Discussion:
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
(too old to reply)
bigdog
2018-04-26 17:44:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?

In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-04-27 11:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
There's a key difference between suggesting: (1) he should have been more
closely watched because he was a possible security threat to the US versus
saying (2) he should have been more closely watched because he was a
possible threat to the president.

The case for the first one, for me, is strong; for the second, not strong.

However, from that the question is then: IF he had been more closely
watched because of (1) would that have prevented the assassination? I'm
not sure (right, no one is) but I don't think we can just dismiss it out
of hand. Yes, 20/20 and all; but that's why we ask counterfactuals, isn't
it? Particularly of great events.

Second: It seems to me that you're projecting what we learned about Oswald
AFTER the assassination - that he indeed was just an oddball crank - onto
what they knew about him BEFORE. As such, you're viewing Oswald minus his
deep anti-US hatred, his defection to the Soviet Union and his meeting
with a KGB agent known to be in charge of assassinations in the Western
Hemisphere. The latter was known by the top people in the CIA and FBI.
Again, you're just viewing him as an oddball, a run of the mill crank -
which he again was but not something they new for certainty beforehand.

How many oddballs had his background? Not a single FBI agent met him
face-to-face to talk about what he was doing in MC. Sizing him up, seeing
how he reacts. This is the middle of the Cold War. And he's meeting top
KGB agents? In Mexico City? Yes, we know NOW there was an innocent
explanation. But they didn't know this beforehand.

And again, this shouldn't have happened because he was a threat to JFK; it
was because this clearly is a possible threat to the US. Oddballs just
don't meet top KGB people.
mainframetech
2018-04-28 00:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
There's a key difference between suggesting: (1) he should have been more
closely watched because he was a possible security threat to the US versus
saying (2) he should have been more closely watched because he was a
possible threat to the president.
The case for the first one, for me, is strong; for the second, not strong.
However, from that the question is then: IF he had been more closely
watched because of (1) would that have prevented the assassination? I'm
not sure (right, no one is) but I don't think we can just dismiss it out
of hand. Yes, 20/20 and all; but that's why we ask counterfactuals, isn't
it? Particularly of great events.
Second: It seems to me that you're projecting what we learned about Oswald
AFTER the assassination - that he indeed was just an oddball crank - onto
what they knew about him BEFORE. As such, you're viewing Oswald minus his
deep anti-US hatred, his defection to the Soviet Union and his meeting
with a KGB agent known to be in charge of assassinations in the Western
Hemisphere. The latter was known by the top people in the CIA and FBI.
Again, you're just viewing him as an oddball, a run of the mill crank -
which he again was but not something they new for certainty beforehand.
How many oddballs had his background? Not a single FBI agent met him
face-to-face to talk about what he was doing in MC. Sizing him up, seeing
how he reacts. This is the middle of the Cold War. And he's meeting top
KGB agents? In Mexico City? Yes, we know NOW there was an innocent
explanation. But they didn't know this beforehand.
And again, this shouldn't have happened because he was a threat to JFK; it
was because this clearly is a possible threat to the US. Oddballs just
don't meet top KGB people.
As per Marina, Oswald had a high opinion of JFK and said he liked him,
and that he was "a great leader". Why kill him? As to the being watched,
there were plenty of police around Oswald as he was being led to a car,
and this was before the time when certain criminals were made to wear
bullet proof vests. No one would think that their friend Jack Ruby, who
offered them all drinks at his nightclub, would come in and fire a gun
into his body. At that, he only got off one shot.

Chris
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-28 19:25:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
There's a key difference between suggesting: (1) he should have been more
closely watched because he was a possible security threat to the US versus
saying (2) he should have been more closely watched because he was a
possible threat to the president.
The case for the first one, for me, is strong; for the second, not strong.
However, from that the question is then: IF he had been more closely
watched because of (1) would that have prevented the assassination? I'm
not sure (right, no one is) but I don't think we can just dismiss it out
of hand. Yes, 20/20 and all; but that's why we ask counterfactuals, isn't
it? Particularly of great events.
All your babbling is cute, little boy, but kinda besides the point if
Oswald was not part of the assassination team. Maybe the FBI should have
keep better track on the CIA since some of their officers had threatened
to kill President Kennedy.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Second: It seems to me that you're projecting what we learned about Oswald
AFTER the assassination - that he indeed was just an oddball crank - onto
THey knew that BEFORE the assassination. The CIA had a 201 file on him.
Do you have a 201 file?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
what they knew about him BEFORE. As such, you're viewing Oswald minus his
deep anti-US hatred, his defection to the Soviet Union and his meeting
with a KGB agent known to be in charge of assassinations in the Western
Hemisphere. The latter was known by the top people in the CIA and FBI.
Again, you're just viewing him as an oddball, a run of the mill crank -
which he again was but not something they new for certainty beforehand.
Geez, you're not trying hard enough. Why not have him on the watch list
the moment he was born? That sure would have solved the problem, wouldn't
it?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
How many oddballs had his background? Not a single FBI agent met him
22 million. How many agents does it take to monitor 22 million people?
Then we need more agents to monitor those agents because they are
getting drunk and falling asleep on the job.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
face-to-face to talk about what he was doing in MC. Sizing him up, seeing
how he reacts. This is the middle of the Cold War. And he's meeting top
KGB agents? In Mexico City? Yes, we know NOW there was an innocent
Sure, but PROVE that he knew they were KGB agents. You meet KGB agents
every day, but you don't know they are KGB.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
explanation. But they didn't know this beforehand.
And again, this shouldn't have happened because he was a threat to JFK; it
was because this clearly is a possible threat to the US. Oddballs just
don't meet top KGB people.
What about just a threat to National Security? Not good enough for you?
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-04-28 22:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
There's a key difference between suggesting: (1) he should have been more
closely watched because he was a possible security threat to the US versus
saying (2) he should have been more closely watched because he was a
possible threat to the president.
The case for the first one, for me, is strong; for the second, not strong.
However, from that the question is then: IF he had been more closely
watched because of (1) would that have prevented the assassination? I'm
not sure (right, no one is) but I don't think we can just dismiss it out
of hand. Yes, 20/20 and all; but that's why we ask counterfactuals, isn't
it? Particularly of great events.
Second: It seems to me that you're projecting what we learned about Oswald
AFTER the assassination - that he indeed was just an oddball crank - onto
what they knew about him BEFORE. As such, you're viewing Oswald minus his
deep anti-US hatred, his defection to the Soviet Union and his meeting
with a KGB agent known to be in charge of assassinations in the Western
Hemisphere. The latter was known by the top people in the CIA and FBI.
Again, you're just viewing him as an oddball, a run of the mill crank -
which he again was but not something they new for certainty beforehand.
How many oddballs had his background? Not a single FBI agent met him
face-to-face to talk about what he was doing in MC. Sizing him up, seeing
how he reacts. This is the middle of the Cold War. And he's meeting top
KGB agents? In Mexico City? Yes, we know NOW there was an innocent
explanation. But they didn't know this beforehand.
And again, this shouldn't have happened because he was a threat to JFK; it
was because this clearly is a possible threat to the US. Oddballs just
don't meet top KGB people.
Now that is a nerd post <g>.

Yes, he should have been more closely watched but not because he was a
threat to JFK but because he fit the profile, as I read it, of someone who
belonged on the security index. Hoover wrote a scathing memo about it.
Recall the intercepted letters he wrote to his brother when he was in the
USSR? He wrote that he would "kill any American" in the event of a war.
Add the other evidence the FBI had and it sure looks to me that he would
be someone of serious interest.

Whether that would have prevented the assassination is another question.
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-29 22:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
There's a key difference between suggesting: (1) he should have been more
closely watched because he was a possible security threat to the US versus
saying (2) he should have been more closely watched because he was a
possible threat to the president.
The case for the first one, for me, is strong; for the second, not strong.
However, from that the question is then: IF he had been more closely
watched because of (1) would that have prevented the assassination? I'm
not sure (right, no one is) but I don't think we can just dismiss it out
of hand. Yes, 20/20 and all; but that's why we ask counterfactuals, isn't
it? Particularly of great events.
Second: It seems to me that you're projecting what we learned about Oswald
AFTER the assassination - that he indeed was just an oddball crank - onto
what they knew about him BEFORE. As such, you're viewing Oswald minus his
deep anti-US hatred, his defection to the Soviet Union and his meeting
with a KGB agent known to be in charge of assassinations in the Western
Hemisphere. The latter was known by the top people in the CIA and FBI.
Again, you're just viewing him as an oddball, a run of the mill crank -
which he again was but not something they new for certainty beforehand.
How many oddballs had his background? Not a single FBI agent met him
face-to-face to talk about what he was doing in MC. Sizing him up, seeing
how he reacts. This is the middle of the Cold War. And he's meeting top
KGB agents? In Mexico City? Yes, we know NOW there was an innocent
explanation. But they didn't know this beforehand.
And again, this shouldn't have happened because he was a threat to JFK; it
was because this clearly is a possible threat to the US. Oddballs just
don't meet top KGB people.
Now that is a nerd post <g>.
Yes, he should have been more closely watched but not because he was a
threat to JFK but because he fit the profile, as I read it, of someone who
belonged on the security index. Hoover wrote a scathing memo about it.
Well, he did and he was.
Are you going to assign a baby sitter to everyone who is on a Watchlist?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Recall the intercepted letters he wrote to his brother when he was in the
USSR? He wrote that he would "kill any American" in the event of a war.
Yes, did the CIA intercept those letters?
Please don't answer.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Add the other evidence the FBI had and it sure looks to me that he would
be someone of serious interest.
Again, answer my damn questions. Do you have a 201 file?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Whether that would have prevented the assassination is another question.
Remember Sarah Jane Moore? The SS interviewed her and took away her gun.
They even made Ford wear a bullet proof vest. Did any politician wear a
bullet proof vest back in 1963? You are not allowed to answer. SCI.
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-04-27 11:59:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
and not just a security threat to the US:

From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas. He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."

Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-28 19:24:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas. He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
That's nice in thory, but in the real world back then it did not happen.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
Picked him up? When and how and under what pretext? Take him to lunch.
When the 2 SS agents visited me I took them to the pizza shop.
Oh, that's right, Oswald didn't like pizza.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
What if? So compartmentalization doesn't mean anything to you?
What happened when the FBI shared intelligence with the CIA?
All their agents in Moscow were killed.
Do you know what a mole is?
Angleton was on a mole hunt.
bigdog
2018-04-28 23:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-04-29 22:50:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.

Hoover disagreed.

Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?

Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.

Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-30 22:26:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
Hosty was not allowed to know that.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
You destroy your records.
bigdog
2018-05-01 02:44:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Routine. Oswald was one of the cases on Hosty's plate. He was supposed to
keep tabs on him. Naturally he would be concerned about the MC trip but I
don't see anything that would raise that level of concern to alarmed.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
It's easy to say now that I would have a heightened level of interest in
Oswald but at that point, Oswald probably just seemed more like a
screwball than a threat. He had defected once and he might after been
considering it again. At that point I think the FBI was more concerned
that Oswald was engaging in espionage rather than assassination. There was
no reason to think that he would have a golden opportunity to kill JFK
handed to him by random circumstances.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
I would probably make note of the trip and try to find out if Oswald was
doing anything that would indicate he was gathering intelligence. When I
found out he was working in the TSBD, I would probably realize he wasn't
learning any state secrets there. Nothing to make him a high priority
case.
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-05-02 04:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Routine. Oswald was one of the cases on Hosty's plate. He was supposed to
keep tabs on him. Naturally he would be concerned about the MC trip but I
don't see anything that would raise that level of concern to alarmed.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
It's easy to say now that I would have a heightened level of interest in
Oswald but at that point, Oswald probably just seemed more like a
screwball than a threat. He had defected once and he might after been
considering it again. At that point I think the FBI was more concerned
that Oswald was engaging in espionage rather than assassination. There was
no reason to think that he would have a golden opportunity to kill JFK
handed to him by random circumstances.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
I would probably make note of the trip and try to find out if Oswald was
doing anything that would indicate he was gathering intelligence. When I
found out he was working in the TSBD, I would probably realize he wasn't
learning any state secrets there. Nothing to make him a high priority
case.
From Hosty's book, "Assigment Oswald". This is right after he learns who
Kostikov was and that FBI headquarters - who got the information from one
of their double agents - withheld the information from him.

"What! [FBI] Headquarters knew this and didn't tell me, the field agent in
Dallas monitoring Oswald....The conversation casually changed subjects,
but I was thinking only about Kostikov. Now everything made sense. I now
understood what Malley's aide, Dick Rogge, meant when he said that I had
the case on Oswald but that I didn't know he was dangerous."

I'm just repeating myself at this point but Oswald was not - based on what
was known about him prior to the assassination - a routine, run of the
mill oddball.

He had defected to the USSR and returned; he threatened to give classified
information to the Soviets; he told his brother in intercepted letters
that he'd "kill any American" in a war; his mother visits the Kennedy
White House inquiring about the status of her son; he returns to the US -
which is odd that the Soviets would let someone return - and is never
fully interviewed as to what he did in the USSR; and he visits the Soviet
and Cuban embassies in MC and meets with top KGB agents. And, as Hosty
mentions: Kostikov.

There are a bunch of red flags to me that indicate this is a possible
threat to the US.

I think Hosty would agree.
bigdog
2018-05-03 00:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Routine. Oswald was one of the cases on Hosty's plate. He was supposed to
keep tabs on him. Naturally he would be concerned about the MC trip but I
don't see anything that would raise that level of concern to alarmed.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
It's easy to say now that I would have a heightened level of interest in
Oswald but at that point, Oswald probably just seemed more like a
screwball than a threat. He had defected once and he might after been
considering it again. At that point I think the FBI was more concerned
that Oswald was engaging in espionage rather than assassination. There was
no reason to think that he would have a golden opportunity to kill JFK
handed to him by random circumstances.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
I would probably make note of the trip and try to find out if Oswald was
doing anything that would indicate he was gathering intelligence. When I
found out he was working in the TSBD, I would probably realize he wasn't
learning any state secrets there. Nothing to make him a high priority
case.
From Hosty's book, "Assigment Oswald". This is right after he learns who
Kostikov was and that FBI headquarters - who got the information from one
of their double agents - withheld the information from him.
"What! [FBI] Headquarters knew this and didn't tell me, the field agent in
Dallas monitoring Oswald....The conversation casually changed subjects,
but I was thinking only about Kostikov. Now everything made sense. I now
understood what Malley's aide, Dick Rogge, meant when he said that I had
the case on Oswald but that I didn't know he was dangerous."
At that point, the FBI's concern would have been espionage and not
assassination. Who could have known at the time that months later a
motorcade would be routed past Oswald's workplace that would bring JFK
into rifle range of Oswald. I doubt they even knew he had a rifle. The key
phrase here is "...I didn't know he was dangerous". Of course they didn't
know that. How could anybody except Marina know that?
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I'm just repeating myself at this point but Oswald was not - based on what
was known about him prior to the assassination - a routine, run of the
mill oddball.
What their concern would have been after he repatriated was whether or not
he was a Soviet agent. That's why they would want to be concerned with
where he worked and who he was seeing. The MC trip would have raised
concerns but his activities prior to 11/22/63 would not have indicated to
them he was gathering intelligence. I'm guessing at that point they would
have been more curious than concerned about him. Certainly nothing they
could have known would have indicated he was potentially an assassin.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He had defected to the USSR and returned; he threatened to give classified
information to the Soviets; he told his brother in intercepted letters
that he'd "kill any American" in a war; his mother visits the Kennedy
White House inquiring about the status of her son; he returns to the US -
which is odd that the Soviets would let someone return - and is never
fully interviewed as to what he did in the USSR; and he visits the Soviet
and Cuban embassies in MC and meets with top KGB agents. And, as Hosty
mentions: Kostikov.
It's easy to connect the dots now. Not so easy prior to 11/22/63.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
There are a bunch of red flags to me that indicate this is a possible
threat to the US.
I think Hosty would agree.
They only seem like red flags now. This is all 20/20 hindsight.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-04 13:00:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Routine. Oswald was one of the cases on Hosty's plate. He was supposed to
keep tabs on him. Naturally he would be concerned about the MC trip but I
don't see anything that would raise that level of concern to alarmed.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
It's easy to say now that I would have a heightened level of interest in
Oswald but at that point, Oswald probably just seemed more like a
screwball than a threat. He had defected once and he might after been
considering it again. At that point I think the FBI was more concerned
that Oswald was engaging in espionage rather than assassination. There was
no reason to think that he would have a golden opportunity to kill JFK
handed to him by random circumstances.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
I would probably make note of the trip and try to find out if Oswald was
doing anything that would indicate he was gathering intelligence. When I
Not gathering intelligence. Acting as an agent of an enemy country.
Maybe even a sleeper agent. Maybe even a replacement double.
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
found out he was working in the TSBD, I would probably realize he wasn't
learning any state secrets there. Nothing to make him a high priority
case.
From Hosty's book, "Assigment Oswald". This is right after he learns who
Kostikov was and that FBI headquarters - who got the information from one
of their double agents - withheld the information from him.
No one told Hosty exact who and what Kostikov was.
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
"What! [FBI] Headquarters knew this and didn't tell me, the field agent in
Dallas monitoring Oswald....The conversation casually changed subjects,
but I was thinking only about Kostikov. Now everything made sense. I now
understood what Malley's aide, Dick Rogge, meant when he said that I had
the case on Oswald but that I didn't know he was dangerous."
At that point, the FBI's concern would have been espionage and not
assassination. Who could have known at the time that months later a
After all, no foreign agent would ever assassinate one of our leaders.
How rude!
Post by bigdog
motorcade would be routed past Oswald's workplace that would bring JFK
into rifle range of Oswald. I doubt they even knew he had a rifle. The key
False argument. One can easily shoot down at Main Street from the TSBD.
Love Field would be a very difficult shot though.
Post by bigdog
phrase here is "...I didn't know he was dangerous". Of course they didn't
know that. How could anybody except Marina know that?
Did Marina know that Lee was planning to kill the President?
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
I'm just repeating myself at this point but Oswald was not - based on what
was known about him prior to the assassination - a routine, run of the
mill oddball.
What their concern would have been after he repatriated was whether or not
he was a Soviet agent. That's why they would want to be concerned with
where he worked and who he was seeing. The MC trip would have raised
concerns but his activities prior to 11/22/63 would not have indicated to
them he was gathering intelligence. I'm guessing at that point they would
have been more curious than concerned about him. Certainly nothing they
could have known would have indicated he was potentially an assassin.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He had defected to the USSR and returned; he threatened to give classified
information to the Soviets; he told his brother in intercepted letters
that he'd "kill any American" in a war; his mother visits the Kennedy
White House inquiring about the status of her son; he returns to the US -
which is odd that the Soviets would let someone return - and is never
fully interviewed as to what he did in the USSR; and he visits the Soviet
and Cuban embassies in MC and meets with top KGB agents. And, as Hosty
mentions: Kostikov.
It's easy to connect the dots now. Not so easy prior to 11/22/63.
It was easy enough to connect the dots then and put him on a watch list
and open a 201 file on him. Do YOU have a 201 files? How many Americans
had a 201 file back then? Which Watch lists are you on?
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
There are a bunch of red flags to me that indicate this is a possible
threat to the US.
I think Hosty would agree.
They only seem like red flags now. This is all 20/20 hindsight.
So you don't know what a 201 file is and you think everyone is normally
on a watch list?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-03 01:59:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
As to closely monitoring Oswald because he was a threat to the president
From Bugliosi (RH, pg. 1246): "In a secret memo dated December 10, 1963
from FBI special agent J.H. Gale to Clyde Tolson, the number two man at
the bureau, in which he signed off on disciplinary action against thirteen
FBI agents for their negligent pre-assassination handling of the case,
Gale says that the FBI also never had Oswald's name on any list of people
to check out when Kennedy came to Dallas.
Sounds like the kind of CYA/PR move typical of Hoover. He was a zealot in
guarding the reputation of the FBI.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
He writes, "It is definitely
felt that subject Oswald should have been on the Security Index (SI) based
on the following facts". Gale sets forth eight facts, among which were
Oswald's defection to Russian and his contact with the Soviet Embassy in
Mexico that September and October. It is not the direct responsibility of
the FBI to protect the president, but if Oswald had been on the FBI
Security Index, it would have been the responsibility of the FBI to
furnish the information on Oswald to the PRS [the intelligence division of
the SS]. The head of the PRS told the Warren Commission that the Secret
Service had a standing request to all federal agencies to provide "any and
all information that they may come in contact with that would indicate
danger to the president." And Sorrels said that if the FBI had informed
him "that a defector to Russia was working along the motorcade route, I
would have picked him up as part of the presidential protection."
The question then becomes whether there was any reason to think Oswald was
dangerous. He didn't have a known history of violence.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Sorrels says that had he known about Oswald he would have picked him up.
I'm skeptical of that. But what if he was told that defector went to MC
and met the head of KGB assassinations for the western hemisphere? I'm
less skeptical.
Do you think anybody in the FBI even realized Oswald was working along the
motorcade route? That would presume the FBI was notified by the SS of the
motorcade route and that the FBI plotted where every person worked whom
they had a file on. I seriously doubt that would have happened. For one,
why would anyone assume a potential assassin would use his workplace as a
base for an assassination attempt. It would take considerable man hours to
determine where all these people worked and for what. An assassin wouldn't
be limited to using his workplace. In Oswald's case, it just made it
convenient for him. Taking the time to plot where all those screwballs
worked doesn't seem like a judicious use of personnel, unless of course we
are looking at the event in hindsight.
Gale suggested to Hoover that they NOT punish the agents until after the
WC report was issued and things calmed down because it could draw
attention to the FBI's failure. That is, sweep it under the rug.
Hoover disagreed.
Why do you think Hosty went to interview Oswald - he tried twice - after
learning about the MC visit?
Routine. Oswald was one of the cases on Hosty's plate. He was supposed to
keep tabs on him. Naturally he would be concerned about the MC trip but I
don't see anything that would raise that level of concern to alarmed.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Let's try this: You're Hosty. You learn about Oswald's trip to MC AND that
he met with three KGB agents over two days. Including the presumed head of
assassinations.
It's easy to say now that I would have a heightened level of interest in
Oswald but at that point, Oswald probably just seemed more like a
screwball than a threat. He had defected once and he might after been
considering it again. At that point I think the FBI was more concerned
that Oswald was engaging in espionage rather than assassination. There was
no reason to think that he would have a golden opportunity to kill JFK
handed to him by random circumstances.
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Do you just file that away? What would you do with it? Yes, we have FBI
regulations/procedures versus what you would do. What would you do?
I would probably make note of the trip and try to find out if Oswald was
doing anything that would indicate he was gathering intelligence. When I
found out he was working in the TSBD, I would probably realize he wasn't
learning any state secrets there. Nothing to make him a high priority
case.
From Hosty's book, "Assigment Oswald". This is right after he learns who
Kostikov was and that FBI headquarters - who got the information from one
of their double agents - withheld the information from him.
"What! [FBI] Headquarters knew this and didn't tell me, the field agent in
Dallas monitoring Oswald....The conversation casually changed subjects,
but I was thinking only about Kostikov. Now everything made sense. I now
understood what Malley's aide, Dick Rogge, meant when he said that I had
the case on Oswald but that I didn't know he was dangerous."
I'm just repeating myself at this point but Oswald was not - based on what
was known about him prior to the assassination - a routine, run of the
mill oddball.
He had defected to the USSR and returned; he threatened to give classified
information to the Soviets; he told his brother in intercepted letters
that he'd "kill any American" in a war; his mother visits the Kennedy
White House inquiring about the status of her son; he returns to the US -
which is odd that the Soviets would let someone return - and is never
fully interviewed as to what he did in the USSR; and he visits the Soviet
and Cuban embassies in MC and meets with top KGB agents. And, as Hosty
mentions: Kostikov.
There are a bunch of red flags to me that indicate this is a possible
threat to the US.
I think Hosty would agree.
Oswald WAS on a watchlist. Who took him off and why?
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-27 22:00:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
It's always easy to cover up for a screw-up by the government by saying
that no one knew about it. That's what they did with the VA. That's what
they did with Pearl Harbor. They said how could we possibly know. Well, a
British spy TOLD Hoover about the attack and Hoover ignored him.
Post by bigdog
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Compartmentalization.
What happened to Duty to Warn?
mainframetech
2018-04-27 22:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
What a raggedy bunch of OPINIONS you just flatulated! One big long
imagination head first dive into fantasy!

Chris
BOZ
2018-04-29 18:50:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
Anthony Marsh
2018-04-30 13:05:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
Sure, but how many wives do that? And then SHE might get deported.
Had she hooked up with the Paines by then? Ruth didn't even write the
invitation until April 7th.
How would she support herself?
bigdog
2018-04-30 13:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-01 15:36:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
claviger
2018-05-02 04:34:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
What grassy knoll shooter? Was the shooter male or female?
Smoke on the Grassy Knoll indicates a black powder rifle was
the weapon of choice. Any witness see someone in a tricorne
hat leaving the scene of the crime?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-03 14:33:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
What grassy knoll shooter? Was the shooter male or female?
Male. We've been over this before. Pay attention.
Post by claviger
Smoke on the Grassy Knoll indicates a black powder rifle was
the weapon of choice. Any witness see someone in a tricorne
No, silly. SOme modern rifles do emit smoke. The Carcano can emit smoke.
Post by claviger
hat leaving the scene of the crime?
You reach for the ridiculous because you deny simple facts.
BOZ
2018-05-09 15:29:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
What grassy knoll shooter? Was the shooter male or female?
Male. We've been over this before. Pay attention.
Post by claviger
Smoke on the Grassy Knoll indicates a black powder rifle was
the weapon of choice. Any witness see someone in a tricorne
No, silly. SOme modern rifles do emit smoke. The Carcano can emit smoke.
Post by claviger
hat leaving the scene of the crime?
You reach for the ridiculous because you deny simple facts.
disinformation
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-10 01:08:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
What grassy knoll shooter? Was the shooter male or female?
Male. We've been over this before. Pay attention.
Post by claviger
Smoke on the Grassy Knoll indicates a black powder rifle was
the weapon of choice. Any witness see someone in a tricorne
No, silly. SOme modern rifles do emit smoke. The Carcano can emit smoke.
Post by claviger
hat leaving the scene of the crime?
You reach for the ridiculous because you deny simple facts.
disinformation
You're like that CIA officer being questioned today who refuses to
answer yes or no. Maybe SHE needs to be waterboarded.
OHLeeRedux
2018-05-10 01:08:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by BOZ
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Marina should have turned him in when he tried to shoot Walker.
How different would history have been? I wonder if she is haunted by that
realization.
How? She didn't know about the grassy knoll shooter.
And maybe there was more attempts planned.
What grassy knoll shooter? Was the shooter male or female?
Male. We've been over this before. Pay attention.
Post by claviger
Smoke on the Grassy Knoll indicates a black powder rifle was
the weapon of choice. Any witness see someone in a tricorne
No, silly. SOme modern rifles do emit smoke. The Carcano can emit smoke.
Post by claviger
hat leaving the scene of the crime?
You reach for the ridiculous because you deny simple facts.
disinformation
That is Mr. Marsh's forte.
donald willis
2018-05-02 02:33:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
Wasn't there a movie, "Closely Watched Oswalds"?
claviger
2018-05-02 02:37:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
In this case the perp was too obvious, hiding in plain sight we might say.
He wanted attention and succeeded in NO and Dallas. The local police
were aware he was handing out Fair-Play-for-Cuba sheets in both cities.

This is a most interesting observation by FBI Agent Hosty :
_________________________________________________________________________

The article ended with some enlightening comments from the police:
"Dallas police officers watched several known extremists prior to the
Kennedy visit and even sent representatives as far as 75 miles to
interview others thought to be planning demonstrations.

[Police chief Jesse] Curry privately has told friends, 'If we had known
that a defector or a Communist was anywhere in this town, let alone
on the parade route, we would have been sitting on his lap, you can
bet on that.' But he refused public comment."

The police were blatantly trying to wriggle out from under a rock. . . . I
wanted to laugh. The police had a long list of well-known Communists in
Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22. In fact, Detective H. M. Hart told me that the police neither picked
up nor watched anyone the day of November 22. Clearly, someone from the
police department had fed this story to [reporter Hugh] Aynesworth. . . .
_________________________________________________________________________

A few questions:

How did Hosty know: "The police had a long list of well-known Communists
in Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22."

Did the local FBI office and home office in DC have that list prior to the
Dallas visit? If so, who developed that list and was it available to the
Secret Service?

Was it made available to the DPD, DCSD, and TXDPS?

What about Dallas area Federal Marshalls?

The big question: Was LHO on that list? If not, why not?

Did any other well-known Communists work on the parade route?

Again, was this information shared with all law enforcement and protective
agencies involved? It would appear there was plenty of manpower to
provide adequate protection in the Dealey Plaza area of downtown Dallas
and elsewhere.
bigdog
2018-05-03 00:14:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
In this case the perp was too obvious, hiding in plain sight we might say.
He wanted attention and succeeded in NO and Dallas. The local police
were aware he was handing out Fair-Play-for-Cuba sheets in both cities.
_________________________________________________________________________
"Dallas police officers watched several known extremists prior to the
Kennedy visit and even sent representatives as far as 75 miles to
interview others thought to be planning demonstrations.
[Police chief Jesse] Curry privately has told friends, 'If we had known
that a defector or a Communist was anywhere in this town, let alone
on the parade route, we would have been sitting on his lap, you can
bet on that.' But he refused public comment."
The police were blatantly trying to wriggle out from under a rock. . . . I
wanted to laugh. The police had a long list of well-known Communists in
Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22. In fact, Detective H. M. Hart told me that the police neither picked
up nor watched anyone the day of November 22. Clearly, someone from the
police department had fed this story to [reporter Hugh] Aynesworth. . . .
_________________________________________________________________________
How did Hosty know: "The police had a long list of well-known Communists
in Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22."
Did the local FBI office and home office in DC have that list prior to the
Dallas visit? If so, who developed that list and was it available to the
Secret Service?
Was it made available to the DPD, DCSD, and TXDPS?
What about Dallas area Federal Marshalls?
The big question: Was LHO on that list? If not, why not?
Did any other well-known Communists work on the parade route?
Again, was this information shared with all law enforcement and protective
agencies involved? It would appear there was plenty of manpower to
provide adequate protection in the Dealey Plaza area of downtown Dallas
and elsewhere.
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?

Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had been a
white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was a white
supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have been keeping
close tabs on him. That would mean that they should have been keeping tabs
on all white supremacists in the Dallas area. How many of them to you
suppose there were?

Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who those
people are unless they act.
claviger
2018-05-04 00:23:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.

Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas. The DPD had no idea who LHO was
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?

Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
Post by bigdog
Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had
been a white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was
a white supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have
been keeping close tabs on him. That would mean that they have been
keeping tabs on all white supremacists in the Dallas area.
How many of them to you suppose there were?
I have no idea, but I would think Dallas area Law Officers would know
and could liaise with the FBI and SSA to find out what Intel they might
have. LHO would certainly have been a "person of interest" had that
meeting took place.
Post by bigdog
Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who
those people are unless they act.
LHO had made his presence known in downtown Dallas handing out
pro-Castro propaganda. That would be considered a Far Left stance
in 1963 and anti-American to many people during the Cold War. So
LHO would definitely be on their radar screen to be checked out.
bigdog
2018-05-05 01:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
If I knew that they wouldn't be untold numbers.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Tracking people requires a considerable amount of manpower and these
agencies don't have unlimited manpower. You only do that for the highest
priority people of interest. I've seen nothing that indicates Oswald
should have been one of those.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.
He handed out leaflets in New Orleans. He got into a skirmish with
anti-Castro Cubans which resulted in a misdemeanor arrest. Not the kind of
thing that would put up a red flag with the DPD.
Post by claviger
Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas.
Do you think they knew where every KKK member in Dallas worked?
Post by claviger
The DPD had no idea who LHO was
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?
Hosty got rid of the note because he feared the wrath of Hoover.
Post by claviger
Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
If they dumped hundreds of names of people on their radar screen to the
DPD, it wouldn't be very effective. You identify the highest priority
people. The people you think pose the greatest danger. I see nothing that
would have made Oswald one of those people.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had
been a white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was
a white supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have
been keeping close tabs on him. That would mean that they have been
keeping tabs on all white supremacists in the Dallas area.
How many of them to you suppose there were?
I have no idea, but I would think Dallas area Law Officers would know
and could liaise with the FBI and SSA to find out what Intel they might
have. LHO would certainly have been a "person of interest" had that
meeting took place.
Trying to figure out who might be an assassin is like looking for a needle
in a haystack.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who
those people are unless they act.
LHO had made his presence known in downtown Dallas handing out
pro-Castro propaganda.
New Orleans. If he handed any out in Dallas, there were no incidents and
no reason the DPD would know about it.
Post by claviger
That would be considered a Far Left stance
in 1963 and anti-American to many people during the Cold War. So
LHO would definitely be on their radar screen to be checked out.
There were lots of far left people back then as there are now. How could
they have known who the assassin was going to be?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-06 00:46:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
If I knew that they wouldn't be untold numbers.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Tracking people requires a considerable amount of manpower and these
agencies don't have unlimited manpower. You only do that for the highest
priority people of interest. I've seen nothing that indicates Oswald
should have been one of those.
Exactly. That's why 9/11 happened. There were too many terrorists to
keep track of. They could handle 1 or 2, but not 30 or 40.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.
He handed out leaflets in New Orleans. He got into a skirmish with
anti-Castro Cubans which resulted in a misdemeanor arrest. Not the kind of
thing that would put up a red flag with the DPD.
Post by claviger
Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas.
Do you think they knew where every KKK member in Dallas worked?
I like that. Do you think they even cared?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
The DPD had no idea who LHO was
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?
Hosty got rid of the note because he feared the wrath of Hoover.
Post by claviger
Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
If they dumped hundreds of names of people on their radar screen to the
DPD, it wouldn't be very effective. You identify the highest priority
That's right. There were thousands of people who wanted to assassinate
President Kennedy. How could they know which one would get lucky?
Post by bigdog
people. The people you think pose the greatest danger. I see nothing that
would have made Oswald one of those people.
Watch list. 201 file. Tapes of his visits to the embassied in Mexico.
Kostokov.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had
been a white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was
a white supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have
been keeping close tabs on him. That would mean that they have been
keeping tabs on all white supremacists in the Dallas area.
How many of them to you suppose there were?
I have no idea, but I would think Dallas area Law Officers would know
and could liaise with the FBI and SSA to find out what Intel they might
have. LHO would certainly have been a "person of interest" had that
meeting took place.
Trying to figure out who might be an assassin is like looking for a needle
in a haystack.
Yes, there must be billions of assassins out there. Great argument to do
nothing.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who
those people are unless they act.
LHO had made his presence known in downtown Dallas handing out
pro-Castro propaganda.
New Orleans. If he handed any out in Dallas, there were no incidents and
no reason the DPD would know about it.
There is absolutely no evidence that Oswald handed out FPCC leaflets in
Dallas. Some people are conflating New Orleans with Dallas.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
That would be considered a Far Left stance
in 1963 and anti-American to many people during the Cold War. So
LHO would definitely be on their radar screen to be checked out.
There were lots of far left people back then as there are now. How could
they have known who the assassin was going to be?
Yes, you're right. There must be billions and you can't watch them all.
Just like 9/11.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-06 00:36:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.
Not that unique.

How can they watch him if they didn't even know where he was?
Post by claviger
Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas. The DPD had no idea who LHO was
You mean like the Adlai Stevenson incident? How many peoople had to resign
over that? How many people had to resign over the FJFK assassination?
Post by claviger
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?
Hoover.
Post by claviger
Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
Compartmentalization. Why didn't the CIA tell the FBI about its
terrorists called al Qaeda?
Post by claviger
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
Hosty couldn't find him.
When Curry publicly complained about the FBI not telling the DPD about
Oswald, Hoover personally threatened him.
Post by claviger
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
Sorry, that is not allowe in our government.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had
been a white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was
a white supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have
been keeping close tabs on him. That would mean that they have been
keeping tabs on all white supremacists in the Dallas area.
How many of them to you suppose there were?
So what? A WHite supremacist did threaten to kill the President and no
one did anything about it.
Post by claviger
I have no idea, but I would think Dallas area Law Officers would know
and could liaise with the FBI and SSA to find out what Intel they might
have. LHO would certainly have been a "person of interest" had that
meeting took place.
Not allowed.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who
those people are unless they act.
LHO had made his presence known in downtown Dallas handing out
pro-Castro propaganda. That would be considered a Far Left stance
I've asked you to show some proof of that and you can't. You got Dallas
confused with New Orleans.
Post by claviger
in 1963 and anti-American to many people during the Cold War. So
LHO would definitely be on their radar screen to be checked out.
Yeah, he was. So what? He was on a watch list than someone took him off
just before the assassination. WHo did that and why?
<crickets>
claviger
2018-05-17 03:05:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.
Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas. The DPD had no idea who LHO was
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?
Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States

Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. §
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
claviger
2018-05-18 00:19:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. §
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
John McAdams
2018-05-18 00:37:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. §
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
The "blow up" business is Nanny Fenner's recollection of the note.

Hosty's more bland account is more credible, since we know how Oswald
wrote when he felt he had been badly treated (letter to Soviet Embassy
in DC complaining about his treatment at the embassy in Mexico City).
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-19 01:24:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. §
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
The "blow up" business is Nanny Fenner's recollection of the note.
Hosty's more bland account is more credible, since we know how Oswald
The difference being that HOSTY was ordered to cover up the incident. I
would more likely believe the person who was not part of the cover-up.
Post by John McAdams
wrote when he felt he had been badly treated (letter to Soviet Embassy
in DC complaining about his treatment at the embassy in Mexico City).
.John
Oswald's complaint was about HOSTY bothering and threatening Marina.
Post by John McAdams
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-19 01:25:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. ?? 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. ?? 875, 18 U.S.C. ??
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
Not likely. First they have to do an investigation to see if there was
enough eidennce to WARRANT an arrest. The 2 Secret Service agents did not
arrest me. They just wanted to SEE my article to confirm the rumor that
one of you guys had started.

BTW, you did not complain when I stated that Oswald should already have
been in prison for shooting at Walker. You acted like it was not a big
deal.
claviger
2018-05-21 02:30:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. ?? 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. ?? 875, 18 U.S.C. ??
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
Not likely. First they have to do an investigation to see if there was
enough eidennce to WARRANT an arrest.
All the evidence was inside the FBI office! They had the threatening
note and eyewitnesses to LHO. What more evidence do they need?
Post by Anthony Marsh
The 2 Secret Service agents did not arrest me. They just wanted
to SEE my article to confirm the rumor that one of you guys had
started.
What rumor?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-22 22:32:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. ?? 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. ?? 875, 18 U.S.C. ??
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
Not likely. First they have to do an investigation to see if there was
enough eidennce to WARRANT an arrest.
All the evidence was inside the FBI office! They had the threatening
note and eyewitnesses to LHO. What more evidence do they need?
Post by Anthony Marsh
The 2 Secret Service agents did not arrest me. They just wanted
to SEE my article to confirm the rumor that one of you guys had
started.
What rumor?
That I was planning to assassinate the President.
I was worried that someone else was and they hadn't caught him yet.
claviger
2018-05-23 20:26:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. ?? 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. ?? 875, 18 U.S.C. ??
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Did FBI Shanklin and Hosty violate Federal Law by not arresting LHO
for the bomb threat he made to blow up the FBI Office? LHO could
possibly be sitting in the Dallas County jail awaiting trial during the
Parade.
Not likely. First they have to do an investigation to see if there was
enough eidennce to WARRANT an arrest.
All the evidence was inside the FBI office! They had the threatening
note and eyewitnesses to LHO. What more evidence do they need?
Post by Anthony Marsh
The 2 Secret Service agents did not arrest me. They just wanted
to SEE my article to confirm the rumor that one of you guys had
started.
What rumor?
That I was planning to assassinate the President.
I was worried that someone else was and they hadn't caught him yet.
Which President?

Anthony Marsh
2018-05-18 00:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
How do you know that as a fact?
Post by bigdog
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
Isn't that part of their job description? If not the police, then who?
Post by bigdog
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
The only US Marine to defect to the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
who gave away secrets, married a Russian citizen, and recently passed
out "Hands Off Cuba" sheets in downtown Dallas makes him stand out
from the crowd, so I would start with him and work down the list.
Bet the DCSD and DPD knew who the KKK agitators were and other
local troublemakers and told there would be hell to pay should they
embarrass the City of Dallas. The DPD had no idea who LHO was
but the Dallas FBI certainly did. If they did nothing wrong why get
rid of the hand written note where LHO threatened to blow up their
building?
Which brings up the obvious question, why did the local FBI office
NOT tell the Dallas Police and Sheriff about this threat and the guy
who made it? Had they done that at the time both Chief Curry and
Sheriff Decker could put him on a watch list and find out where he
lived and worked. At this point both would notice he worked at the
TSBD on the parade route and did not want him tossing bombs at
the Motorcade as it passed through Dealey Plaza. With that info
they could easily work out something with the TSBD to keep an
eye on LHO. All this is basic commonsense.
Threatening government officials of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_government_officials_of_the_United_States
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under
federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony
under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment,
that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening
other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum
penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. §
876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
Juvenile. The FBI was not going to admit that they screwed up.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-04 13:02:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
In this case the perp was too obvious, hiding in plain sight we might say.
He wanted attention and succeeded in NO and Dallas. The local police
were aware he was handing out Fair-Play-for-Cuba sheets in both cities.
_________________________________________________________________________
"Dallas police officers watched several known extremists prior to the
Kennedy visit and even sent representatives as far as 75 miles to
interview others thought to be planning demonstrations.
[Police chief Jesse] Curry privately has told friends, 'If we had known
that a defector or a Communist was anywhere in this town, let alone
on the parade route, we would have been sitting on his lap, you can
bet on that.' But he refused public comment."
The police were blatantly trying to wriggle out from under a rock. . . . I
wanted to laugh. The police had a long list of well-known Communists in
Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22. In fact, Detective H. M. Hart told me that the police neither picked
up nor watched anyone the day of November 22. Clearly, someone from the
police department had fed this story to [reporter Hugh] Aynesworth. . . .
_________________________________________________________________________
How did Hosty know: "The police had a long list of well-known Communists
in Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22."
Did the local FBI office and home office in DC have that list prior to the
Dallas visit? If so, who developed that list and was it available to the
Secret Service?
Was it made available to the DPD, DCSD, and TXDPS?
What about Dallas area Federal Marshalls?
The big question: Was LHO on that list? If not, why not?
Did any other well-known Communists work on the parade route?
Again, was this information shared with all law enforcement and protective
agencies involved? It would appear there was plenty of manpower to
provide adequate protection in the Dealey Plaza area of downtown Dallas
and elsewhere.
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying after the fact, "If only we
had known". That's easy to say and comes across as CYA. The fact is there
were untold numbers of people in Dallas who had questionable backgrounds.
Should local or federal law enforcement been keeping tabs on all of them.
It's was to say afterward that the one who carried out the assassination
is the one that should have been watched but what was there prior to
11/22/63 that would have made Oswald stand out?
Suppose instead of a defector to the Soviet Union the assassin had been a
white supremacist. Would we now be saying the fact he was a white
supremacist was reason enough law enforcement should have been keeping
close tabs on him. That would mean that they should have been keeping tabs
on all white supremacists in the Dallas area. How many of them to you
suppose there were?
Any time a president travels to a city, there are going to be potential
assassins among the population. The problem is nobody knows who those
people are unless they act.
I like that. So you say there are assassins in every city of our
country? Do they have their own club? How could we have enough SS agents
to watch ALL of them? It would take like 100,000 agents.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-04 00:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Several people have maintained that if the federal agencies and the DPD
been more diligent and had shared what they knew about Oswald with each
other that the assassination could have been prevented. I have long taken
the view that is nothing more than 20/20 hindsight and I just saw John
McAdams express that same sentiment in another thread. It's easy to say
now that he should have been watched more closely but prior to 11/22/63,
what reason would there have been to do that. Up until then he had only
one minor brush with the law in New Orleans that summer and he apparently
wasn't even the instigator in that event. Nobody in law enforcement knew
he had taken the shot at Walker earlier that year. As far as anybody knew,
he was just an insignificant little screwball who had defected to the
USSR, married a Russian girl, and then repatriated. Naturally they would
have a file on him but it's not as if the people in the CIA and the FBI
didn't have other cases on their plate. What was there that should have
made Oswald standout? What was there that would have justified the level
of surveillance that would have told them that he was working in a
building along the motorcade route and that he posed a danger to the
President?
In the aftermath of the recent tragic school shooting in Parkland, FL, we
learned the shooter had given ample warning of his intentions and yet even
then those in law enforcement failed to take actions that would have
prevented that tragedy. Oswald had given no such signals prior to his
actions in Dallas. He had shown himself to be a screwball. There are lots
of screwballs in this world and most of them aren't dangerous. A few do
prove to be a danger but identifying which ones those are is often
difficult if not impossible to do. I see nothing in what authorities knew
about Oswald prior to 11/22/63 that should have alerted them that he was a
danger to the POTUS.
In this case the perp was too obvious, hiding in plain sight we might say.
He wanted attention and succeeded in NO and Dallas. The local police
were aware he was handing out Fair-Play-for-Cuba sheets in both cities.
_________________________________________________________________________
"Dallas police officers watched several known extremists prior to the
Kennedy visit and even sent representatives as far as 75 miles to
interview others thought to be planning demonstrations.
[Police chief Jesse] Curry privately has told friends, 'If we had known
that a defector or a Communist was anywhere in this town, let alone
on the parade route, we would have been sitting on his lap, you can
bet on that.' But he refused public comment."
The police were blatantly trying to wriggle out from under a rock. . . . I
wanted to laugh. The police had a long list of well-known Communists in
Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22. In fact, Detective H. M. Hart told me that the police neither picked
up nor watched anyone the day of November 22. Clearly, someone from the
police department had fed this story to [reporter Hugh] Aynesworth. . . .
_________________________________________________________________________
How did Hosty know: "The police had a long list of well-known Communists
in Dallas, and not one had a police officer sitting on his lap on November
22."
Did the local FBI office and home office in DC have that list prior to the
Dallas visit? If so, who developed that list and was it available to the
Secret Service?
Was it made available to the DPD, DCSD, and TXDPS?
What about Dallas area Federal Marshalls?
The big question: Was LHO on that list? If not, why not?
Did any other well-known Communists work on the parade route?
Again, was this information shared with all law enforcement and protective
agencies involved? It would appear there was plenty of manpower to
provide adequate protection in the Dealey Plaza area of downtown Dallas
and elsewhere.
No.

Oswald's name was on a watch list before the assassination. Someone in the
FBI took his name off that watchlist shortly before the assassination. How
come you don't want to know who and why?
claviger
2018-05-02 04:23:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?

Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.

Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
bigdog
2018-05-03 00:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That means they would have to have done that with every person in Dallas
who was on their radar screens for what ever reason.
Post by claviger
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
The conspiracy hobbyists would have just invented a different place for
their imaginary second gunmen or claimed the deputies were in on the plot.
You underestimate them.
claviger
2018-05-04 00:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That means they would have to have done that with every person in Dallas
who was on their radar screens for what ever reason.
That would be a good place to start, but LHO was a newcomer to Dallas with
some strange baggage as a defector to the USSR who returned to the USA,
but still had outspoken opinions in support of Marxism and the Cuban
Revolution, which makes him a rather peculiar outsider in Dallas, Texas
for the 1960s in the middle of The Cold War.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
The conspiracy hobbyists would have just invented a different place for
their imaginary second gunmen or claimed the deputies were in on the
plot. You underestimate them.
They do have an amazing myopic inclination to ignore a mountain of facts
to focus on a pebble of CTistic minutia, then exclaim "Ah Hah! Here is
the evidence I've been searching for that proves I'm right! Now YOU can
SEE my new CONSPIRACY!!!" Then start dancing like Church Lady on SNL!
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-06 00:32:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That means they would have to have done that with every person in Dallas
who was on their radar screens for what ever reason.
That would be a good place to start, but LHO was a newcomer to Dallas with
some strange baggage as a defector to the USSR who returned to the USA,
Newcomer? Didn't his mother live in Dallas?
Ever read the Warren Report?
Post by claviger
but still had outspoken opinions in support of Marxism and the Cuban
Revolution, which makes him a rather peculiar outsider in Dallas, Texas
for the 1960s in the middle of The Cold War.
Tell us all about the rallies and passing out fliers he did in Dallas.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
The conspiracy hobbyists would have just invented a different place for
their imaginary second gunmen or claimed the deputies were in on the
plot. You underestimate them.
They do have an amazing myopic inclination to ignore a mountain of facts
to focus on a pebble of CTistic minutia, then exclaim "Ah Hah! Here is
the evidence I've been searching for that proves I'm right! Now YOU can
SEE my new CONSPIRACY!!!" Then start dancing like Church Lady on SNL!
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-06 00:33:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That means they would have to have done that with every person in Dallas
who was on their radar screens for what ever reason.
That would be a good place to start, but LHO was a newcomer to Dallas with
some strange baggage as a defector to the USSR who returned to the USA,
but still had outspoken opinions in support of Marxism and the Cuban
Revolution, which makes him a rather peculiar outsider in Dallas, Texas
for the 1960s in the middle of The Cold War.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
The conspiracy hobbyists would have just invented a different place for
their imaginary second gunmen or claimed the deputies were in on the
plot. You underestimate them.
They do have an amazing myopic inclination to ignore a mountain of facts
to focus on a pebble of CTistic minutia, then exclaim "Ah Hah! Here is
the evidence I've been searching for that proves I'm right! Now YOU can
SEE my new CONSPIRACY!!!" Then start dancing like Church Lady on SNL!
You're old enough to remember that? And you ADMIT it?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-04 13:01:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That means they would have to have done that with every person in Dallas
who was on their radar screens for what ever reason.
I like that. You think ever y citizen in Dallas had a 201 file and was on
a watch list. Nothing out of the ordinary about that. You have a 201 file
and you are on several watch lists to you think that is normal for
everyone.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
But they did not secure that area.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
The conspiracy hobbyists would have just invented a different place for
their imaginary second gunmen or claimed the deputies were in on the plot.
You underestimate them.
A WC defender already invented a different place for an imaginary second
gunman. The Queen Mary.

You mean some irresponsible conspiracy kook simply FORGOT to include the
deputies in the UBBER CONSPIRACY?

I'm shocked, I tell you, utterly shocked!
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-03 14:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
Several Deputies were just standing around outside the Sheriff Office
watching the parade passing by as spectators when the motorcade
was ambushed inside their own backyard. They could just as easily
watched from the wooden fence as they secured that area. It would
have saved the entire population of the Western World from having to
endure the never ending CT ghost stories of all the phantom snipers
hiding behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll.
All that sounds pretty and reassuring, but you think it would have been
all for naught since you think JFK's own SS agent shot him in the head.
No one was watching the SS.
claviger
2018-05-18 00:57:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
That should have been a committee of Four:

Dallas Police Department, Dallas Sheriff Department,
Local Secret Service Agent, Local FBI Agent

They should have accepted the offer from the:
US Army Intel Unit at Fort Sam Houston
They already had a file on LHO
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-19 01:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Should Oswald have been more closely watched?
Obviously the answer is yes, and he would have been had the FBI sat
down with the DPD and DCSD to discuss the overall situation with
these local law enforcement departments and established a central
coordination committee of three, to make sure there was maximum
information and cooperation.
Dallas Police Department, Dallas Sheriff Department,
Local Secret Service Agent, Local FBI Agent
Why should they cooperate with each other? When had they ever done so
before? Tell me the previous case where they did.
Post by claviger
US Army Intel Unit at Fort Sam Houston
They already had a file on LHO
112th was ordered to stand down.
Loading...