Charles Drago Wrote:To these ears, LHO's "I'm just a patsy!" exclamation is that of a man who already has realized that he's been betrayed -- at least by some of his ostensible colleagues/superiors -- and is sending a "do the right thing or I'll say a lot more" message.
In any event, I find your DPD "cooperating with a known CIA undercover operative" construction to be fascinating and even novelistic in the best sense of the term.
There's nothing in that that contradicts anything I said. Oswald could easily be sending a message in his patsy protest while still conforming to everything else.
If you look at some of Oswald's other crazy statements while in custody or while being interviewed by authorities his patsy claim is right in line with everything else known about his Fair Play persona.
I forget where I read it, but in my internet readings I saw someone claim Dallas Police had contact with Oswald where they were given file information to show Oswald was an FBI informant. Plus they would know this from seeing Oswald at Ruby's back office at the Carousel.
Ruby was most-likely keeping an eye on Oswald as the representative of this cabal at the press conference. His presence there was to stare Oswald in the eye and convey that he was under their watch. The Dallas Police knew damned-well Ruby wasn't a journalist. Ruby's tone reinforces to Oswald that he is a member of the "Fair Play For Cuba Committee" ("and don't forget that"). Oswald knows he is not only under Ruby's eye but all those police who associate with Ruby as well.
Even though the Dallas Police take no notes all they have to do to convey their plan is say something to Oswald like "So you know your rights and right to have a lawyer - right?" All this seemingly innocuous and routine statement needed to be accompanied by was the right tone of voice or facial expression and Oswald would know right away what the plan was.
02-02-2011, 11:04 PM (This post was last modified: 03-02-2011, 04:16 PM by Charles Drago.)
The Package, the 1989 film starring Gene Hackman and Tommy Lee Jones, directed by Andrew Davis, and written by John Bishop, presents as the most profound and illuminating cinematic rendering of 20th century deep political events in general and the JFK assassination in particular (even though the Kennedy hit ostensibly has nothing to do with the film's plot) I've ever experienced.
Hackman plays an Army sargeant assigned to escort the "package" -- military prisoner Jones -- from Europe to D.C.
It turns out that Hackman has unknowingly assisted in the illegal entry into the U.S. of a highly skilled assassin whose mission is to shoot the American president and/or the Soviet chairman at a ... wait for it ... Chicago event where they will celebrate the unprecedented detente which they've brought about.
The high level Facilitators of the plot turn out to be American AND Soviet military and intelligence officers whose own masters, to use George Michael Evica's classic terminology, are "above Cold War differences."
An Oswald/Vallee patsy is set up: sheep dipped as a neo-Nazi sympathizer and given a job in an office that overlooks the podium at which the targets will speak.
Brilliant, tight, deeply aware of deep political matters.
Ok Charles,this brings me to the recent showing on BO Radio of Fletcher Prouty.John Judge asks him how a patsy is set up.Prouty gives his explanation,and then ends by saying,"Then they bring in the mechanics from overseas".
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.â€
Buckminster Fuller
I'd be shocked to learn that the Dealey Plaza gunmen were not imports. All of the Mac Wallace/James Files/Chauncey Holt/Richard Cain/Roscoe White/Dallas sherrif variety of "shooters" must be rejected for the role they and/or others claim for them.
Why? Because an assassination attempt that did not result in the death of JFK would have spelled doom for the Facilitators and perhaps -- just perhaps -- some of the Sponsors.
Accordingly, the most highly skilled hunters of humans available had to have been charged with making the kill.
Gerry Patrick Hemming told me that the rifleman in the NW 6th floor TSBD was a former Nazi sniper -- "one of the Rat Line boys" -- who some time later was asked by Hemming if he were concerned that one or more of the many researchers on the case would discover his identity.
The answer -- recounted, appropriately over ham and eggs, by Hemming in a too-heavy German accent: "Just spell my vucking name right!"
Prouty was not alone in his knowledge and willingness to speak of these matters.
And no, my Hemming-Prouty comparison does not extend beyond this observation.
Your reference to the Gene Hackman, Tommy Lee Jones film The Package and its removal of the U.S. and Soviet leaders in Chicago leads me to two similar lines of thought.
One is that Khrushchev was removed in October, 1964, and replaced with Brezhnev. Out with the detente-seeker; in with the hawk. Oddly familiar.
As a side note, Brezhnev brought Prague, the repression, at which Clinton and Talbott were oddly present, perhaps to learn how the international paradigm was maintained.
Secondly, the supranational forces you describe hark back to the tacit agreement of Oceania, Eurasia, Eastasia that perpetual war was desirable to consume wealth and control populations, that it would no longer cross borders but be confined to the quadrangle described.
As for the stateless mechanics Prouty described, your reference to the ratline in the Dal-Tex takes us back to the OSS players who continue in the post-war world.
Robert K. Wilcox in Target: Patton presents an odd interchangeability, that Brits claimed OSS was run by "one of their own," that Gehlen was penetrated by Soviets.
Hence Who Killed Patton might be the same supranational cabal which persists throughout history.
Albert Doyle Wrote:[quote=Charles Drago]
I'm very curious: Where would LHO's "I'm just a patsy!" public plea fit into your extraordinary rendition -- sorry -- of events?
Elementary my dear Drago. Oswald knows only one role. That of New Orleans Fair Play For Cuba Committee agitator and agent provocateur. He is simply maintaining that role in the Dallas Police station, which means he really is Garrison's hero and patriot and really would have gone all the way and taken the rap without blowing his cover. Little did he know the men he was being loyal to and trusted were in the process of betraying him and planning his murder.
I disagree with this. It overlooks another absolutely crucial piece of evidence. The one that I believe necessitated Ruby killing Oswald.
Ruby could have killed Oswald prior to that morning. He did not. Why?
Because I think they were waiting to find out what Oswald would do while under questioning and in his press conferences. Its quite clear that he has no idea he was being framed for JFK' s murder from his reaction to the news that he is being charged with it. This clearly stuns him.
When Oswald tried to make the call to John Hurt, as Victor Marchetti said, he signed his death warrant. The next morning he was killed. It was a really tragic and terrible error on his part. He wanted to know what was going on, what did they want him to say, what was going to be his defense? That was too much.
I could not agree with you more heartily regarding the Chicago evidence. My hypothesis has ZERO effect on its immense significance.
Ditto the "shameful" handling of Black's piece by rather, well, shameful people.
In re Bill's Rex and November 1 triple header hypothesis: I've long said that "consider the timing" is for our investigations what "follow the money" was for Watergate: a directing mantra. So I share your sense of the general significance of these connected phenomena.
It's just that I remain at a loss to understand how the Kelly hypothesis falsifies the Drago hypothesis in this instance.
BTW, a few years ago I found the Black piece on a now-forgotten Internet site. It was my first reading of it, and I thought it ended abruptly at a point where, if memory serves, Black is writing about returning to Chicago.
Are you able to direct us to an on-line version of the piece?
Thanks,
Charles
The link below has Edwin' Black's article about the Chicago plot that was published in the Chicago Independent in November, 1975.
Thanks for that link John, that's new to me. I remember Sherman Skolnick had dug up some documents on Vallee, but there's a lot of stuff in there that's new to me. I think Black's anonymous SS informant is the real deal and not peddling dizinfo, and there should be a lot more documents available now since that was published. Also would like to see the complete article. CPD Capt. Robert Lisky, Jay Lawrence Sticks, Myron Weinstein and Thomas D. Strong are all new names to me.
I have never seen a complete rundown of Abe Bolden's claim about the Dallas office calling asking for info on a "Hurt," which would be worthwhile for someone to do.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Ruby could have killed Oswald prior to that morning. He did not. Why?
Because I think they were waiting to find out what Oswald would do while under questioning and in his press conferences. Its quite clear that he has no idea he was being framed for JFK' s murder from his reaction to the news that he is being charged with it. This clearly stuns him.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but this contrasts with the meticulous world-class level of diabolical planning we see elsewhere in the conspiracy. If we extrapolate this level of planning, we can look at the fact there is any predicament with Oswald at all as a sign that this is somehow a failure in the plot. According to the rest of the plot, if there is any vulnerability or compromise the conspirators are defending against by having Oswald in custody then it would be reasonable to assume this is something that wasn't planned. It makes you wonder if Oswald was never supposed to get this far to the police station and Ruby and his monitoring is desperate damage control. Something's definitely not right here. In no way would the original plot involve a suicide attack by Ruby in the police station.
Safe Mode: We don't know which combination of Oswald's was supposed to do what or be killed by whom after assassination. It wouldn't shock me if Lee was MKULTRA programmed to shoot the cop that arrested him and then be gunned-down by the cops.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:When Oswald tried to make the call to John Hurt, as Victor Marchetti said, he signed his death warrant. The next morning he was killed. It was a really tragic and terrible error on his part. He wanted to know what was going on, what did they want him to say, what was going to be his defense? That was too much.
I really wish Stone has put this in his film.
You have to imagine a Lee Oswald who was sitting in the 2nd floor lunchroom and realizes something funny is going on when JFK gets shot. He either gets handed a gun by Ruby or goes home and gets one. He's now a man on his own because he doesn't know who has betrayed him, how exactly he was betrayed, who is in on it, who he doesn't know is in on it, who is still operating under the original orders and is trustworthy, what the new plan is, or what to do?
Right. Oswald calls Hurt because he wants to touch base with his network. I have to assume Hurt is an old contact from the Atsugi/Russia days. He calls Hurt because he no longer trusts the local contacts surrounding the conspiracy. He takes a step back and contacts an outside ONI contact because he feels Hurt's still clean and trustworthy and hasn't been compromised. This shows the depth of the conspiracy because Oswald doesn't suspect the deep layering involved. Oswald doesn't worry about exposing himself or Hurt because he knows the cops are in with Ruby and therefore in with the conspirators. And he might even take slight relief in the call not going through. That would mean he is being controlled by the people he's trying to contact.
We have to wonder what Oswald would have told Abt? I imagine if he made it to Abt and his counsel he would have tried to contact FBI again like in New Orleans.
the rex...from james richards...no he did not name them..not at that time....b ps just a thought but with jfk making the comment that the ss had taken care of that, and no threats reported from dallas, could that not have proceeded that the security was then made as lax as it was, no problems scenario, so no second thought to leaving the bubble top off, the sharp curve at elm, and the removing of the motorcycle guards and dpd car security from the motorcade as well..giving jfk and all a sense of false security...b
