Monday, June 30, 2014

This just in from OIC senior member Pete Mellor: 

Pete Mellor According to my timeline for 22/11/63, Wade was at the Trade Mart for the luncheon. When that was abandoned he went home and later went out to dinner. He didn't arrive at DPD HQ until the evening.

So, there you have it. Doesn't it pretty well rule out Henry Wade as the architect of the phony bus and cab ride scheme? 

So, who is there left? Who was high enough in the Dallas PD hierarchy to launch this thing? It was a big decision. No low-level guy could have the authority to do it. It involved the Dallas Police Department engaged in an outright criminal fraud to frame Oswald for something that he didn't do. It was the kind of outright police corruption that meant certain jail time for the perpetrators if caught.

So, who have you got left to blame at the top? The only ones I can think of are Curry and Fritz. Do you think it was one or both of them? But, Fritz didn't start talking to Oswald until 3:15. That was just 50 minutes before the bus transfer ticket was filed into evidence. Did he even have enough time to think about it?

Tell me this: Do you think Fritz had foreknowledge of the assassination? Do you think he knew that Kennedy was going to be killed that day, and that it was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of government? And that Oswald was going to be framed for it? What do you think? 

Well, I think not. And if I am right, then how could Fritz be the one to order the phony bus and cab rides? 

So, that leaves Curry, and even if you think Curry was in on it, how could he go to Fritz and the others who were not in on it and ask them to set up a phony bus and cab ride? 

The more you tear this thing open, the more you realize that it's just not plausible. It's just not a real-world thing.     
I think it is very significant that Jim Garrison never claimed that Oswald's bus and cab rides were faked. 
The fact is, Backass, you don't know ANYTHING about that pick-up in front of the Depository for Oswald except that you believe that it happened. You don't know who arranged it. You don't know who it involved as a driver or whether anyone else was in the car. You don't know what occurred between the time of the pickup and the time Oswald surfaced at the theater. You don't know jack shit. 

And, you act as though I am the only Oswald defender who thinks that he did ride the bus and cab, that it is a Ralph Cinque exclusive. Well, James Douglass, in JFK and the Unspeakable, vouches for Oswald taking the bus and cab, and the Oswald double going off in the car, as seen by Roger Craig and others. And the same is true of John Armstrong in Harvey and Lee. And the same is true of Pat Shannan in JFK and the Uncensored Story of the Two Oswalds. 

In fact, among Oswald-innocent CTs (that is, excluding CTs who think there was a conspiracy that involved Oswald as a shooter, what I call HSCA CTs) there are plenty who think that Oswald took the bus and cab. I have never heard James Fetzer or John Costella or David Mantik or Doug Horne or Craig Roberts or Jack White or Vincent Salandria or many others endorse the claim that the bus and cab rides were faked. So, it isn't just me. Granted, there are things that I alone claim- and I do so vociferously- but this isn't one of them.

So, once again, you are just making a complete fool of yourself, Backass. I am gaining supporters, and you are losing them. It was Oswald in the doorway, and that is on ice. But, you haven't begun to prove your claim. And what do you think the default is? It isn't what you're claiming. But, you are just too dumb to realize it.      
Joseph Backes admits that it's ridiculous to think that Oswald would have arranged a pickup for 12:40. What for? He wasn't going to kill Kennedy that day, and he knew nothing about it. So why should he expect to be going anywhere at 12:40?

So, that leaves someone else to arrange it. But the problem is that if someone else arranged it with Oswald in advance, they couldn't do it without revealing to him that something extremely disruptive was going to happen that day. 

So, that doesn't work either and that's why Backes gravitates to no arrangement at all. Nothing was set up. Somebody just pulled up, yelled at Oswald to get in, and off they went. 

But, how did the driver know that Oswald would be standing outside? Oswald could have been inside. Then what? Would the driver have parked and went in to look for him? Or, Oswald could have left already on foot. So then what? Would the driver have started driving around the area looking for Oswald on the street? Do you really think the conspirators would have left Oswald's movements after the shooting up to chance? Or up to him?

What the conspirators needed was for Oswald to obtain a gun- so that there would be legal grounds to shoot him to death. And they needed a place for this to happen. Since, the story was that he was the LONE gunman, with the emphasis on lone, no one could be involved in aiding Oswald's actions or movements. So, his ACTIONS and his MOVEMENTS could not involve anyone else, except perhaps a bus driver or cab driver, which isn't personal. It's just public transportation.  

So, what I think happened is that Oswald was told NOTHING in advance about what was going to happen. And then after the assassination, he was told to go home, get his gun, and then go to the theater, so that he could die, but not telling him the last part. Who told him? I don't know. Maybe it was Bill Shelley, or maybe it was Jack Ruby. There is a possibility that Jack Ruby gave him the pistol. John Armstrong puts a lot of stock in that. But, if that didn't happen, and Oswald got the pistol from his room, then surely he was told to get it. They wanted him armed. 

And Oswald went home every day by bus anyway. So, why shouldn't he go home by bus that day? Since it would look very bad for there to be a getaway car for him, why would the conspirators send one? Backes has already admitted that Oswald didn't arrange a pickup, which means they must have done it. So, why would they send a getaway car for Oswald when it was the worst thing in the world for them? They couldn't. They wouldn't. They didn't.  
If Oswald made an arrangement to be picked up by somebody at 12:40 that day, then obviously, he knew ahead of time that it was not going to be an ordinary day, that something special was going to happen to disrupt the normal schedule.  

So, making such an arrangement means that he had foreknowledge of the assassination. There is no getting around that.

But, you know how Joseph Backes gets around it? He says there was no arrangement. He says that Oswald was just standing around outside the TSBD, not sure what to do, then somebody yelled at him, "Oswald, get the fuck in the car!"

Was that a good idea? Making a scene, a spectacle, on Elm Street involving Oswald, the supposed assassin, right after the assassination? Calling him by name? How did they figure that would go unnoticed? How did they expect to sell a tale about a bus ride if they've got somebody yelling at Oswald by name and having him enter a car in broad daylight? 

And don't you think that everything was planned? This was 12:40 or 12:45. What if Oswald had left at 12:35? What if he wasn't in front of the TSBD when that guy drove by? What if he just decided to leave? What if he had remained inside the building? What if the idea of going somewhere never occurred to him? 

But, if a guy yelled "Oswald, get the fuck in the car!" loud enough for Oswald to hear, then surely it would be loud enough for others to hear. Doesn't that shoot your lone gunman theory down the tubes? 

Backes, I really think you may have come up with the dumbest thing you've said yet, and that's saying a lot.  
You put Oswald in a car in Dealey Plaza, and it makes no sense to take him to a theater.

David Sanchez Morales: OK, Lee, I just have to get you to So-and-So, and he’s going to help you do such-and-such. He’s going to meet you inside a theater.

Oswald: Why inside a theater?

DSM: I don’t know.

Oswald: But, I don’t even know what he looks like, and it’s dark inside a theater.  Plus, there will be other people around, perhaps a lot of people. Plus, you can’t talk in a theater; we’ll have to whisper. And even if we do, it may attract attention. Besides, we’ve got this car. Why can’t you take me where I have to go? What do we need him for?

DSM. Hey, you know I borrowed this car from Ruth Paine, and her kid has got a recital tonight, or something, and she needs it back. I’ve got to hightail it back to Irving.

Oswald: How did you get out to Irving to get the car in the first place?

DSM: Took the bus.

Oswald: I’m starting to wonder if I shouldn’t have taken the bus. You travel 20 miles to borrow a car just to drive me 2? And then you have to return it? Then, how are you supposed to get back to Dallas?

DSM: You know, I hadn’t thought about that. I guess I’ll take the bus again. Do they run at night?

Oswald: You realize that is two round trips. You will have traveled 80 miles to borrow a  car just to drive me 2.

DSM: Shit, you’re right.

Oswald: But, let’s get back to this theater thing. Whose idea was that? Look, he’s got to get to the theater, presumably by driving. So, he drives there and parks and goes in, and we do the same. But, why couldn’t we both just park at the same place? I leave you, and I go with him. I get out of your car; I get into his. Simple. Direct. Fool-proof. That way, I’m not wandering around a theater looking for a guy I don’t know.

DSM: I hear you, Man, but hey, I just do what I’m told.

Oswald: And what do we need him for at all? I just have to get to Redbird Airport. Why can’t you take me there?

DSM: I told you, Man! Ruth Paine’s kid has got a recital or a school play or a sing-along or some such shit. I got to get the car back, Man!    

Oswald: Then why can’t you just take me directly to this guy? Wherever he is. He’s got a place, right? He doesn’t wander the streets, does he? Why meet inside a theater when the theater has got nothing to do with it?

DSM: I don’t know, Man. It’s just a spy thing. Whispering inside a theater. Trying to figure out who the person is. Speaking in code. Don't you think it's cool?  Oh, and by the way, you’re supposed to sit next to him in the theater and say, “The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain.”

Oswald: From My Fair Lady? That doesn’t even come out for another year.

DSM: You’re yelling at the messenger, Man! Now shut the fuck up! Of the two of us, I’m the only one who is a real assassin. Remember?

Oswald: Alright, then just tell me who I have to meet. Describe him.

DSM: I don’t know. He’s just a guy. Or a gal. And she might be pregnant. I can’t narrow it down for you, Man. You're giving me a headache. Just sit next to people and say the line: “The rain in …”

Oswald: I know, I know. From Lerner and Loewe. Why couldn't they pick something from Rogers and Hammerstein?
No, Backes, the theater was not good. It's dark in a theater, and Oswald apparently had no little or no idea what the person he was supposed to meet looked like, since he tried out a lot of people. 

Plus, a theater room is supposed to be quiet. People aren't supposed to talk, remember? And, it's enforced.  Plus, according to you, Oswald was already in a car. Somebody came to get him. Remember? That's what you claim, isn't it? So, why couldn't that person take him where he needed to go, and I mean to a safe place? 

What was the point of meeting someone else in a theater, and someone he didn't even know? Why couldn't Oswald's driver just take him to wherever this other person was going to take him? Why did they have to meet in a public place where talking wasn't even allowed? No, the idea of the theater makes no sense, especially since Oswald was already mobile. He could have been driven any number of places that were more appropriate than that theater. And since he already had transportation from the driver who picked him up in Dealey Plaza, there was no justification for him to go to the theater. What the hell did he need from the guy in the theater?

How many other times do you know of in which a getaway driver goes to a theater?    

Sunday, June 29, 2014

If Oswald knew about the assassination plot, he could have saved Kennedy. If all else failed, he could have gone out onto Elm Street ahead of the limo and with his arms raised so that his empty hands were seen, and he could have yelled, "Stop! Danger! Snipers!" Then he could have pointed to the tops of buildings and to the fence. 

Even if you think a Secret Service agent or policeman would have shot him, it still would have saved Kennedy.

Or, he could have alerted other spectators, telling them: "There are snipers waiting to kill Kennedy. They're high up in the buildings; they're behind the fence. We have to stop them." And here's what they could have done: Oswald and some spectators could have held hands, formed a train, and walked out onto Elm Street. Obviously, you can't hold someone's hand and also hold a weapon. So, there would have been no reason for any Secret Service agent or policeman to shoot at these people. And the snipers weren't going to shoot at them either, having nothing to gain from doing so. It would have brought the motorcade and the assassination to a halt.  

But, Oswald had no explicit knowledge of the assassination. He asked Junior Jarman why people were gathering on the sidewalk, so he didn't even know that the motorcade was driving by the TSBD. Apparently, he didn't see the motorcade route in the newspaper. 

Did he have an inkling, a suspicion that something bad was about to happen or could happen? Maybe, but I don't know. There is a report that someone name "Lee" called the FBI in Chicago to alert them to the plot up there to kill Kennedy. And as a result of that warning, Kennedy's attendance at the Army/Navy football game was cancelled.   

But, if you think it really was Oswald who provided Kennedy with several more weeks to live, there is all the more reason to think that if Oswald knew about the Dallas plot, he would have tried to stop it. And I mean including at peril to himself. 

Oswald didn't know. He had no explicit knowledge of the Dealey Plaza operation. And he had absolutely no reason to arrange for anyone to pick him up at 12:40 that day. And he certainly had no reason to go driving off with Mac Wallace, Frank Sturgis, and David Sanchez Morales, as some contend.  
There is also the theory that the driver just delivered Oswald to his room on Beckley and had nothing to do with getting Oswald to the theater. He just dropped him off at home and said, "See ya." 

Well, that doesn't work either. Oswald could not have gotten home before 1:00, maybe a little later. Then, he was inside for several minutes. He changed his pants and presumably got his pistol. We don't know what else he could have been doing. 

But, it had to be at least 1:03 when he left, and Butch Burroughs reported seeing Oswald in the Texas Theater at 1:07. And even if Butch was off by a little, it wouldn't matter. It was over a mile, and Oswald could not have walked there in time. 


Average Walking Speed
What is a good average walking speed for fitness walking? The answer depends on a few factors, such as your age, fitness level, leg length, terrain (flat or hilly) and gender (research has shown that men move faster than women).
In general, it is between 3.0 – 3.5 miles per hour which means you can walk one mile in 17 to 20 minutes.
Besides, if Oswald wasn't staying at his room, why would his friend leave him there? Wouldn't they discuss it as they were driving? Aren't the odds extremely great that since Oswald was only going to be in his room a few minutes at most that his friend would wait for him to come out and take him to wherever he needed to go? 
So, you can't make it that a friend picked Oswald up in Dealey Plaza just to drop him off at his room. That makes no sense. It doesn't play Peoria, and it doesn't play here.  

If Oswald was picked up in a car in Dealey Plaza, why did he wind up in the Texas Theater? It doesn't make sense. They were already mobile. They  had wheels. So why couldn't his driver take Oswald to a safe place? I mean theoretically, of course. What justification could they have given him to take him to a theater? To meet someone else? Why? And why meet this person INSIDE the theater?

Look: if you're going to transfer a person from one car to another, you bring the two cars to the same place, where they can be parked next to each other. Oswald gets out of one car and into the other car. Both cars then go their separate ways. That's it! No muss, no fuss. But why accomplish the transfer by having him meet the other driver inside a theater? Inside it? That's ridiculous. Why not meet behind the theater? Or why not meet somewhere where people don't congregate?

Now, I realize that the theater was really a trap for Oswald. But, what explanation could they have given to justify taking him there? How was Oswald supposed to make sense of it? He's with this guy or guys, and they have a car, and instead of taking him where he needed to go or taking him to the location of someone else who could help him, they tell him that he needs to go to the theater and into the theater? That is patently absurd.

What I am saying is that you can't connect Oswald being picked up by a driver in Dealey Plaza with him winding up inside the theater. It doesn't compute. It's irrational. Since they were already in a car, why have him go into the theater?

If Oswald already had a ride, if he was on the road, on the move, why did he go into the theater, Backass?
bpete pointed out that the person I thought was Beckham wasn't. 

He said: "The person on the right, as Ralph found it, isn't Beckham."

I know, but that's the guy that your pal Joseph Backes continues to identify as Beckham. 

So, if you were sincerely a friend of Proscenium Joe, you would send him an email and inform that he is wrong, that he is making a mistake, that he is identifying a Salvadoran poet as Thomas Beckham.  Here is what Backes just said:

"I already explained why he is not Rogue Dalton Garcia and why it is extremely stupid to suggest that he is." 

But, the guy he is talking about is Rogue Dalton Garcia. I now know a lot more about Thomas Beckham than any of you, and that's from talking to his son. And I've got a whole album of pictures of him- more than I have shown. And I know full-well that the guy Backes is claiming to be Beckham is not him. And bpete knows it too. But no, he's not going to say anything to Backes to help me. You see, they're not really friends. 

And I have to laugh at these idiots. This doesn't change anything. It's still Oswald in the doorway. And I mean, of course, the Altgens doorway, not that obese guy from the Darnell film. I'll admit a mistake when I make one, but I haven't made too many. It's Oswald in the doorway, Lovelady not at the desk in the squad room, Lovelady not outside the TSBD after the assassination, no Woman and Boy in Altgens, no Woman and Baby in Towner, no second sighting of Doorman in the Wiegman film- he was faked, and it was because Oswald had already left for the lunch room by that time.

What, were you guys thinking that this one reversal was going to be the start of a trend? You dreaming idiots.  

Saturday, June 28, 2014

I was able to locate Thomas Beckham, and I got to speak to his son, at length. And on the basis of that conversation, and from obtaining other images of him, and from also seeing clearer, sharper frames from the leafleting footage, I now recognize the possibility and the likelihood that that was Beckham at the Trade Mart. 

And that leaves me to add two things: First, I apologize to those I was battling over this. You were right, and I was wrong. However, I will inform Joseph Backes that his images of Beckham are spurious. That was another man who happened to be a Salvadoran poet. 

But second, there are NO other retractions that go along with this. It is still Oswald in the doorway, clasping his hands. It is still NOT Lovelady at the desk in the squad room- that was faked. It is still NOT Lovelady milling around outside the TSBD after the assassination- that was faked. And all the other photographic and film alterations I have cited remain in effect.

Yet, as humbling as it is, I see the importance of correcting mistakes and shedding spurious conclusions- as soon as they are recognized. 

And fortunately, I have had to do very little of that. There is NOTHING that I have had to remove from the OIC website, and this claim about Shelley being at the Trade Mart was never put there. So, there was no harm done to the Oswald Innocence Campaign. 

Frankly, it wasn't unreasonable to suspect that guy was Shelley. And I don't expect to have any influence on David Josephs, even if he hears about this. But, the claim of that guy being Shelley is not bankable, and that's why I'm dropping it. 

Finally, this has no bearing on the other problem in the film, which is the man with the anomalous hand. That remains an unaccounted for anomaly.  

Backes, stop the insanity! They interrogated Oswald at 3:15, and he told them that he rode the bus. So, why would they feel the need to reinforce that by drumming up a phony transfer ticket? There was no controversy. He said he rode the bus, and no one was disputing it. So, why would they have to seek PHONY physical evidence for HIS story when they didn't need it? Why take such a chance for NO reason?  

Or do you think he told them something different? Do you think that he told them that a friend picked him up in Dealey Plaza and drove him home? Well, if he said that then surely they would have demanded to know the name of this friend. And he would have told them. Right? How could he not? 

So, they would have had the name of this friend who picked him up in Dealey Plaza and drove him home and to the theater- and to the laundromat- if you believe that. 

Don't you think that before they launched a phony bus ride story, including a phony transfer ticket, that they would have followed up on what Oswald told them, including looking up this friend and interrogating him? Yet, by 4:05 pm, less than an hour after they first sat down with Oswald, they were filing the bus transfer ticket into evidence. 

I know that Richard Hooke thinks that Oswald DID tell them that he rode the bus.  Richard says that Oswald was ordered to lie. He does not tell us WHO told Oswald to lie or WHEN Oswald was told to lie or HOW it was possible for anyone to get to Oswald to tell him to lie. But somehow, that happened. 

Well, if it happened, IF OSWALD DID SAY THAT HE RODE THE BUS, then why would they feel any need to reinforce it with a phony transfer ticket? Are you following me? If there was no dispute with Oswald about it, if they were accepting what he was saying about it, why would they take action to bolster it? If they weren't disputing it, then nobody was disputing it, in which case there was no need to prove it. There was no need to take it to a higher level. 

I'll tell you, Backass, but first I want to know who conceived of the idea to frame Oswald for riding the bus and cab. Then, I want to know who authorized it because it was a big decision to do it, with a lot riding on it, so who took responsibility for it? Who gave the go-ahead? Then, who devised the particulars of the story? Who wrote the script? Then, who was put in charge of the operation? Because it was an operation- a big criminal operation- and someone had to be in charge of executing it. So, you answer those questions, and I'll get back to you on the other. 
Mr. FRITZ. He told me he went over and caught a bus and rode the bus to North Beckley near where he lived and went by home and changed clothes and got his pistol and went to the show. I asked him why he took his pistol and he said, "Well, you know about a pistol; I just carried it." Let's see if I asked him anything else right that minute. That is just about it.
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he killed Tippit?
Mr. FRITZ. Sir?
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he shot Tippit?
Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes.
Mr. BALL. What did he say.
Mr. FRITZ. He denied it---that he did not. The only thing he said he had done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, "That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I have done wrong."
The bus transfer ticket was entered into evidence at 4:05. It became part of the official evidence in the case at that time. It means that they were committed to it, and they couldn't revise it later. 

So, since they didn't start talking to Oswald until 3:15 to find out what he had to say, how could they possibly have come up with that ticket by 4:05? If you are going to say they faked it, then they must have gotten started faking it BEFORE they heard anything from Oswald. 

So, who decided that it was necessary to do that? And when was it decided? And how did they go about picking a bus on which to place Oswald? 

It was a VERY risky thing to do because Oswald could very easily have proven that he traveled by car (if he did). And sticking a bus transfer ticket in his pocket? Look: as long as they didn't do that, they could always play dumb if it went south. Even if it were proven that Oswald did something else, that would only mean that they were mistaken. No harm, no foul. But, a bus transfer ticket can't just jump into a man's pocket. If he didn't ride the bus, it means they planted it on him. So, why would they plant hard evidence on Oswald against themselves? 

They didn't need it. They could have claimed he rode the bus without it. And it would have left them an out. So, if they did it, it was really stupid. He wasn't even disputing it. He wasn't saying he did anything else.  Since he agreed with them, why plant phony physical evidence? It would have been really dumb to do that. 

So, who made the decision, Backes? Who decided to round up a phony bus transfer ticket and say it came from Oswald?   
"Bus transfer No. 4459 was found in Oswald's left shirt pocket by Detective Sims at 4:05 pm on November 22nd (along with five live rounds of .38 caliber pistol shells --- WC Sims Exhibit A, Vol 21, pg 514."

The above is a quote from John Armstrong, but there are any number of others who have said the same thing. The fact is: the bus transfer ticket went into the official record at 4:05 pm on Friday, November 22, and from that moment on, they were committed to it. 

The dye was cast. They crossed the Rubicon. All other bridges were burned. 

So, they didn't begin to hear what Oswald had to say about his movements until they started talking to him at 3:15. But, 50 minutes later, they had a story all worked out that he had taken the Bus 1213 on the Marsalis line, boarding at St. Paul and Elm. 

So, how they did they formulate this story so fast? How could they possibly have arrived at it so fast and obtained the fraudulent transfer ticket so fast? Isn't it obvious to everyone that, if the story was fraudulent, then they had to start working on it before they heard a peep out of Oswald? 

And why work so hard to sell this story. Since Oswald was agreeing with them, that he rode the bus and cab, why bother with a transfer ticket? There didn't have to be one. Oswald was not to ride the bus again, so he didn't really need a transfer ticket. And since he wasn't disputing what the police were saying about how he got home, why bother with the ticket?

Backes, who came up with the idea to concoct a phony bus and cab ride for Oswald? Whose idea was it? I want a name. And did the person who conceived of it also write the particulars about it or were others assigned to do that? And what time was Operation Bus and Cab launched? Do you admit that it must have been BEFORE the time of Oswald's first interrogation? Was it perhaps even before he was apprehended at the theater? So, what motivated them to do that before they even knew what Oswald was going to say?   
There is an important distinction that has to be made: between what Oswald said about the first part of his trip and the second part of his trip.

There are multiple reports that Oswald said he traveled by bus and cab to his room on Beckley. But, there are no reports about what Oswald said about how he got from his room to the theater.

But, how can that be? They must have asked him: "OK, so you went to your room, you changed your pants, and then you went to the theater. So, how did you get to the theater?"

Of course, the official story has it that he walked from his room on Beckley  to 10th and Patton where he killed Tippit, and then he walked a different direction to get to the Texas Theater. But, what did Oswald say?

We don't know, but he must have said something. Why didn't they tell us? Why won't they tell us? 

I think it's because they don't want any other story out there to contrast with the story they're telling. If Oswald's account was published, it would go toe to toe against the official story, and maybe it would fare well. In fact, maybe it included elements that were so damaging that they couldn't let it be known. 

For instance, we all know about the police car that pulled up in front of his room and the horn tapped twice. That's according to his landlady. What if the driver of that car drove Oswald to the theater? According to Butch Burroughs, Oswald was in the theater by 1:07, which means that he couldn't have walked there. There wasn't enough time. But, there was enough time for him to be driven there. 

But, how would it sound if a POLICEMAN drove Oswald to the theater? Obviously, TERRIBLE. So, if that's what Oswald said, they couldn't let the world know. 

So, what did they say he said? Nothing. They didn't make up a phony story. I guess they could have but they knew better Because if they made up a phony story, they might have blown it. They might have said something that gave it away as being phony. So, it was better to say nothing. 

And it makes it all the more likely the bus and cab ride were true because it shows that they were aware of the danger of making up phony stories. Again: they made up no phony story about what Oswald said about how he got to the theater. No phony story. No phony story.   

Friday, June 27, 2014

Some people think Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade was the one to conceive of the plan to fake a bus and cab ride for Oswald. Presumably, it started with just a bus ride. But, if they were going to invent such a ride, why not do it cleanly? Why not have Oswald get on the nearest bus to Dealey Plaza and one that was actually going towards his house?  Why have him walk for 6 blocks and then get on a bus that was going the wrong way: back to Dealey Plaza? 

I know it's strange for Oswald to do it, but it's even more strange for someone to make it up and try to sell it as something Oswald did. 

The Dallas Police were committed to the Marsalis line bus #1213 by 4 PM. They produced the bus transfer ticket. It had the driver's, Cecil McWatters, symbol on it. So, why would they pick that bus? Wade hatched the scheme, according to some but did Wade also write the script? Or did somebody else do that? And, whether it was Wade who wrote it or someone else, why would ANYBODY write it that way?

And I'll remind you of something I've said before: There was no way a phony transportation story could hold up. OSWALD would have destroyed it. All he had to do was give a credible account of what he really did, which would not have been hard for him to do. And if the Dallas Police were exposed for such an monstrous frame-up- and monstrous is not too strong a word- then everyone would know that Oswald must be innocent. If the Police were lying, then they must be the guilty ones, not Oswald. This would have turned the tables on everything. 

And even if you think they knew about the plan to kill Oswald, how could they be sure it would work? What if Oswald had seen Ruby and reacted resulting in a different sort of melee, one in which Oswald survived? And they could hardly try again to kill him because who would have believed it? It would have been way too obvious that they were targeting him. One chance was all they were going to get. 

Plus, they, the conspirators, had plenty of time to think about this in advance. They could not have had any expectation of killing Oswald in Dealey Plaza, which means that they knew ahead of time that he was going to leave the Plaza. They had to give some thought to it. They would have recognized right away that having their lone gunman be picked up by a driver was not good. So, they would have made sure that that didn't happen. Is anyone suggesting that Oswald bypassed them, that he went around them and arranged the pickup himself? Is anyone suggesting that they lost control of Oswald? Again, they had plenty of time to think about this and work it out to their advantage. If they didn't want Oswald leaving Dealey Plaza in a private car, then I'm sure they had the power to prevent that. You can't say that they had David Sanchez Morales pick up Oswald in a car that he borrowed from Ruth Paine because that has the conspirators acting against themselves. The conspirators wanted Oswald to be the LONE gunman with NO accomplices, therefore, they would not have had David Sanchez Morales or Ruth Paine act in those ways. It just doesn't make sense.

When was the phony bus ride conceived? Oswald was arrested at 1:45 and reached the DPD at 2:00. He wasn't interviewed until 3:15. Presumably, they didn't know what he was going to tell them about how he traveled. But, at 4:05, they were showing the bus transfer ticket to reporters and talking about the bus ride. So, at what time did they get the idea that they should concoct a phony story about how he left Dealey Plaza? Didn't they have to start planning it far in advance? How did they know that the Marsalis bus or any bus could get him to Oak Hill in time for the Tippit killing? And what if somebody came forward who saw Oswald in the course of his actual movement from Dealey Plaza to the Theater? It would have contradicted what they were saying, and it might have been iron-clad. 

What I am looking for here is a time, At what hour on what day did the first inkling of the idea to fabricate a phony bus ride for Oswald occur? I should think that it would have to have been well before the assassination. This was no trivial thing that they were doing. This was a whole separate and distinct conspiracy within the conspiracy, and it was fraught with risk and danger- to them. That's because if word got out that police fabricated a phony story with phony evidence about Oswald's travels, it would have meant automatic acquittal. Hey, when police commit crimes, when they lie, when they are corrupt, and it comes out, the defendant usually gets off. O.J. Simpson got off at the mere suspicion of the mishandling of the blood evidence and because Mark Fuhrman used the N word. 

So, this was a BIG decision to do so; it put everything in jeopardy. So, who made it? Henry Wade? By what authority? He was the DA of Dallas but he wasn't running the assassination of President Kennedy. Do you really think that he would have wanted the responsibility of taking the plot in that direction? And if you think that he did it, when did he do it? Because it doesn't sound like he had enough time to even analyze the idea, never mind put it into action. 

But, the biggest question is: if the conspirators thought it was such a terrible idea for their lone assassin to escape Dealey Plaza in a getaway car, why the hell did they let him do it? Don't you think they could have stopped it? Don't you think they were controlling Oswald and managing him? If they thought it would be better for him to use public transportation, then why didn't they see to it that he did that?
The Idiot Backes keeps quoting Fritz' statement to the Warren Commission that he took no notes, and the idea that he was lying is anathema to Backes. 

Now, think about the inherent contradiction that spews from the crippled mind of this stupid Backass:

a) on the one hand, Backes thinks that Fritz not only lied about Oswald having ridden the bus and cab, but he engaged in an elaborate and protracted fraud which involved a phony bus transfer ticket being planted on Oswald plus phony witnesses who were rounded up and prepped to give false testimony.  

b) But, Fritz must have spoken the truth when he said he took no notes because, after all, he said it. 

It's not a matter of understanding; it's a matter of accepting. And, I don't accept it. And, the part of "I kept no notes at the time" that I don't accept is: all of it. And, it's precisely because Fritz said it. 

Now, what part of "being a liar" do you not understand? Because Fritz was a liar. He lied about Oswald's alibi during the shooting. He should have told the Commission that Oswald said he was "out with Bill Shelley in front." Instead, Fritz took something that Oswald said that he did earlier- well before the assassination- which was to eat lunch in the first floor lunch room at a time when Junior Jarman and Harold Norman were milling around, and he shifted it, fraudulently, to the time of the assassination. Fritz actually had the nerve to say that Oswald said he was eating lunch with other employees during the shooting. That is so ridiculous. The employees were let go for lunch at 11:45 AM, which may have been earlier than usual. Why? Precisely so that they could get their biological needs met before the President's arrival at 12:30. That was 45 minutes to eat, drink, urinate, and defecate. There is no reason to think that ANYBODY in that company put off eating lunch to the time of the motorcade, and certainly not Oswald and others. IT WAS A LIE! A bold-faced lie. Fritz wasn't called on it because the WC wanted him to lie. They didn't want the truth. The whole investigation was a whitewash.  

So, what you need to do, Backass, is that when you read "I kept no notes at the time", you don't take it literally. Instead, you take it as code for: 

"I took notes, but I can't show them to you because Oswald said he was out with Bill Shelley in front during the shooting, and I know you don't want to hear that. So, let's just assume that I took no notes."

Comprende? Capisce? That's how it works, Backes. That's how it went down. But, it requires that you be something more than a blockhead with nothing but a proscenium arch between his ears. 

Now, Backes has pulled something new from out his ass: the idea that the lying, fabricating Fritz first was going to go with just the fake bus ride for Oswald. But then, they realized that the bus they faked him on would not have gotten him to Oak Hill in time to kill Tippit. So, they had to take him off that bus and stick him in a cab. 

It says the 2nd interview on the 23rd. So, that's quite a lot later. But, let's be realistic about something here: Oswald wasn't arrested until 1:45, and he didn't reach the PD until 2:00. And his very first interview didn't start until 3:15. And presumably, they didn't know what he was going to tell them about how he got to the Theater. Yet, by 4:00, they announced about the bus ride and showed reporters the transfer ticket. It was 4:05 to be exact. 

So, when did they concoct the scheme? You can't tell me that they concocted it in 45 minutes. If you're going to go with it, you have to stipulate that the police conceived of it much earlier and were working on it and laying it out before Oswald was even arrested, and before they knew what he was going to say about his movements.  

So, why couldn't they stick him on a bus that would get him to Oak Hill in time? Why couldn't they monitor the situation and pick a bus that worked? And if no bus worked, then why not just have him take a cab and be done with it? One thing. Keep it simple.

What the childish Backes is doing here is just letting his imagination run wild. It's preposterous to think that they were scheming such a lie because there were too many unknowns. What if somebody came forward who saw Oswald during the odyssey that he actually took which contradicted the official story about the bus and cab? How would they deal with that? 

And why did the conspirators allow Oswald to be picked up in Dealey Plaza if he was supposed to be the lone gunman? If they thought it looked better for him to travel by public transportation, then why not let him do it? Why let someone pick him up and then have to make up this fanciful story? If they didn't want him to travel that way, couldn't they have prevented it? Who picked him up, Backes? Who did Oswald ask for a ride? And if it wasn't his idea, then whose idea was it? It couldn't have been the same people that framed him because they didn't want him traveling that way. Don't you think they were controlling him every step of the way? Don't you think they told him to go to the Texas Theater? You don't think he had a hankering for a war movie, do you? So, whomever told Oswald to go the Theater would also have covered his means of getting there and made sure it was consistent with the story they were telling about a lone gunman with no accomplices. So how did this one aspect of the thing- a getaway driver- slip from their hands? And if it didn't slip from their hands, if they, the conspirators, arranged it, why did they arrange it? If it wasn't good for them, why did they do it? 

You're stupid, Backes. It doesn't work. You're twisting and weaving and trying to pounding a square peg into a round hole- which is your usual nightly routine. But, this one doesn't fit; it doesn't work; and you're just too stupid to realize it.      

Before you join the cadets in Dealey Plaza to sing America the Beautiful, you ought to watch this video. In it, a law professor spells out the outrageous sentences that have been given to minor drug offenders due to "minimum sentencing laws." This is what our insane "War on Drugs" has resulted in: small-time drug dealers getting longer sentences than rapists and murderers. 

In case you don't know it, the U.S. government is completely insane, and there is NOTHING to sing about. 

This is by famed JFK researcher John Kelin. Not Ralph Cinque but John Kelin:

"That the experienced head of a big city homicide and robbery unit would fail to keep notes on the interrogation of the most important prisoner he had ever had, or likely would have, has always been hard to accept. And lo and behold, it appears that Fritz did keep notes! A little wordplay, fancy semantics, is letting Fritz off the hook, though. The ARRB says in its press release that:

Fritz told the Warren Commission in 1964 that he took no notes during the Oswald interrogations, but indicated that he later typed a report based on "rough notes" that were made "several days later." These notes are believed to be the ones acquired by the Review Board.
Well, Fritz kept notes. Read them, look at this sample page

 and decide for yourself whether Fritz lied. The notes are indeed "rough," and look contemporaneous to me. And it remains preposterous that he would not have kept notes or that no one would have made a tape recording of this momentous event."

Why do you have to be so stupid, Backes? Oswald, himself, referred to the notes Fritz was taking during the interrogation. Speaking to Fritz, he said: "You took notes, so why don't you refer to them if you need to refresh your memory." What part of that don't you understand? 

And what else could Oswald have been referring to except his whereabouts during the shooting? He was responding to questions from Fritz, and what would have mattered more for Fritz to ask about? It wasn't after the shooting since Shelley left right away and saw Baker from a distance. So, Shelley was gone after the shooting. And, Shelley was definitely NOT lingering out in front when Oswald left for home. So, "out with Bill Shelley in front" could only have meant DURING the shooting. 

Besides, you've already sanctioned the Prayer Man hypothesis, remember? 

I know it hurts, but try to think. Why wouldn't Fritz take notes during the interrogations? Others did. Why would Fritz assume that he could remember everything Oswald said- including tedious things like a street address? It involved names, places, dates. How could Fritz possibly remember all that? You think he had a photographic memory? You think that only afterwards he realized that it was important?

And we are talking about WHAT OSWALD SAID. So, how could Fritz get that from the Texas Rangers or anywhere else?    

Of course Fritz lied. He lied about what Oswald said he was doing during the shooting, didn't he? There is no chance that Oswald was on the 5th floor eating his lunch while Junior Jarman and Harold Norman were looking out the window. Yet, Fritz said that Oswald said he was eating lunch with other employees during the shooting. That was a lie! It was a bold-faced lie! What's the matter with you?

And this whole idea of a mystery driver taking Oswald out of Dealey Plaza is bull shit. You hear me, Backes? It's bull shit- like everything else you say. You haven't the foggiest idea of who it could be. And don't you think that after 50 years, with all the tenacious investigating, and I mean PRIVATE investigating, that somebody would? And yet the ONLY name that has ever surfaced is DAVID SANCHEZ MORALES. And why? Because Roger Craig referred to the driver being "dark-skinned". Ipso facto, it must have been David Sanchez Morales. And because Oswald reportedly (by one person, Roger Craig) said something about not bringing Ruth Paine into it, it therefore meant that David Sanchez Morales must have gotten out to Irving to borrow Ruth Paine's station wagon because the fate of the biggest coup d' etat in the history of government overthrows, which involved the most powerful men on the planet, depended on borrowing a car from Ruth Paine.  

Oswald traveled by bus and cab, and he said so himself. There was no friend to pick him up. I have told you before, and I am telling you again now that Oswald had no friends in Dallas. NO FRIENDS! And the conspirators would NOT have provided him a driver since they wanted him to be the LONE gunman. That means he could have NO ACCOMPLICES. 


Thursday, June 26, 2014

I hope I have convinced you that it could not have been a friend of Oswald's who picked him up. It could have been ostensibly a friend but not a real friend. In other words, it could have been a handler, but someone who was setting him up and betraying him.

But, even that doesn't work. That's because anyone working for the conspiracy would have been bent on framing Oswald for the Tippit murder. Tippit wasn't murdered until 1:15, and Oswald was in the theater by 1:07. That's right; Oswald was in the theater when Tippit was still living and breathing. Wouldn't it have been better for a conspirator driver to delay getting Oswald to the theater in order to support the timeline for him killing Tippit?  

So really, you can't have a friend picking up Oswald, and you can't have an enemy picking up Oswald either. You just can't have anybody picking him up. 

Backes asks: Have you never heard of aiding and abetting? 

Aiding and abetting what? Oswald didn't do anything. And the driver just drove him to the theater. 

Oswald was the "accused" lone assassin, and even if he had been the real assassin- and we know he wasn't- why would Oswald tell his friend as they were driving to the Theater that he was the one who killed Kennedy? In other words, even if Oswald had done it, and he didn't, why assume that the driver knew?

Keep in mind that Backes claims that Oswald was picked up and driven away without claiming to have ANY knowledge of who it was. He has no idea who it was, yet somehow, he is sure that it happened.  

Others claim to know more. Some of them claim to know that it was David Sanchez Morales. They also claim to know that Morales borrowed Ruth Paine's car to do it. But, that really make no sense. Why would Morales have to borrow Ruth Paine's car? She didn't even live in Dallas; she lived in Irving. This was a "national security event", a coup d'etat, the overthrow of the US government, and you're saying that it all depended on borrowing Ruth Paine's car?

Let's break this down to bare bones: Oswald didn't kill anybody. Therefore, however he left Dealey Plaza, he had no reason to lie to the police about it. It could not possibly have been in his interest to do that, and he had to know it. And Oswald told police that he traveled by bus and cab. 

How much weight does that carry? Tons. 

Second, if a friend had picked him up and transported him, there was no crime in that, and that person would have had no reason to keep it a secret.  Look at Robert Vinson. He wound up on an Air Force cargo plane with the other Oswald, and he was afraid for his life. Yet eventually, even he came forward. You can't tell me that it would have been any different for a friend of Oswald's. 

So, that leaves only one other possibility: that Oswald got picked up, but it wasn't by a friend, but by an enemy. It was by somebody who was part of the plot, who was working with those who were framing Oswald. Then of course, that guy would have had no reason to come forward -ever. 

But, the problem is: why would the conspirators send someone to pick Oswald up and drive him away if they thought it looked bad? If they thought it would look better for him to use public transportation, why not let him? Why give him a ride and then have to concoct a phony story when it would have been much easier to just let him travel the way they thought he should?

So, what we're left with is something like this:

Henry Wade: "Listen, we're going to send someone to get Oswald and drive him to the theater, but it won't look good, so we'll make up a story that he took a bus and cab. And, we'll have to gather up phony witnesses and prep them and obtain a phony bus transfer ticket and plant it on him, and why we're doing all this I don't know since it would be much easier to just let him travel by bus and cab." 

So, Backes doesn't think Fritz lied to the Warren Commission about not keeping notes. If he said he didn't, he didn't, says Backes.

But, we already know that Fritz lied to the WC about what Oswald told him. Fritz said Oswald said he was eating lunch with other employees during the assassination, and we know Oswald didn't tell him that, plus we know that didn't happen.  

And, Backes thinks Fritz could have gotten the details about Oswald from the newspaper. But, that is really far-fetched. They published Oswald's New Orleans address in the newspaper? But wait! Why bother to make the notes at all? The Notes didn't go anywhere. It wasn't until 10 years after his death that they surfaced. So, in terms of him and his life and what he knew and what he expected, they NEVER surfaced at all. So, why did he bother making them? 

You just painted yourself into a corner, Backass. And this paint ain't never gunna dry.  
I hope you are following the logic of this. Since everyone who believes that the bus and cab rides were faked believes that Oswald was innocent, it means there was no illegality involved in picking him up in Dealey Plaza and driving him to the Texas Theater. And if you think they stopped at the boarding room first, that wasn't a crime either. 

And remember: Oswald hadn't done anything, so he had nothing to tell the guy. The guy wasn't Oswald's accomplice because nobody was: Oswald hadn't done anything. 

So, what reason did this man have to remain quiet? Why wouldn't he want to tell the world the truth? What trouble could he get into? What could they do to him? Kill him? No way. 

Look, they just let Oswald be killed. So now they were were going to allow another whoops killing? Get another guy like Ruby to knock him off? They'd have no reason to even put the guy in custody. For having done what? Driven a friend to the movies?  
I am presuming that the folks here know that Oswald didn't shoot anybody. Therefore, this supposed driver wasn't aiding and abetting a criminal in his escape from the scene of a crime. And they didn't commit any crimes together on their way to the Texas Theater. Therefore, there was no problem in coming forward and just telling the truth. So, to those who think there was such a friend who drove Oswald, what happened to this friend, and why didn't he come forward?
Backes is crazy. The Fritz Notes were taken during the interrogations. It is insane to think that Fritz repeatedly interrogated Oswald and didn't write a thing down until after Oswald was dead.

How could he possibly remember it all? How could anybody?

For example, here is page 4 of the Fritz Note which includes Oswald's address in New Orleans:

 So, Fritz remembered 4706 Magazine St? He remembered William B. Riley Company? He remembered the B? He remembered the name of Mr. Abt? That's a very unusual name. If it had been Smith or Jones or Collins, it would have been easy to remember, but Abt? 

I'm pretty sure Will Fritz was not a member of Mensa, and he wasn't a savant either. And there is no reason to think he knew Bill Shelley or knew who Bill Shelley was. It was a name he got from Oswald.  

Let's remember that FBI Agent Hosty also told the WC that he took no interrogation notes with Oswald, then 31 years later, he included them in his book. And Postal Inspector Harry Holmes reported the following as a quote of Oswald who at the time was speaking to Fritz:

"I’ve told you all I’m going to about that card. You took notes, just read them for yourself, if you want to refresh your memory.”

That was in reference to the ID in his possession of Alec Hidell. But, the rest speaks for itself. 

And I don't doubt that they lifted the palm print from Oswald after he was dead. 

But, the Fritz Notes are of vital important. They're the most important discovery of JFK evidence of the last 20 years.  They confirm Oswald's presence in the doorway- by his own admission. And they also confirm that Oswald told police that he rode the bus and cab. 

Where is the evidence that Oswald ever said that a friend picked him up from Dealey Plaza? And since it wasn't a crime for a friend to pick him up in Dealey Plaza and drive him to the Texas Theater, why didn't this friend come forward afterwards and say so? And if the police wouldn't listen, why didn't this person go to the press? If it was a friend of Oswald, wouldn't he want to vindicate him? If he knew the police were concocting a story about Oswald riding a bus and cab, why wouldn't he want to help his dead friend obtain justice? After all, if he could prove that police were lying about that- and surely he could- then wouldn't it suggest that they were lying about Oswald having killed Kennedy? Why wouldn't he come forward to help his friend?  
I'm sure James K. Lambert was very particular about which CT he featured in his trailer. And, I am not saying that to criticize the young man that he featured. I agree with everything he said. But, the plain truth is that talking about Johnson's motives for killing Kennedy and JFK's battle with the Federal Reserve as another motive has the ring of paranoia regardless of who says it. It screams Conspiracy with a capital C.  

But, what I would have said instead was that Oswald could not have killed Kennedy because he was standing outside in the doorway at the time. 

And again, I'm not saying that the other is paranoia, only that it can easily be construed as paranoia. But, this thing about Doorman isn't paranoia on any basis. This is just vision, meaning what you do with your eyes. Your vision and your focused mind are telling you that Oswald was outside, and therefore, he could not have been on the 6th floor. It's the same clothes, and the only one who dressed that way was Oswald. Lovelady wasn't dressed like that. It's Oswald's slender build. It's the shape of Oswald's face. And, it's the same stance of clasping his hands together in front, left over right. That was Oswald's stance; it wasn't Lovelady's. We have multiple pictures of Oswald doing that, including at the last moment of his conscious life when Jack Ruby shot him. 

This isn't about interpreting. It's not about inferring anything. It's about seeing something and recognizing it. Oswald was standing in the doorway, and that wraps up the whole case. It is checkmate. 
This is just in from Professor James Norwood, who is a real favorite of mine. I very much appreciate James' loyal correspondence and his tracking of what goes on here on this blog. In the midst of so many enemies, it's nice to have friends, and James is definitely one of mine. 

His comment below concerns the new film by James Lambert extolling the official story of the JFK assassination.  


I read with great interest your critique of the film trailer of James K. Lambert.  I also read through his comments on another
link of his home website where, in the shameful guise of "patriotism," he is soliciting funds for his documentary film:

On his website, he writes the following about himself:

"I am not a historian but I have always had a keen interested in the human story."

Those credentials should not inspire confidence in prospective contributors to his film because we need integrity and
bona fide historical research methods to truly understand the death of President Kennedy.

I very much appreciated your insightful and well-written commentary about Lambert's trailer.  His approach to the JFK
case is no different than the plethora of shallow and unsubstantiated media documentaries on the occasion of the 50th anniversary. 

Such lightweights as Lambert should motivate us all to make the 51th anniversary one that will get us closer to the truth
about the assassination of our 35th president.

For those who maintain that the Dallas Police made up the story about Oswald taking the bus and cab, I realize it is a popular position, but you should realize that there is a problem with it. And the problem is: the Fritz Notes. In those notes, besides Fritz writing down that Oswald told him that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front", Fritz wrote down that Oswald said he went "home by bus changed britches". 

Now, these were notes that Fritz took for himself and no one else. He never admitted to having the notes, and actually, he denied having them. He actually said he didn't take notes during the interrogations even though these are obviously cryptically written notes that were hastily written while someone was talking. 

They didn't surface until 10 years after Fritz' death, and he obviously had nothing to do with it happening. Therefore, we have to assume that Fritz was being truthful with himself. Hence, "out with Bill Shelley in front" is a true statement that Oswald made, and likewise, "home by bus changed britches" is also a true statement- of Oswald's. 

So, if you are going to believe that the Dallas Police concocted a lie about Oswald taking the bus and cab, you also have to believe that Oswald- for his own reasons- concocted the same lie. 

But, that is a tough row to hoe because, as you know, Oswald didn't kill anybody. He didn't commit any crimes- except for taking a swing at a policeman, and that was pretty much a non-issue. 

So, not having committed any crimes, why should he lie to the police? Lying is associated with guilt. Right? It would make him look guilty if he lied, wouldn't it? And since he didn't kill Kennedy or commit any other crimes, why not tell police that a friend picked him up, if that's how he left Dealey Plaza? Why lie about it? 

Here is a typed copy of the Fritz notes. It is the first of the Fritz notes, which followed the first interrogation. Why did Oswald tell Fritz that he took the bus?    
Here is a Facebook post by one Chris Simondet. Look at the term he used:

Kennedy-killers. I do believe I invented the term, and I am pleased to see others use it. I like to call a spade a spade, and that's what our enemies are: traitorous, blood-soaked Kennedy-killers. And I don't mean it symbolically or figuratively. I mean it literally. Because, when you aid and abet killers- even after the fact- you are a killer. You have blood on your hands. And they are aiding and abetting the killers of John Kennedy 50 years later. So, refer to them as Kennedy-killers. It is what they are. 

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

James K. Lambert has produced a documentary film that defends the official story of the JFK assassination, and the title of it is: CONSPIRACY THEORISTS LIE. You can watch the trailer here:

It comes out this fall, in time for the 51st anniversary. I don't know how he plans to distribute it. I can't imagine it will be shown in theaters. If Tom Hanks couldn't sell a movie about JFK officialdom (Parkland, which bombed badly) I doubt that James Lambert can. So, I suspect that it will just be an online thing, 

This man has training in documentary film-making, and he also teaches in the field of Media. But, there isn't much to the trailer. It's an appeal to Americana (love for America) with clean-cut, polished cadets singing in perfect harmony at the 50th anniversary gathering in Dealey Plaza last year. And then it breaks to a scruffy CT who is arguing with Lambert about Johnson's motives for killing Kennedy and more, to which Lambert  responds: "Much of what you're saying isn't true." And that's it. That's the end of it.  

I'm not a film-maker, but I have penned two scripts, and I don't think that this trailer was well done at all. Even if I were an LN, I first wouldn't appreciate being patronized with all that tear-jerking Americana stuff. It doesn't lend anything to finding the truth about what happened on 11/22/63. Personally, I don't think a government is anything that anybody should love. And I mean any government, and certainly not this one.  But, even if you disagree, brandishing love of America does not in any way advance JFK truth; it is irrelevant. In other words, Lambert is just playing the patriotic card. 

And I didn't recognize the CT that he argues with at the end, with the CT doing most of the talking. He spoke of the conflicts and resentments that LBJ had with Kennedy as a motive for his involvement in the murder, and he spoke of Kennedy's resolve to weaken the Federal Reserve. 

Well, both of those things are true. One of our senior members, Phillip Nelson, wrote a book about LBJ entitled LBJ: Mastermind of the JFK Assassination which I have read: twice. 

And regarding the Federal Reserve, I heard Judge Andrew Napolitano say on national television, "The last President who stood up to the Federal Reserve was John F. Kennedy, and look what happened to him."

That was a couple of years ago, and within a few months, his program, Liberty Watch, got cancelled even though it had high ratings. But, I remember thinking to myself at the time: "WTF! That is some statement to hear on prime time television." 

But, I have to give the devil his due. Lambert was quite clever. That's because the singing cadets seemed so peaceful, so harmonious, and so elevated; they were like the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. But, the CT was scruffy and routy; he talked fast and furious; he was aggressive; not physically of course, but he seemed zealous, maybe even over-zealous. He wasn't calm, like the cadets. He wasn't soothing, like the cadets. He didn't rise to a higher level, like the cadets. He seemed combative and abrasive. Maybe even fanatical is the right word to describe him. It was his belligerence that was being showcased and contrasted with the fine a cappella voices of the cadets singing for their beloved country. 

As political propaganda goes, it was textbook. You could call it Stalinist if you prefer "motherland" or you could call it Nazi if you like the sound of "fatherland" better. It doesn't matter. Take your pick. Either/or, that's what Lambert is selling. The trailer offers NOTHING of substance on why we should believe the official story of the JFK assassination. 

I doubt that the film will go far. In fact, I suspect that the high and mighty would like to see the 51st commemoration be quiet and subdued. They don't want a lot of fanfare. But, I am calling your attention to it because I think that we JFK truthers may be able to use this film to our advantage. I think it could be a springboard- for us.