"What Happened to JFK--and Why it Matters Today"

[Peter Lemkin]

As for our "exchanges", I connected Jack with Allan and was receiving copies of their discussions as well as of Jack's work. I presumed
that we all knew that we were communicating with one another.

Enough has been said for the members of this forum to make up their own minds about this. I invite everyone to consider all of the evidence that has been presented. There is more than enough.

Jack is right about the multiplicity of familiar faces in Dealey Plaza. Given the others of whom we are aware and that Lansdale was photographed there, too, it is not surprising Conein would be there.

It is significant that Fletcher Prouty also endorsed the identification of Mainman as Conein. In one of my communications, I said that, if "Adams" is not a close facsimilie of Conein, he must be Conein himself.

Allan may have removed the word "plaque", but he has continued to cite the (now) "newspaper clippings" as evidence that Mainman was Adams and not Conein. Think about it. That is simply stunning!

Allan could set things right by removing his endorsement of the identification of Mainman as Adams and noting that the evidence is not merely equivocal but has been challenged in studies by Jack White.

Jim...I think you misspoke about Prouty endorsing Mainman as Conein
I think. Fletch died before this identification came up, as I recall.
But Fletch DID SAY Conein was in DP, but misidentified him as
being on Elm Street. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF MY MEMORY IS WRONG.
I could be misrembering. If Prouty identified Mainman as Conein,
I would be absolutely convinced. Fletch knew him well!

Jack

From memory, not old notes, Prouty said Conein was in Dallas [as he said Landsdale was], but did not ID him correctly in the correct photo - his sources told him Conein was there that day. Very significant is that Conein and Landsdale often worked together - and both were apparently there.