Sunday, April 3, 2016

John Newman is right that the Mexico City affair was a CIA operation through and through, all the way, from beginning to end. But, he is WRONG that the real Oswald could have been involved. They never would have done that. Why? Because it would have given Oswald too much information that he could have told police after his arrest.

"You know I am a CIA agent, right? That they recently sent me to Mexico City on an assignment? That was just a few weeks ago. So, I was a Marine with a top security clearance, and now I am a CIA agent, and you think I killed the Commander in Chief?  Tell you what: let's get David Atlee Phillips in here. He'll tell you who I am. And there are other people in the Agency who will vouch for me. You want names? I'll give you names."

When you are accused of killing the President of the United States, you are going to use whatever you've got to defend yourself. At that point, Oswald would have talked. He'd have spilled his guts.

They may have hoped that he'd be killed before he could talk. But, you hope for the best and prepare for the worst. You know who said that? The corrupt CIA Chief in The Bourne Ultimatum played by Scott Glenn.

Great show, by the way. 

So, no, no, no. There is no way they had such an intricate CIA operation going on weeks before the assassination which involved the real Oswald. It was way too much inside information to arm him with. They wouldn't have done that. They didn't do it. 

Oswald was manipulated to do what he did in New Orleans with the leafletting. But, I'm sure it was a subtle process. But, there is no way you can subtly get a guy to make a trip to Mexico City to request Soviet and Cuban visas, all on pretense.  

And since there definitely were Oswald impostors involved in Mexico City, how could the real Oswald have also been involved? What if he ran into them, at the Embassies or elsewhere? The very fact that there were Oswald impostors in Mexico City tells you that he wasn't there. 

This is very important. It's very important because if Oswald was set up in Mexico City, then what are the chances that he wasn't set up in Dallas just a few weeks later? If he didn't do the thing in Mexico City, then he didn't do the thing in Dallas.

Of course, we know- independently- that he didn't do the thing in Dallas. For goodness sake, we have images of him standing in the doorway at the time of the shots. But, even if we didn't have them, I'm saying that this Mexico City plot, to impersonate him there, to blame him for that when he wasn't even there, which preceded the Dallas plot, proves that he was innocent and set up in Dallas as well.  

There is no chance that Oswald went to Mexico City, and there is no chance that he killed John F. Kennedy. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.