The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight

It’s too early to write the history of the Obama administration. But, at this point, it looks like, for the most part, that history may be summed up in three words: coulda, woulda, shoulda. I “coulda” signed an immigration bill, but Congress was too busy shutting down the government. I “woulda” closed the gun show loophole, but the NRA wouldn’t let me. “I “shoulda” done something about climate change, but I just ran out of time.

The one, big exception is the Affordable Care Act. That is the one concrete thing President Obama has accomplished. As Joe Biden would say, that’s a “BFD,” which is why the breakdown of the Obamacare website is so inexcusable. It will be fixed, but it never should have collapsed in the first place.

Launched on October 1, the same day Congress shut down the federal government, problems with the website designed for people to sign up for one of 36 state health exchanges popped up immediately. Customers had to be cleared before they could shop (just the opposite of most commercial websites). The website shut down in the middle of many searches, dropping all stored data, and forcing customers to start over from scratch. Rates were often misquoted, and inaccurate information relayed to insurance providers.

And what was the response of the Obama administration? One pitiful excuse after another. First, they declared that the problem was simply too much traffic. They didn’t expect so many people to check it out, they lamented, so they couldn’t handle the volume, which made no sense at all. How can you preach for years that millions of Americans are eager to buy health insurance — and then say you’re surprised when millions of Americans are, indeed, eager to buy health insurance?

At the same time, the White House minimized problems with the site as the kind of “glitches” every new site experiences, but which would quickly work themselves out. Except that experts soon confirmed that difficulties navigating the site stemmed from serious system failures, and not mere glitches.

Then HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius told CNN that part of the problem was that so many people going to the website were not “tech savvy.” Which may be true, but which is also why the site should have been designed as fool-proof and easy to use. Not to mention that countless “tech savvy” people reported they couldn’t find their way around the website, either.

Finally, 21 days after launch, President Obama admitted the problems were serious, expressed his anger and frustrations with the website failures and announced he was bringing in a team of the best and brightest, the so-called “tech surge,” to straighten out the mess. Good move. But, one must wonder, why the best and brightest weren’t hired to design the system from the start, instead of CGI, a Canadian firm, who, according to USASpending.gov, were paid upward of $634 million — for nothing. HHS would have been better off subcontracting the whole operation out to Amazon or ProFlowers. They know how to handle traffic. They thrive on it.

It’s not all bad news. Where the federal government has floundered, state governments have soared. On my show, I’ve heard nothing but success stories from those 14 states — California, New York, Washington State, Maryland, Connecticut and others — where governors have embraced Obamacare and set up their own websites. Under Democratic Governor Steve Beshear, Kentucky leads the pack, signing up an average of 1,000 new health care patients a day. Ironically, it’s only in those states where Republican governors have rejected Obamacare that the administration has run into trouble.

Nevertheless, opponents of the Affordable Care Act are enjoying this meltdown a little too much. They love the fact that the launch is having so many problems. It just reinforces their stale old argument that the ACA should be delayed or dumped altogether. But they’re only kidding themselves. Obamacare is here to stay. It’s already helped millions of Americans. Problems with the website, which is only one part of Obamacare, will soon be fixed. By January, as many as 30 million more Americans will be able to sign up for the health care they need for themselves and their families, at bargain rates never before available.

In the meantime, this isn’t rocket science. The Obama administration should stop making lame excuses, admit they dropped the ball big time, and just get busy and fix the darned thing. Fast!

2170 Responses to The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight

  1. What about the sworn testimony that conflicts with your sworn testimony? Why do you ignore it? Why can’t you answer a simple question like why shoot from the front? Why shoot from the opposite side of the road where you have to shoot thru two rows of occupants to hit your target? Not very sound tactics is it? Assume your shooter was in the above ground drain. Look at the angle, look at the direction the car was traveling. The shooter would have had about a 6 inch window to out the bullet thru with the vehicle traveling towards him leading to a possible high shot and from his right to left forcing him to compensate for lateral motion. It’s a shot that has a very low probability of success and not one a professional would take. Not to mention look at the location on the windshield (at the top) of the supposed hole and where the drain was, lower than the car. In order to have a chance of hitting the target the entry point would have had to be in the bottom of the windshield as the shooter would have been shooting at an upward angle. If it entered where fetzer claims it does it would have travelled well above the intended target. It’s amazing the thought you guys put into proving that oswald couldn’t have fired from the tsbd but accept as gospel that some unnamed person took an impossible shot from somewhere else just because they’re not oswald. Yet the shot and forensics from oswalds position have been reproduced but none of the others have, they’ve only been theorized. The best place to shoot from? 6th floor of the tsbd. The vehicle was moving almost directly away so the only compensation needed would be elevation. If the shooter didn’t compensate his shot would fall low but the distance was so small it would be minimal. It wasn’t a hard shot for oswald to take.
    I don’t need a government report or an idiotic website. The problem is your claims are so implausible and devoid of reality that they are easily debunked. You claim to have served in ‘nam but appear to have no knowledge of basic shooting techniques. Follow all of your supposed shooting positions and account for both elevation and lateral displacement and the real and imagined wound locations. They don’t line up. They line up with one trajectory only, 6th floor of the tsbd, and it’s been proven several times.

    “I’m gonna go out a limb here and say that if tomorrow morning you wake to find all the JFK records have been released.
    You will not be swayed.” That’s because there’s bit there there.
    “You’ll just blow it off by saying they couldn’t release that stuff because then it might look like a CIA sanctioned conspiracy.” Actually I wish they would release the records so we could watch you flounder claiming how they didn’t really release everything and how they need to release just one more thing so you could prove your theory. Problem is we know the answer, your buddy did it.
    “I don’t think Hillary was the problem. I think the problem was Jrs’ George, magazine.. Just a little too democratic.” Going for the anti Semite angle again? I think he fucked up and killed himself. Care to identify who you think did it? Got any proof?
    Still waiting on the $52 an hour while your at it. And an actual picture of a bullet hole in the windshield.

  2. did you read right past the DaL-Tex building shooters”
    The term that comes to mind and used extensively is ” simultaneous triangulation”
    They refuse to use it because it implies more than one shooter.
    Latest poll says 6 out of 10 don’t believe oswald did it. 3 out of 10 believe he acted alone.
    I can’t say with certainty who did shoot JFK, but, I am positive it was not LHO.
    Why did president ford need to lie about the bullet hole in JFK s back?? To protect oswald??
    Why did the CIA have an office in the TSBD ? At that time the CIA was not allowed to operate within our borders.
    The omissions keep coming to the surface. Bullets were flying everywhere. The lady ten feet away from JFK being murdered and the high inquisition didn’t see her as relevant!
    There’s not enough on oswald to be convicted today. No prints, screwed with evidence trails, so many different accounts, some real some changed. The conspiracy of the hidden facts. Now, who do you think owns that one??
    The plans were uncovered for similar actions on the president in Chicago an Jacksonville.
    Who on this planet would’ve have capable of killing the president??
    Any more info on the COG??

    The more you dig. The curiouser it gets. The autopsy photos had another unexpected death. That was the guy in the other room watching the autopsy on video.
    And taping it. So, he had to go, too.

  3. “Latest poll says 6 out of 10 don’t believe oswald did it. 3 out of 10 believe he acted alone.” Thought you said polls were lies? Since you now believe in polls do you think aliens are walking among us? You said half the country believes it. Polls say 63% want obamacare stopped. Believe that poll?

    “Who on this planet would’ve have capable of killing the president??” A lone gunman.

    “The term that comes to mind and used extensively is ” simultaneous triangulation”
    They refuse to use it because it implies more than one shooter.”
    They refuse to use it because it’s an idiotic theory and only happens in Hollywood. I think you and your pals watch to much of the Bourne conspiracy. You know it’s not real right.

    “Why did the CIA have an office in the TSBD ? At that time the CIA was not allowed to operate within our borders.” Because they didn’t. Got any proof mrs. Innocent until proven guilty? Say they did. Wouldn’t it be a but imprudent to use the building you have an office in from which to either kill or set someone up to kill the president? If the CIA was as inept as all of your theories make them out to then they didn’t stand a chance of pulling this off.

    “Why did president ford need to lie about the bullet hole in JFK s back?? To protect oswald??” Seriously? You hang your hat on the dumbest shit. What’s the difference between base of the neck and slightly above the shoulder? Anyway you look at it that’s about an inch. That’s proof of what? That Ford sucked at anatomy? It’s absolutely meaningless but your whacked out world it’s proof of a conspiracy.

    “No prints”. No palm prints you mean. Anyway I suggest you take the time to research exactly how hard it is to recover prints from a weapon. It’s much harder than CSI makes it out to be and not uncommon to find none even when you know the person used the weapon. Plus he did have GSR on his hands. But you avoid that.

    “I can’t say with certainty who did shoot JFK, but, I am positive it was not LHO.” No you can’t. He’s the only viable candidate. You just don’t want to believe he did it. Most likely because you see yourself in him and don’t want to admit what you could be.

    “The conspiracy of the hidden facts. Now, who do you think owns that one??” You do. There are no hidden facts, just your need to believe in some larger evil force because your reality is so shitty.

    “so many different accounts, some real some changed.” Oddly enough when they support your point if view you deem them as real. When they are changed to support your point of view they are real. Otherwise you conclude they are false.

    “The lady ten feet away from JFK being murdered and the high inquisition didn’t see her as relevant!” What about all those around the Clinton’s who have meet questionable deaths? You don’t find them “relevant”? See what I mean. When it suits your agenda you believe it, when it doesn’t you ignore it .

    “The more you dig. The curiouser it gets. ” not really. More inane really. What’s curious is how twisted you and your nutty pals can get. The way you turn on one another when you disagree with each other.

    Speaking of which did you know that some of your pals think fetzer is a government plant? His job is to make up such idiotic conspiracies so as to cause the general public to discount all conspiracy theories. Is it true? Or is it just another conspiracy theory?
    Oh the tangled web we weave.

    The reality is conspiracy theories are for the weak of mind which is why they suit you. Youve proven yourself time and again to be utterly inept and useless when it comes to facts, $52 an hour comes to mind. Yet you can make yourself feel so much smarter if you believe in oswald. Believing in your idiotic theories make you smarter then Bush. Smarter then Ford. Smarter then LBJ. You were smart enough to out smart the CIA, FBI, Mafia, Mossad, and all of their secret agents and hit men. You, you were able to overcome all of their power and money and influence because you were able to see thru their scheme and figure it out. This isn’t about jfk or oswald, it’s about you pumping up your self esteem because you’re such a failure in real life that all you have are these fantasies.

  4. “Right here would be a great place to practice your reading between the lines skills.
    Do you think they would’ve embraced an American patriot who hated ruskies into the Soviet Union ??
    He was not a degenerate loser..as he was portrayed .far from it.”

    Except he wasn’t an American patriot, like you he hated capitalism, hated the right wing and conservatives and embraced Castro. If he were alive today he probably would be a Hugo fan. In his brothers own words he went to russia. Now, why is it you think you know more about him then his own brother? How do you know he wasn’t a degenerate loser? People who actually knew him said he was. Were you there? Did you know him? Or is it just the cult of oswald that told you so? If what you say is true then he was probably border line mentally handicapped to be so totally clueless and so easily set up. See, this falls right into your little man versus the power mantra. You’ve idolized the man who killed jfk because it suits your needs. Had he killed Nixon or ford you probably wouldn’t even care would you?

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/biographies/oswald/interview-robert-oswald/

    “You don’t think that there was any possibility that he was on some mission when he went to Russia?

    Definitely not. This was something all his own. This was his grand experience at the time. I anticipated, and I said to the family, “He’ll be back within a year.” Well, it took him a little bit longer than that, but he started trying after a year to come back.

    When you learned he had defected, did you have any explanation?

    I wasn’t real sure what the explanation was. … I was just completely in the dark. Apparently he’d been planning this for a long time. … The planning that Lee did probably at least extended all the way back to the time he was in Japan … because of the clothes he purchased at the time

    If it didn’t work for Russia, he was going to stay in Europe anyway. He’d actually applied for Albert Schweitzer’s school in Switzerland, and been accepted for that summertime or fall semester. So, to me, that was his back-up plan if everything else failed. Those are the indications that say he took some thought, some planning over a long period of time. …

    From Russia, he had written you, saying that he was worried about charges being brought against him when he came back. What was his concern?

    Well, his concern was, was there anything that I was aware of that [there] were going to be charges placed against him from anybody? This would have to be at the federal level. I wrote him back that, to my knowledge, nothing he has done warrants any charges, because they did not let him accomplish anything over there, i.e., the U.S. Embassy did not accept his citizenship rejection. They didn’t finalize that. He was, in fact, an American citizen all the time, and still had the rights of the American citizen.

    But he had said he was going to give the Russians any information he had, and it seemed like he did.

    As far as Lee giving any information to the Russians while he was over there, even though he said he would if they had asked, apparently they weren’t interested in it. Now apparently, for whatever reasons or however they checked it out, they found out whatever he knew wasn’t necessarily anything they’d be interested in.

    With regard to his return home from Russia in June 1962 with his family — what did he tell you about reporters meeting him, and what do you think it really meant?

    He indicated that, if reporters were asking about when he’s coming back, to say nothing He wanted not to be bothered by the reporters. But … he had prepared answers and statements, anticipating reporters either at the ship or some place down the line on the return. I think he was surprised when he stepped off the plane in Dallas Field — he asked me, “What, no reporters?” I said, “Yes. I’ve managed to keep it quiet.” That was it. But I think he was disappointed. He was ready.”

  5. you should read an oswald bio.
    He was a marine, who got picked by the CIA. He was honorably discharged from the marines under a hardship discharge because his mother had a can of beans fall out of the cupboard on her.
    After that he was working on the U-2 spy plane program. They of course let everyone do that , right??
    When he returned, he walked right thru the gate .no problem.
    How did he do that??
    Oh right, because he was working for he CIA.
    Check out where he was handing out , freedom for Cuba literature. Right across the street from the Federal Building.
    Where Bannister used to go to read magazines.
    These are documented facts.
    Er, the wrong documented facts.
    Jim Garrison- Federal Judge in New Orleans did extensive research on this. His book covers facts, documented facts. His was threatened, his research was stolen. Who had the motivation to do this.?
    The movie JFK was filled with facts found by Jim Garrison.
    You should read it.
    The old couple sitting on the porch watched oswald shoot Officer JD Tippet in front them. In front of their porch.
    Only a couple problems popped up.
    1. He was short with dark hair.
    2.the police found casings at the scene obviously from an auto loader.
    3. The officer who picked up the casings engraved his initials into the casings.
    4. The evidence bag holding the shells had in it 3 auto loader shells and one .38 special revolver shell casing
    5. When oswald was picked up, he was carrying a .38 special ………revolver. That had not been fired.
    6.the real oswald was nowhere near where Tippett was shot.
    7. Also there were 2 oswalds picked up at the theater.one went out he front door and one out the back…any ideas on why??
    Why no W-2 s for oswald.

  6. Excerp:
    COG leadership constitutes a “permanent, though hidden, national security apparatus of the United States, … a world in which Presidents come and go, but America always keeps on fighting.”(44) – See more at: http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/10/05/the-hidden-government-group-linking-jfk-watergate-iran-contra-and-911/#sthash.wLw5i90r.dpuf

    Explain to me, COG. Is this just more aliens and sea monsters?? Or is this a real part of your govt?? Backing up everything I’ve been saying?
    Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld. The troika of the shadow government.

  7. *****No prints”. No palm prints you mean. Anyway I suggest you take the time to research exactly how hard it is to recover prints from a weapon. ****
    Ohh momma Mia!!
    Believe me, I do know how hard it is trying to get the right prints off a rifle that was not fired by the accused. It’s hard, really, really hard. The assumed rifle went to 3 different labs and none found any prints, fingerprints or otherwise.
    And then, oswald fell from heaven and landed on a slab in the morgue in Dallas.
    Taadaa’!!
    No fingerprints, but, a slight Palm print that was definitely oswalds was miraculously found.
    He was an innocent man, his time with the CIA notwithstanding.

  8. aren’t you the little world book of knowledge.
    You always answer the questions, don’t you??
    Usually with only opinion and conjecture .
    Don’t they have any facts over at your information station??
    And,
    “Oh yeah? Well what about Clinton?”
    Is not an answer for anything.

  9. “He was a marine, who got picked by the CIA. He was honorably discharged from the marines under a hardship discharge because his mother had a can of beans fall out of the cupboard on her.
    After that he was working on the U-2 spy plane program. They of course let everyone do that , right??”

    Here’s your problem. When oswald was in the USMC he worked on a base at which Air Force U2s were stationed. He did not work in the U2 program. He was a radar operator as I recall.
    He was never “picked up by the CIA”. Got proof he was?

    “Usually with only opinion and conjecture .
    Don’t they have any facts over at your information station??”
    Do you really think what you offer is anything but opinion, conjecture and false accusation? Citing sources like fetzer and whowhatwhy is useless. Fetzer has never proven anything. Neither have the whowhat idiots.

    If you can’t figure out COG then you’re an idiot. The only conspiracy here is the one in your head. Perhaps instead if a continuity plan you would prefer chaos? Every organization has a continuity plan. Quite frankly I would be more concerned if we didn’t have one as it would mean we were unprepared.

    “Jim Garrison- Federal Judge in New Orleans did extensive research on this. His book covers facts, documented facts.” Jim garrison is known to have been certifiable and ALL of his theories proven wrong.

    Why can’t you explain the ineptness if the tactics? Don’t want to deal with reality?

  10. “Odio testified that one of the Hispanics (who used the “war name” or pseudonym “Leopoldo”) phoned her the next day and told her he wanted her to meet “Leon Oswald” because he had been in the Marine Corps, because he was an excellent shot, and “because he is great, he is kind of nuts.” “Leopoldo” also told her that “Leon Oswald” said the Cubans “don’t have any guts . . . because President Kennedy should have been assassinated after the Bay of Pigs, and some Cubans should have done that. . . .” Warren Commission Report

    You believe in sworn testimony don’t you? Or is that only when it supports your point if view?

  11. He was not an excellent shot. He was a marksman, the bottom rating of three.
    Why do you keep asking for proof?? You can’t handle the proof!
    Anything that points away from oswald in your little fairy tale is total bullshit. It’s bullshit because you can’t handle the proof. It’s your CD again. Isn’t it??
    It’s all like whistling past the graveyard.
    Can’t handle the proof. So , it’s all lies, isn’t it??
    Lies, lies, lies. It’s all that calms your nerves, right”
    Read a bio on oswald. Do you really need to be spoon fed everything in detail??
    Read a book from fetzers list.
    Read about Lee and Harvey: how the CIA framed oswald.
    Watta Ya fraid???

  12. ***“Jim Garrison- Federal Judge in New Orleans did extensive research on this. His book covers facts, documented facts.” Jim garrison is known to have been certifiable and ALL of his theories proven wrong.***
    No they have not. Where do you get this bullshit from.?
    Not theories.documented, proven, corroborated facts.or omissions that were dug up in spite of the Warren commission report. Or that surfaced in spite of the attempted suppression..

  13. Here’s a brief on the above book.
    Beware more facts.;;
    From h price;
    I’ll add my voice to those praising this outstanding work. I’ve read it through several times, and stopped and checked the DVD with it at the appropriate points. A fantastic work of scholarship on a host of details that have been overlooked or not pointed out loudly enough. This book answers a lot questions, such as why J. Edgar Hoover put out the memo in June of 1960 about someone using “Oswald’s” birth certificate when the false defector Harvey was in the Soviet Union (the real Oswald was trying to buy vehicles in Florida as part of a CIA gun running operation to Cuba), why the real LHO’s half-brother John Pic couldn’t identify a picture of “Lee Harvey Oswald” at the Bronx zoo as his brother to the Warren Commission (because he had never met or seen “Harvey”), the discrepencies in height, weight, identifying features such as scars, a missing mastoid bone behind the ear, tonsils, a tatoo, etc not to mention teachers, schoolmates and neighbors identifying to two different people as Lee Harvey Oswald. The dissenter reviewer states that part of his disbelief is that the book claims that back in 1953 the CIA set this up as means to conduct an assassination. The book says nothing of the sort, the book states that the CIA (and probably the State Department co-operating) set up a dual-identity program for a False Defector program to infiltrate the USSR in the first decade of the Cold War, and that there were at least two other false defectors in the USSR at the same time Harvey Oswald, the native Russian speaker, was there (and that Marina Prusakova, whose father was a colonel in the Soviet Interior Ministry, the department of which the KGB was a part, was trying to get close to one of them before latching onto and then marrying Harvey Oswald–Armstrong makes the compelling case that she was KGB but was cut loose the moment it was announced that “Lee Harvey Oswald” was being charged with the murder of JFK).

    The amount of detail is amazing. Such things as serial numbers of money orders Harvey used to repay a State Department loan to return to the U.S., the fact that the Postal Money Order supposedly used to pay for the Smith&Wesson .38 revolver was out of a stack of serial numbers that wouldn’t have been used until 1965, the fact that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano that was manufactured with serial number C2766, that such a carbine with that serial number with that length barrel wouldn’t have been sold by Kleins Sporting goods, the intelligence connections of Ruth Paine and her husband Michael, are all here. And the witnessed movements of the real Lee Harvey Oswald after the assassination: being seen pulling up to a laundromat in the gray Rambler wagon that Deputy Sherrif Roger Craig saw him picked up in, in front of the Book Depository, being taken out of the back of the Texas Theater to a police car as Harvey was being taken, arrested, out the front, driving a red Ford that had plates belonging to
    another car that was owned by a friend of the late Dallas Policeman J.D. Tippett (who’s movements on November 22 Armstrong details showing his job was to kill Harvey and instead was killed by Lee) blew my mind, I had never read or heard those things before.

    One very important thing that ties in with some information in a couple of other books was an incident that occured two days before the assassination, on Wednesday November 20 1963 at the municipal airport at Fort Worth, about 5 miles south of downtown Dallas, that was then called Redbird Airport. Described on page 780 of the hard cover edition, a man named Wayne January who owned American Aviation was approached by two people who got out of a car, a woman and a “heavy set” man, while a third man stayed in the car. The man said they wanted to fly to the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico on Friday, the 22nd, and inquired about a Cessna 310, regarding the speed and range without refueling. After the assassination, January recognized the picture of Harvey Oswald on tv as the man he saw sitting in the car. Of course, Harvey had been at work at the TSBD that day, as he had every day since starting work in October, it’s one of many instances of Lee impersonating him (a role reversal of sorts considering he was the real Oswald). In Daniel Hopsicker’s book Barry and the Boys–The CIA, the Mob and America’s Secret History the author devotes chapter 4, titled “Did Barry Seal Fly A Getaway Plane Out of Dallas”, the book is about drug runner and CIA covert ops pilot Barry Seal. Hopsicker reports that at about 1PM, 30 minutes after the shots were fired in Dealey Plaza, people living along the road across from the airport called police to complain about an airplane revving its engines for about an hour (that is, a half hour before the assassination) and they couldn’t hear the tv and radio news reports about the JFK shooting. Shortly after that the plane, a green and white Piper Commanche, took off. Air Traffic Controller Louis Gaudin thought this activity, and the three men in business suits and with suitcases standing near the plane. Just to make contact, Gaudin asked the pilot if he needed assistance, the reply was no. He asked the pilot which way he was going, the reply was south. But after two miles, the pilot turned north, and flew to Dallas Love Field (where the presidential aircraft were). Guadin listened to the radio traffic between the pilot and the ATC at Love Field. Gaudin tried to call an FAA security number they’d been given but only got a busy signal. In 1967 Louis Guadin filed a report about this with the FBI, as he told Hopsicker, the only reason he filed it was that investigators from New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison’s office and talked to him about it, and showed him four photos and asked if any of them looked like the man who was the pilot or came out on the 20th. One picture was of David Ferrie, and a week later Ferrie was dead. That’s when he filed the FBI report. But the FBI lied saying the incident of Wednesday, November 20, 1963 was actually in July of 1963. They forgot apparently that Harvey Oswald was living in New Orleans in July of 1963. Gaudin said one man who could have info on that Piper Commanche and its pilot and passengers would be Merritt Goble, who owned TexAir at Redbird Field. He asked Goble about the people, any receipts or paperwork regarding fueling the plane that day in 1963, in 1967, and Goble told him it was none of his business and he’d only talk to bona fide law enforcement people; even though he and Gaudin were friends. In Russ Baker’s 2009 book “Family of Secrets” about the Bush family, in Chapter 4, title “Where was Poppy”, Baker proves that George Herbert Walker Bush was in Dallas the night of November 21, 1963 giving a speed to an oil drillers association at 6:30PM, and that he was with a Rockefeller connected and oil man named Joe Zeppa, who let Bush use his airplane (make and model unknown). Baker feels Bush and Zeppa probably stayed the night in Dallas at the Sheraton, where he gave the speech and that Zeppa as a past president of that organization probably attended. Bush made an elaborate show, making a report to the Houston FBI by phone fingering a somewhat mentally disabled man named James Parrott who did some work at the Houston GOP headquarters, as a possible assassin. Turns out he had one of his guys from that GOP office at Parrott’s house as an alibi, and the agent he made the phone report to was the brother of a very close friend who is in the oil business, and the whole thing was to try and establish that Bush was in Tyler, Texas, 90 miles away, at 1:45PM, 75 minutes after the assassination. They flew in Zeppa’s plane out of Dallas, to Tyler, then George H.W. and Barbara Bush flew out of Tyler to Dallas Love Field for a commercial flight to Houston. There is a picture of a man who looks a great deal like Poppy Bush standing in front of the TSBD about 3 minutes after the shots are fired. [...] Barry Seal owned a Piper Commanche, but the make and model of Joe Zeppa’s plane is not mentioned in Baker’s book. Baker says that Zeppa’s plane flew out of Redbird Airport, make a loop back to Dallas Love Field. Was the plane John Armstrong mentions in this book that flew out of Redbird Joe Zeppa’s plane, with Zeppa and George H.W. Bush on board and Barry Seal at the controls, and the fly to Tyler for Bush’s alibi?
    Yawn…Ho hum.

  14. ‘He was not an excellent shot. He was a marksman, the bottom rating of three.’
    When did I say he was an excellent shot? A marksman is still a good and capable shooter. A marksman is required to score hits on targets at 500 yds. The shot on Kennedy was about 100 yds, perfectly in the realm of oswalds capabilities.

    ‘Why do you keep asking for proof?? You can’t handle the proof!’ Why do never offer any

    ‘Anything that points away from oswald in your little fairy tale is total bullshit. It’s bullshit because you can’t handle the proof. It’s your CD again. Isn’t it??
    It’s all like whistling past the graveyard.’
    So why can’t you answer simple questions? Why shoot from the front and side of the target if you’re framkng a guy to the rear? Explain how this makes sense for a highly skilled hit team. You won’t answer because fetzer hasn’t provided you with one.

    ‘Can’t handle the proof. So , it’s all lies, isn’t it??’ Talking about yourself? The cult of Oswald has sucked you in deep.

    ‘Read a bio on oswald. Do you really need to be spoon fed everything in detail??’ Why would I read a bio written by someone who didn’t write it objectively?

    ‘Read a book from fetzers list.’
    Why would I do that. Fetzer doesn’t we landed on the moon. He thinks holograms hit the trade center and the Mossad is behind sandy hook. Like garrison he’s certifiable.
    ‘Read about Lee and Harvey: how the CIA framed oswald.
    Watta Ya fraid??? ‘. Wasting time I’ll never get back. Again, it was written with a predetermined conclusion in mind and devoid of facts.
    If youre so open minded and not afraid of the truth why do you not address oswalds brother? How about his friend? Why do you not acknowledge that the people who knew him best believe he did it? You hide from these statements from their very own mouths. Who’s afraid of the truth?

    Your long post with supposed “facts”. There’s not one fact. There are claims. There are assertions. There are accusations. But those don’t qualify as facts.
    You have about as many facts as the birthers have or the Clinton murder nuts have, which is to say none.

  15. ‘Here’s a brief on the above book.
    Beware more facts.;;
    From h price’

    Who the fuck is ‘h price’ and why should I believe anything he says? I know, you can’t and won’t answer. I can find some online review j smith talking about how great and anti Obama or Clinton book is, does that mean anything? No it doesn’t. God you’re an idiot!!
    You have a very low threshold for evidence. It’s essentially if you agree with it it’s true, if you don’t it’s false. The content of it doesn’t matter.

  16. If your boys Armstrong book is so factual why did he need to make up facts?
    ‘HARVEY & LEE
    Part Two-Polishing the Big Apple and Other Matters
    By W. Tracy Parnell Ó 2002

    The second part of this series begins my direct examination of John Armstrong’s “Harvey and Lee” presentation. I have chosen to use Jerry Robertson’s two-volume booklet “Denial #2” for this critique for several reasons. First, it contains supporting documents that were lacking from other versions. The booklet is well organized (I compliment Mr. Robertson for adding order to this already confusing theory) and prepared with Armstrong’s approval. Finally it admittedly corrects several errors contained in previous versions. For the sake of simplicity, I have listed after each bold section heading the corresponding page number for volume one of Denial #2. Endnotes are used for other citations.

    I will not try to answer every point made by Armstrong, as many of his allegations are based on eyewitness accounts (discussed in detail in part 1 of this series) and therefore cannot be proven either true or false. Throughout this document I will use “Harvey” and “Lee” (with quotes) when referring to Armstrong’s double Oswalds.

    Gordon Lonsdale (p. 1)

    Armstrong begins his presentation with the story of Gordon Lonsdale a spy arrested in 1961 for passing British defense secrets to the Russians. After his arrest, it was determined that Lonsdale, who held a Canadian passport, was really Konan Molody (Armstrong uses the spelling Molodi, but his source and one I found both use Molody) who was a Russian born in 1922 (my source says 1923). Molody went to California at the age of nine where he lived with his aunt and learned the English language. In 1954 he went to Canada where he assumed Lonsdale’s identity. He then traveled to England where he began his espionage activities. Armstrong states, “If the KGB recruited young boys, can there be any doubt that our intelligence agencies ran similar operations?”.

    Armstrong is trying to use the example of Lonsdale-Molody as powerful confirmation that the CIA and KGB ran child spy programs and that “Harvey and Lee” are an example of such a program. However, there is quite a difference between a spy assuming a dead man’s identity and two boys (not identical twins but somehow similar enough to pass for the same person) being recruited from childhood to lead parallel lives. I assume that if Armstrong had been able to locate an example of child spies of this type that he would have used it for his opening instead of Molody. Was Molody in fact sent to California to become a spy or did the fact that he had spent time there and learned the language later make him a desirable KGB recruit? My source says, “Whether or not this was actually planned in the hope that he could be later used as a sleeper agent is not easily confirmed…”. [1]

    Mrs. Jack Tippit (p. 1)

    Armstrong uses a phone call from an unidentified woman to Mrs. Jack Tippit of Westport, Connecticut as the basis for several otherwise uncorroborated claims. The caller said she knew Oswald’s father and uncle and they were Hungarian communists. Armstrong states, “If this information is correct, one of the two Oswald’s lived in New York in his youth. This could explain Oswald’s interest in communism (from his father and uncle), which began as a teenager and continued throughout his life.” [2] Armstrong adds, “She gave two names-Louis Weinstock and Emile Kardos”.[3]

    A further look at the FBI document (Denial #2 Volume 2 Item 3) that details the phone call is revealing. Armstrong says that the woman caller “knew the Tippits were related to Officer JD Tippit”.[4] This statement is apparently an attempt to give weight to the woman’s allegations. Unfortunately, it is incorrect. The FBI document states, “Mrs. Tippit received a telephone call from unknown woman who asked if Mr. Tippit was a policeman and if he was related to the policeman Tippit who was shot in Dallas”.[5]

    Armstrong makes another slip when he says that the unidentified caller gave the name Louis Weinstock. The caller gave only the last name Weinstock and Armstrong has filled in the blank with a first name helpful to his theory. Louis Weinstock was, of course, the General Manager of “The Worker”, the left-wing publication that Oswald read. Weinstock had also corresponded with Oswald on at least one occasion to thank him for his offer to make posters for the publication. To be fair, the caller did say “Weinstock, the editor of Woman’s World”. If the caller said “The Worker” and the Mr. And Mrs. Tippit heard it as “Woman’s World” then Armstrong is justified in adding “Louis” to “Weinstock”. But Armstrong leaves the reader with the impression that the caller said “Louis Weinstock” which isn’t the case.

    The FBI document adds, “The woman then began speaking indistinctly, disjointedly and nervously”.[6] The woman’s nervousness could have resulted from the fact that she was making a crank call. Another possibility is that if the caller was referring to Louis Weinstock the call was an effort to embarrass him by associating him with Oswald.

    Mental Tests (p. 2)

    Page two of the book includes the assertions of Louise Robertson who was a housekeeper for Marguerite in the summer of 1953. Mrs. Robertson remembered that Marguerite had said that she brought Lee to New York to have mental tests at Jacobi Hospital. Armstrong then states, “Marguerite was asked about this by Warren Commission attorney Rankin, but she avoided his question”.[7] Again, Armstrong has made an incorrect statement. The pertinent passage from the Warren Volumes shows that after Rankin asked his question Marguerite answered, “No sir, never”.[8] She did not avoid the question but instead answered it directly and then went on to defend her son and his mental state.

    I am not sure what Armstrong’s intent was when he included this issue, but let me offer these thoughts. Let’s assume for a moment that Robertson was correct [*] and Marguerite did make this statement. Perhaps it is an indication that Marguerite was becoming increasingly aware of Lee’s problems and had decided to do something about it. Robertson also says in her FBI statement that Marguerite related an incident in which Lee ran away from home and was returned by the police. Obviously If this were true Marguerite must have been very concerned about his behavior especially when taken in the context of his other troubles in New York (truancy, knife incident, etc.) I don’t know of any police report being turned up in regard to this matter or if anyone has looked for one. But if Robertson’s statement is to be accepted as Armstrong has done, then it is a possibility that Marguerite wanted to have Lee tested at Jacobi but for whatever reason did not follow through. If she was aware of Lee’s problems, it certainly does nothing to hurt the Warren Commission view of a disturbed lone gunman who had an abnormal childhood. And if one rejects any part of Robertson’s statement then it follows that the entire statement should be disregarded.

    New York School Records and Related Matters (p. 2-3)

    Armstrong next explores the issue of Oswald’s New York school records. He says, “During the year and a half Lee Oswald resided in New York, there are few records of his activities.” [9] He goes on to say, “The Warren Commission records tell us Oswald first entered Trinity Evangelical School in the Bronx in September, 1952 many miles from his residence in Manhattan. When asked for copies of Oswald’s school records, the Trinity School allegedly told the FBI that they did not maintain records until 1957. This is nonsense. Who ever heard of a school that did not maintain records? If the school did not maintain records, how were the dates of his attendance at Trinity obtained? How did the FBI know he even attended Trinity? And why would 12 year-old Oswald attend junior high in the Bronx instead of Manhattan?” [10]

    Armstrong is correct that it would be odd for a school to not keep records and in fact somebody did provide at least partial records. They are available in CE 1384 of the Warren Commission Exhibits and Armstrong himself alludes to them in the Appendix of Denial #2, Vol. 1 on page 2. The principal of the school in 1963, R.H. Showers, also provided the FBI with the name of Oswald’s teacher and school principal at the time he attended. [11]

    Lee’s mother, Marguerite, appeared before the Warren Commission and her testimony resolves the remaining issues:

    ” I immediately enrolled Lee in a Lutheran school, because Lee was not confirmed–he was baptized in the Lutheran faith, but because of moving around–I had married Mr. Ekdahl in this period and so on, Lee was not confirmed. I enrolled him in the Lutheran school which took him approximately an hour or longer by subway to get there. It was quite a distance. That is when we first arrived in New York. I believe that Lee was in that school a very short time, 2 or 3 weeks, because at this time I was living in my daughter-in- law’s home and son.” [12]

    We can see from Marguerite’s testimony that it was her idea to enroll Lee in the Trinity School for religious reasons even though it was a long commute for Lee by subway thereby solving one mystery. As for the dates of attendance at Trinity, The Warren Commission records the date of Oswald’s enrollment as September 8 to 26, which jibes nicely with Marguerite’s recollection of 2 to 3 weeks. Armstrong tries to use Oswald brother John Pic’s testimony to muddy the waters even further by saying “Pic was certain Lee attended school two blocks from his Manhattan apartment”. [13] But what would be more credible in this instance, the memory of his half-brother from 11 years earlier or the testimony of the boy’s own mother (who by Pic’s admission enrolled him at the school) and whose recollections are supported by the Warren Commission investigation?

    Similarly, when Armstrong quotes Dr. Milton Kurian as remembering that Oswald was “a little fellow…perhaps 4′ 6″ tall”, [14] the reader must keep in mind the 40 plus years that have elapsed between the time Kurian examined Oswald and Armstrong interviewed him. It is also worthwhile to remember the Warren Commission testimony of another doctor who examined Oswald, Renatus Hartogs. Dr. Hartogs was convinced that his memory of the event was accurate. However, he greatly overstated his 1953 diagnosis of Oswald until Warren Commission Attorney Wesley Liebeler showed him his own report. If Hartogs could be mistaken 11 years after the fact Kurian’s undocumented observations nearly 45 years later should be taken with a grain of salt.

    Probation Officer John Carro’s interview of Marguerite Oswald is another area of the record that is singled out by Armstrong. He points out several “errors” made by Marguerite in the interview most of which are not troubling and could be attributed to miscommunication. However, two of these assertions demand closer scrutiny. Armstrong states, “Marguerite told Carro she was the youngest of six children, yet there were 5 children in the Claverie family”. [15] Armstrong apparently used census reports as the basis for this statement. While he is to be commended for his attempt at obtaining his own sources of information, the Warren Commission testimony of Lillian Murret is the “best evidence” in this instance. She gave the names of the six Claverie children from oldest to youngest: Charles, Lillian, John, Pearl, Marguerite, and Aminthe.[16] There is no reason to believe that Lillian wouldn’t know how many brothers and sisters she had and in fact she describes most of them in some detail. Also, when Armstrong says, “She gave her sister’s (Lillian’s) name as Lillian Sigouerette” [17], there is no citation and the statement appears nowhere in Carro’s report (Carro Exhibit 1) of the interview, the presumed source.

    In the next part of my series I will look at the allegations of Oswald in Stanley, North Dakota and “new” evidence that shows how this factoid became accepted as truth in the JFK research community.

    [*] Abraham Jocobi Hospital did not open until 1955. Robertson’s statement was made ten years after Marguerite’s alleged comment and she could have been mistaken about the name of the hospital. It is possible that the Hospital was to have opened earlier and was delayed-I have not looked into this matter. It is of course, also possible that Robertson is mistaken about the entire incident or is confusing it with information about mental tests Lee did take at Youth House.

    [1] Richard Deacon, Spyclopedia (William Marrow & Co., 1987), pp. 337-39.
    [2] Jerry Robertson, Denial #2: The John Armstrong Research Volume One (self-published), p. 1.
    [3] Ibid.
    [4] Ibid.
    [5] Robertson, Denial #2: The John Armstrong Research Volume Two (self-published), Item 3A.
    [6] Ibid., Item 3B.
    [7] Denial #2 Vol. 1, p. 2.
    [8] Denial #2 Vol. 2, Item 5 (WC Vol. I, p. 230).
    [9] Denial #2 Vol. 1, p. 2.
    [10] Ibid.
    [11] Denial #2 Vol. 2, Item 7.
    [12] Testimony of Marguerite Oswald. WC Vol. I, p. 226.
    [13] Denial #2 Vol. 1, p. 2.
    [14] Ibid.
    [15] Ibid., p. 3.
    [16] Testimony of Lillian Murret. WC Vol. VIII, p. 96.
    [17] Denial #2 Vol. 1, p. 3′

  17. ‘***“Jim Garrison- Federal Judge in New Orleans did extensive research on this. His book covers facts, documented facts.” Jim garrison is known to have been certifiable and ALL of his theories proven wrong.***
    No they have not. Where do you get this bullshit from.?
    Not theories.documented, proven, corroborated facts.or omissions that were dug up in spite of the Warren commission report. Or that surfaced in spite of the attempted suppression..’
    Ok. Let’s assume you’re correct. At the core of his ‘documented, proven, corroborated facts’ was the ‘fact’ that Oswald was part of the conspiracy…and that there was only one Oswald. Yet another of your sources contradicts your own argument. Remember files said Oswald was a part of it too.

    Then there is the very real fact that garrison was almost laughed out of the courtroom and a jury took less than an hour to find shaw not guilty. They took I to account the sworn testimony of both sides and the credibility of garrisons single witness. Not to mention that he had a history of accusing those whom he disagreed with of being part of one conspiracy or another.

  18. if you can believe anything in the Warren report, then , you should tell everyone you know how right you are about what happened to your president and your country that fateful day.
    Oswald was being groomed as a patsy. Only he didn’t know it. So, yes, he was a part of it, albeit unknowingly. He was being handled by George demorenshieldt.
    A personal friend of poppy’s. The whole crew with Ruth pain was CIA. She got oswald the job at the depository.

    Look, the people guilty of this whole thing are still walking around and they don’t want to go to jail. They are powerful with capabilities of doing mostly anything.
    Garrison found that testimonies given by live people were changed and re signatured with phony signatures. He found this by rechecking the testimonies to the witnesses, the ones that at the time were still alive. These are the facts facts you keep running to.? The Warren report was just a major cover up of the real facts. Are you able to see this …..yet”?
    There were witnesses who saw a man looking like clay shaw on the opposite side of the TSBD with a rifle. Clays alibi was that he was upstate giving a lecture at some college.
    The college had no record of it, and had no idea who clay shaw was.but, then when they sent ” people” up to investigate, voila! Yep, shaw was there giving a lecture. So, go ahead, form your opinion.
    Read the garrison book again and watch the movie. Ask yourself, why do you think these people went to the trouble of covering up and omitting valid evidence.
    Why, is my major question, it’s why to everything. Open and shut oswald did it hasn’t flown in years.
    Files is still alive. He’s in jail on an unrelated charge. How could files know anything about oswald.? Was files CIA , too?? Contracted by CIA? Contracted by the mob?
    This is why there is so much controversy.. I’ve heard there were at least six hit teams in Dallas. Did they all know each other or did they think they were the only one”? How could files know anything about oswald. How could files know anything other than what he was told??

    **Not to mention that he had a history of accusing those whom he disagreed with of being part of one conspiracy or another.***
    These are your tactics, no?? If you don’t like the answer attack the person. Destroy his credibility. Make a joke of him.
    Your pals, your tactics.
    Works well, kinda hits you right in the CD, no?
    Do you want to be called crazy, silly, stupid.and ridiculed?? Or just go home and be good german??

  19. “Read the garrison book again and watch the movie.”
    Those aren’t evidence moron. Garrison was the making up evidence, because he’d didn’t actually have any. Shaw was not seen at the tsbd. That witness saw a dark skinned man which is densely not. The movie was fictional. Do you know what that means. Seriously you’re trying to use an Oliver stone movie as fact? Of garrisons book supports his claim but all made up ‘facts’.

    ‘Files is still alive. He’s in jail on an unrelated charge. How could files know anything about oswald.? Was files CIA , too?? Contracted by CIA? Contracted by the mob?’.
    Jackass files wad your guy. You thought his story was’compelling’. I’m just pointing out that his compelling story and yours conflict. According to his compelling story both he AND Oswald were working for the mob. No cia. According to garrison Oswald helped plan the ‘triangulation of fire’ which makes him a willing accomplice. Again in direct conflict with your position.

    Why are you afraid to address Oswald brothers statements? How about those of the kid who drove him around that summer?
    Why would you send 6 teams to kill someone? Any idea how much confusion that would cause? How would coordinate the timing of the shooting? Especially if they didn’t know about each other? How you costly get that many teams into position and extract them?. It’s tactically impossible. How do you keep them all quiet for 50 years? If they were that desperate to kill Kennedy why not rig his plane to have a mechanical failures? Then they could control the crash site, all the evidence and no witnesses. Our better yet just let him live. The fact it’s he was probably going to lose the election. Buy your supposed cabal decided to kill him in front of thousands of witnesses and fucked up just about every aspect of the hit. Perhaps you should be looking at the keystone cops?

    Your line above says it all “… Watch the movie”. You live in a fantasy world.

Leave a reply