29-01-2013, 09:13 PM
Albert Doyle Wrote:I also lean towards Armstrong. If Leibeler avoided the Pfister employment record there must have been something there. We have enough evidence of Dallas doubles to carry Armstrong, at least to that degree.I don't know who they are to this day, Nobody does. I have stromg suspicians. But it has taken years to develop them. I was 17 when JFK died and hadn't even begun to question Vietnam. But I must have missed when Dulles, Helms, Phillips, Morales, etc, were tried and went to jail. And who knew at that time Harriman, Prescott and George Bush, along with a number Big Banking/Military Industialists, and several members of the Joint Chiefs, could be involved. IMO they have done a pretty good job of maintaining their plausible deniability. A lot of people who were involved and have known a lot about the conspiracy besides Oswald, maybe they even knew more than he did, have tried to speak out. What has happened to them? I think they could have managed an Oswald trial. They managed Ruby's and he knew a lot too. The reason we got the lone nut instead of Oswald/Castro IMO, is because Hoover was afraid for his reputation and the embarrassment of the Bureau, and Johnson was afraid of WWIII. But I agree with you that at the highest levels it mattered little whether they went into Cuba or Vietnam. They were in a position to take advantage of both.
However don't you realize how what you write shows why there was no chance of the CIA higher-ups being insulated? The fact you already know about them shows that there was no point in hiding it. Also, the fact Oswald was shot by Ruby greatly increases the likelihood he was supposed to be killed that day.
I think Stockwell agrees with me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pCXJQKGZ7k
.