egafd.com

Essex Lad wrote:

> Robches wrote:
> >
> > The House Select Committee on Assassinations found that the
> JFK
> > assassination was as a result of conspiracy,
>
> In fact, the House Select Committee on Assassinations
> specifically stated that the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, mafia,
> anti-Castro Cubans, Cuba, etc were not involved in any
> conspiracy to kill the president. The committee's belief in a
> conspiracy was based solely on their view that there was a
> "high probability" (their words) that a fourth shot was fired
> based on the analysis (discussed elsewhere) of the police
> Dictabelt. If you ignore that piece of "evidence" then their
> conclusion was that Oswald shot the president and there was no
> evidence that he conspired with anyone else - identical to the
> Warren Commission.

I recommend you try a book such as "The Last Investigation" by Gaeton Fonzi, who was an HSCA investigator. You will see how much evidence they unearthed which was suppressed by Robert Blakey, who now admits that he trusted the CIA and they lied to him. Who would have thought it?

JamesW wrote:

> Essex Lad wrote:
>
> > As Vincent Bugliosi says if he had been in cahoots, don't you
> > think that they would have whisked him out of the area as
> soon
> > as possible rather than letting him wander the streets of
> > Dallas before shooting a policeman?
>
>
> Exactly. If there had been any conspirators then the gunman is
> likely to have been in Mexico within 2 hours of the shooting.
> That is the most important point of all to be made in any
> discussion of this subject.
>
> The chances of conspirators somehow failing to arrange a
> getaway car and leaving the gunman to fall into the hands of
> the Dallas police are frankly zero. Even conspiracy theorists
> should be able to understand that.
>

Yo do not seem to have considered that the CIA wanted to tie the crime to a man who appeared to be a pro-Castro Marxist. Has it occurred to you that they did not want an unsolved crime, they wanted one with a particular culprit?
>

Essex Lad wrote:


>
> It's actually worse than that. Lee Harvey Oswald was a nutcase.
> He defected to the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War
> and when he was refused asylum, he slit his wrists.
>
> The presidential trip was announced on 26 September 1963.
> Oswald was in Mexico until at least 1 October, trying to get to
> Cuba so no conspiracy could have been hatched before then -
> just seven weeks before President Kennedy's death. It took
> seven years to organise the 2012 Olympics and still things are
> going wrong. Could the CIA, mafia, anti-Castro Cubans et al
> have began a conspiracy and found a reliable assassin (and
> another reliable assassin to kill the assassin) in just seven
> weeks?
>
> In that small time scale they had to find a killer, make sure
> he didn't mention the plot to anyone, and also ensure that they
> only told those conspirators who could be relied upon to keep
> their mouths shut - so not one smalltime mafia hood could be
> told because he might make a deal with the authorities or an
> informer mention the president was going to be assassinated in
> Dallas to his FBI/CIA handler (unless, of course, every single
> FBI/CIA agent was in on it and have all kept their mouths shut
> for 49 years).
>
> Oswald began working at the Texas School Book Depository on 15
> October 1963, so obviously the conspirators can pull strings to
> get him in the right place at the right time. But no! Hang on!
> The decision to drive past the TSBD was not taken until 18
> November and published in Dallas Morning News on 19 November so
> the conspirators must have hatched and executed their plan in
> THREE DAYS. Unless, of course, Oswald was hired to track and
> kill the president wherever he was in Dallas, which is
> preposterous.

You must be unaware of the US Navy's false defector programme in the 1950s. Oswald was not the only ex-Navy or Marine man to "defect" and then return to the USA. Apparently he had offered the Soviets radar secrets from his time at Atsugi Air Base, yet he was never prosecuted.

If you think the entire plot was hatched in a month or two you are very naive,just as if you think Oswald was the only patsy, or Dallas the only possible assassination site. Are you aware of the Miami and Chicago plots? Are you aware of the role of Ruth Paine in getting Oswald his job at the TSBD, and that her sister worked for the CIA? You seem to think Oswald was the triggerman, not the fall guy.

Essex Lad wrote:

> Apologies, I missed your excellent evaluation of the HSCA
> (hence my posting the self same thing albeit linked to a
> Robches posting).
>
> As for Howard Hunt - as you say he was a Watergate conspiracy.
> And that unravelled in about a fortnight, despite being known
> only to President Nixon's closest supporters - yet it leaked.
> For a CIA conspiracy to have validity, how many dozens even
> hundreds of agents mist have kept schtum - something that they
> could not manage in 1972.

I think your logic is a bit faulty. Watergate was a conspiracy, but there was a leak, therefore all conspiracies must have leaks? But when E Howard HUnt finally comes clean about the JFK conspiracy, he's lying? Have I got that right?

Robches wrote:

> There was, for instance, evidence that Oswald was seen with
> Ruby, who himself had deep links to the Chicago Mob.

No, he didn't. That's one of the great myths of the case. Ruby shot Oswald on the spur of the moment because he idolised JFK. Ruby arrived at the place from where he shot Oswald no more than 15-30 seconds before Oswald was brought out according to an NBC reporter. Wouldn't a mob assassin be in place some time before his intended victim arrived? Say five minutes? But five minutes before Oswald was shot, Ruby was in a post office sending some money to a stripper. Indeed in his testimony before the Warren Commission, Ruby said that "I hope the truth will come out one day" (which is what Mark Lane writes) before adding, "There was no conspiracy" (which Lane omits).

Dallas authorities failed to find any links between Ruby and Oswald. And also, Oswald was 24, a Marxist who tried to defect to the USSR. Ruby was a 52-year-old Jewish Democrat who idolised the president. How could they have met? What would they have talked about? What did they have in common?

There is
> evidence that Oswlad knew David Atlee Phillips of the CIA, all
> of which was developed by investigators at the HSCA, but
> suppressed by Robert Blakey.

Conspiracists claim that Phillips got Oswald his job at the TSBD but re my other posting, it was only known that the motorcade would pass by there on 18 November or did Phillips tell Oswald to follow Kennedy wherever he went?

Robches wrote:

You seem to think Oswald was the
> triggerman, not the fall guy.

So you are saying Oswald didn't shoot Kennedy?

I must say you do like your conspiracy theories - some of the photographs taken on the moon were faked. The CIA killed President Kennedy. Do you believe that 9/11 was an inside job as well?

Robches wrote:


>
> If you think the entire plot was hatched in a month or two you
> are very naive

I don't believe the plot was hatched in a month. I don't believe a plot was hatched at all - just a lone nutcase shooting from an office window.

Robches wrote:
>
> I think your logic is a bit faulty. Watergate was a conspiracy,
> but there was a leak, therefore all conspiracies must have
> leaks? But when E Howard HUnt finally comes clean about the JFK
> conspiracy, he's lying? Have I got that right?

Most conspiracies do leak - Cato Street, Gunpowder Plot, Watergate, Tolpuddle Martyrs - but wouldn't have Hunt revealed a few more details IF there had been a conspiracy?

Robches wrote:

Are you aware of the role of
> Ruth Paine in getting Oswald his job at the TSBD, and that her
> sister worked for the CIA?

It is a bit of a stretch to say that Ruth Paine got Oswald his job at the TSBD. She and Marina happened to visit a neighbour whose brother happened to work at the TSBD and who happened to mention in passing that they had jobs going. Marina asked Ruth to call on her behalf because, remember, Marina was Russian and her English not very good. Ruth was told to get LHO to ring for an interview which he did lying about his military background in the process. I would hardly describe that as Ruth Paine getting him a job.