Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Tink Thompson did a video on the Umbrella Man in which he ridicules the idea that he was an operative because of the story that came out during the HSCA that the Umbrella Man was a guy who was protesting Joseph P. Kennedy's actions in the 1930s in the run-up to World War 2 in which he met secretly with the German ambassador to the UK to seek a way to prevent another war.  

Kennedy, as U.S. ambassador to the UK, made public statements trying to avert war. But, nobody wanted the war to be averted, and least of all FDR and his inner circle. They wanted war. So, Kennedy was asked to resign, and he did, and the war, of course, happened. 

To me, Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. was a hero for trying to prevent a war that killed 65 million people. 

Here is Tink's video. Go ahead and watch it. He's got that folksy way about him. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuoZWb9gqv0&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3ZxEpm5ZCfJF-LMBuANt3QzJ8Cg3KX_GwGatnHSLYLxqhFS1DwdaqGIKw

But, fast forward now to 1963 when WW2 was long over, and the Nazis were long defeated, and not just defeated but eliminated- except for the 2400 of them that were given visas to the U.S.because they had valuable skills that we needed, such as in chemical weapons. And, a new enemy grew out of WW2: the Soviet Union, and that was the big concern in 1963, not the Nazis. 

So, what reason was there, mentally, to go back to what Joseph P. Kennedy did in the 1930s? And why would anyone think that JFK would see an open umbrella and think, "Oh! He must be protesting what my father did in the 1930s." Why would Kennedy's mind even go there? Don't you think he had other things on his mind? And I mean current things; things that he had to deal with; things that were on his plate. 

And there is no reason to think that an open umbrella would bring up thoughts of Neville Chamberlain. There are numerous images of Hitler and Chamberlain shaking hands, but there is no umbrella involved.

There are lots of pictures of Chamberlain with an umbrella, but mostly not open. He used it like a cane, and it was like a fashion accessory for him. 

So, why should JFK, upon seeing this guy, have any thought about his father's actions in the run-up to World War 2?

It's ridiculous. The whole story is ridiculous. The man who came forward claiming to be Umbrella Man was Louis Stephen Witt who was born in 1924 in Rockwall, Texas. In the late 1930s, he was still a teenager, so why, at that young age, would he have been so enthralled with this? Or, did he become a WW2 buff later in life? And why not consider the possibility that he was an actor and a liar? In other words, what reason is there to believe him any more than there is to believe Judyth Baker that she was Oswald's lover as they trapsed around Louisiana trying to develop a bio-weapon to kill Castro? Why believe that Beverly Oliver at age 17 was the matronly, frumpy, overweight Babushka Lady? And the same goes for Louis Witt claiming to be Umbrella Man. Why believe any of these people who inserted themselves into the JFK story years later? 

Why be so gullible? I'm asking you, Tink: Why are you so gullible?  Why do you believe Louis Witt? Where is your natural-born skepticism? Where is your natural-born cynicism? If you don't have it, then get some. And grow up, would ya?  Stop being so childishly gullible. When you hear a preposterous story, assume that the lipflapper is lying, would you? Is that too much to ask? It's the year 2020, for goodness sake. STOP BEING SO GULLIBLE!