Post by Rob Caprio on Sept 30, 2024 19:55:22 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2025
api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/gettyimages-503031611.jpg
media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/11/21/ap070213017745_custom-a152d00008f8ce189e7589299f4e65bbcbe220f1-s1100-c50.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963. They claimed that all the evidence pointed to him acting alone.
On November 24, 1963, LHO was gunned down while being transferred by the Dallas Police Department (DPD), therefore, there would be no trial for LHO. Since LHO was never going to receive his chance in court to give his side of his story, why was the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) worried about what witnesses were going to say to the press after his death?
Why were they ordering witnesses to keep their mouths' shut when supposedly ONLY LHO was involved, and he was deceased? That is the focus of this article.
***********************************************
[Note: This article is not meant to paint the FBI in a bad light as an organization. The majority of the people that work for them do a very good job and uphold the laws and rights that they swore an allegiance to. This article is about what some agents opted to do in regard to the JFK assassination investigation.]
This tactic, some have said intimidation, was first reported on by the New York Times (NYT) on December 6, 1963. Reporter Joseph Loftus sent the following dispatch from Dallas.
Quote on
Most private citizens who had co-operated with newsmen reporting the crime have refused to give further help after being interviewed by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dallas city and county police withdrew their help the same way. One high official said he wished he could answer questions “because it would save us a lot of work.” Mr. Loftus gives a specific case: “The best authority on presumably the exact angle of entry of the bullet is the man who made the autopsy. He is Dr. J.J. Humes of the Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md. Dr. Humes said he had been forbidden to talk.” (New York Times, Joseph Loftus, December 6, 1963)
Quote off
Why was the FBI interested in muzzling these witnesses? Why was Dr. Humes “forbidden to talk?” If LHO was really the lone assassin as claimed, why were these things occurring?
Malcolm Price had met “Oswald” at the Sports Drome Rifle Range and helped him by sighting his telescopic sight.
Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anyone with him?
Mr. PRICE. No; he was by himself, and I have heard that he couldn't drive, but he was driving that day because he was the only one in the car, and he came down and inquired if there was anyone there that could set a scope, a telescope on a rifle, and I told him that I could, and he said, well--he had one that he had had mounted and boresighted but it hadn't been fired on a range and that he would like to have it sighted in, so I went down and set up a target on a hundred yards…. I took him down to set his telescope and we stayed there that much longer, and Mr. Davis came in and Mrs. Davis went on home.
Mr. Price said that he looked through the scope and that it was very clear. This witness was quoted in the NYT as saying the following when he asked a question.
Quote on
[Mr. Price] declined to answer further questions because the FBI had asked him not to talk. The FBI here [Dallas] denied this.” (New York Times, December 10, 1963)
Quote off
This quote makes it sound like a request by the FBI to Price, but Price told Associated Press (AP) correspondent Bernard Gauser something else.
Quote on
I cannot tell you a thing. If the FBI says it is okay for me to talk, why then I'd be glad to tell you what I know. But up to then it is strictly classified.
Quote off
Why would Price's observations be “classified” if LHO was really the lone assassin? Probably because he saw someone impersonating LHO at the rifle range. This impersonation, and the others, makes it obvious that LHO was being set up as a radical person who liked his guns. If LHO was guilty and had acted alone as claimed this type of information wouldn't need to be suppressed.
William Waldman of Klein's Sporting Goods (KSG) said this when asked a question by the Christian Science Monitor (CSM).
Quote on
[Waldman] says the FBI has ordered him not to comment on the company’s presumed transaction with Lee Harvey Oswald…”. (Christian Science Monitor, November 26, 1963)
Quote off
If the rifle order was ordered as claimed, why was Waldman ordered to keep quiet about the details?
The owner of KSG, Milton Klein, told Italian reporter Marcelli, “I've had more than enough publicity…and the FBI has warned me to keep my trap shut.”
Dealey Plaza (DP) witness Amos Euins refused to speak with or take questions from the media because “a Secret Service man said I'd be in real trouble if I talked.” (National Guardian, March 21, 1964)
Was it the Secret Service (SS) as 14-year-old Euins says or was it the FBI who told him this? Most likely it was the FBI as they were with the WC during this time.
For the record the FBI has NO legal authority to tell anyone to shut up. It is not within their scope of authority and directly violates our First Amendment right. To do this in a presidential assassination investigation is even more in violation of the laws and rights they swear to uphold.
These weren't simple requests, and they were beyond the authority of the FBI, so why did people agree to remain quiet when they didn't have to? Clearly there was intimidation involved in some of these cases. The person feared what would happen if they didn't comply.
To be fair, a few of these instances the person could have felt that they were doing their civic duty to comply, but the point is that they didn't have to. When the FBI tried this tactic on people who knew their rights they received a very different result.
Quote on
On April 29, [Mark] Lane said, he was accosted outside his apartment building by two FBI agents…demanded: “Do you have information in your possession, which you have secured illegally from the files of the FBI?” To which Lane responded: “Who are you?
“The agents identified themselves as William E. Folkner, 5954, and John Di Marchi, 4256, and repeated the question…
“Lane: “What leads you to ask me that question?”
“Agent: “We have confidential information that you have such information.“
“Lane: “I am surprised that it is so easy to acquire FBI information. I do not ever expect to be questioned in this fashion by an agent of the FBI. If the FBI wants answers from me, then I suggest that J. Edgar Hoover or someone write to me. In no case will I answer after being stopped in front of my own house by police agents, particularly in the rain. These are the tactics of a police state.”
“Agent: “Then I take it that you admit you have documents in your possession from the files of the FBI and (raising voice) I now demand that you turn over to me all such documents in your possession at this time.”
“Lane: “Excuse me. Taxi.” (National Guardian, May 9, 1964)
Quote off
This is the tactic of a police state. If the FBI really had information as they claimed (note how it is always confidential in circumstances like this) then they would have approached this very differently. This was meant to intimidate Lane.
Notice too how they used the same approach that many of the WC defenders use. Lane never said that he had any FBI documents in his possession, but the agent says he will take his statement as an admission. Ridiculous.
The Realist reported the following incident in March 1964.
Quote on
President Kennedy was in Ashland, Wisconsin, on September 24. That's about 400 miles northwest of Milwaukee. On September 16, a man signed in as “Lee Oswald, Dallas” at the Fox and Hounds Inn, a motel in Wausau, about 30 miles northwest of Milwaukee. A reporter has inspected the guest register, only to find that the pages from July 30 to September 18th are missing. The motel manager has no comment. The Milwaukee FBI has no comment.
Quote off
Again, it is not hard to imagine why there was no comment. The official version of events never tells us that LHO was ever in Wisconsin in September 1963, thus, this story would once again show that LHO was being impersonated in a way that would make him seem like he was stalking JFK.
We saw this quote from Nancy Lee Fenner in this series regarding the alleged threatening note issue at the Dallas FBI office.
Quote on
…She noticed the man when he got off the elevator. “From my desk I could see him clearly”, she recalled. “My desk was right in the aisleway. He came to my desk and he said, “S.A. Hosty, please. And he had a wild look in his eye, and he was awful fidgety, and he had a 3 x 5 envelope in his hands.” There was a piece of paper, folded like a letter, and “during this time he kept taking the letter in and out of the envelope.”
Quote off
The key part of the quote in terms of what she said is that the man had “a wild look in his eyes.” That doesn't fit LHO at all. I found this quote while perusing Commission Documents (CD).
Quote on
James T. Terrell…advised as follows:
From mid-October until the end of November, 1962, he was in Saltillo, Mexico, on business for International Harvester Company…One night in about the third week of November, 1962, …he and eight or nine Mexican employees of International Harvester went to a night club and house of prostitution located outside of Saltillo, known as the Mona Lisa.
…While at the Mona Lisa sitting at a table in the club, a complete stranger walked up to their table and grabbed Terrell's thumb, pulling and twisting at it…Terrell thought at first that the incident was some sort of joke and he wrestled with the stranger, and pushing him away. No further trouble ensued, but he realized that the man was serious and that it was not intended as a joke. Mexicans in the night club seemed to know the stranger and there was some talk about him being a Castro sympathizer.
Terrell indicated that after seeing pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald in the newspapers, he was sure that the man who he had scuffled bore a striking resemblance to Oswald .
Peculiarities: …Had wild look in his eyes. (CD, 37, pp. 3 & 4)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10438#relPageId=4&tab=page
Quote off
Is this just another in an endless string of coincidences? It doesn't matter if Terrell couldn't positively identify the man as LHO either as that is not important as the WC never claimed that LHO was in Mexico in 1962, and the point is the look in this man's eyes matched what Fenner saw in November 1963.
We see in this article that quite a few things that the FBI didn't want the media and the American public to know about was at odds with the official narrative that they and the WC would provide to us. If this was indeed an honest and open investigation as we have been told, then this sort of behavior wouldn't have been necessary. More to the point these kinds of leads would have been investigated instead of being buried.
Because of this behavior the official conclusion cannot be correct, thus, it is sunk.
api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/gettyimages-503031611.jpg
media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/11/21/ap070213017745_custom-a152d00008f8ce189e7589299f4e65bbcbe220f1-s1100-c50.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963. They claimed that all the evidence pointed to him acting alone.
On November 24, 1963, LHO was gunned down while being transferred by the Dallas Police Department (DPD), therefore, there would be no trial for LHO. Since LHO was never going to receive his chance in court to give his side of his story, why was the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) worried about what witnesses were going to say to the press after his death?
Why were they ordering witnesses to keep their mouths' shut when supposedly ONLY LHO was involved, and he was deceased? That is the focus of this article.
***********************************************
[Note: This article is not meant to paint the FBI in a bad light as an organization. The majority of the people that work for them do a very good job and uphold the laws and rights that they swore an allegiance to. This article is about what some agents opted to do in regard to the JFK assassination investigation.]
This tactic, some have said intimidation, was first reported on by the New York Times (NYT) on December 6, 1963. Reporter Joseph Loftus sent the following dispatch from Dallas.
Quote on
Most private citizens who had co-operated with newsmen reporting the crime have refused to give further help after being interviewed by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dallas city and county police withdrew their help the same way. One high official said he wished he could answer questions “because it would save us a lot of work.” Mr. Loftus gives a specific case: “The best authority on presumably the exact angle of entry of the bullet is the man who made the autopsy. He is Dr. J.J. Humes of the Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md. Dr. Humes said he had been forbidden to talk.” (New York Times, Joseph Loftus, December 6, 1963)
Quote off
Why was the FBI interested in muzzling these witnesses? Why was Dr. Humes “forbidden to talk?” If LHO was really the lone assassin as claimed, why were these things occurring?
Malcolm Price had met “Oswald” at the Sports Drome Rifle Range and helped him by sighting his telescopic sight.
Mr. LIEBELER. Was there anyone with him?
Mr. PRICE. No; he was by himself, and I have heard that he couldn't drive, but he was driving that day because he was the only one in the car, and he came down and inquired if there was anyone there that could set a scope, a telescope on a rifle, and I told him that I could, and he said, well--he had one that he had had mounted and boresighted but it hadn't been fired on a range and that he would like to have it sighted in, so I went down and set up a target on a hundred yards…. I took him down to set his telescope and we stayed there that much longer, and Mr. Davis came in and Mrs. Davis went on home.
Mr. Price said that he looked through the scope and that it was very clear. This witness was quoted in the NYT as saying the following when he asked a question.
Quote on
[Mr. Price] declined to answer further questions because the FBI had asked him not to talk. The FBI here [Dallas] denied this.” (New York Times, December 10, 1963)
Quote off
This quote makes it sound like a request by the FBI to Price, but Price told Associated Press (AP) correspondent Bernard Gauser something else.
Quote on
I cannot tell you a thing. If the FBI says it is okay for me to talk, why then I'd be glad to tell you what I know. But up to then it is strictly classified.
Quote off
Why would Price's observations be “classified” if LHO was really the lone assassin? Probably because he saw someone impersonating LHO at the rifle range. This impersonation, and the others, makes it obvious that LHO was being set up as a radical person who liked his guns. If LHO was guilty and had acted alone as claimed this type of information wouldn't need to be suppressed.
William Waldman of Klein's Sporting Goods (KSG) said this when asked a question by the Christian Science Monitor (CSM).
Quote on
[Waldman] says the FBI has ordered him not to comment on the company’s presumed transaction with Lee Harvey Oswald…”. (Christian Science Monitor, November 26, 1963)
Quote off
If the rifle order was ordered as claimed, why was Waldman ordered to keep quiet about the details?
The owner of KSG, Milton Klein, told Italian reporter Marcelli, “I've had more than enough publicity…and the FBI has warned me to keep my trap shut.”
Dealey Plaza (DP) witness Amos Euins refused to speak with or take questions from the media because “a Secret Service man said I'd be in real trouble if I talked.” (National Guardian, March 21, 1964)
Was it the Secret Service (SS) as 14-year-old Euins says or was it the FBI who told him this? Most likely it was the FBI as they were with the WC during this time.
For the record the FBI has NO legal authority to tell anyone to shut up. It is not within their scope of authority and directly violates our First Amendment right. To do this in a presidential assassination investigation is even more in violation of the laws and rights they swear to uphold.
These weren't simple requests, and they were beyond the authority of the FBI, so why did people agree to remain quiet when they didn't have to? Clearly there was intimidation involved in some of these cases. The person feared what would happen if they didn't comply.
To be fair, a few of these instances the person could have felt that they were doing their civic duty to comply, but the point is that they didn't have to. When the FBI tried this tactic on people who knew their rights they received a very different result.
Quote on
On April 29, [Mark] Lane said, he was accosted outside his apartment building by two FBI agents…demanded: “Do you have information in your possession, which you have secured illegally from the files of the FBI?” To which Lane responded: “Who are you?
“The agents identified themselves as William E. Folkner, 5954, and John Di Marchi, 4256, and repeated the question…
“Lane: “What leads you to ask me that question?”
“Agent: “We have confidential information that you have such information.“
“Lane: “I am surprised that it is so easy to acquire FBI information. I do not ever expect to be questioned in this fashion by an agent of the FBI. If the FBI wants answers from me, then I suggest that J. Edgar Hoover or someone write to me. In no case will I answer after being stopped in front of my own house by police agents, particularly in the rain. These are the tactics of a police state.”
“Agent: “Then I take it that you admit you have documents in your possession from the files of the FBI and (raising voice) I now demand that you turn over to me all such documents in your possession at this time.”
“Lane: “Excuse me. Taxi.” (National Guardian, May 9, 1964)
Quote off
This is the tactic of a police state. If the FBI really had information as they claimed (note how it is always confidential in circumstances like this) then they would have approached this very differently. This was meant to intimidate Lane.
Notice too how they used the same approach that many of the WC defenders use. Lane never said that he had any FBI documents in his possession, but the agent says he will take his statement as an admission. Ridiculous.
The Realist reported the following incident in March 1964.
Quote on
President Kennedy was in Ashland, Wisconsin, on September 24. That's about 400 miles northwest of Milwaukee. On September 16, a man signed in as “Lee Oswald, Dallas” at the Fox and Hounds Inn, a motel in Wausau, about 30 miles northwest of Milwaukee. A reporter has inspected the guest register, only to find that the pages from July 30 to September 18th are missing. The motel manager has no comment. The Milwaukee FBI has no comment.
Quote off
Again, it is not hard to imagine why there was no comment. The official version of events never tells us that LHO was ever in Wisconsin in September 1963, thus, this story would once again show that LHO was being impersonated in a way that would make him seem like he was stalking JFK.
We saw this quote from Nancy Lee Fenner in this series regarding the alleged threatening note issue at the Dallas FBI office.
Quote on
…She noticed the man when he got off the elevator. “From my desk I could see him clearly”, she recalled. “My desk was right in the aisleway. He came to my desk and he said, “S.A. Hosty, please. And he had a wild look in his eye, and he was awful fidgety, and he had a 3 x 5 envelope in his hands.” There was a piece of paper, folded like a letter, and “during this time he kept taking the letter in and out of the envelope.”
Quote off
The key part of the quote in terms of what she said is that the man had “a wild look in his eyes.” That doesn't fit LHO at all. I found this quote while perusing Commission Documents (CD).
Quote on
James T. Terrell…advised as follows:
From mid-October until the end of November, 1962, he was in Saltillo, Mexico, on business for International Harvester Company…One night in about the third week of November, 1962, …he and eight or nine Mexican employees of International Harvester went to a night club and house of prostitution located outside of Saltillo, known as the Mona Lisa.
…While at the Mona Lisa sitting at a table in the club, a complete stranger walked up to their table and grabbed Terrell's thumb, pulling and twisting at it…Terrell thought at first that the incident was some sort of joke and he wrestled with the stranger, and pushing him away. No further trouble ensued, but he realized that the man was serious and that it was not intended as a joke. Mexicans in the night club seemed to know the stranger and there was some talk about him being a Castro sympathizer.
Terrell indicated that after seeing pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald in the newspapers, he was sure that the man who he had scuffled bore a striking resemblance to Oswald .
Peculiarities: …Had wild look in his eyes. (CD, 37, pp. 3 & 4)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10438#relPageId=4&tab=page
Quote off
Is this just another in an endless string of coincidences? It doesn't matter if Terrell couldn't positively identify the man as LHO either as that is not important as the WC never claimed that LHO was in Mexico in 1962, and the point is the look in this man's eyes matched what Fenner saw in November 1963.
We see in this article that quite a few things that the FBI didn't want the media and the American public to know about was at odds with the official narrative that they and the WC would provide to us. If this was indeed an honest and open investigation as we have been told, then this sort of behavior wouldn't have been necessary. More to the point these kinds of leads would have been investigated instead of being buried.
Because of this behavior the official conclusion cannot be correct, thus, it is sunk.