Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Once again, the intrepid John Armstrong was on the case: Here is his Adele Edisen file in the John Armstrong Collection at Baylor. In early 1985, she did provide to the San Antonio FBI office a narrative of the events involving Rivera as well as her own CV with a list of her professional publications. San Antonio forwarded it on to the Director (yep - my good buddy William Webster!  :D :D :D). So she was definitely public with this before Rivera had died.

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/new-orleans-witnesses-adele-edisen/705722?item=705723

Lance, when I talked with Adele for a combined 9 or 10 hours on the telephone over two weekend days in 2010, she was close to my current age and seemingly as sharp
as a tack. She impressed me so much I turned the phone over to my wife and they had an amiable chat.

She told me her son was an Army Colonel and that she had received help from a then FBI agent, presumably in that San Antonio office and that he managed to get her claims into
the inventory record of the HSCA, despite the investigation being closed at that point. Her attorney, in 1976, had written to the HSCA but had not included the name of his
client.

She shared the name of the, by 2010, former FBI agent. I checked it out, he described his former FBI career to assist in obtaining clients in his current business as a PI.
The same name was also the son of the Officer above Dr. Humes who had assigned Humes to perform the autopsy of JFK.
I kept the name to myself, but I regularly received PMs from Gary Mack, correcting details I posted on the Ed Forum, JFK Debate. He did not post publicly, he got other forum members to do it for him. He was unfamiliar with the name and background of that unusual FBI Agent, turned PI.

His father was RADM EDWARD C KENNEY
https://www.vlm.cem.va.gov/EDWARDCKENNEY/66B65B2

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopsy_of_John_F._Kennedy
......
Navy Surgeon General Edward C. Kenney ordered two naval medical doctors, Commander James Humes and Commander J. Thornton Boswell, to conduct the autopsy.[14] Humes was selected as lead surgeon. Boswell called the decision to conduct the autopsy at Bethesda "stupid" and argued that it should instead be held at the specialized Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) just five miles away. Although both had conducted autopsies, neither were trained or certified in forensic pathology.[15 ...
22
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: Quoting Common Sense
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 11:49:08 PM »
OK, I'm beating this past the point of common sense (and proud of it!  :D). In a long dialogue with Tom at the Ed Forum, here is the esteemed Bill Kelly's take on what this might have been all about. I can't say it makes a whole lot of sense to me, but maybe that's a point in Adele's favor:

My personal opinion is the whole Edisen/Rivera saga is about a security test run, devised in April, 1963, to see if the Secret Service and FBI lines could be trusted or had to be neutralized or compromised further, and indeed Adele does what Rivera tells her she will do and that's to contact the Secret Service BEFORE the assassination and tell them something is wrong. Rice is given the assignment and he wants to know more and opens the door, so when she finally comes in on Sunday, Nov. 24, the test run comes back. Rice and Bartlett then take in everything Adele has to tell them, pass it on to their superiors in DC and Baltimore, and let them put the stoppers in.

Adele was sent out as a sort of trial balloon to see how the security apparatus would respond and who would do the responding, and it appears that even though Adele has a high opinion of Agents Rice and Bartlett, they had to have been compromised for giving Col. Rivera a free "get out of jail" card.

And its a shame that nobody ever got to question Rice and Bartlett about these things before they died.

Most significant, and I'm sure the History Channel's resident historian Steve Gallen and Mr. Morrow should be interested in this - the FBI's Orin Bartlett, liaison to the Secret Service and White House at the time of the assassination, and in on the interview with Adele on Sunday afternoon as Oswald is being shot, this same guy FBI agent Bartlett is the guy that LBJ specifically requested to be aboard AF1 whenever and whereever he traveled. And this request or order was made by LBJ directly to J. E. Hoover, and an order carried out. LBJ told Hoover that he didn't trust the Secret Service and wanted an FBI agent he could trust to be with him when he was aboard AF1.

So it isn't just about Col. Rivera and Dr. Edisen, it's about the individuals she leads us to, especailly John W. Rice and Orrin Bartlett, both of whom become entwined up to their ears, Rice in investigating Oswald in New Oreans and Bartlett as LBJ's private security blanket.



As far as Adele is concerned, I have taken what she has said, and followed up on it as best I can, and unlike other witnesses, she leads me to other witnesses and suspects - all of whom are interesting in their own right - especially Jose Rivera, John W. Rice and Orrin Bartlett.

She certainly didn't make their names up, and when checked, they were exactly what she said they were - a NIH scientists and Col. in Army reserves, the head of the SS in New Orleans and the FBI liaison to the Secret Service, and they each have other roles to play in the Dealey Plaza drama other than what Adele has to say.

So even if you discount everything she says about everything else, these are three aces she brought to the table that would have gone by the wayside had she not called our attention to them.

23
I'm not here to please ex-lawyers.
Why do you look at the shoulder raise in isolation with JBC's other movements. The facts that his right arm flipped upward at precisely the same moment JFK's arms started upward and that he was sitting in front of and slightly to JFK's left which put him directly in line with a bullet exiting JFK's throat should be enough to convince a person with common sense that they were hit by the same bullet.

I'll never understand why people want to complicate the JFKA when the answers are all so obvious. It's as if people don't want a clear answer.

Maybe he was just doing the Funky Chicken - ever think of that, huh, huh? It does seem to me that Jackie and Kellerman flinch at the same time, so I simply raise the question as to whether we can be sure that this is a reaction to being hit or possibly merely a reaction to a bullet whizzing past him. What we see JBC doing is pretty much exactly what he said he did, but for some reason he has been relegated to "the one person who had no idea what he was talking about."
24
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: Quoting Common Sense
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 11:21:48 PM »
Once again, the intrepid John Armstrong was on the case: Here is his Adele Edisen file in the John Armstrong Collection at Baylor. In early 1985, she did provide to the San Antonio FBI office a narrative of the events involving Rivera as well as her own CV with a list of her professional publications. San Antonio forwarded it on to the Director (yep - my good buddy William Webster!  :D :D :D). So she was definitely public with this before Rivera had died.

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/new-orleans-witnesses-adele-edisen/705722?item=705723
25
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: Quoting Common Sense
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 11:09:06 PM »
Fortified by a second screwdriver (hey, my wife is in Belarus until Wednesday, so the cats and I are living it up!), I read the l-o-n-g 2009 interview with Adele. She was very sharp and told a consistent story. Two red flags might be: (1) she didn't go public until 1991, two years after Rivera had died, and (2) by the time of the interview, she was neck-deep in CT theorizing and had obviously been for a long time; she was even a member of the Ed Forum. Roswell researchers have been burned by so many characters who seemed so credible for so long, until they were finally exposed, that I would definitely say "proceed with caution." One "plus" with Adele is that her story is so flat-out wild that it almost invites the "she's nuts" response; the hoaxsters seldom have a tale this wild (unless their names are Judyth Vary Baker).
26
I'm not here to please ex-lawyers.
Why do you look at the shoulder raise in isolation with JBC's other movements. The facts that his right arm flipped upward at precisely the same moment JFK's arms started upward and that he was sitting in front of and slightly to JFK's left which put him directly in line with a bullet exiting JFK's throat should be enough to convince a person with common sense that they were hit by the same bullet.

I'll never understand why people want to complicate the JFKA when the answers are all so obvious. It's as if people don't want a clear answer.

   "...DIRECTLY in line with a bullet exiting JFK's throat..."? Nobody knows the exact position of Connally relative to JFK when that shot struck JFK. They were behind the Stemmons sign. Stop trying to get by with just throwing  BS: against the wall. 
27
Here are two books providing a different slant....

https://www.amazon.com/Kennedy-Ripples-True-Love-Story/dp/0963929801/
Kennedy Ripples: A Priest, a Woman, and the Assassination of J.F.K.
by Marianne Sullivan (Author)

The object of the above author of the above book's affection, Dallas Catholic priest, Walter Machann, who re-emerged in NOLA, post assassination.

Right into the hands of Stephen B Lemann, the man Garrison accused of being CIA paymaster in NOLA, at the same time Lemann and his brother, Thomas,
were each listed as individually, 10 percent or greater owners of the holding company that owned WDSU. The Lemann brothers happened to be step-sons
of the mother-in-law of a man Joan Mellen described to Rex Bradford as a CIA person in NOLA, David Baldwin, Clay Shaw's Trade Mart spokesman.
During the week Garrison indicted Clay Shaw, evidence in the archive of Clay Shaw shows that David Baldwin advised his friend,, Shaw, that David Baldwin
was Godfather and first cousin of Garrison's wife, Leah, and that Garrison was a psych case.



....
Despite my 2016 discovery that Mildred Crumb Lyons Lemann (wife of NOLA attorney Monty Lemann) was step-mother of Garrison accused, "WDSU outside counsel" distributing CIA funds to pay lawyers representing clients obstructing the Garrison investigation, Stephen B. Lemann and his brother, Thomas B. Lemann, father of prominent, chronic Garrison critic Nicholas B. Lemann, and that Mildred C.L. Lemann also happened to have a daughter, also Mildred, married to former CIA covert agent, David G. Baldwin, described by author Joan Mellen,

.....
In the course of attempting to determine if my new fact checked research details were actually original, I found identical details, by author of a biography of Clay Shaw, Donald H Carpenter.



https://books.google.com/books?id=9mQtAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT138&lpg=PT138&dq="joan+mellen"...


...I am hoping the above flaw in the research and writing of DiEugenio, Ms. Pease, and Ms. Mellen is obvious to readers. Garrison had kept secret, even from his own biography editor, Zachary Sklar, co-screenplay writer with Oliver Stone, of "JFK the Movie," that "CIA brothers" David and Edward Baldwin, were sons of Garrison's wife's father's sister, Adele Ziegler Baldwin Raworth, and that Shaw knew this from the week after his arrest. The Lemanns, including Garrison critic, Nicholas, Clay Shaw, the Baldwin brothers, and Garrison were all keeping the same secret.... that the Garrison alleged "conflict" with the CIA likely could have been sorted out over a family dinner on Easter Sunday, 1967.

In the last hour, still smarting from a couple of cheap shots posted by Mr. Smith and Mr. Freeman on the now 54 pages long Tippit shooting thread, I got back to work, intent on presenting this in my recent thread....

The co-author of the following title was a long time, NY Times journalist, Lucy Freeman,

https://www.amazon.com/Lucy-freeman-julie-roy-1977-01-16/dp/B014BH6QXM/
Betrayal (1977-01-16)
by Lucy Freeman and Julie Roy (Author) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Freeman

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Freeman
Lucy Sylvia Freeman (née Greenbaum ; 13 Dec 1916–29 Dec 2004) [1][2] was an American journalist and author who published 78 books. [3][4] She is best known for her articles on psychiatry and mental health for The New York Times,

A third party version of the same sexual assault by WC witness, Dr. Hartogs,:
The “sensuous psychiatrist”: the case of Julie Roy vs. Renatus Hartogs, MD, PhD: landmark case of sexual abuse by a therapist

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9780429298431-11/

VS Dr. Hartogs' testimony against his former adolescent examination subject, LHO, a student in NYC public school, LHO,
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/hartogs.htm
28
I believe that's what we ex-lawyers call a non-responsive answer.

I'm not here to please ex-lawyers.
Quote

The issue is why JBC's shoulder raises abruptly. I noted that both Kellerman and Jackie seem to flinch - admittedly less - in the same direction at the same time. I further noted that when I whip around, my own shoulder raises noticeably. One possibility is that JBC's shoulder raised because he was hit by the same bullet that hit JFK; another possibility is that it was the natural consequence of him whipping his head around. I'm not arguing for one or the other, merely asking the question if we can be certain about the reason for JBC's shoulder movement. The answer is not a matter of common sense. You think it is because you assume the SBT is correct. This is the fallacy of begging (avoiding) the question. If we knew the SBT was correct, Steve's video and this thread would be pointless. This is what I have described before as your tendency to reason backwards: because we know the SBT is correct, it follows that this is why JBC's shoulder raises.

Why do you look at the shoulder raise in isolation with JBC's other movements. The facts that his right arm flipped upward at precisely the same moment JFK's arms started upward and that he was sitting in front of and slightly to JFK's left which put him directly in line with a bullet exiting JFK's throat should be enough to convince a person with common sense that they were hit by the same bullet.

I'll never understand why people want to complicate the JFKA when the answers are all so obvious. It's as if people don't want a clear answer. 
29


I thought his cheapie scope was nonadjustable - no?

There are three adjustments available on the scope found on the rifle on the sixth floor of the TSBD on 11/22/63.
1).  Elevation - adjusts the horizontal crosshair up and down.
2).  Windage - adjusts the vertical crosshair left and right.
3).  Ocular or Diopter - adjusts the focus to bring the the crosshairs (reticle) into sharp focus.

What it doesn’t have is any adjustment for different magnifications (it is fixed at 4X). And it doesn’t have any adjustment for parallax (to bring the target into sharp focus and minimize any parallax effects).

I wonder if Oswald ever bothered to adjust his scope. At the ranges he fired at both in the Walker attempt and the JFKA, he didn't need competition level precision. A really good marksman probably wouldn't  even need the scope for such short ranges but for an average USMC marksman like Oswald, I can see how it would be helpful, even if not perfectly zeroed of the distance he was firing at. The fact the FBI determined the scope was aiming high indicates it had been zeroed for longer ranges. The scope was also aiming very slightly to the right. The WC theorized the high right aim of the scope might have aided Oswald because the movement of the limo would require Oswald to  lead his target and put his aim point high and to the right. We will never know if Oswald took all of this into account he aimed the rifle. Whether by skill or luck, Oswald did manage to put three of his shots on his intended target because his rifle was the one that fired the shots that struck JFK to the exclusion of all other firearms in the world.

One thing we will never know is what Oswald's aim point was. Was he aiming at the center of mass which would mean the headshot was high or was he aiming at the head which would make the backshot low. That's one of several questions Oswald never answered for us.
30
I would recommend the following six books for a new student of the JFKA:

(1) The first chapter ("Summary and Conclusions") of the Warren Report to get familiar with the basic facts as presented by the Commission. This is a good starting point.

It's a damn good finishing point as well.
Quote

(2) Final Report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Chapters I B ("Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy") and I C ("The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.")

This is where things go off the rails.
Quote

(3) Sylvia Meagher - Accessories after the Fact to get acquainted with criticism of the Warren Report. For the same reason I would encourage the reading of

(4) Harold Weisberg - Whitewash I

This is where the train has completely jumped the tracks.
Quote

(5) Jim Marrs - Crossfire - The Plot that killed Kennedy. One of the books promoting the existence of a rather large conspiracy. Biographical data about Oswald interesting, in general well written by former journalist Marrs. The complete absence of end notes prevents the reader from fact checking the sometimes bold statements. A good read though.

This is where the train has gone down the embankment and is plowing through a cornfield.

Jim Marrs never met a conspiracy theory he didn't embrace. The guy was a charlatan.
Quote

(6) The Zapruder film is not a book, therefore the recommendation of Josiah Thompson's Six Seconds in Dallas for an analyses of the film.

Not the silliest conspiracy book ever written but one of the earliest. Even the title of the book is a faulty premise since the shooting took more than 6 seconds despite popular beliefs to the contrary.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10