Author Topic: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++  (Read 40723 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10603
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #175 on: January 11, 2017, 07:49:13 PM »
Yes, I have read that memo, but - as John said - there is nothing in there about Hoover telling Katzenback what to do.

Who posted this?

Remember this...  

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General
November 25, 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

The idea of the memo originated with Hoover and LBJ......  Hoover and Johnson both wanted   '"a statement to this effect be made" ......

The statement to be made ....."that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial".

Amazing clairvoyance !!.....  In just a couple of days Johnson and Hoover had the case solved.....and wanted their solution broadcast to the pissants.       
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 07:56:20 PM
by Walt Cakebread
»

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5571
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #176 on: January 11, 2017, 07:55:34 PM »
Who posted this?

Remember this... 

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General
November 25, 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

Yes... I remember.... that's part of the Katzenback memo. Now where does it say what Hoover told Katzenbach to do?

I really don't understand where you get the idea from that Hoover could/would tell Katzenbach anything...

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8802
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #177 on: January 11, 2017, 08:11:29 PM »
Yes... I remember.... that's part of the Katzenback memo. Now where does it say what Hoover told Katzenbach to do?

I really don't understand where you get the idea from that Hoover could/would tell Katzenbach anything...

He made it up.

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10603
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #178 on: January 12, 2017, 01:22:22 AM »
Yes... I remember.... that's part of the Katzenback memo. Now where does it say what Hoover told Katzenbach to do?

I really don't understand where you get the idea from that Hoover could/would tell Katzenbach anything...
Do you think that Katzenbach would have written any memo that Hoover desired  if that request was sent through LBJ who was in complete accord with Hoover.

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5571
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #179 on: January 12, 2017, 02:40:17 PM »
Just a quick bump so that James Hess does not forget to counter John's reply to his OP.


So, you've already conceded that these are not all actually "facts".  Yes, these can all be refuted.

Persuasive to you perhaps.

"Oswald’s Mannlicher Carcano" is something that needs to be demonstrated, not just claimed.

These aren't evidence against Oswald.

Brennan didn't actually see any shots fired.  His original description of the person he saw in the building did not match Oswald's height, weight, age, or clothing.  He failed to identify Oswald at a police lineup even though he had already seen Oswald on TV before the lineup.

Correction:  a partial palm print that arrived at the FBI a week later on an index card was identified as being Oswald's

See #1

He worked there getting books out of boxes.

A brown bag that has no demonstrated connection to a rifle or to the crime, which was not photographed in situ or even seen by the first 5 officers on the scene.

No evidence that CE399, CE567, or CE569 killed anyone or even went through a body.


"Proven" by handwriting "analysis" of photocopy of a microfilm copy of an order coupon with 40 non-unique characters written in block text.  Analysis which is unscientific, had no recognized or proven standards or controls, and was subjective and full of bias.

Unproven.

Unproven.

Uncorroborated say-so of McDonald.

Unproven, and irrelevant.

Based on the analysis of 1 bullet slug by Joseph Nicol, who 8 ballistics experts from the WC and HSCA disagreed with.  Linked to a weapon that had no chain of custody until it was turned in as evidence 2 hours after Oswald was taken out of the theater.

Only one witness known to be at the scene allegedly saw Oswald shoot Tippit, and she had to be asked 6 times in her testimony if she recognized anybody in the lineup.

Only a lie if you can prove that he did.

"Effectively"?  What does that even mean?

Not evidence of any crime.  There's not even any evidence that the 2 foot long (give or take a few inches) bag made out of flimsy paper was ever recovered.

"Witness testimony (whoever it is) should be corroborated by the physical evidence or even other witness testimony is helpful." -- James Hess

"what a witness did not see or hear is not evidence." - James Hess

I agree, DOES THIS MATTER?  And you know that this is false how?

False.  They were "similar", not proven to be from the blanket.

You can't even prove that the C2766 Mannlicher Carcano rifle was ever in the Paine garage.

False.  They were "similar", not proven to be from the same shirt.

So were at least 18 other people.

Not sure how that tells you who did the shooting.

Not evidence of any crime.  Not even sure what basis you have to call this an "escape".

False.  Nobody told him he was under arrest.  There were no grounds to arrest him (or even search him) when he was confronted.

Restatement of #13.  False, anyway.  McDonald claimed that Oswald "went for" a revolver and he grabbed Oswald's hand before the revolver came out.

Correction:  you don't like his explanation.  You can't even prove this ID was "found on him at arrest".

And you know this is a lie, how?

Not sure what this even means.  But:

"Witness testimony (whoever it is) should be corroborated by the physical evidence or even other witness testimony is helpful." -- James Hess

Lots of people were seen on the 6F around noon.  How does that demonstrate who was on the 6F at 12:30?  Givens initially told the FBI that he saw Oswald reading a newspaper in the Domino room at 11:50 am.  He didn't come up with the going back for his cigarettes story until April 1964, after Lt. Jack Revill reported that Givens "had been previously handled by the Special Services Bureau on a marijuana charge and he believes that Givens would change his story for money.”

This is just a rephrasing of #1.  That's one way to make it look like you have more evidence.

Your evidence that Oswald perceived Kennedy to be anti-Cuba?

Not evidence of any crime.

A restatement of #20

That would apply to at least 50 other people, IF shots actually rang out from that building.

Restatement of #29

Unproven

Restatement of #5a

Same goes for Dougherty, West, Hine, Piper, and Wilson.

Unproven.

Restatement of #26

So far the only response from Hess was;


John,
Thank you for addressing the OP point by point.
That is how this should be done.
 :thumbs1xx:


which is clearly not how this should be done.....

But in fairness to Hess, before his brief "departure" he promised (in a now - thanks to Hess himself - deleted post) that he would in fact reply in the future.

So, I propose we keep this thread alive and stop it from fading in the background until Hess does indeed reply.

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5571
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #180 on: January 12, 2017, 03:26:09 PM »

Do you think that Katzenbach would have written any memo that Hoover desired  if that request was sent through LBJ who was in complete accord with Hoover.


I don't know, but let's for argument's sake say that the answer to that question is "yes".

How does that show us that Hoover, either directly or through LBJ, did in fact tell Katzenbach what to do?

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5571
Re: +++Can Anyone Refute These 43 Facts?+++
« Reply #181 on: January 12, 2017, 04:04:46 PM »
This might explain interaction between the two on the memo:


There may be no other document that makes it more clear that there was no interest in a true investigation by the highest federal authorities and it was issued just days after the assassination. A memo prepared by Walter Jenkins reflects his conversation with J. Edgar Hoover where Hoover makes this telling statement:



"The thing I am most concerned about, and Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so that they can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin."

This conversation occured on November 24, 1963, one day prior to Katzenbach's memo below. Meanwhile, Hoover himself wrote a glaring similar memo on the same day that reads:



"The thing I am most concerned about, and SO IS Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so that WE can convince the pubic that Oswald is the real assassin." (HSCA, vol 3, pp 471-473. This memo was apparently prepared by Hoover at 4 pm.)

A third memo written by the FBI's Courtney Evans on November 26th mentions that Hoover himself drafted the Katzenbach memo. (North, "Act of Treason")


Thanks Steve.

I am aware of those documents and they do indeed show that Hoover and Katzenbach shared the same concern about having something issued to convince the public that Oswald was the assassin. I have no problem accepting that there must have been interaction between Hoover and Katzenbach on this highly questionable point, but I do not see how it shows that Hoover told Katzenbach what to do.