Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Shirley Temple is Prayer Man According to Duncan McRae
Today at 4:12 am by steely dan

» The Eighth Naval District
Yesterday at 11:33 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2
Yesterday at 8:08 pm by barto

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt1
Yesterday at 11:58 am by barto

» JFK Assassination
Yesterday at 7:15 am by jack ferguson

» Lifton on his "new evidence"
Yesterday at 4:47 am by steely dan

» friends student exchange programs
Wed 07 Dec 2016, 12:01 pm by greg parker

» Richard Bernarbei
Tue 06 Dec 2016, 11:29 pm by barto

» The Facts about Connally's Wounds
Tue 06 Dec 2016, 11:23 am by Paul Francisco Paso

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Furl  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Page 22 of 22 Previous  1 ... 12 ... 20, 21, 22

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 5:56 am

terlin wrote:
greg parker wrote:
There is more - and very specific info - that ties all this to stuff in LHOCW Vol One - but that has to wait.

Titillate...

then leave them wanting for more.

Curses on you, Parker!!!
 :joker:

You want 33 pages of real juicy stuff, Terry? Then you're going to have to go and ask your government for it because things like the transcript below are still postponed for release:



ORIGINATOR : HSCA
FROM : [No From]
TO : [No To]
TITLE : SWORN TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM JAMES LOWERY
DATE : 05/26/1978
PAGES : 33
DOCUMENT TYPE : TRANSCRIPT
SUBJECTS : LOWERY, WILLIAM JAMES, DEPOSITION; HOSTY, JAMES;
OSWALD, LEE, POST-RUSSIAN PERIOD, POLITICAL AND
SUBVERSIVE..; ...ACTIVITIES, COMMUNIST PARTY
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/29/1993
COMMENTS : Folder 1 of 2. Enclosed testimony; 157-5. Routing slip
008624 attached to doc. #008652. Folder 2 contains
three copies of deposition. Box 157.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 7:26 am

greg parker wrote:
Like other aspects of his later accounts, this is totally different to what he said at the time.
Telling lies is easy. Trying to remember them all is the hard part.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 8:22 am

Hello Goodbye wrote:You want 33 pages of real juicy stuff, Terry? Then you're going to have to go and ask your government for it because things like the transcript below are still postponed for release:

Well, Lee, I would like to help but my government and I are no longer on speaking terms. It was for postponing the release of just such documents, I believe.

And whatever happened to The Times? I used to subscribe - back in the 70's - because they would at least print honest news about the U.S. You know, the stuff the local press wouldn't dare print. Nowadays it seems they are under the same gag-order as their US counterparts.

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 5:51 pm

terlin wrote:
Hello Goodbye wrote:
Just partially shooting from the hip here, Terry, but that kind of where my head goes when thinking about your question.

What are your thoughts?

Lee,

That was brilliant!!

Everybody spying on everybody and no one knowing about it.

I had already pieced together the Joe Molina connection - I believe from something either you or Greg had mentioned months ago - as the motive for getting Oswald into the TSBD but if Paine was CIA (?) and Hosty was FBI, did the two agencies know they were working together?

And did the USSS know about this in advance or was this operation just coincidentally coincided with the killing of JFK? With so many of the strands from Oswald reaching back toward Hoover, I am certain he would obstruct everything about those connections (just as Stanton did when Lincoln was killed) but do we have anything connecting this bizarre ménage à trois to the actual killing?

The big picture stuff is not my forte.  Greg is the man who can take the pieces and extrapolate into much broader terms.

However, that being said I believe the plot was, to use the often overused term, heavily compartmentalised.  The cover up was heavily compartmentalised.  The intimidation/buttering-up of witnesses was heavily compartmentalised. The tampering of evidence was heavily compartmentalised.

I doubt very few people knew the full extent of how what they were being asked to do fit into a much bigger picture.  I'm sure some of the dirty work crossed over between the FBI, USSS and the CIA but most individual agents (junior or senior) knew very little about how the small things would ultimately have a massive impact on the overall direction of the case.

The Hosty-Paine relationship is one that is quite strange.  Was Ruth pure CIA?  It's possible but I doubt it -- not in the strictest sense of the term.  I think she did what she believed was her duty for her country whilst trying to adhere to her religious principles.  Goban Saor said in his last post that Ruth's lying was more overt than we possibly originally believed.  I don't necessarily agree - at least not when looking at it from a particular perspective.  I have yet to find any blatant in-your-face lies from Ruth Paine in any of the documents.  That is not to say that I believe she told the truth.  It simply means that she very carefully chose the language she used to make sure she didn't lie about anything.  Most of her Warren Commission testimony (and it's extensive) is a masterclass in subterfuge, manipulation, and wriggling out of sticky situations -- all without any actual bald-faced lies.

I also doubt that Paine was knowingly working with Jim Hosty on any aspect of manipulating Oswald.  I think they both played their parts the way they were supposed to play them without knowing that their actions would at some point merge -- with the help of Mrs. Roberts possibly being used as an informer/helper for Hosty.

It was just a big game of chess and the pieces had some grandmasters making them move.  Who were the chess masters?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 7:55 pm

Hello Goodbye wrote:The big picture stuff is not my forte.  Greg is the man who can take the pieces and extrapolate into much broader terms.

...

However, that being said I believe the plot was, to use the often overused term, heavily compartmentalised.  The cover up was heavily compartmentalised.  The intimidation/buttering-up of witnesses was heavily compartmentalised. The tampering of evidence was heavily compartmentalised.

Compartmentalization is an aspect of the case that has been used frequently, especially to talk about the different things going on in this case. There must have been a helluva lot of compartments!! But, what IF it was not all one big mess but a set of rather smaller messes? (This may be directed more toward the big picture man, Greg, more than yourself)

The Big D - A Tale of One City, Two Conspiracies, and Three Cover-ups

Yes, the city was large enough that five crimes could live side-by-side, though they bumped into each other quite often

The way that I understand the overall big event is through two different conspiracies:

1 - the conspiracy to kill President Kennedy; this one involved the Secret Service and a few friends at the DPD who helped arrange the motorcade route;

2 - the conspiracy to eliminate the meddling undercover operative, Lee Harvey Oswald; this one involved the criminals working out of the TSBD and their associates on the DPD (at least one of whom was affiliated with #1 above);

and the mess was furthered hampered by three different cover-ups:

A - the cover-up to hide the involvement of the FBI with one Lee Harvey Oswald, basically tossing him to the wolves;

B - the cover-up to hide the framing of Oswald by the locals, basically by allowing the DPD to look like a bunch of incompetent idiots (losing face to save their butts) which wasn't too difficult;

C - the cover-up to hide the Secret Service involvement in the assassination, at Dealey Plaza, at Parkland, and points beyond, continuing to the present.

Three cover-ups, two conspiracies, and one blasted partridge in the stinkin' pear tree. Merry freakin' Christmas, what?

#1 above was not a political coup d'etat. It was small and personal. In the history of coups, there is a lot more that changes other than just the head of state. The massive "takeover" of the government that supporters of this theory imagine did not seem to occur in any real sense. Sure the country has gone down the toilet since Kennedy but it has been a very gradual descent into the abyss. Not what one imagines as the outcome of a violent coup.

That said, the shadow government (i.e. the confluence of State/Cia [the Dulles/Dulles creation]), is known for its opportunism. They did not take an active part in killing JFK but they were certainly not going to let any moss grow on their backsides when such a marvelous chance was given them.

The chance? Not to take over the government - with the sort of power they wield, the reins of power and the stifling architecture of due process would have been an immense bother - but the increase the level of fear in the populace. Many writers seem to think that they want the people to become demoralized zombies. Not so. They want them on edge in fear. People in fear are set and ready to move when directed; zombies are slow and cannot be put into action quickly. What action, you wonder? Panic, most likely. That is the natural result of instilling fear in a large mass of people. Why? Hey, I don't know everything! I'm mostly filling in the blanks as I go.

You may notice I did not mention Tippit or Ruby.

Tippit, it seems to me, was a throw-away. Either he was already on someone's short-list or the killing occurred coincidentally with the other activity. Fortune does sometime shine brightly for the bad guys. Whether it was kismet or planned, Oswald was set-up for killing Tippit. Once arrested by the DPD the framing of him for the killing of JFK was put into motion. There does not seem to be a lot of interest in Oswald before this time and it seems to me that most of the case to frame him for JFK began to take shape after he was framed for Tippit. Someone began this process of shifting the case to Oswald.

It appears the DPD was content to frame him for Tippit alone until someone else started feeding them material to include the killing of the President.

Ruby was working with the guys at the TSBD and their friends on the force. When the government began looking into the case, they realized looking too deeply was going to reveal more than they wanted. Ruby was sent to finish off the patsy. And he really thought he was going to get off rather easily for saving the country the trouble of a trial. (Or so he said. He probably thought his friends at the DPD were going to help spirit him away.)

Of course, Ruby could have been doing the deed at the behest of the FBI, the CIA, the Mafia, the Vienna Boys Choir, or his great-aunt Gertrude. It makes more sense that the locals put him up to it rather than the national organizations, or agencies. I think Hoover really thought they could fix the trial well enough - probably by talking to Oswald about some sort of deal or something of that sort. Of course, I could be wrong and Hoover ordered the hit. It just feels wrong to me, though.

Looking at it in sectionalized portions like this (not as one giant plot) it takes on a whole new shape. It does not look anything like the case we're used to looking at and I think that's a start. We cannot keep going over the same ground expecting the eureka moment. We have to step outside the box a little to do that.

Anyway, that's all I got at my end.

Feel free to add, detract, or correct any of my thinking.

I'm sure we have not broken through the wall of fictions completely.

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 10:01 pm

terlin wrote:
Hello Goodbye wrote:The big picture stuff is not my forte.  Greg is the man who can take the pieces and extrapolate into much broader terms.

...

However, that being said I believe the plot was, to use the often overused term, heavily compartmentalised.  The cover up was heavily compartmentalised.  The intimidation/buttering-up of witnesses was heavily compartmentalised. The tampering of evidence was heavily compartmentalised.

Compartmentalization is an aspect of the case that has been used frequently, especially to talk about the different things going on in this case. There must have been a helluva lot of compartments!! But, what IF it was not all one big mess but a set of rather smaller messes? (This may be directed more toward the big picture man, Greg, more than yourself)

The Big D - A Tale of One City, Two Conspiracies, and Three Cover-ups

Yes, the city was large enough that five crimes could live side-by-side, though they bumped into each other quite often

The way that I understand the overall big event is through two different conspiracies:

1 - the conspiracy to kill President Kennedy; this one involved the Secret Service and a few friends at the DPD who helped arrange the motorcade route;

2 - the conspiracy to eliminate the meddling undercover operative, Lee Harvey Oswald; this one involved the criminals working out of the TSBD and their associates on the DPD (at least one of whom was affiliated with #1 above);

and the mess was furthered hampered by three different cover-ups:

A - the cover-up to hide the involvement of the FBI with one Lee Harvey Oswald, basically tossing him to the wolves;

B - the cover-up to hide the framing of Oswald by the locals, basically by allowing the DPD to look like a bunch of incompetent idiots (losing face to save their butts) which wasn't too difficult;

C - the cover-up to hide the Secret Service involvement in the assassination, at Dealey Plaza, at Parkland, and points beyond, continuing to the present.

Three cover-ups, two conspiracies, and one blasted partridge in the stinkin' pear tree. Merry freakin' Christmas, what?

#1 above was not a political coup d'etat. It was small and personal. In the history of coups, there is a lot more that changes other than just the head of state. The massive "takeover" of the government that supporters of this theory imagine did not seem to occur in any real sense. Sure the country has gone down the toilet since Kennedy but it has been a very gradual descent into the abyss. Not what one imagines as the outcome of a violent coup.

That said, the shadow government (i.e. the confluence of State/Cia [the Dulles/Dulles creation]), is known for its opportunism. They did not take an active part in killing JFK but they were certainly not going to let any moss grow on their backsides when such a marvelous chance was given them.

The chance? Not to take over the government - with the sort of power they wield, the reins of power and the stifling architecture of due process would have been an immense bother - but the increase the level of fear in the populace. Many writers seem to think that they want the people to become demoralized zombies. Not so. They want them on edge in fear. People in fear are set and ready to move when directed; zombies are slow and cannot be put into action quickly. What action, you wonder? Panic, most likely. That is the natural result of instilling fear in a large mass of people. Why? Hey, I don't know everything! I'm mostly filling in the blanks as I go.

You may notice I did not mention Tippit or Ruby.

Tippit, it seems to me, was a throw-away. Either he was already on someone's short-list or the killing occurred coincidentally with the other activity. Fortune does sometime shine brightly for the bad guys. Whether it was kismet or planned, Oswald was set-up for killing Tippit. Once arrested by the DPD the framing of him for the killing of JFK was put into motion. There does not seem to be a lot of interest in Oswald before this time and it seems to me that most of the case to frame him for JFK began to take shape after he was framed for Tippit. Someone began this process of shifting the case to Oswald.

It appears the DPD was content to frame him for Tippit alone until someone else started feeding them material to include the killing of the President.

Ruby was working with the guys at the TSBD and their friends on the force. When the government began looking into the case, they realized looking too deeply was going to reveal more than they wanted. Ruby was sent to finish off the patsy. And he really thought he was going to get off rather easily for saving the country the trouble of a trial. (Or so he said. He probably thought his friends at the DPD were going to help spirit him away.)

Of course, Ruby could have been doing the deed at the behest of the FBI, the CIA, the Mafia, the Vienna Boys Choir, or his great-aunt Gertrude. It makes more sense that the locals put him up to it rather than the national organizations, or agencies. I think Hoover really thought they could fix the trial well enough - probably by talking to Oswald about some sort of deal or something of that sort. Of course, I could be wrong and Hoover ordered the hit. It just feels wrong to me, though.

Looking at it in sectionalized portions like this (not as one giant plot) it takes on a whole new shape. It does not look anything like the case we're used to looking at and I think that's a start. We cannot keep going over the same ground expecting the eureka moment. We have to step outside the box a little to do that.

Anyway, that's all I got at my end.

Feel free to add, detract, or correct any of my thinking.

I'm sure we have not broken through the wall of fictions completely.
Terry,

just some off the cuff observations and comments. Your approach is imo, the right one to take.


  • At least one person was necessarily needed to be involved in the trip planning and arrangements.
  • Not entirely convinced Oswald was anyone's undercover operative, but if he wasn't, he more than likely thought he was.
  • I long ago harbored suspicion that the TSBD was shipping stolen weapons in those crates. Could it be meaningful that the TSBD serviced the exact same 5 states that the 112th MIG covered, and that the MIG was working with other agencies on the weapons walking out the doors of various bases? 
  • A successful coup d'tat is not uncovered. If you very suddenly found yourself living under Fascism post 11/22/63, I think that is a bit too obvious. It works that way in the third world only. We see the first signs of the emerging Neocons in the LBJ administration, and Vietnam fall into full scale war. As you point out, it's been pretty much downhill since. I think both Ruby and the so-called Oxnard caller both gave clues as to the direction the country was going to head.
  • Groups/individuals most likely involved (without, as Lee says, necessarily knowing the extent of what they were involved in): Roy Truly, the Paines, Lowery and associates, members of the LBJ inner circle, White Russians (and similar emigre groups from Europe and supporters of same), DPD. Pulling the strings of some of these people were of course, the FBI and/or CIA and/or MIG


  Some of the best, but missed clues until now have been,


  • The importance of Lowery in this story
  • Various relationships between key people (to come)
  • The carbon copy similarities between 2 key events in the life of Lee Oswald to events in the life of Julius Rosenberg, and the connective tissue between the Rosenbergs, Youth House, the Paines, and CIA officers
  • The importance of the CIA Redskin Program and a number of US/Soviet exchange programs
  • The real reason the Soviets were hard to deal with at the summits
  • The fact that a close relative of Michael Paine worked on biological weapons during WWII (to come)
  • The Odio incident and the two individuals who really need scrutiny - Colonel Castorr and Mrs Connell.
  • The testimony of Marina and Marguerite concerning a certain photo
  • Timing! It's everywhere from jobs appearing at the right time and place for an assassination back to starting to order Soviet publications just after a new law came into being regarding same, and all the way back to the defection and the urgent need not to wait the few weeks he had left to give the Marines - and also the timing surrounding his initial intention to return to the US coinciding with the end of two CIA anti-Soviet programs.  


Cuba. I think Cubans were involved only as potential false sponsors. 
   
All I can add is that I have all these components and other bric-a-brac floating around in my head and that it all fits together and makes internal sense. We all get where we are going through a combination of design and coincidence. What I've done is gathered all the data that got Oswald to Dallas and where design was involved, who was behind that design.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3448
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on Thu 19 Jun 2014, 11:09 pm

greg parker wrote:
All I can add is that I have all these components and other bric-a-brac floating around in my head and that it all fits together and makes internal sense. We all get where we are going through a combination of design and coincidence. What I've done is gathered all the data that got Oswald to Dallas and where design was involved, who was behind that design.

Thanks for the additional information... and all that other stuff that is "to come". Which makes the other volumes of your Lee Harvey Oswald set so important. **hint, hint**

And we have to help the wider research community start to look at the case differently; stop following the "lead" of the WC and all their fictitious evidence and re-construct the case from ground zero.

I think we're making a decent start.

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on Wed 25 Jun 2014, 3:07 am

Maybe what we really need to do - since the MSM won't touch this stuff - is to retain a Public Relations Firm.

Anyone know somebody who'll work cheap? (or for free because it is such a great cause?)

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Mick Purdy on Sun 29 Jun 2014, 1:34 pm

This might be a bit off topic, but what was the name of the man who Truly called to give him Oswald's TSBD file, from memory starts with A, Im having trouble tracking him down online. Would be nice to know what time this file was requested by Truly...to hand over to DPD

Mick Purdy

Posts : 33
Join date : 2013-07-26
Location : Melbourne Australia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on Sun 29 Jun 2014, 3:32 pm

Mick Purdy wrote:This might be a bit off topic, but what was the name of the man who Truly called to give him Oswald's TSBD file, from memory starts with A, Im having trouble tracking him down online. Would be nice to know what time this file was requested by Truly...to hand over to DPD
Mick, His name was Aiken... but I'm not sure he was ever asked...

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3448
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Colin Crow on Wed 30 Jul 2014, 9:30 pm

Another nail in the lunchroom encounter. Mrs Reid's story falls apart when Geneva Hine's testimony is analysed.


Colin Crow

Posts : 214
Join date : 2013-08-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Sponsored content Today at 9:01 am


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 22 of 22 Previous  1 ... 12 ... 20, 21, 22

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum