to kill, no matter how long and by ever how many means it might take? Seems to me that any conspirators in their right minds would have told Wallace, "Don't call us, we'll call you."

One thing about LBJ, he didn't get where he was by being a fool. Why would he want Mac Wallace anywhere near

Dallas that day? With CIA and FBI and whoever else on board, he clearly did not need him.

Ron,

According to testimony from didn't Billy Sol Estes Wallace and LBJ were involved in at least seven murders over the years, including LBJ's sister. Maybe egomania, arrogance and power overuled prudence in LBJ's case.

[Bill Charleston]

Granted that LBJ played a major role, but he had plenty of help. It was not quite as "simple" as you seem to suggest. It was not LBJ sheep-dipping Lee Harvey Oswald, setting him up for months, it was the CIA. And I doubt that LBJ sent out invitations to a few lucky CIA agents like Robertson, Hunt, and Lansdale (or was that General Maxwell Taylor?) to be at Dealey Plaza if they wanted to see "the big event" pulled off by Mac Wallace and El Indio (Loy Factor, not David Morales).

Ron

Ron, according to this show (THE GUILTY MEN) based on Barr McClellan's book BLOOD MONEY POWER actually the "setting up" was done by Ed Clark who was a lawyer in the law firm that represented LBJ, and according to McClellan arranged the murder. With Hoover and Nixon's ties to the mafia, there's no telling what trash was watching that day in Dallas.

Also shown at about the same time was further testimony that Richard Nixon, LBJ, J. Edgar Hoover.... were at a get together (at Murchison's) the night before the assassination. LBJ, according to his mistress, came out of that meeting with the statement "Those SOB Kennedy's after tomorrow will never embarass me again, that's no threat, that's a promise."

With LBJ having Presidential power after the assassination and Hoover controlling and filtering the evidence the Warren Commission saw, no other combination is possible to ensure an effective coverup. The CIA could have killed him, but no one other than the President had the power to turn lies into truth.

It's the simplest answer and it easily explains all the silliness that we see, LBJ and Hoover did the coverup, Ed Clark arranged the shooting (Occam's razor).

The US Government simply cannot afford to let the public know that JFK was killed by the Vice President. All of the constitutional checks and balances failed. The Press failed miserably, they should have blown this out of the water years ago but instead we see silly computer animations in documentary after documetary that are easily shown to be wrong, instead we continue to be told a lone gunman did the impossible.

[Ron Ecker]

Bill,

Why would E. Howard Hunt, on his near-deathbed, finger his own CIA (i.e. rogue agents, including probably himself), in addition to LBJ, if it were not so?

I think we can agree to disagree that it was a wider conspiracy than posited in McClellan's book (which BTW is fictionalized regarding Oswald and the shooting, so who knows regarding what else).

As for Ed Clark, he may have helped, but it's not surprising that such an arrogant Texas big-shot (I believe he was called "the boss of Texas") might claim more credit than he deserved.

[Chris Newton]

Bill,

Why would E. Howard Hunt, on his near-deathbed, finger his own CIA (i.e. rogue agents, including probably himself), in addition to LBJ, if it were not so?

I think we can agree to disagree that it was a wider conspiracy than posited in McClellan's book (which BTW is fictionalized regarding Oswald and the shooting, so who knows regarding what else).

As for Ed Clark, he may have helped, but it's not surprising that such an arrogant Texas big-shot (I believe he was called "the boss of Texas") might claim more credit than he deserved.

I think it's probable, with the identification of Wallace's prints on the fith floor, that he had been directed by Clarke to set up the "patsy", Oswald. He may have simply pointed the weapon out the window and fired (wounding Teugue? or hitting the windshield?) thereby further setting the stage. Then it was a matter of hiding the rifle and acting inconspicous until he coulde leave the building. Real snipers do not allow their weapon to be seen protruding from a window. This scenario does not conflict with the theory that Harvey used his mafia connections to find the shooters or that other rogue assets were involved. I think the puzzle pieces are really beggining to fall into place.

I do agree with Charleston in that the Government will do anything to keep this "under the rug". An example is Jimmy Carter's weighing into the fray concerning the "Men Who Killed Kennedy" LBJ episode purchase debacle. Was it he who stated that he was doing it for the "...sanctity of the Office"? This is the mindset. That we can't handle the truth.

It may be time now, with Hunts recorded confession, McClellan's admitals and the ARRB documents among others to put real heat to the notion of a true Grand Jury Investigation.