Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
But, Jefferson Morley has suggested Mossad was tight with Angleton and wanted JFK out of the picture as the president opposed Israel's nuke program....so you know, Mossad is a serious suspect in the JFKA...

Just connect the dots.

Angleton, whose confidant, mentor, and mole-hunting superior, Bruce Solie, was probably a KGB mole, had the Israeli Account and was tight with MOSSAD.

That doesn't necessarily mean, however, that MOSSAD and/or Angleton killed JFK, despite what John M. Newman believed in 2008 before he'd read Tennet H. Bagley's 2007 book, Spy Wars: Moles, Mysteries, and Deadly Games (which you can STILL read for free by googling "spy wars" and "archive" simultaneously).

2
Joffrey van de Wiel:

I don't suspect the JFKAC was well-funded or backed by powerful people.

My guess is a couple of guys split off from G2, or possibly Alpha-66 (itself penetrated by G2), and conspired with or manipulated LHO (who had a propensity to shoot at major public figures---see General Walker) regarding the JFKA.

They got lucky on the motorcade route.

How much planning does it take to point rifles at the President and shoot? All three participants likely had military or para-military backgrounds. LHO did.

The GK smoke-and-bang show as a diversion in an interesting idea. A snub-nose .38, the default conceal-carry weapon of the day, would have served perfectly for such a role.

Caveat emptor, and draw your own concusions.
3

I could be wrong, but I don’t think there is any other photographic evidence that seems to clearly show a “back and to the left” JFK head movement. So, perhaps we might have avoided that controversy.

The Nix and Muchmore films show back motion from the head shot, so more people may believe in a frontal shot.



I think the SBT survives, but many of the witnesses heard 3 shots with the first being at Z-223 when both men react. Connally heard a rifle shot before they were both hit that many others missed. I suppose without Zapruder's film they would rely on Croft, Willis, and Altgens.







4
But, Jefferson Morley has suggested Mossad was tight with Angleton, and wanted JFK out of the picture as the president opposed Israel's nuke program....so you know, Mossad is a serious suspect in the JFKA...

Just connect the dots...
5
In an article published March 21 2025, by magazine Vanity Fair, JFKA researcher made this statement:

For his part, Morley, after reviewing the latest documents released, now believes that there is sufficient evidence to conclude definitively that the CIA had a role in JFK’s murder. He asserted, “A small clique in CIA counterintelligence was responsible for JFK’s assassination.”

He promised to back up his claim with documents from the recent batch and explanatory articles on his JFK Facts Substack.


Well? I suppose we can dance around the word "responsible." Semantics. To the layman, that suggests an element within the CIA planned and effected the JFKA, or knew of a potent plan to do that, and sat by idle.

But where is the evidence that a small clique in the CIA put some people on the ground in Dallas on 11.22.63, and they either assisted, or framed, LHO in the JFA?

There is evidence there was animosity inside the CIA towards JFK for the Bay of Pigs, and also for sacking the Diems in 11.63 (the brothers were brutally murdered in South Vietnam in a Kennedy Administration-financed coup. The CIA station in SV backed the Diems, but were overruled by JFK).

The Cuban exile community had many members who were deeply angered by the BoP, and said so in recorded video and tapes.

But...suspicions are a mile from having information that would compel someone to say, "A group within the CIA arranged for these two men, X and XX, to go to Dallas to help LHO wax JFK. I believe this beyond reasonable doubt."

It appears the CIA and domestic agencies were monitoring LHO in 1963---given his background and activities, I would expect that. It may even be they let him be "to see where he leads." Maybe they planned to use him in some capacity, if possible.

One must remember that at all times, these agencies have many fish to fry.

In 11.22, there was no indication LHO was dangerous, since the Walker shooting had not generated any leads.

It may also be that Russian mole Bruce Solie was gumming up the works inside the CIA re LHO.

In fact, there is evidence LHO was or had been a KGB asset and was friendly with G2.

If Morley has backed up his statement, I am all ears and will stand corrected.

Maybe he needs to confer with Vladimir Putin, first.
6
In an article published March 21 2025, by magazine Vanity Fair, JFKA researcher made this statement:

For his part, Morley, after reviewing the latest documents released, now believes that there is sufficient evidence to conclude definitively that the CIA had a role in JFK’s murder. He asserted, “A small clique in CIA counterintelligence was responsible for JFK’s assassination.”

He promised to back up his claim with documents from the recent batch and explanatory articles on his JFK Facts Substack.


Well? I suppose we can dance around the word "responsible." Semantics. To the layman, that suggests an element within the CIA planned and effected the JFKA, or knew of a potent plan to do that, and sat by idle.

But where is the evidence that a small clique in the CIA put some people on the ground in Dallas on 11.22.63, and they either assisted, or framed, LHO in the JFA?

There is evidence there was animosity inside the CIA towards JFK for the Bay of Pigs, and also for sacking the Diems in 11.63 (the brothers were brutally murdered in South Vietnam in a Kennedy Administration-financed coup. The CIA station in SV backed the Diems, but were overruled by JFK).

The Cuban exile community had many members who were deeply angered by the BoP, and said so in recorded video and tapes.

But...suspicions are a mile from having information that would compel someone to say, "A group within the CIA arranged for these two men, X and XX, to go to Dallas to help LHO wax JFK. I believe this beyond reasonable doubt."

It appears the CIA and domestic agencies were monitoring LHO in 1963---given his background and activities, I would expect that. It may even be they let him be "to see where he leads." Maybe they planned to use him in some capacity, if possible.

One must remember that at all times, these agencies have many fish to fry.

In 11.22, there was no indication LHO was dangerous, since the Walker shooting had not generated any leads.

It may also be that Russian mole Bruce Solie was gumming up the works inside the CIA re LHO.

In fact, there is evidence LHO was or had been a KGB asset, and was friendly with G2.

If Morley has backed up his statement, I am all ears, and will stand corrected.






7
Without the Z-film, how would Frazier know JBC was turned too far to the right. There would have been no Z210 and no Z240.

The Z-film was the timepiece for the JFKA. Without it, the WC would have nothing to base the timing of the assassination on the sequence of the shots.
That was my point:  “So it does appear that the zfilm was important in creating the SBT.”

Quote
They probably would have figured out the headshot was the final shot but would have nothing but conflicting eyewitness accounts on which to base much else. More unknowns would have given the CTs more opportunities to fill in the blanks.
They would not have had conflicting witness accounts on the first shot causing JFK to immediately react. That’s why I suggested that if the SBT had been considered (because JFK did not stop the neck bullet) it likely would have been a first shot SBT. 
8
You've been given every opportunity to illustrate how it would even be possible for Oswald to shoot JBC in the back when JBC was facing him and you have declined to do so. We both know you can't do it because you know that would have been impossible. Since your entire theory of what happened collapses without that element, there is no point in even discussing the rest of your silly theory which has a whole bunch of other problems.

You have managed to do one thing. You have the LNs and CTs agreeing with each other on something. We all know how ludicrous your theory is.
I see that should have said:

MASON: Well an argument is not the same as contradiction.
CORBETT: Can be.
MASON: No it can’t. An argument’s a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition.  In this case, the witnesses say the first shot struck JFK and the vast majority said last two shots were closer together. That means a separate shot hit JBC after the midpoint between 1 and 3. I have explained how the bullet path through the body, as found by Dr. Shaw, is consistent with hitting JBC while his torso is twisted around so his shoulders are sideways in the car. In that position a path from the lateral edge of the scapula to right nipple goes around the pleural cavity.    The wounds are inconsistent with him facing forward because when facing forward the path from back wound to exit wound goes through the pleural cavity.  If you want to contradict that it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.
CORBETT: No it isn't and no I don't. You have to disprove my spidey senses and they tell me that JBC could not have been hit in the torso at z271.
MASON: No I don't.  You keep just contradicting.
CORBETT:  Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
MASON: But it isn’t just saying, “no it isn’t.”
CORBETT:  Yes it is!
MASON: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction’s just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
CORBETT:  No it isn’t.  ....
9
Blunt can say whatever he wants. But show me the evidence.

fred

Dear fweddy,

The evidence that probable KGB mole Bruce Leonard Solie (look him up) hid from the HSCA the Office of Security's files on, among others, E. Howard Hunt, June Viola Cobb, Bernard L. Barker, J. Walton Moore, David Atlee Phillips, Priscilla Johnson McMillan, William Gaudet, Luis Clemente Posada Carriles, Joaquin Godoy y Solis, Nicolas Petrulli, Dorothe Matlack, Norman Rothman, Francisco Rodriguez (Tamayo), Antonio Cuesta-Valle, and Claude B. Capehart, and . . . gasp . . . Richard Case Nagell?

-- Tom
10
And so it goes - my apologies to Monty Python:

MASON: Well an argument is not the same as contradiction.
CORBETT: Can be.
MASON: No it can’t. An argument’s a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition.  In this case, the witnesses say the first shot struck JFK and the vast majority said last two shots were closer together. That means a separate shot hit JBC after the midpoint between 1 and 3.  If you want to contradict that it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary.
CORBETT: No it isn't and no I don't. You have to disprove my spidey senses and they tell me that JBC could not have been hit in the torso at z271.
MASON: No I don't.  You keep just contradicting.
CORBETT:  Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
MASON: But it isn’t just saying, “no it isn’t.”
CORBETT:  Yes it is!
MASON: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction’s just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
CORBETT:  No it isn’t.  ....

You've been given every opportunity to illustrate how it would even be possible for Oswald to shoot JBC in the back when JBC was facing him and you have declined to do so. We both know you can't do it because you know that would have been impossible. Since your entire theory of what happened collapses without that element, there is no point in even discussing the rest of your silly theory which has a whole bunch of other problems.

You have managed to do one thing. You have the LNs and CTs agreeing with each other on something. We all know how ludicrous your theory is.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10