Blatburst-Roy, Carpenter and Holland

[Dawn Meredith]

http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/...es-friends

The above is one of the early signs of why I began to have my doubts about Roy/Blatburst.

It is an utterly fascinating display of two laymen trying to go after a doctor. And not doing very well.

Note also who Roy/Blatburst is allied with, the inveterate cover up man Dave Reitzes. Which matches with him putting his review of the Clay Shaw cover up book on Max Hollands's web site.

In the long debate on EF about Judy Baker where Jim Fetzer fell on his sword, I tried to gently tell Jim he should defer to someone like Bill Davy about Clinton/Jackson and not take her word for it.

Know who Blatburst/Roy recommended? Patricia Lambert.

Does it get more clear than this.

Anyway, enjoy this interesting colloquy. And let me add, Reitzes says here that I hold that Ferrie was murdered. That is not so. I have never said that. I don't know what happened to Ferrie in any certain way. That is just a cheap smear on his part in order to polarize the discussion.

Patricia Lambert??? Very telling indeed. I used to see his posts at EF all the time but all of this puts him in an entirely new light.

Dawn

[Jim DiEugenio]

See, I have always thought who you hung out with and who you endorsed was important.

Martin Hay considers Lambert's book one of the ten worst ever published on the case. I think he may be right.

When you endorse a book like that over Bill Davy's, and you hang out with Reitzes, and you post at Max Holland's, then what kind of "careful researcher" are you?

[Albert Doyle]

One who is careful to avoid the real evidence while wasting people's time with filler. There's too many alleged researchers who say they are giving the other side fair hearing and then proceed to allow a flow of lies from Lone Nutter-oriented sources. Fair airing does not excuse lies or disingenuous arguments.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Especially when on tries to present oneself as being oh so objective and judicious.

And then you post your stuff on Max Holland's web site. Right next to the fruity cyber terrorist John McAdams.

[Jim DiEugenio]

BTW, getting back to the Reitzes/Blatburst Roy association, can you believe what that idiot Reitzes said to Pitelli?

After they had been routed by him, Retizes says that hey, I never said it wasn't a conspiracy, but I never saw any evidence about what Garrison was outlining.

Why is that ridiculous? Because Reitzes was an LBJ did it advocate in is early days!

In other words, we are supposed dot believe that that was a credible theory, but Garrison's CIA did it was not??

In other words, 544 Camp Street and Guy Banister, and all the people who saw Oswald there, and Banister exploding when he learns that Oswald put his address on the Corliss Lamont flyer, all the witnesses who saw Shaw and Ferrie with Oswald in Clinton/Jackson, all the witnesses who said that Shaw was Bertrand (about 14 of them, including Andrews to Weisberg), Ferrie searching for both his library card and the CAP photo in the wake of the assassination, Banister telling Delphine Roberts that there will be no real inquiry in New Orleans about the assassination, Oswald calling the FBI when he is arrested, Walter seeing his informant file there, Shaw calling Andrews to defend Oswald, etc etc etc. That is not evidence right?

Can the man be serious? These are the kind of people Roy/Blatburst finds comfort with.

[Tracy Riddle]

What happened to Reitzes, anyway? Some of the articles he wrote in the 1990s were pretty good. Did he undergo a miraculous conversion lol?

In any case, I think that the events in New Orleans involved people at the low end of the plot - logistics people, and setting up the patsy - not the chief organizers. These low-level people (CIA, mob, Latin Americans, ex-FBI "private security" groups, right-wingers) can conceivably be tied in with Texas oilmen (as we see later with Iran-Contra and the Bush family), or the Pentagon (Operation Northwoods), or international drug trafficking/gun-running, or Nazi war criminals, or all of them. The international flavor of many of these plots (RFK assassination) makes it hard to untangle them.

Garrison himself often put out different public statements about who was ultimately responsible - sometimes blaming Nazis; or 1/1968 in Ramparts, Garrison was quoted as saying, "Who appointed Ramsey Clark, who has done his best to torpedo the investigation of the case? Who controls the CIA? Who controls the FBI?...The one man who has profited most from the assassination - your friendly President, Lyndon Johnson." But then he also told Playboy in 1967 that "our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon".

[Jim Hargrove]

In other words, 544 Camp Street and Guy Banister, and all the people who saw Oswald there, and Banister exploding when he learns that Oswald put his address on the Corliss Lamont flyer, all the witnesses who saw Shaw and Ferrie with Oswald in Clinton/Jackson, all the witnesses who said that Shaw was Bertrand (about 14 of them, including Andrews to Weisberg), Ferrie searching for both his library card and the CAP photo in the wake of the assassination, Banister telling Delphine Roberts that there will be no real inquiry in New Orleans about the assassination, Oswald calling the FBI when he is arrested, Walter seeing his informant file there, Shaw calling Andrews to defend Oswald, etc etc etc. That is not evidence right?

LOL. What's kind of weird, though, is that Warrior stamp kit allegedly used to make hand stamps on both the Crime Against Cuba booklet and and the FPCC flyer clearly was not in Oswald's possession in Dallas, either at the rooming house or the Paines' garage. It wasn't initialed by the Dallas cops and didn't appear on the original inventory lists, and it didn't appear in the photos. I don't see how the Dallas cops could have missed a damned rubber stamp kit! It only appears after Oswald's possessions were secretly sent to Washington and then returned to Dallas, vastly expanded.

I don't doubt that "Lee Harvey Oswald" had a hand in stamping those hand-outs, but it sure is undeniable now how much the FBI was determined to "improve" the evidence.

[Jim DiEugenio]

I beg to disagree with two guys who I like, but I do.

First of all, I would not call David Phillips part of the lower level. He was at the mid level. And if you read my book, the second edition of Destiny Betrayed, you will see that he was the CIA's man in charge of their anti FPCC campaign (along with McCord). And this is clearly what Oswald was doing that summer in the Crescent City.

Further, as you can also see in my book, there is good evidence that Phillips had met with Arcacha Smith and Banister at 544 Camp Street the year before. And then there is the training camp film that Tanenbaum and others saw while at the HSCA, which features Phillips, Oswald and Banister.

Then of course there is Phillips in MC lying his head off about just about everything to cover up the fact that the CIA was setting up Oswald even further there.

As per Garrison, I think you have swallowed some Reitzian, Blatburst,Summers/Hoch disinfo. Its true that at the start Garrison was involved in a hall of mirrors and could not really decipher what the heck was going on. This is why he let CIA plants like De Torres into his office. But by the summer of 1967, he had decided that CIA was the main perp in the crime. You can tell this by reading the Playboy interview which was conducted that summer. The Ramparts article does not actually say LBJ was in on the plot; it says he benefited from the plot and was in on the cover up. Which is true.

As per the Corliss Lamont flyer, I don't quite get what you are trying to say. I thought that that flyer, along with other paraphernalia, was given to the FBI upon Oswald's arrest. Therefore it would not be in the DPD's hands at the time of the assassination. But the stamp on it was done with a rubber and ink stamp. And such a kit is in the WC volumes. Now if it did not belong to Oswald, who did it belong to?

And why would the FBI and WC put it there if it did not?

The FBI and WC relied on the whole 544 Camp street scene being covered up forever. This is why Ferrie was allowed to lie his head off to the FBI and why the WC never interviewed Banister or SAS. And why the FBI covered up the fact they knew that Shaw was Bertrand.

They understood how important all this was to keeping Oswald as the sociopathic communist they needed him to be. If not, a keystone of the cover up would collapse. Garrison screwed all that up for them.

[Jim Hargrove]

As per the Corliss Lamont flyer, I don't quite get what you are trying to say. I thought that that flyer, along with other paraphernalia, was given to the FBI upon Oswald's arrest. Therefore it would not be in the DPD's hands at the time of the assassination. But the stamp on it was done with a rubber and ink stamp. And such a kit is in the WC volumes. Now if it did not belong to Oswald, who did it belong to?

And why would the FBI and WC put it there if it did not?

The FBI and WC relied on the whole 544 Camp street scene being covered up forever. This is why Ferrie was allowed to lie his head off to the FBI and why the WC never interviewed Banister or SAS. And why the FBI covered up the fact they knew that Shaw was Bertrand.

They understood how important all this was to keeping Oswald as the sociopathic communist they needed him to be. If not, a keystone of the cover up would collapse. Garrison screwed all that up for them.

Exactly! I can't disagree with a word you say, but that's why the stamp kit plant is so weird.

The kit clearly wasn't among Oswald's possessions at DPD headquarters the night of 11/22, and therefore it couldn't have been sent to Washington during the secret xfer of Oswald's possessions to the FBI during the wee morning hours of 11/23. But it sure as hell was among "Oswald's possessions" when the expanded items were secretly returned to Dallas a few days later, along with a Minox light meter, tax documents from Oswald's teen-aged years, and so on.

No doubt this is a minor point, but I've been puzzled about it for some time.

[Tracy Riddle]

I agree that Phillips would be at the middle level of the plot. He was obviously higher up than the people in New Orleans, some of whom were probably compartmentalized to the point of not knowing exactly what Oswald was being set up for.