Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.
That's what his son and daughter, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rory Kennedy, reported in an interview with Charlie Rose last weekend in Dallas.
It's also what author and Salon founder David Talbot reported, when he called Robert F. Kennedy the "first conspiracy theorist" in 2007.
Here's why the news from Robert and Rory is so important:
RFK called the Warren Commission report "shoddy workmanship."
Attorney General Kennedy knew about the Ruby-Mafia connections immediately, which is vital when considering the Mafia were hired by Allen Dulles and the CIA during Eisenhower's administration to murder Fidel Castro -- an operation which the CIA failed to inform the president and attorney general.
The interview with Charlie Rose marked the first time members of the immediate Kennedy family have voiced the attorney general's doubts about the Warren Commission and its lone gunman theory.
Those are the facts we learned Friday, Jan. 11, 2013. It's called history.
= new reply since forum marked as read
So, if you think JFK was killed by Oswald and not the hundreds you have implicated over the years, you can't be a democrat?
Just another reason not to take you seriously.
The BFEE has my back!
Building on your excellent exposition, here's my two-cents regarding how Warren Commission members Mr. Dulles and Mr. McCloy fit into the story:
A fact curiously missing from American history and any mention of the Warren Commission
It is amazing, ZD-san, how few Americans know this history. What's telling are those who show no interest in learning it. Worst of all are they who know it and don't want others to know.
Oswald, the CIA and Mexico City
By John Newman, Ph.D.
Copyright ©1999 by John Newman.
All Rights Reserved.
I. The Rosetta Stone
The Assassination Records Review Board finished its search more than a year ago—a search for records relating to the murder of a president thirty-six years ago. Surprisingly, the passage of time has not managed to erode or cover over all of the important evidence. On the contrary, the work of the Review Board has uncovered important new leads in the case. I will leave medical and ballistic forensics to others. I will confine myself to document forensics, an area for which the work of the board had been nothing less than spectacular. More specifically, I will confine myself to the documentary record concerning Lee Harvey Oswald’s 1963 visit to Mexico City.
In 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) completed its work, including a report on Oswald’s activities in Mexico written by Eddie Lopez and Dan Hardway. Our first glimpses of their report began shortly after the 1993 passage of the JFK Records Act. Not even all the redactions of those early versions could hide the seminal discoveries in that work. While Lopez couched his words in careful language, he suggested that Oswald might have been impersonated while he was in Mexico City just weeks before the assassination. Lopez was more forthright when I interviewed him about this in 1995. Armed with more CIA documents and the first Russian commentary (Nechiporenko’s book, Passport to Assassination), I went further in my own Oswald and the CIA (Carroll & Graf: 1995) in advancing the argument that Oswald was impersonated in the Mexican capitol. Specifically, someone pretending to be Oswald made a series of telephone calls between 28 September and 1 October, allegedly to and from the Cuban and Soviet consulates in Mexico City.
I concluded then, that, based on the content of the CIA Mexico City telephone transcripts alone, the speaker purporting to be Oswald was probably an impostor. I will not repeat my lengthy discussion here, other than to summarize it in this way: the speaker’s words were incongruous with the experiences we can be reasonably certain Oswald underwent. For reasons still obscure, the CIA has lied consistently for these past several decades about the tapes from which those transcripts were made. The Agency concocted the story that the tapes were routinely destroyed before the assassination. It is perhaps true that some tapes were destroyed before the assassination. But Lopez uncovered FBI documents containing detailed accounts of how two of the tapes were listened to after the assassination by FBI agents familiar with Oswald’s voice.
More evidence would come in time. Shortly after the passage of the JFK Records Act, the public gained access to a telephone transcript the day after the assassination in which FBI Director Hoover informs President Johnson that it is not Oswald’s voice on the tapes. The Review Board diligently followed these leads and settled the matter when they found CIA documents in which the Agency itself explicitly states that some of the tapes were reviewed after the assassination. The CIA’s continued silence on the matter of the tapes stands, like a giant beacon, pointing the way forward to the investigator. The impersonation of Oswald in Mexico by someone who drew attention to an Oswald connection to a KGB assassination officer may prove to be the Rosetta stone of this case.
Before going further, I once again pay tribute to Peter Dale Scott, who wrote of these matters as early as 1995, advancing his "Phase I-Phase II hypothesis" on largely deaf ears. I will not repeat his lengthy discussion here, other than to summarize it in this way: In Phase I, immediately after the assassination, previously planted evidence of a Cuban/Kremlin plot surfaced in Oswald’s files; this, in turn, precipitated Phase II, in which a lone-nut cover-up was erected to prevent a nuclear war.
In Oswald and the CIA, I deliberately steered clear of the conspiracy-anti-conspiracy vortex in order to set out some of the facts concerning Oswald’s pre-assassination files. Since then, the cumulative weight of the evidence uncovered by the Review Board has led me to the conclusion that the Oswald impersonation can best be explained in terms of a plot to murder the president. I remain open to other interpretations and fresh analyses by fellow researchers, and I understand that new evidence could corroborate or undermine this hypothesis. What follows is a first stab at explaining, in a short and simple way, how those plotting the president’s murder may have left their fingerprints in the files.
CONTINUED...
http://www.ctka.net/pr999-osciamex.html
Sprague became a national figure when he successfully prosecuted Tony Boyle, President of the United Mine Workers for the murder of Joseph Yablonski. He also had a record of 69 homicide convictions out of 70 prosecutions.
In 1976 Thomas N. Downing began campaigning for a new investigation into the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Downing said he was certain that Kennedy had been killed as a result of a conspiracy. He believed that the recent deaths of Sam Giancana and Johnny Roselli were highly significant. He also argued that the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation had withheld important information from the Warren Commission. Downing was not alone in taking this view. In 1976, a Detroit News poll indicated that 87% of the American population did not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman who killed Kennedy...
On 2nd February, 1978, Henry Gonzalez replaced Thomas N. Downing as chairman of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Gonzalez immediately sacked Sprague as chief counsel. Sprague claimed that only the full committee had the power to dismiss him. Walter E. Fauntroy agreed with Sprague and launched a campaign to keep him as chief counsel. On 1st March, Gonzalez resigned describing Sprague as "an unconscionable scoundrel"
Louis Stokes of Ohio was now appointed as the new chairman of the HSCA. After a meeting with Stokes on 29th March, Sprague agreed to resign and he was replaced by G. Robert Blakey.
Sprague later told Gaeton Fonzi that the real reason he was removed as chief counsel was because he insisted on asking questions about the CIA operations in Mexico. Fonzi argued that "Sprague... wanted complete information about the CIA's operation in Mexico City and total access to all its employees who may have had anything to do with the photographs, tape recordings and transcripts. The Agency balked. Sprague pushed harder. Finally the Agency agreed that Sprague could have access to the information if he agreed to sign a CIA Secrecy Agreement. Sprague refused.... "How," he asked, "can I possible sign an agreement with an agency I'm supposed to be investigating?"
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6407
More on Richard A. Sprague here and here.
Congrats on not only the single dumbest post in the history of DU, but, in all likelihood, the single dumbest thing ever written on the internet.
Seriously, congratulations!!!
From footage found in a dumpster outside ABC Dallas in the late 90's:
Video: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/171830/secret_service_jfk /
Afterward, in William Manchester's book, Death of a President, we see the "official story" of what happened:
"Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library edition, pp. 37-38)
The thing is PRESIDENT KENNEDY NEVER SAID THAT.
Not until 35 years later do we learn the truth, though, when the great investigator Vincent Palamara asked the Secret Service agents who were there what happened in 1963:
Agents Go On Record
and about that Neutron Activation analysis....
or don't acknowledge your own words.
Speaking of which...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2232672
"As for Oswald, I don't know if he was a hero in all this or not."
And by the way, for such an self-proclaimed expert on the BFEE, how come you don't know they pay me by the hour???
I implied that certain thoughts were yours which may or may not have been yours, despite having no concrete evidence to back up those implications.
Pretty much what RFK Jr. has done. 
and in the end, he agreed with the WC that there was no conspiracy.
He was supplied all of the information the WC had in their hands ("I have seen all of the archives"
. He agreed with the findings of the WCR and is listed as doing so in the WCR:
"Based upon the investigation reviewed in this chapter, the Commission concluded that there is no credible evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald was part of a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. The conclusion that there is no evidence of a conspiracy was also reached independently by Dean Rusk, the Secretary of State; Robert S. McNamara, the Secretary of Defense; C. Douglas Dillon, the Secretary of the Treasury; Robert F. Kennedy, the Attorney General; J. Edgar Hoover, the Director of the FBI; John A. McCone, the Director of the CIA; and James J. Rowley, the Chief of the Secret Service, on the basis of the information available to each of them." (http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/wcr6.htm#p19 )
The reason they don't is that they're not stupid and don't want to waste time, as the Warren report is largely wrong.
Here's your Warren Commission's entire argument ... The Magic Bullet.
JFK Exhibit F-294
Photo of 5 bullets fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle: (left to right) the "magic bullet" (CE 399), two bullets fired into cotton wadding(CE 572), a bullet fired through a goat rib (CE 853), and a bullet fired through the wrist of a human cadaver (CE 856).
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=45739
The magic bullet appears to have been fired into cotton wadding.
That makes clear why the Warren Commission's case is bogus.
Why so selective?
Note, in your photo, how the base of the bullet is deformed. That's what happens to bullets that have been fired from a rifle or pistol. I don't believe it
The important thing to remember is that the FBI found the Magic Bullet had no traces of blood or human tissue, odd considering how it is ALLEGED to have caused seven wounds in two men -- including breaking bones in Gov. Connally's wrist.
DETAILS: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Single_Bullet_Theory
CE 399
PS: Based on the images, I don't believe your picture even shows the base of CE 399.
Mary Ferrell? Right.
First off, what does it matter what the surgeon who performed the autopsy on JFK thought about bullet fragments removed from Gov Connally? Said surgeon never examined Gov Connally, nor did he ever look at the fragments or any of the other physical evidence gathered by the WC. Last I looked, Connally survived the shooting, which meant that no autopsy surgeon ever had a look at him in connection to this case.
Second, Ferrell adds this total speculation to the link you refernced: "There is also some doubt about whether the fragments now in evidence (CE 842) comprise all that was removed from Governor Connally's wrist."
Really? Says who? Why, Mary and the other JFK CTists who can't bring themselves to dealing with the facts in the case, but who trade in speculation ("there is also some doubt."
You really are a sucker for this shit, aren't you?
On the other hand, John Lattimer - who DID have access to and who did examine the evidence - said this in his book "Kennedy and Lincoln":
Were the Four Fragments in Connally Excessive?
Critics also contended that the four fragments of
bullet seen in the preoperative X-rays of Connally s wrist
and thigh were too many to be produced from the amount of
lead estimated to be missing from bullet 399, that is, 2.2
grains. Again, they said this without checking for its
validity. Once more it appeared to me and my sons that we
could contribute answers to this question.
It would be necessary, it seemed to us at once,
carefully to weigh 100 of the sample bullets. These would
have to be identical to those fired by Oswald.
First, however, I closely examined the fragments of the
bullets removed from Kennedy's head, from Connally's wrist,
and from the automobile. Neutron activation analysis
revealed that the wrist fragments all came from bullet 399.
All the other bullet fragments, from the Presidents brain
and from the floor of the car, came from the head bullet No
other bullets were represented in the car.
As far as the weight of the bullets and the amount of bullet material found in Connally, Lattimer writes:
After considerable difficulty, I
obtained a substantial supply of exactly the same cartridges
as Oswald had used. Around 1954, four lots of these
cartridges had been manufactured. I was finally able to
procure samples from lots 6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003, and
the FBI obtained samples from lots 6000 and 6003, all of
which proved consistent and reliable. One hundred of these
bullets were pulled from cartridges, and my son Jon weighed
them on a precision balance in the laboratories of the
Englewood School for Boys. The weights ranged from 159.80
grains for the lightest bullet to 161.50 grains for the
heaviest, with an average weight of 160.844 grains and a
median weight of 160.80 grains.
This compared fairly closely with the weight range of
three sample bullets weighed by the FBI laboratory and
reported by firearms expert Robert Frazier. He found them to
weigh 160.85 grains, 161.1 grains, and 161.5 grains, with an
average weight of 161.15 grains, whereas our larger sample
yielded a mean weight of 160.84 grains.
Since bullet 399 weighed 158.6 grains when found, we
have assumed that it lost between 1.2 grains and 2.9 grains,
with a mean probability of 2.2 grains.
More here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wound3.txt
EXCERPT...
The drawing above demonstrates the alleged behavior of the single bullet. The drawing was designed (though not executed) by John Lattimer, a urologist who has published several infomercials in medical journals promoting the lone assassin theory. What is wrong with this picture, aside from the fact that the men are too far apart? Experts assure me the Carcano bullet is much too stable to behave like this. Perforating a neck could divert the bullet, but not make it tumble to this extent in so short a time and in so short a space. (There is more on Lattimer below.)
The wound in Connally’s back did not indicate a sideways hit any more than the wound in the back of Kennedy’s head. The latter was 1.5 x 0.6 centimeters, and the former, 1.5 x 0.8 centimeters, as documented on at least four occasions by the governor’s thoracic surgeon, Dr. Robert Shaw. (4WCH104, 107; 6WCH85, 86). The holes in the back of Connally’s shirt and jacket were as small as his back wound. (5WCH64) (See TABLE below.) The damage inside Connally’s chest also disproves a sideways hit. According to Shaw, the bullet created a "small tunneling wound" (7HSCA149) and he noted, "the neat way in which it stripped the rib out without doing much damage to the muscles that lay on either side of it." (4WCH116) Shaw felt that the shape of the bullet was explained either by a “slight tumbling,” or by it striking at a tangent. (6WCH95) It had to have been a tangential hit since the bullet “followed the line of declination of the fifth rib” (4WCH105), i.e., its path slanted downward.
SOURCE: http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/BigLieSmallWound/BigLieSmallWound.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
Roughly three grains of weight compared to an unfired bullet missing, slightly more than recovered fragments; examination of CE399 discloses extrusion of lead core from base jacket and deformation:
You continue to apparently wilfully distort the actual evidence, and make claims contrary to those accepted not merely by the Warren Commission but by the 1978 HSCA (whose findings of probably conspiracy were in any case based on flawed acoustical analysis of Dictabelt recordings).
Furthermore, it does not take into account the fragments that remained in Gov. Connally's body, nor any that were lost as the bullet passed through the body and out, along with lost blood, bone, muscle and soft tissues.
The point is: The doctors who treated Connally and compared what they removed with the Magic Bullet said there were too many fragments to have come from CE 399.
Besides, there was no blood or tissue on CE 399. That is unlike any bullet known to have caused seven wounds in two victims, or even one wound.
Along with its near pristine condition and odd location on a cart that was not used to carry either the president or governor, implies the bullet was planted at the hospital.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=45739
Simple facts:
On the night of the 21st Oswald went to Ruth Paine's house to see his wife; he attempted to reconcile with her and to get her to move back in with him. She said "no". He left almost all the money he had in the world and his wedding ring behind when he left the next morning. (This is not the action of a man who expects to see his wife again.)
A man fitting Oswald's description was witnessed in the sixth-floor window of the TSBD, firing a rifle. Men on the fifth floor directly below that window heard the shots, heard the action of the bolt cycling, and heard the spent shells hitting the floor above their heads (at least one of them had dust and plaster debris in his hair that was shaken loose by the reports).
A rifle belonging to Oswald was found on the sixth floor, along with three spent cartridges. Those spent cartridges had been fired by that rifle. CE399 (the Parkland stretcher bullet) and fragments recovered from the presidential limousine were matched to that rifle. Fragments recovered from Connally's thigh were matched to CE399 through neutron activation analysis. Recreation of the trajectory and impacts based on the wounds and positions of Kennedy and Connally resulted in a finding that both men had been shot from a point behind and above consistent with the 6th floor window of the TSBD " target="_blank">and that a single bullet had struck first Kennedy and then Connally. This finding was confirmed by later analysis for the HSCA; see Thomas Canning's testimony. " target="_blank">Simulation of those wounds using 6.5mm Carcano ammunition results in a bullet that exhibits similar deformations to CE399.
Oswald was the only TSBD employee unaccounted for in the aftermath of the shooting. He was witnessed killing Patrolman JD Tippit; bullets recovered from Tippit's body and shell casings recovered from the scene were matched to Oswald's revolver...which was in his possession at the time of his arrest, and which he attempted to draw on the arresting officer (saying "well, I guess it's all over now" . (Not to mention that a jacket discarded near the scene was traced to Oswald by laundry markings.)
So what do we have? We have eyewitness evidence that places a man fitting Oswald's description in the TSBD with a rifle. We have Oswald's rifle, found at the scene. We have a bullet matched to that rifle found on Connally's stretcher at Parkland. We have fragments recovered from the presidential limousine, matched to that rifle. We have a bullet, recovered from Tippit, and spent casings from the scene of his murder, matched to Oswald's revolver.
What we don't have: witnesses who saw anyone firing a rifle anywhere other than the TSBD. Bullets that came from any other rifle. A trajectory consistent with a shooter in any other location. Physical evidence that implicates anyone not named Lee Harvey Oswald.
to support the WCR as to be laughable.
You really need to get out of the 70s and 80s and get caught up on things.
BTW - here's the picture of CE 399 you CTists NEVER seem to provide when you aver the bullet was pristine:
Bullet misshapen, with lead extruding from the bottom. Hardly pristine.
Why is it that you never include this picture in your rants?
BTW - are you not aware of the fact that the bullet was yawing as it entered and passed through Gov Connally? Are you not aware that it was the BACK END of the bullet (CE399) that hit and shattered Connally's wrist, not the nose of the bullet? Are you not aware that the lead removed from Connally's wrist was matched to the lead extruding from CE 399? That the lead fragments found in Connally were about the weight of lead missing from CE 399? Are you not aware that ballistic tests to Oswald's rifle matched CE 399 being fired from that weapon to the exclusion of every other weapon in the world?
You're averring that CE 399 was fired through Oswald's rifle IN ADVANCE of the assassination to later be planted at Parkland. Is that what you're saying?
Why would anyone do that? How would anyone know that Oswald's bullets would be the only bullets to be fired and found after the shooting? How does that work if there were multiple shooters, as you and others allege? Assuming there were other shooters, why would anyone assume that no other shooters hit JFK or Connally? How would one know that other rounds from other guns wouldn't be lodged in JFK and Connally? Why produce a "faked" bullet to implicate Oswald at a time when no autopsy had been done on JFK, and where it was entirely possible that multiple bullets from multiple shooters using weapons other than Oswald's rifle might be lodged in his body?
Planting CE 399 in such a case would serve only to PROVE a conspiracy, NOT to pin the crime solely on Oswald.
Sheer lunacy.
1.) You're conclusion in Item 1 assumes that there was only one bullet striking JFK's head. Most witnesses reported hearing at least 3 shots, including Governor Connally who maintained that 3 shots were fired. The problem with the 3 shot theory is that, based on evidence apparent from the Zapruder film, 3 shots could not be fired that quickly from the rifle found in the book depository. This is why the Warren Commission had to focus on a two shot theory, otherwise it would have lead to the conclusion of a conspiracy (all it takes is two people to make a conspiracy).
2.) Your conclusion from Item 2.) states that CE399 was fired from Oswald's rifle, but does not prove that the bullet struck JFK and Connally. This jibes with my pet theory (outlined in another post from the book "Farewell America" based on RFK's research - related to material from the OP) that Oswald may have been present to shoot AT JFK in order to scare him. There was no human tissue or clothing material found on this bullet.
3.) The Neutron activation analysis tests were performed by the FBI. Since the FBI only seemed to be interested in coming to one conclusion, I hardly consider them to be objective. Be that as it may, I would leave subsequent NAA tests to the experts, including scientists from both the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and independently from the Stanford Linear Accelerator, both of whom disagree with the conclusions. Here is a report from Stanford scientist from May 27, 2001:
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/Scientific_topics/NAA/Snyder_critique.pdf
There's also this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
The technique used by Guinn to analyse the bullet lead from the JFK assassination was a form of what has become known as Compositional Bullet Lead Analysis (CBLA). Instead of using only one element (antimony) to identify a bullet, as Guinn used, the FBI developed a CBLA procedure in which the concentrations of six different elements were measured. The theory was that each lot of bullet lead has a unique profile of these six elements. However, in a 2002 paper ("A Metallurgical Review of the Interpretation of Compositional Bullet Lead Analysis", (2002) 127 Forensic Science International, 174-191)[93] co-authored by Randich and by former FBI Chief Metallurgist, William Tobin, the authors analysed several years of data kept by two lead smelters that supply the raw material for ammunition. According to the authors, manufacturers measure and record the levels of at least 15 trace metals, including antimony, from samples taken when smelters start and finish pouring a batch of lead into casts. Randich, Tobin et al. examined records for 1998 to 2000 held by the Sanders Lead Company in Alabama and Gopher Resources Corporation in Minnesota. They found many instances where it was impossible, using the FBI's chemical profile standards, to distinguish between batches poured months apart.
The 2002 Tobin/Randich paper prompted the National Academy of Sciences (Board on Chemical Science and Technology) to review the science of bullet lead analysis. In a report in 2004[94] the NAS found the scientific basis for matching bullet sources from the analysis of bullet lead composition as practiced by the FBI was flawed. As a result of that report, the courts appear to have stopped accepting this evidence[95] and the FBI has stopped using bullet lead analysis for forensic purposes.[96]
The NAS report on CBLA, and its relevance to the Dr. Guinn's analysis of bullet lead in the JFK assassination, is the subject of comment by Randich and Grant in their 2006 paper at page 719.[97]
4.) The path of the first magic bullet that passed through JFK's back is the subject of extensive controversy. It seems to focus on the actual position where Gov. Connally was seated as well as the position of JFK's back.
Some critics claim this would have had to have been the trajectory of the bullet:
you have no clue what you are talking about.
"1.) You're conclusion in Item 1 assumes that there was only one bullet striking JFK's head. Most witnesses reported hearing at least 3 shots, including Governor Connally who maintained that 3 shots were fired. The problem with the 3 shot theory is that, based on evidence apparent from the Zapruder film, 3 shots could not be fired that quickly from the rifle found in the book depository. This is why the Warren Commission had to focus on a two shot theory, otherwise it would have lead to the conclusion of a conspiracy (all it takes is two people to make a conspiracy). "
The WC, like everyone else, knows there were 3 shots fired. They were not in agreement as to which missed. Although today, most agree the first shot missed.
And only one shot did hit JFK in the head. No proof of anything but one shot.
And it has been demonstrated numerous times that it was possible to shoot 3 times in that time frame with that rifle. Google it if you would like.
EPIC FAIL on your part.
You might want to brush up a little on the BASIC facts before you look foolish.
1. 3 shots by Oswald: the Zapruder film proves that Oswald had 8.5 seconds to take his three shots. The cartridge for the first shot was already loaded in the firing chamber, so you start the clock on the three shots the instant first shot is fired. That gives Oswald 8.5 second to fire TWO MORE SHOTS. Get it? That gives him 4-plus seconds to take the second shot AND another 4-plus seconds to take the third shot. That is not only well within the range of possibility, it is almost TWICE the amount of time that it took the test shooters for the Warren Commission to get off 3 shots WITH Oswald's rifle - misaligned scope and all - and WITH accuracy. One shooter accomplished the task in 4.6 seconds.
But you don't know that because you've never bothered reading THE EVIDENCE.
2. The neutron activation analysis proves that CE399 struck Connally. Period. It is indisputable. End of crazy talk.
3. Smear the FBI because you don't like the results they got.
And what does Ken Rahn have to do with the examination and testing of the bullet fragments that was done by John Lattimer? You provide a link to an article critical of a statistical analysis done by a guy who had nothing to do with Lattimer's examination of the physical evidence.
4. Wow! Now, this is embarrassing - for you. That looks like the laugh riot of a drawing that appeared in Livingston and Groden's "High Treason."
You're repeating the fanciful seating of JFK and Connally that is disproved by 1. the Zapruder film, 2. every still photo and video photo ever taken of the two men in the limo, and 3. the actual location of the seats and positions of the men in the limo when the shots were fired. You're basically presenting the Oliver Stone LIE about how they were positioned.
There IS NO CONTROVERSY about how and where the men were seated in the limo IF YOU BELIEVE IN SCIENCE. Here's the evidence that proves how stupid that drawing you presented is:
First, check out the height difference between JFK and Connally as shown conclusively in this photo:
Second, here is a picture of the limo after it was returned to DC. Notice the difference in the seat heights:
Third, a picture taken by Dallas photographer Duane Robinson CLEARLY shows the alignment of the men as seen from the rear of the limo. Is Connally seated directed in front of JFK as proposed in your ridiculous drawing? Or is he seated INBOARD from JFK, and LOWER than JFK? Duh!:
Here's a drawing by Thomas Canning, a NASA scientist who studied the Single Bullet trajectory for the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He used the Betzner photograph to establish a line to the right of which Connally could not have been. He also estimated the rotation of Connally's torso from the Zapruder film. The result was an alignment that showed the bullet leaving Kennedy's throat to strike Connally in the back near the shoulder — which is where Connally was actually struck (rear of the limo is to the right of the drawing).
Here's a computer-generated look from the sniper's nest at how the men were seated, produced by Dale Myers using the Zapruder film and other physical markers to determine the positions of the men in the limo. Notice how closely it mirrors the photograph shown above:
Failure Analysis Associates, in work done for a 1992 "mock trial" of Lee Harvey Oswald for the American Bar Association, used 3-D computer animation and modelling techniques to research the bullet trajectory, and concluded that the Single Bullet Trajectory works:
Yeah, that seating diagram you provided is a HUGE gaffe on your part and a real embarrassment. No wonder you're so wrong and deluded about what happened that day when you're trusting such idiotic drawings to inform your beliefs about the killing.
three shots were fired. The majority of witnesses testified to hearing three shots, not four. The witnesses on the fifth floor of the TSBD who heard shots from directly above (and heard the shooter operating the bolt of the rifle, and the cartridge casings hitting the floor), heard three shots. One shot missed and struck the pavement (bystander James Tague got a cut across the cheek from a bit of concrete it kicked up); one shot struck both Kennedy and Connally (CE399, the Parkland stretcher bullet, matched to Oswald's rifle ballistically, matched to fragments recovered from Connally by NAA); one shot struck Kennedy in the head and blew out the right front of his skull (this bullet fragmented; fragments were recovered from Kennedy's skull and from the interior of the limousine). That's three shots fired, three accounted for. Any shot that hit Kennedy in the head fired from the Grassy Knoll would have had to penetrate his right temple and leave a wound of exit on the left side...and probably would have struck and killed Jackie who was to his immediate left.. The left side of his head was intact. Jackie wasn't hit. No other bullets or fragments were recovered. QED.
And re Patrolman Hargis getting spattered...this is a high-contrast version of Z-film frame 313 (the head shot); you'll observe that fragments of skull are moving up and forward (the car was in motion, Hargis was in motion, and the wind was in front, there's nothing odd or surprising about him getting spattered): 
And this is what happens when a high-velocity rifle round hits ballistic gelatin (this is what happens to tissue, like a brain, struck by a bullet; it creates a pressure wave and cavity, and causes a blowout of the skull to relieve the pressure):
The skull was bevelled on the interior surface. The evidence of witnesses who were not autopsists, and not physicians, is irrelevant and immaterial. See the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel:
FIGURE 13.--Drawing depicting the posterior head wound. Note also the position of the "white mass," described later.
Accurate reconstruction of the exact dimensions of the wound is difficult because the ruler and wound are in different planes of focus. The long axis of the wound more closely approximates a vertical angle than that depicted within the "Autopsy Descriptive Sheet? (See fig. 6.) The inferior margin of this wound, from 3 to 10 o'clock, is surrounded by a crescent-shaped reddish-black area of denudation, again presenting the appearance of an abrasion collar, resulting from the rubbing of the skin by the bullet at the time of penetration. From 12 to 3 o'clock, there is a suggestion of undermining, that is, tunneling of the tissue between the skin surface and the skull. Three small linear lacerations or tears of the skin, measuring less than 0.2 centimeter, in length, extend radially from the margins of the defect at 11 o'clock, 12 o'clock, and 3 o'clock. (See fig. 14:, a close-up photograph of this wound.)
FIGURE 14.--Close-up photograph of the posterior head wound.
An irregular, somewhat rectangular white object is also seen in these photographs, near the lower margin at the scalp hair at a point which most of the panel considers to be consistent with a localization slightly to the right of, and most likely below, the occipital protuberance. The panel agrees that the object is dried brain tissue.
Examination of the enhanced photographs prepared from the by 5 inch color transparency of the photograph of the back of the head (print No. 4g) reveals more sharply contrasted detail of the wound described in the upper occipital region and the dried brain tissue in the lower occipital region. stereoscopic visualization of this fragment indicates that it is adherent to and on the surface of the hair. computer-assisted image enhancement of this photograph reveals a dark oval shadow within the margins of the scalp perforation in the cowlick area which may be the perforation of the underlying skull. The hole in the scalp lines up with the hole in the skull. The X-rays also locate the skull defect at this point.
FIGURE 15.--Close-up photograph of the "white mass," dried brain tissue, situated in the lower occipital region.
Examination of the dried brain tissue in the lower occipital region by computer-assisted image enhancement also c]early demonstrates that it is on the surface of the hair. Such enhancement further provides some three-dimensional characterization. (See fig. 15, a close-up photograph of the dried brain tissue.) All members of the panel agree that the upper scalp wound, the location of which is identified by X-rays as approximately 10 centimeters (as measured on the X-ray) above the external occipital protuberance, is a typical entrance wound. All concur in its striking similarity to the entrance wound in the upper back. All agree that the white material is a piece of brain tissue and that it has no relationship to the location of the entrance wound, despite the interpretations of the autopsy pathologists in their Warren Commission testimony and interviews.
http://www.jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscv7c.htm#kenhein
Looking at the skull X-ray taken at the autopsy clearly shows an entry wound at the back of the skull in a largely intact area of bone (you can see it above the right eye, to the left side of the X-ray). The orbit of the eye is intact, by the way; the area appears darker because a substantial amount of the brain was missing on the right side of the head.
Here's the HSCA drawing that explains the concept of beveling in JFK's skull:
Three fragments of skull bone were received as separate specimens, roughly corresponding to the dimensions of the large defect. In the largest of the fragments is a portion of the perimeter of a roughly circular wound presumably of exit, exhibiting beveling of the exterior of the bone, and measuring about 2.5 to 3.0 cm in diameter. X-rays revealed minute particles of metal in the bone at this margin. (Source: Wikipedia)
And here's information on beveling that was contained in the WCR:
"Situated in the posterior scalp approximately 2. 5 cm. laterally to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance is a lacerated wound measuring 15 x 6 mm. In the underlying bone is a corresponding wound through the skull which exhibits beveling of the margins of the bone when viewed from the inner aspect of the skull.
"Received as separate specimens from Dallas, Texas are three fragments of skull bone which in aggregate roughly approximate the dimensions of the large defect described above. At one angle of the largest of these fragments is a portion of the perimeter of a roughly circular wound presumably of exit which exhibits beveling of the outer aspect of the bone and is estimated to measure approximately 2. 5 to 3. 0 cm. in diameter. Roentgenograms of this fragment reveal minute particles of metal in the bone at this margin. Roentgenograms of the skull reveal multiple minute metallic fragments along a line corresponding with a line joining the above described small occipital wound and the right supra-orbital ridge. From the surface of the disrupted right cerebral cortex two small irregularly shaped fragments of metal are recovered. These measure 7 x 2 mm. and 3 x 1 mm. These are placed in the custody of Agents Francis X. O'Neill, Jr. and James W. Sibert, of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who executed a receipt therefor." - Appendix IX: Autopsy Report and Supplemental Report, Warren Commission Report, p. 541.
The problem with your citing all of these witnesses at the autopsy is that I am not aware that they had the three large skull fragments in their possession to examine to see the beveling that was clearly seen when the large bone fragments were viewed in isolation. Reading through the comments you provided, it would seem that none of these people ever saw the large bone fragment that contained the actual entry wound and the beveling thereof.
The beveling did happen. it's a fact.
So I ask again - what do you think of the fact that the entry wound to JFK's rear skull was beveled, proving the head shot came from behind JFK (ie: from Oswald's rifle in the TSBD)?
first we have the testimony of eyewitnesses who weren't physicians nor medically trained; their recollections as to what they thought they saw are easily dismissed because we have the evidence of the X-rays and autopsy photos. Regarding Lipsey, this is a drawing of what he claims he saw:
That's not "the back of the head".
Compare that to this drawing by John Lattimer from skull X-rays:
And the Zapruder film clearly shows the back of Kennedy's head was intact. To make the case that the back of the head was blown out would require not just falsifying the medical evidence of autopsy photos and X-rays, but falsifying the Zapruder film as well.
See also here: http://www.vectorsite.net/twjfk_12.html#m1
no.
Zapruder frame 323: 
As published in Life: [IMG]
[/IMG]
One is in colour, one isn't, that's the only difference (that, and the sprocket area is visible in the colour frame).
The back of Kennedy's head is intact in both images. That print run of Life went to press on the 24th and subscriber copies went out in the post on the 25th. The notion that the film was altered is not merely fantastic and absurd, it is frankly stupid.
It would be good if you could cite all the relevant parts of the report you linked to:
This opening was probed by Dr. HUMES with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.
Inasmuch as no complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other area of the body as determined by total body X-Rays and inspection revealing there was no point of exit, the individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explain why they could find no bullets.
...
Immediately following receipt of this information <the portion you cited>, this was made available to Dr. HUMES who advised that in his opinion this accounted for no bullet being located which had entered the back region and that since external cardiac massage had been performed at Parkland Hospital, it was entirely possible that through such movement the bullet had worked its way back out of the point of entry and had fallen on the stretcher.
...
Dr. HUMES stated that the pattern was clear that the one bullet had entered the President’s back and had worked its way out of the body during external cardiac massage
As for the stretcher where the bullet was found, it's not even clear from orderly Tomlinson's testimony that the bullet was indeed found on Connally's stretcher, so I'm afraid that you are the one inventing facts:
http://jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html
Tomlinson told the Warren Commission that he returned Governor Connally's stretcher from the second floor back to the ground floor, and then parked it behind another stretcher that was in front of the door to a rest room. During his testimony, he illustrated the positions of the two stretchers, producing the following diagram:
Tomlinson labelled the two stretchers, "A" and "B", in response to Specter's request:
Mr. SPECTER. Will you mark with a "B" the stretcher which was present at the time you pushed stretcher "A" off of the elevator?
Specter also asked him to label the rest room in the diagram as "C" and explain how he acquired the bullet,
Mr. SPECTER. Where is the men's room located on this diagram?
Mr. TOMLINSON. It would be right there (indicating) beside the "B" stretcher.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you draw in ink there the outline of that room in a general way?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, I really don't know.
Mr. SPECTER. And would you mark that with the letter "C"?
Mr. SPECTER. That's fine. What happened when that gentleman came to use the men's room?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, he pushed the stretcher out from the wall to get in, and then when he came out he just walked off and didn't push the stretcher back up against the wall, so I pushed it out of the way where we would have clear area in front of the elevator.
Mr. SPECTER. And where did you push it to?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I pushed it back up against the wall.
Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, happened then?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I bumped the wall and a spent cartridge or bullet rolled out that apparently had been lodged under the edge of the mat.
Mr. SPECTER. And that was from which stretcher?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I believe that it was "B".
it was reported by Tomlinson as "copper-coloured" (which identifies it as being consistent with Carcano ammunition); he said "it resembles the bullet I found" (which is the most you could expect; a bullet is a bullet, one can't reasonably expect someone who had only given it a cursory examination and passed it on to the Secret Service to be able to say "this bullet which looks like many other bullets is 100% definitely the one I found". See this: 
and also here. (There is no person called Bardwell Odum in the chain of possession. Odum was a Secret Service agent who interviewed OP Wright at Parkland regarding the bullet in January of 1964. This is, again, conflation of unrelated events and facts.)
And the answer is quite simple as to how a bullet fired by Oswald's rifle was found on Connally's stretcher, Connally was SHOT with a bullet from Oswald's rifle, which first struck Kennedy and then him and passed through his body being deflected by a rib, hitting his wrist and then penetrating the thigh (shallowly, look at the description of the wounds). This is expected behaviour for a FMJ bullet that passes through soft tissue without striking bone (as it did when hitting Kennedy). The single bullet trajectory not only works, it's the only explanation for the wounds on both men (since almost all witnesses agreed that there were only three shots fired, and one was a miss).
what we are showing is that the evidence, including declassified FBI documents, contradict it:
there was found on analysis of Western Cartridge 6.5mm Carcano ammunition to be great variation in relative concentrations of trace elements within lots of bullets but not within a single bullet. Most ammunition did not share this characteristic. Neutron activation analyses of fragments found in the limousine (presumably from the head shot) showed significantly different concentrations of antimony and silver to CE399. Recovered fragments from the limousine also had striations and markings from the rifling of the weapon they were fired from and were ballistically matched to Oswald's rifle. And the results of separate analyses, done first in 1964 by the FBI, and second in 1977 for the HSCA, returned the same results.
Leaving aside the NAA results, you have a bullet, fired from Oswald's rifle, recovered from Connally's stretcher. You have fragments of a bullet, fired from Oswald's rifle, recovered from the presidential limousine. You have no evidence that more than three shots were fired; you have no evidence that more than two of those three shots struck their target. Both recovered bullets or fragments conclusively match Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons. A rifle that was discovered in the TSBD where a majority of witnesses heard the shots fired from, and that had Oswald's palmprint on it. You have FOUR eyewitnesses who saw a rifle in the sixth floor window (one of whom saw the shooter and gave a description that broadly fit Lee Harvey Oswald). There is no evidence of other weapons, or of other shooters, or of more than three shots. No-one saw any other shooters. Over half the witnesses said the shots came from the TSBD (considering the acoustics of Dealey Plaza, it's not surprising that the echoes caused some confusion). Over four-fifths said there were only three shots. Kennedy's autopsy, and the forensic review of the autopsy records for the HSCA, established that he was struck by two bullets, fired from above and behind. The trajectory was recreated for the HSCA by a NASA scientist using precise angles and geolocation and found to match up with a shooter in the 6th floor TSBD window. The evidence of the Zapruder film shows Connally hit at the same time as Kennedy--his jacket can be seen to bulge outward from the bullet strike at Z-frame 224; he hunches his shoulders in the space of an eighteenth of a second, see here:
And here: 
ALL of the evidence says: CE399 was the bullet which struck Connally, it struck Kennedy first, and it was fired from the sixth floor of the TSBD from Oswald's Carcano rifle.
My argument is based on the EVIDENCE. This is how criminal investigations work. You start with the evidence and allow the evidence to lead you to a solution. Your argument is based on conspiracy thinking, which starts with a conclusion and disregards evidence that contradicts that presupposed conclusion ("JFK was killed by a conspiracy therefore the single bullet theory must be wrong/the autopsy records were faked/the Zapruder film was altered" .
Do you even know where the Dal-Tex building was located? The lower vertical angle of a third-story window would be more in line with the trajectory required to go through JFK's back ending up at Connolly's position on a jump seat. The horizontal position of the building would also have been more in line with JFK relative to Connolly. Instead of crying about it, can you point to definitive measurements involving the respective buildings and positions of the targets? If you're going to use a computer animation, how do we know that it definitively matches available evidence? Instead of just saying you are relying on experts, tell us what those experts are actually presenting as evidence.
It should be intuitive that a high-powered assault rifle designed to take out a number of humans might be more powerful, not to mention up to date, than an older weapon designed for game. Also, I'm not aware that such a wide bullet is necessarilly intended to penetrate a victim as much as a pointier bullet intended for assault purposes. Yes, many of us saw the film "Full Metal Jacket" and understand what it refers to, but do YOU really know your bullets that well? Obviously you're not up to date on CBLA.
It should also be intuitive that a real film will be altered, if nothing else, every time it gets copied due to degradation. The quality will also depend on the print film and the techniques used.
Wah, wah, "no there wasn't you're just making shit up" 
As I pointed out earlier, the HSCA did in fact come to the conclusion of a conspiracy while simultaneously exonerating the CIA, FBI, SS, etc as organizations on the whole. The primary evidence upon which the HSCA based their conclusion may no longer hold up, but it is a simple example of how a conspiracy can exist consiting of overlapping factions of groups in question. All it really takes is just two to make a conspiracy.
If people can take one thing away from this thread, I hope it is that the overlap of the mafia, CIA, and anti-Castro groups are what need to analyzed, and where much of the evidence has been witheld from investigators.
Try this one:
Lee Harvey Oswald may have been the lone assassin responsible for the death of President John F. Kennedy.
Nice. 
And your reasoning is because the "official story" says Oswald was a leftist?
I thought you wanted a complete investigation! 
"The suspect had an extensive rap sheet, but nothing apparent was related to shootings or killings"
True. His rap sheet did not contain incidents of violence.
" Is it possible that the Dal-Tex building suspect was, nevertheless, adept at acting as a trained sniper, and the fact that this was not part of his rap sheet made him an ideal candidate to participate in a conspiracy to kill the president?"
So, now you're saying that since the had no record of violence OR any history of being a "trained sniper", then that makes him a suspect...as a trained sniper?
So, if I've never cooked anything, by your logic I could actually be a world-class chef?
It's this kind of logic that makes CTers sound irrational...
Please will you tell us?
Go ahead, tell us how many witnesses weren't interviewed and what stories that had to tell that bears interviewing.
No crying now!
Plus potty mouths are a turn-on...
You peddling the notion that someone must read the report to be somehow informed in order to realize how ridiculous the idea of the magic bullet is ridiculous, stopbush.
The Warren Commission says this bullet caused seven wounds, including broken bones, in two men.
The Best Evidence Against the SBT
EXCERPT...
According to the Warren Commission, one bullet caused a perforating wound in the President's neck. The same bullet then went on to perforate the chest and wrist of Texas Governor John Connally and finish up in the Governor's left thigh. This single bullet (often called the "Magic Bullet"
continued its charmed existence by, according to the Warren Commission, dropping out of the Governor's thigh, being found and identified, being proved as causing all seven wounds and being ballistically matched to a rifle found in the TSBD. The other two shots/bullets that the Warren Commission would accept had fragmented, one when it hit JFK's head and one when it hit the curb near James Tague. So, once the bullet, Commission Exhibit 399 (CE 399) was matched to the rifle, it had to be the single bullet. If that bullet had been found anywhere at the scene of the crime or the hospital it would have had to be the single bullet. If the bullet had been found in Ladybird Johnson's handbag, inscribed with Hoover's signature, it would still have had to be the single bullet. That's the ridiculous mess that the Warren Commission was tying itself up in. The Warren Commission had no choice. Regardless of the condition of CE 399 and regardless of where it was found, it had to be the bullet that caused all seven wounds to JFK and Connally.
Why do you spend so many hours peddling the falsehood that the Warren Report is valid, stopbush? Are you a lone nut buff?
It was a telling moment:
Poppy Bush brought up JFK Assassination and ''Conspiracy Theorists'' at Ford Funeral
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3029417
Poppy smirks or laughs or grins at the moment he says "deluded gunman" near the 1:09 mark:
George H.W. Bush’s Eulogy for Gerald R. Ford
The New York Times
Published: January 2, 2007
Following is the transcript of the eulogy for former President Gerald R. Ford delivered today by former President George H.W. Bush in Washington, as recorded by The New York Times.
EXCERPT…
After a deluded gunman assassinated President Kennedy, our nation turned to Gerald Ford and a select handful of others to make sense of that madness. And the conspiracy theorists can say what they will, but the Warren Commission report will always have the final definitive say on this tragic matter. Why? Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford’s word was always good.
A decade later, when scandal forced a vice president from office, President Nixon turned to the minority leader in the House to stabilize his administration because of Jerry Ford’s sterling reputation for integrity within the Congress. To political ally and adversary alike, Jerry Ford’s word was always good.
SOURCE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/washington/02cnd-ford-ghwb.html
PS: Of course, to Gerald Ford Warren Commission skeptics presented "no problem."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3772251
PPS: What's even more telling is how there are still people interested in scrubbing the assassination record of any reference to Poppy.
PPPS: For those interested, background...
Know your BFEE: Poppy Bush was in Dallas the day JFK was assassinated.
the one lone shooter. Did they actually say that President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy? I don't think they did. Plus on Charlie Rose they offered no theory on what they thought actually happened. 
Fifty years, this November 22. They carry it in their hearts. People who believe justice has not been served in the assassination also share the weight.
Going from the news Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rory Kennedy conveyed about their father's thinking, where they revealed he was aware of the connections between organized crime and Jack Ruby:
I wonder if Attorney General Kennedy was aware on that very day of the assassination someone sent by CIA deputy director of plans Richard Helms to meet with a man recruited to assassinate Fidel Castro had been instructed to convey that the meeting was sanctioned by President Kennedy and the attorney general.
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT: AN INTRODUCTION
(Chapter VII of Deep Politics II: Oswald, Mexico, and Cuba)
Peter Dale Scott
EXCERPT...
The AMLASH 1963 Project as a CIA Revolt Against Presidential Policy
Much has been written (albeit inconclusively) about Robert Kennedy's angry reaction on learning that the CIA had used Giancana in an operation, how he ordered CIA in May 1962 to clear such operations in future with the Justice Department, and how the CIA failed to do so.(28) The Democratically-controlled Church Committee assembled much evidence on the question of Bobby Kennedy's knowledge but was inconclusive. We shall soon see that the issue is an important one. From my own reading of the evidence I would conclude:
1. Robert Kennedy (and probable his brother John) had known of these plots from as early as May 22, 1961, if not earlier.(29)
2. It is possible, if not certain, that both Kennedys, although not officially informed of these assassination plots, continued by their non-intervention to tolerate them, up to March 1963.(30)
3. After March 1963, and particularly after a new Cuban policy memorandum of April 21, 1963, the Kennedys neither knew of nor sanctioned by silence such plots. On the contrary, Bobby's Justice Department warned on March 30 it would crack down hard on Cuban exile activities launched from U.S. territory. And a new set of Presidential policy options explored in April and May led to the reasonable finding, by a committee of the National Security Council that U.S. interests were not likely to be served by Castro's death.(31)
This does not seem to have deterred the CIA. On the contrary, the ClA's conduct of the Cubela (GOULASH) operation in late 1963, unambiguously, has the earmarks of a hostile revolt against Presidential authority and policy.
SNIP...
This first coincidence of dates may have been fortuitous. Less excusable is the unauthorized decision of Richard Helms and Desmond FitzGerald to have FitzGerald present himself to Cubela on October 29 as a personal representative of Robert Kennedy, especially since FitzGerald proceeded to discuss an assassination plot against Castro which the Kennedys almost certainly knew nothing about. October 29 was just five days after the President had met personally with Jean Daniel, and given him a personal message to transmit to Fidel Castro. Robert Kennedy had just authorized the Attwood accommodation initiative from which the CIA was being excluded. Crudely put, Helms and FitzGerald chose unilaterally to represent Robert Kennedy, precisely at a time when they could not know what he wanted, or was up to: a time when there was a distinction and potential divergence between CIA and Kennedy interests.
That the CIA was well aware of this distinction was unconsciously revealed in 1976 by FitzGerald's assistant Samuel Halpern. Halpern was deposed by the Schweiker-Hart Subcommittee, who had learned that two senior CIA officers had counseled FitzGerald against the security risk of a personal meeting with Cubela. Halpern discounted the danger that the FitzGerald-Cubela meeting "exposed the CIA to possible embarrassment, because Fitzgerald had not used his real name and, therefore, AMLASH would have been unable to identify Fitzgerald as a CIA officer."
38)
Only Robert Kennedy would be embarrassed, in other words. This indeed would seem to be the most rational intention of such an unprofessional and disloyal meeting. Both Kennedys were lending support to explorations which promised (or alternatively, threatened) to lead to an accommodation with Castro. Those initiatives could only be harmed by FitzGerald's discussion of assassinating Castro with a suspected leaker or double-agent, while claiming to be a representative of Robert Kennedy.
The same Samuel Halpern has argued that the CIA, far from being disloyal to Robert Kennedy in this operation, had in fact gained his explicit approval informally. In the words of John Davis,
Since Kennedy and FitzGerald often met socially and at work, there was no need for formal authorization. The attorney general's approval could just as easily have been conveyed informally and be far less risky for all concerned. This opinion was confirmed by former CIA official, Samuel Halpern, who in 1963 had been executive assistant to the Task Force on Cuba and one of the four men directly involved in the AM/LASH operation. In an interview on November 18, 1983, Mr. Halpern told me that he was absolutely certain that 'Des" FitzGerald "had full authorization from Attorney General Kennedy and President Kennedy to proceed with the AM/LASH plot against Castro," adding that he always felt that since they often met socially, Bobby Kennedy and "Des" FitzGerald conducted most of their business together at Washington cocktail parties and receptions, rather than in their respective offices.(39)
There is a germ of truth underlying this false allegation. Robert Kennedy had indeed authorized the AMTRUNK political operation which the IG Report relates to the AMLASH (Cubela) initiative. AMTRUNK was an ambitious attempt to promote a military coup within Cuba, using assets such as Major Ramon Guin whom Cubela contacted (IG Report, 86). As Helms rightly testified to the Church Committee in 1975, he "had pre-existing authority to deal with AM/LASH regarding 'a change of government' (as opposed to assassination)."
40)
But Halpern and Davis seem to have missed the point: namely, that FitzGerald and Helms never presented the Cubela initiative to their superiors as an assassination operation. It is indeed likely, almost certain, that the CIA had authorization to proceed with the political initiative. But that it had authorization to involve Robert Kennedy's name and authority in an assassination plot with a notorious leaker, at a time when the Kennedys were attempting to open discussions with Castro, is virtually unimaginable. Both Fitzgerald and Helms later denied that the AMLASH operation contemplated assassination.(4l) It seems clear that Kennedy's authorization for AMLASH would have been limited to what they described it as. an attempt to find a group to replace Castro.
CONTINUED...
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/the_critics/scott/IG_Report.html
Thank you, triplepoint, for the very interesting videos and information. I've been going through them over the past few days and am amazed at the various levels of complexity in the crime, cover-up, and search for truth. I very much appreciate that you have stood up for justice. A most hearty welcome to DU!
How come I never see you criticize the BFEE in your journal?
You think the assassination is funny?
Obviously, as you can see by response #10, you are NOT A DEMOCRAT!
a member of the British Columbia Marijuana Party! His avatar looks stoned! 
SCTV!! 
Didn't you know that?
Just as you are misguided about the assassination.
JFK assassination=
You=
-- Inaugural Address of John F. Kennedy, Friday, January 20, 1961
So, in the short time he had, President Kennedy did what he could to balance the interests of concentrated wealth with the interests of the average American -- necessary for the good of the country.
Professor Donald Gibson detailed the issues in his 1994 book, Battling Wall Street: The Kennedy Presidency.
From the book:
"What (J.F.K. tried) to do with everything from global investment patterns to tax breaks for individuals was to re-shape laws and policies so that the power of property and the search for profit would not end up destroying rather than creating economic prosperity for the country."
-- Donald Gibson, Battling Wall Street. The Kennedy Presidency
More on the book, by two great Americans:
"Gibson captures what I believe to be the most essential and enduring aspect of the Kennedy presidency. He not only sets the historical record straight, but his work speaks volumes against today's burgeoning cynicism and in support of the vision, ideal, and practical reality embodied in the presidency of John F. Kennedy - that every one of us can make a difference." -- Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, Chair, House Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs
"Professor Gibson has written a unique and important book. It is undoubtedly the most complete and profound analysis of the economic policies of President Kennedy. From here on in, anyone who states that Kennedy was timid or status quo or traditional in that field will immediately reveal himself ignorant of Battling Wall Street. It is that convincing." -- James DiEugenio, author, Destiny Betrayed. JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Had he lived to serve a second term, I'd bet on JFK over The Fed.
It's not just a case of politics, it's integrity:
Do you think President John F. Kennedy would have fallen for the phony intelligence stating North Vietnam attacked U.S. warships in the Gulf of Tonkin?
I think not.
--------------------------------
Analysis Casts Doubt on Vietnam War Claims
By CALVIN WOODWARD
The Associated Press
Friday, December 2, 2005; 5:31 AM
WASHINGTON -- Another war, another set of faulty intelligence findings behind it.
Forty years before the United States invaded Iraq believing Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, it widened a war in Vietnam apparently convinced the enemy had launched an unprovoked attack on two U.S. Navy destroyers.
Papers declassified by the National Security Agency point to a series of bungled intelligence findings on the purported clash in the Gulf of Tonkin that led Congress to endorse President Johnson's escalation of the Vietnam conflict in August 1964.
Among the documents released Thursday is an article written by NSA historian Robert J. Hanyok for the agency's classified publication, Cryptologic Quarterly. In it, he declares that his review of the complete intelligence shows beyond doubt "no attack happened that night."
Claims that North Vietnamese boats attacked two U. S. Navy destroyers on Aug. 4, 1964 _ just two days after an initial assault on one of those ships _ rallied Congress behind Johnson's build-up of the war. The so-called Gulf of Tonkin resolution passed three days later empowered him to take "all necessary steps" in the region and opened the way for large-scale commitment of U.S. forces.
CONTINUED...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/02/AR2005120200206_pf.html
--------------------------------
Here's the National Security Action Memorandum in which he signed orders to pull U.S. forces out of Vietnam:
Text copy and details:
http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM263.html
--------------------------------
Here's the National Security Action Memorandum in which his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, countermanded JFK's orders. It stated the U.S. would extend whatever help needed to the government of South Vietnam.
Text version and details:
http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html
--------------------------------
No wonder LBJ and J Edgar Hoover hoisted the phony Warren Commission on America: War is good business.
Just like today.
Thank you for your important observation, nyquil_man. It also raises many important questions about authority, power and governance after the assassination.
At least you're honest!
Being smart doesn't mean you can't be wrong.
by James Ellroy
http://www.amazon.com/American-Tabloid-Novel-James-Ellroy/dp/037572737X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1358302817&sr=1-1&keywords=american+tabloid
one of my top 5 books
this thread made me think of it, b/c thats one of the main plot points: they told Bobby after
makes no claim to anything other than fiction, but its a damn good story that explores a 'possibility'. historical fiction, the cast of characters covers them all: Hoover, Hoffa, Marcello, Howard Hughes, Ruby, Trafficante, Giancana, etc. etc.
if youre into that sort of thing
Last edited Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:15 PM - Edit history (1)
having a personal interest in these matters. Just a short time after publicly dismissing the notion.
(25-29 minutes or so into the clip below):
I'm glad they're taking this public now.
***
Re-posted from the Latest Breaking News (Forum)
BTW below is the first part of Lisa's interview:
in a piece I linked in another thread...
His eyes were opened. I continued to correspond with him for a time, and sent him a copy of Carl Bernstein’s underreported essay, published in an October 1977 issue of Rolling Stone, titled, “The CIA and the Media.” In the article Bernstein elaborated on the formal and informal relationships the CIA had with all the major media, from CBS to the New York Times, from upper management to the individual reporters and stringers at home and around the world.
During the Church and Pike committee investigations of the media, this was the most sensitive piece - the CIA’s relationship with the media. It was the one thing the CIA fought to keep from the investigators. They gave up their Castro and Lumumba assassination plots but they would not reveal the names of their media assets, to the chagrin of the Congressional investigators.
In later years, CIA documents spoke openly of how the CIA controlled all the mainstream media in this country, and how that control had helped turn some CIA failures into success stories, or how other stories had been discredited or nipped in the bud...
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?p=235749#p235749
Wait, what? CIA and the Media? Sounds like a lousy Conspiracy "Theory."
Come to think of it Watergate, uncovered by Carl Bernstein, entailed a Conspiracy too. So that's probably not true either.
BTW Octafish, you're lucky to have some 'diligent' DUers follow you from thread-to-thread. How else could you disabused of these crazy conspiracies?
Indeed...
WOO WOO!
I give this thread five tinfoilhats out of five.
WOO WOO!
I give your post 4 out of 5 tinfoilhats.
WOO WOO!
I give it 3 tinfoilhats, and 2 googley eyes.
I only give your journal two tinfoilhats and a googly eyes:
A better question is-why should your complete and utter bullshit go unchallenged?
It's a discussion board...why all the crying when people don't buy your snake oil?
WOOF WOOF!
I'VE never understood why some people want to make a big deal out of the well-earned suspicions most of us have on the matter.
It's starting to look, well, suspicious! :
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1813/Most-Americans-Believe-Oswald-Conspired-Others-Kill-JFK.aspx
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-584668.html
If there was a conspiracy, the perpetrators got away with the crime and, thus, are at large.
The possibility also exists that those who arranged and benefited from the crime are still alive and, thus, deserve prosecution.
The fact that so few in authority, apart from Jim Garrison and a handful of others, have tried to bring justice speaks volumes about legislative courage and the nature of real power in the United States.
Thank you, Kurovski, for the info on the polling. Interesting how our elected representatives suffer another seeming disconnect from the interests of the People. I truly appreciate you standing up and being counted, way back when.
PS: Remember this one from DU2?
Even a collection of your posts over the years on DU in some published form whether hard back, paper back, or kindle would be much appreciated. Hmmm wonder if a kindle book could be written with 'links' ... connected to the internet to expand on more info in the book. You could be the first !!! That would be great !!! Ha, all the best and thanks for your work over the years. Peace.
But that's ok. You can go on pretending you don't know what I mean and I will continue to sincerely be indifferent to your doing so.
Carry on.
A difference that simply wasn't there.
Here, look at this picture of Kennedy and Connally in the limo, do you see any offset between JFK and Connally?
Looks like Connally's shoulder is hard against the side of the vehicle, ie he is seated directly in front of Kennedy. But let's do a bit more digging.
This is picture of the limo in question after it was first purchased.
You can clearly see that the jump seat in question was constructed so as be right next to the wall of the vehicle, not offset into the center. Again, we see that Connally would be seated directly in front of JFK.
But let's take another look at something else, the bullet itself
Now tell me, how does a bullet, one that has smashed through solid bone, tough flesh and sinew, come out on the other side with absolutely no hint of mushrooming or other disfiguration? Have you ever done any hunting? Bullets that smash through bone are distinctly deformed, yet this one is pristine. How did that happen?
As far as Bugliosi and his book goes, many people have criticized him for taking some serious liberties with the evidence, many people who actually do believe the fiction known as the Warren Report. He played fast and loose with the evidence, and if something didn't fit his preconceived notion, he either manipulated that evidence until it fit his preconceived theory, or simply ignored it. He writes in a snarky, self congratulatory manner. Worse, he throws everything up against the wall in order to see if something sticks, ie something he can attack. Hell, the man cooks up JFK being shot by SS agent George Hickey, then promptly tears it down. I've never, ever heard of anybody speculating that Hickey killed JFK, but by tearing apart a paper tiger of his own creation, time and again, Bugliosi thinks this makes him look serious, a man with some gravitas. And he does this time and again for 1,600 agonizing pages.
Look, if it somehow restores your faith in humanity and the universe to believe in the Warren Commission Report, fine. Feel free to stick your head in the sand. But the rest of us are going to continue questioning the official story, because the simple fact of the matter is that the official story simply isn't plausible.
The bullet DID NOT "smash through" the bone.
Here's an x-ray of Connally's wrist that was provided by Octafish in yet another JFK thread from last November. Please tell me where the "smashed through" bone is in this x-ray. I see lead fragments in the bone and a break in the bone below said fragments. Those fragments pinpoint where the bullet impacted Connally's wrist. Smashed-through bone? Hardly:
A photo shot by Dallas photographer Duane Robinson of the limo on Cedar Creek, published in Paris Match. Connally is CLEARLY sitting inboard from the side of the limo. Notice how JFK's arm extends onto the outer edge of the limo while Connally's arm is contained entirely within the limo:
James Altgen's photo of the limo rounding the corner of Main and Houston. Check out the relative heights of Kennedy and Connally:
A frame from an amateur movie shot by presidential aide Dave Powers that went missing and was rediscovered 33 years later. Connally is clearly seated inboard from the limo door (Source: CNN):
A picture of the limo after it was returned to DC. The relative heights of the rear and jump seats are clearly seen:
Whose vision needs checking?
Typical.
This thread has you dodging and ducking more than usual.
Off topic...who do you like this weekend in the playoffs?
I'm leaning to the Patriots and the Niners...
Have a great weekend with friends and family, Octafish!
They must be discouraged, for their world is crumbling by the second.
Or they just enjoy assuming their position.
The JFK Assassination:
A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes
by Vincent J. Salandria
Thank you, Dr. Gary Aguilar, and the other members of the Coalition on Political Assassinations for affording me this privilege. I accepted your invitation because I feel that the point of view for which I and thousands of unsung others have stood for thirty-five years is important. I believe that for us to be free to work for a more decent society we must come to accept the point of view which I will now explain.
For one half of my seventy years, from almost the very date of the assassination, I have been convinced that the killing of President Kennedy was a patent Cold War killing --- the bloody work of the U.S. military-intelligence system and its supporting civilian power elite.
For us to allow thirty-five years to pass, while debate rages on the subject, is not only an abdication of the required work of a democratic citizenry, but the debate itself actively serves the interests of the assassins. Such debate masks the damage done to the constitutional structure by the extra-constitutional firing of the President.
To understand fully the nature of the assassination and its coverup one has to view it from an historical perspective. We must look back at least to the year 1898 to examine the militarizing of this country --- a process which eventually led to President Kennedy's assassination.
In 1898 President William McKinley, pursuant to a congressional resolution, authorized the use of United States armed forces to engage the Spanish forces in Cuba. This congressional resolution was followed by a declaration of war against Spain. This splendid little war led the way to an American Empire built upon the strength of the U.S. military. We acquired through this imperialistic effort Puerto Rico, and the Philippine Islands, and we subjected Cuba to a semi-colonial status.
Those conquests failed to satiate our hunger for empire. In the continuing quest to expand our imperialist power we truncated democracy in our nation. Political reform efforts of the progressive period were abandoned. Our oligarchs saw the acquisition of an empire as a means of diverting the American people from the struggle for political reform.
CONTINUED...
http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/27th_issue/vs_text.html
Thank you for the Rec, H2O Man. I very much appreciate you standing up to the kennel and its keepers.
with laughter.
"I believe the Kennedys are going to soon tell the full story and reveal other information..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=206529
Too funny!
Oh, and just to be clear since, like a broken record, I fully expect our friend to say I "find the assassination funny"..
JFK assassination =
Octafish and his "theories" =
For some reason, President Kennedy's motorcade turned from Main Street on to Elm Street, a turn of around 120-degrees that made the President's car slow down and giving his assassins an ideal position for ambush. It also changed the course of the motorcade to pass directly in front of Lee Harvey Oswald's last place of employment, the Texas School Book Depository.
This has a major parallel in history that seldom, if ever, gets mentioned: the assassination by ambush in 1942 of the Nazi leader Reinhard Heydrich, the Butcher of Prague and a principal architect of The Holocaust.
A 120-degree turn in the road slowed down Heydrich's car, giving his assassins an ideal position for ambush.
Oliver Stone raised this aspect in his film, "JFK" when Jim Garrison, portrayed by Kevin Kostner, says, "This was a military-style ambush from start to finish... a coup d'etat with Lyndon Johnson waiting in the wings."
It takes a platoon leader to see these things. A hairpin turn is an ideal spot for an ambush. The tactic works for removing a tyrant or a president.
Another parallel: Both men rode in open cars in hostile country.
Almost forgot to mention: Thanks to DU, this remarkable parallel between the assassination of President Kennedy and that of the NAZI Heydrich has almost been lost to history. I learned about this in researching a reply to a post above.
Did you know that the JFK assassination shares some traits with the Lincoln assassination?
Both presidents last names have 7 letters!
Both presidents shot on a Friday!
Both presidents shot in the head!
Both president were warned not to go to the place they were assassinated!
Both successors were named Johnson!
Andrew Johnson was born in 1808, while LBJ was born in 1908!
Booth was born in 1839, while Oswald was born in 1939!
Both assassins names had 15 letters!
Booth and Oswald were killed before their trials!
Isn't that amazing!!!!!!!!
The route for the motorcade was NOT changed. it was announced in all of the local newspapers days before the event.
Printed descriptions of the motorcade route were published in both Dallas newspapers on Nov. 19. Maps of the route were published by the Dallas Times-Herald in their Nov 21 evening edition, and in the morning edition of the Dallas Morning News on Nov 22. Both maps reflect EXACTLY the description of the motorcade route that appeared in their Nov 19 editions.
THERE. WERE. NO. CHANGES.
Here's the printed announcement of the motorcade route as published in the Dallas Morning News on Nov 19:
.
.
.
Here's the announcement from the Nov 19 edition of the Dallas Times-Herald :
.
.
.
Congrats! You've moved from mere speculation to outright - and easily refuted - lies.
You and your CT buds must be proud!
Go right ahead!
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jimlie.htm
more?
Discussing Garrison's cameo appearance in Oliver Stone's JFK (portraying Chief Justice Earl Warren), longtime researcher Paul Hoch writes, "Unintentionally, this is not just an ironic touch: the actions of both men did much to discourage or co-opt other investigations." Hoch quotes David Lifton, author of the conspiracy book Best Evidence (and who worked alongside Garrison for a time), as calling Garrison "intellectually dishonest, a reckless prosecutor, and a total charlatan." 4)
"Jim Garrison was one of the biggest frauds that ever came down the pike," Lifton said in an August 6, 1995, e-mail to Gary Aguilar. "He prosecuted innocent people, did an enormous disservice to the movement, and when the jury acquitted Shaw, it was 'good riddance.'"
Hoch and Lifton express the way most conspiracy theorists felt about Garrison prior to his Oliver Stone-fueled "comeback."
http://www.jfk-online.com/ctsonjg.html
wait, there's more?
CT Sylvia Meagher:
. . as the Garrison investigation continued to unfold, it gave cause for increasingly serious misgivings about the validity of his evidence, the credibility of his witnesses, and the scrupulousness of his methods. The fact that many critics of the Warren Report have remained passionate advocates of the Garrison investigation, even condoning tactics which they might not condone on the part of others, is a matter of regret and disappointment (Accessories After the Fact, 1992 ed., 456-7).
More?
CT Harold Weisberg:
as an investigator, Jim Garrison could not find a pubic hair in a whorehouse at rush hour" (Robert Sam Anson, "The Shooting of JFK," Esquire, November 1991; reprinted in Oliver Stone and Zachary Sklar, JFK: The Book of the Film, 221). "Garrison was a tragedy," Weisberg wrote in a letter in 1998.
Guess that's it...oh wait!
"[Oswald] was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency and was obviously drawn into a scapegoat situation and made to believe ultimately that he was penetrating the assassination. And then when the time came, they took the scapegoat ... and killed him real quick. And then the machinery, disinformation machinery, started turning and they started making a villain out of a man who genuinely was probably a hero."
- Jim Garrison
Was Oswald "probably a hero", Octafish?
Jim Garrison was a hero:
Garrison's Case Finally Coming Together
by Martin Shackelford
Fair Play No. 25
In 1969, government secrecy severely hampered the investigation by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison into the assassination of President Kennedy. Today, with the documents released under the JFK Records Act, some of that secrecy has crumbled, and elements of Garrison's case look stronger today than in 1969.
Perry Raymond Russo, the key witness who described conspiratorial conversations including the defendant Clay Shaw and the deceased David Ferrie, maintained the veracity of his testimony until his death in 1995.
The case was sabotaged, however, by Garrison's inability to establish supporting claims that David Ferrie had long known Lee Harvey Oswald, and that Clay Shaw was connected to the CIA. There is no longer any doubt that both of these claims are true.
As late as 1993, with the publication of Gerald Posner's book Case Closed, Garrison's critics were denying that David Ferrie was in the Civil Air Patrol in New Orleans at the same time at Oswald (the mid-1950s), despite contrary witness testimony. Shortly after the publication of Posner's book, however, the PBS news program "Frontline" located two photographs showing Ferrie and Oswald together at a CAP barbecue; one, shown on the program "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?," has since been widely published. In addition, former Deputy Counsel Robert Tanenbaum of the House Select Committee on Assassinations has stated that his staff located a film showing Oswald and Ferrie at an anti-Castro training camp near New Orleans in the summer of 1963.
Clay Shaw's connections to the Central Intelligence Agency are now thoroughly documented. Though he told reporters he was in the Medical Corps during World War Two, documents show that he worked for an Army Counterintelligence group called the Special Operations Section. His military record remains classified. In Europe, he became involved with a Rome-based CIA front organization, the Centro Mondiale Commerciale. Between 1948 and 1956, he filed reports with the CIA's Domestic Contact Division, and provided documents to the Foreign Documents Division.
SNIP...
A September 1977 memo written by HSCA staff counsel Jonathan Blackmer concluded: "We have reason to believe Shaw was heavily involved in the anti-Castro efforts in New Orleans in the 1960s and possibly one of the high-level planners or 'cut out' to the planners of the assassination."
SOURCE:
http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/25th_Issue/shaw.html
As for Oswald, I don't know if he was a hero in all this or not. He did say he was a "patsy" accused of a crime he did not commit, but then he was shot dead while in police custody. So, likely we will never hear his side of the story.
Have you ever done anything heroic, zappaman? Be honest.
If your standard of "heroism" is Jim Garrison, then no I haven't done anything heroic.
You have a warped view of "heroism", Octafish.
Also, unlike Jim Garrison, I'm not batshit crazy either...
Among the many journalists who talked to Jim Garrison -- and listened to Garrison's crackpot statements, was Hugh Aynesworth. William Broyles' article "The Man Who Saw Too Much" (in the March 1976 issue of the Texas Monthly) records some of Aynesworth's experiences with Garrison. Quoting Aynesworth:
"I had just started with Newsweek back in 1967, and Jim Garrison called and invited me over to New Orleans to compare notes. He started showing me all this stuff from all the kooks I knew back in ’63 and ’64, plus some new, obviously kooky stuff. I kept saying, ‘No, that’s not the way it was. I was there.’ He’d put his head back and fix me that General Walker stare and say, ‘You don’t understand.’ Then he’d run off and shout some chess move into the phone. After he’d done that a couple of times, I asked him what was going on. ‘That’s the code!’ he said. ‘The Feebies’ -- that’s what he called the FBI -- ‘will never break it.’ I was beginning to understand. Then he suddenly looked up and said he had to take his kids out to play, because he only had an hour before noon. So I asked him why couldn't the kids play after noon. My kids do it all the time. ‘There’s a torpedo from Miami after me,’ Garrison said with that General Walker stare again. ‘Everybody knows they sleep 'til noon.’ Oh, yeah. He was something. He was planning to arrest Bobby Kennedy if he came to New Orleans. He was paranoid as hell, but he was no fool."
http://web.archive.org/web/20010630150734/http://www.texasmonthly.com/archive/manwhosaw/manwhosaw.1.html
Oswald said he was a "patsy"?!!!!!
Stop the presses! A criminal says he's innocent!
That the best you got, Octafish?
tell us again when the Kennedy family will reveal all?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240206426#post28
"I believe the Kennedys are going to soon tell the full story and reveal other information and evidence that has been hinted at in recent months."
Either way, people should have gone to jail. Yet, nothing happened.
Here's physical evidence for the latter: Videotape shot at Love Field on November 22, 1963 clearly shows Secret Service Agent Donald Lawton holding up his arms thrice in the classic "What the heck?" gesture. The video also shows SS agent Emory P. Roberts standing up in the follow-up car to order Lawton* off the presidential limousine's back bumper, leaving the president unprotected from behind. President Kennedy was murdered a few minutes later.
Video: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/171830/secret_service_jfk /
From Vince Palamara:
An important discovery was made by this correspondent during review of video of the Dallas trip shot by the ABC television affiliate in that city. During the start of the fatal motorcade at Love Field, Secret Service agent Don Lawton begins to jog alongside the presidential limousine. He is immediately called back by his shift leader and commander of the follow-up car detail, Emory P. Roberts.
Lawton's dismay and confusion is made manifest by his unambiguous body language: He throws up his arms several times before, during and after the follow-up car passes him. He was not being allowed to do his job -- and it was not JFK who was ordering the stand-down.
Despite the discovery by this correspondent of three reports to the contrary (two by Roberts) written on November 22, 1963, this newly discovered photographic evidence confirms that frustrated and vocal-in-his-objections Rybka did not enter the follow-up car and was left behind at the airport.
Afterward, in William Manchester's book, Death of a President, we see the "official story" of what happened:
"Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library edition, pp. 37-38)
For the record: PRESIDENT KENNEDY NEVER SAID THAT.
SOURCE:
Agents Go On Record Yet, someone in a position of authority was interested in creating that impression.
* Previously, the man in the photo was incorrectly identified as Secret Service agent Henry J. Rybka. According to records, he also was ordered to stay off the car and remain at Love Field. Much "chatter" arose over the misidentification. Of course, were it not for someone preserving the videotape, few would ever know anything about this important evidence for conspiracy.
You owe me a new meter...
You just accused me of making up your Oswald statement and I quoted it and linked to it.
Now you just act like you didn't say it?
So, that is an acknowledgement I was telling the truth about you and your sad statement?
Thanks...apology accepted!
So get back to us when you decide whether or not Oswald is a hero.
Does it bother you?
Obviously, I never said it cuz you can't link to it!
Wow. Octafish just makes things up!
Who would have thought!
"You spam: "So, when did you stop beating your wife?" "
I guess you can't find a link for me saying that, eh?
Just another thing you've made up I suppose...
"an above-average shooter" when compared to his fellow Marines and "an exceptional shot" when compared to a civilian without Marine training in firearms.
The USMC also testified that the shots Oswald took were "not difficult" considering his expertise as a shooter. He was, after all, classified as a Sharpshooter while in the USMC.
What makes you say there was "a weird angle" to the head shot? There was no such thing. This was the view Oswald had from the sniper's nest on the 6th floor of the TSBD:
I would suggest that your inabilities as a shooter have nothing to do with Oswald's expertise as a shooter.
stopbush: "I would suggest that your inabilities as a shooter have nothing to do with Oswald's expertise as a shooter."
What the experts who disagree with the lone nut theory have to say about Dale Myers, the computer history generator guy.
BTW, this is the view from the TSBD if the Secret Service had stayed on the car:
But, they were ordered off at Love Field.
PS: The agent throwing up his hands in apparent disgust upon being ordered off the bumper at Love Field was Donald J. Lawton, not Henry J. Rybka as originally identified.
Last edited Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:27 AM - Edit history (1)
The FBI destroyed evidence -- obstructed justice -- when Special Agent James P. Hosty destroyed a note wriiten by Lee Harvey Oswald and left at the Dallas FBI office 13 days before the assassination of President Kennedy. A secretary who received the note from Oswald read it and told the House Select Committee on Assassinations that it contained a threat to blow up the FBI in Dallas. In her words, Oswald's "letter" read: ("I will either blow up the Dallas Police Department and the FBI office." . Hosty said its contents were of a "non-violent" nature, directed toward him because he had interviewed Marina Oswald when Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't home.
The FBI destroying this note is just one of many examples of important information that the FBI excluded from reporting to the Warren Commission. Other government agencies also withheld important information from the Warren Commission include the Secret Service and the CIA.
What was in the note Hosty destroyed upon hearing Oswald was dead? Oswald could have been warning the FBI about the upcoming assassination. Because the FBI destroyed evidence, we probably will never know for certain what was really in the note. Oswald might have even been trying to do something heroic. That, you wouldn't know, zappaman.
You're a good authority! 
"disinformation"?
Well, since you spread more bullshit...er...disinformation than anyone else on this site, I will accept your expert opinion on this matter!
Sid
I simply correct the record when the CT nuts openly lie about the evidence in the case.
I would think that well serves the discussion. For instance, when you yourself thanked me for providing links to the WCR that explained conclusively and in great detail who was in charge of deciding the Dallas motorcade route - when it was decided and who knew about it. There is nothing "NEW" to learn about who decided that route. We've known who decided on that route for 48 years. We know there was no change to that route once it was decided and released to the press on 11/18/63. There was nothing "NEW" in Jim Garrison announcing that he had discovered that the motorcade route was changed at the last minute. That was simply another lie told by a serial liar.
Same thing with your constantly posting a photo of the limo and SS agents at Love Field with the screaming headline, "SS Called Off JFK's Limo," and "JFK Didn't Call SS Off Rear Step of Limo!!!' Yet we know from the testimony of those very SS agents to the WC that JFK had called them off that rear step as recently as JFK's motorcade in Tampa on 11/18/63, and that it was - in fact - a known "policy" that JFK did not want SS agents riding the rear bumper of the limo in crowd situations that mirror EXACTLY the crowd conditions they found in Dallas that day. We know from the WCR that SS Agent Hill rode on the rear step of JFK's limo at least FOUR TIMES during the motorcade through downtown Dallas. Which means that we know that the SS agents were NOT called off riding on the rear of the limo for the duration of the motorcade, that they did, indeed, absolutely and without question ride on the rear of the limo during the motorcade.
Think about it: for years, you have posted threads at DU with screaming headlines ("JFK Didn't Order Bubble Top Removed!!!" that exhibit total ignorance of the evidence in the case that has been available to the public for 48 years. 48 YEARS! Yes, JFK didn't order the bubble top off his limo. It was his top aide Kenneth O'Donnell who ordered it removed. It's in the WCR. It's been in the WCR for nearly 5 decades. What is there "NEW" to learn about who ordered the bubble top removed?
THERE. IS. NOTHING. NEW. TO. LEARN. HERE.
BTW - nobody interested in the JFK killing can be considered to be "tops in their search for the truth" if they are ignorant of what is contained in the WCR. Even the most-rabid JFK CT author is held hostage to the evidence contained in the WCR, because 1. it is the only set of forensic evidence in the case, and 2. none of them has ever had the opportunity to personally examine the physical/forensic evidence in the case. Even the CTist hell bent on dismissing the WCR cannot do so unless they are knowledgeable about the evidence, even if their eventual gambit is to misrepresent said evidence.
The audacity of people who have no problem criticizing something they have never read is as stunning as it is infantile. No more so than in this case which is - for all the CTist's bluster - a simple case of murder.
Consider the link between Vietnam and Gulf War II.
War for profit. War for power.
Rich get richer. The rest of us get penured.
And the NAZIs? Forgeddaboudem.
PS: A lot of those links contain busted links. Anyone interested in learning more can plug the names and events into the GOOGLE and be amazed at the vital stories Corporate McPravda, let alone academia, seem to have missed.
PPS: Thank you infinitely for your post, Judi Lynn.
PPPS: Have you met my official mascot?
It's Dude the Wrestling Chihuaha™.
You can thank your hero, Lee Harvey Oswald, for assassinating JFK and helping to put these things into motion.
Keep digging!
Seen my official mascot?
It's you, my friend, and your buddies hot on the trail!
The only guy on DU who thinks Oswald may be a hero.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2232672
"As for Oswald, I don't know if he was a hero in all this or not."
..for putting more WOO in one response than all the other responses combined.
So, for that, I commend you.
So, when I answer the question (and the answer seems not to satisfy most who ask it) I try to isolate the Dallas plot and attack from other things being planned by different groups. And that leads me to Lee Oswald and the fact that Oswald had been manipulated for some sort of incident related to JFK on the East Coast, which was supposed to happen in September. The first report we had of that was from Richard Case Nagell, who offered it based on what he said was his personal observation of people recruiting Oswald while he was in New Orleans. Interesting on the face of it but even more so when we come up with two completely independent sources of corroboration...
But beyond that, we have something far more solid. We have a series of letters that Oswald wrote to the SWP and CPUSA about moving back to the East Coast, volunteering his services and even asking if he should “go underground”. Pretty incriminating stuff actually, not highlighted by the WC due to its rather explosive nature I suppose. Or perhaps because the WC also had to deal with Oswald’s manuscript written earlier – which expresses his total disgust with the CPUSA. Comparing the letters with the manuscript might have raised some dangerous questions about his real motives.
So….the first part of my answer to the question of when “it” started is – August in New Orleans, but with Washington D.C. as the venue and Oswald as the patsy. Which suggests that the plot for Dallas started once the D.C. action aborted and it became extremely likely that Lee would be in Dallas for the birth of his new baby daughter, during the same period in which the President would be traveling to Texas.
http://larryhancock.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/when-did-it-start/
In SWHT I give several examples of CIA domestic activities – ranging from the orchestration of the purchase of the first covert infiltration vessel going into Cuba by private citizens (the CIA did pay for modifications and operation of the vessel) to the mechanics of creating domestic mailing and residence backstops for agents serving overseas. Other examples range from installing a tape recorder for William Pawley in his office (and repairing it when it broke) to the interview of individuals coming back from Cuba (Gerry Hemming was even given a temporary low level classification during a period of some months for debriefing purposes). I go over a host of additional domestic activities in my covert warfare book including little things like briefing major American corporate business people before the operation in Guatemala, using corporate owned boats to move arms there for the coup and also using the same company to produce commercial covers for personnel doing logistics operations on the project. Fro the moment though, I thought I’d share a few examples form a long time CIA Clandestine Services officer. Henry A. Compton writes about his final years of service in The Art of Intelligence...
So, if you thought, as I once did many years ago, that the CIA only operated overseas or that it was very mysterious to find Clay Shaw (in a World Trade Center) as a CIA asset – not at all. In fact I’ve seen CIA documents relating to assets at other World Trade Centers including LA and San Francisco. When you think about it, it makes a lot of sense.
http://larryhancock.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/domestic-operations/
'Arrogant' CIA Disobeys Orders in Viet Nam
"If the United States ever experiences a 'Seven Days in May' it will come from the CIA, and not from the Pentagon," one U.S. official commented caustically.
("Seven Days in May" is a fictional account of an attempted military coup to take over the U.S. Government.)
One very high American official here, a man who has spent much of his life in the service of democracy, likened the CIA's growth to a malignancy, and added he was not sure even the White House could control it any longer.
posted by gary at 9:31 PM
Sid
Last edited Tue Feb 5, 2013, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)
Will the RFK Jr. interview w/Charlie Rose ever air?
On the evening of January 11th, Charlie Rose interviewed Robert Kennedy Jr. and his sister Rory in Dallas at the Winspear Opera House. This was part of Mayor Mike Rawlings hand chosen committee’s year long program of celebrating the life and presidency of John F. Kennedy. In fact, Rawlings introduced the program. He probably did not like how it turned out, for during this interview Kennedy Jr. said that his father thought the Warren Report was a “shoddy piece of craftsmanship” and he was “fairly convinced” that others were involved. Robert Jr. himself thought that the evidence in the JFK case, “…at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman.”
To my knowledge, this is the first time that a member of the Kennedy family has stated these sentiments in public. Kennedy Jr. went further and backed up the idea, widely held by many that RFK “publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it.” He added “He was a very meticulous attorney. He had gone over reports. He was an expert at examining issues and searching for the truth.” ...
Please contact Mayor Mike Rawlings and tell him that, in the interest of democracy, history, and proper journalism, it should be posted immediately.
Phone: 214-670-4054
Fax: 214-670-0646
Address: Dallas City Hall, 1500 Marilla Street, Room 5EN, Dallas Texas, 75201
or send an email to Chris Heinbaugh, Vice President of External Affairs | AT&T Performing Arts Center
http://www.ctka.net/2013/The_MSM_and_RFKJr.html
Btw, I actually missed this entirely, the interview, any notice of it, and this OP.
We have a standing member (whose name shall not be mentioned) to thank for posting an OP smearing RFK allowing the space to give this OP wider attention!
