Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
dmgspycat

Jackie Kennedy Tapes Released

96 posts in this topic

J. Edgar Hoover also wrote a memo naming George H.W. Bush as a CIA officer in the covert war against Castro, including the Bay of Pigs invasion. In 1972, when E. Howard Hunt was arrested during the Watergate burglary and demanded $1 million from Richard Nixon, Bush's business old business partner Bill Liedtke (another CIA guy) arranged for the payment. Ramon Rodriguez, yet another anti-Castro Cuban and CIA officer, wrote the actual checks from the bank in Mexico where he worked--a bank that was a CIA front and money laundering operation.

Nixon chief of staff H.R. Haldeman, always said that Nixon was really afraid that Hunt and his friends would start talking about the "Bay of Pigs thing", by which he meant the JFK assassination. Nixon was willing to commit a crime and jeopardize his presidency to prevent any public discussion of this.

Needless to say, when Bush was in charge of the CIA, he was not exactly cooperative with Congressional investigations of the Agency or the JFK assassination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However there seems to be evidience from both sides. One just has the backing of the official case to back it. Kinda makes it easy for those that go with the official story. The JFK assasination by no means went down the way we have been told. Of course it`s just my opinion and the conflicting story to make me think such a thing.

I think you, Silver, and many, many others, agree that this did not go down as advertised.

I am, of course, of similar mind in this matter.

However, what I speak to here, and which seems to be ignored largely, by people with their own sometimes outlandishly unsubstantiated "theories" are the multitudinous red herrings thrown into the mix, such as we see here...and such as have been seen in many a competent independent investigations...

...debating over unsubstantiated things and conjectures and extrapolations. Some of it is complete fiction.

It's hardly worth debating over most of this junk. An official and real investigation is what I'd love to see, and what I don't think most of us will ever see.

I certainly don't want to waste much time talking about the driver shot him, or the agent in the right seat, or the Grassy knoll shooter who never existed, or George H.W. Bush's involvement, or even Richard Nixon's!

ou know what we really don't know?

We don't know what happened to John F. Kennedy with any medico-legal certainty. All we need is forensic confirmation of what's actually seen on the Zapruder film and we at least have concurrence to a conspiracy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hardly worth debating over most of this junk. An official and real investigation is what I'd love to see, and what I don't think most of us will ever see.

I certainly don't want to waste much time talking about the driver shot him, or the agent in the right seat, or the Grassy knoll shooter who never existed, or George H.W. Bush's involvement, or even Richard Nixon's!

I don't claim to know exactly what Bush's involvement was, only that he involved himself in it immediately. Why?

You asked me to prove that he was in the CIA and I did so. I also showed that like many CIA people involved in the covert war against Cuba, he wanted JFK to invade and get rid of Castro. This is very well-established at this point, as is the fact that many of Bush's closest friends and business associates were in the CIA and also involved in the covert war against Castro.

Far from being unsubstantiated nonsense, this Cuban connection comes up again and again in the JFK assassination. E. Howard Hunt, Clay Shaw, Bush, Frank Sturgis, and some of these people even admitted that they were involved. William Colby, the CIA director, told Congress that E, Howard Hunt was involved, and Nixon also seemed to know this. In any case, Hunt being employed as one of the White House Plumbers and bringing his whole team of Cuban CIA men from Miami was not an association that could have pleased Nixon.

Whatever else he was, Nixon was not a stupid guy, and at the very least he had grave suspicions about who and what these people were.

No, it's not nonsense with this same group of people keep popping up again and again. If I were looking for the real conspirators, this particular group would be my first stop, and Bush was one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there were the Operation Northwoods documents that called for staging incidents of sabotage and assassination in the US, win the blame pinned on Cuba as a manufactured pretext for an invasion. Isn't it possible that operations like these blew back on JFK, especially when he didn't invade Cuba after all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prior to the HSCA investigation in the 70's, the fact that the CIA contracted mafia hitmen to kill Castro was laughed at, and denied by the lone nutters. "The government would never work with the Mafia"! Wrong. The very same mobsters uncovered in the CIA plots are the ones implicated in the JFK murder. Marcello, Roselli, Trafficante, Nicoletti and others. One person who knows the Cubans involved is Sylvia Odio. She's not talking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A nice research site. http://www.history-matters.com/index.htm

"First, some background. At last November’s JFK Lancer conference in Dallas, former military intelligence officer and history professor John Newman gave an electrifying presentation. In this talk, he discussed in detail the existence, post-assassination, of the famous “Oswald” Mexico City tapes. One of the most astonishing documents to surface in this regard was a transcript of a phone call between FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and the new President Lyndon Johnson. This call occurred at 10:01 AM on the morning of November 23, 1963, less than 24 hours after the assassination, while Oswald was still alive in a jail cell in Dallas. The most explosive portion of this transcript is reproduced below:

LBJ: Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet embassy in Mexico in September?

Hoover: No, that’s one angle that’s very confusing, for this reason—we have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet embassy, using Oswald’s name. That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man’s voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet embassy down there.[1]

Tapes of Oswald calling the Soviets not matching his voice? But hasn’t the CIA declared since the beginning that these tapes were routinely recycled prior to the assassination, leaving only transcripts as evidence on November 22, 1963? When the above LBJ-Hoover conversation was first revealed a few years ago, many assumed that Hoover was being typically loose with his facts. But last November, Newman presented a good deal of evidence which corroborates Hoover’s astounding statement that the taped calls did indeed survive the assassination and were listened to by FBI agents. Some of this comes from the Lopez Report, the long-suppressed House Select Committee on Assassinations staff report on Oswald’s trip to Mexico City. More still comes from newly released FBI materials, some only available for the first time last year. The Lopez Report excerpted a memorandum from FBI’s Belmont to Tolson on 11/23/63, which states:

…..Inasmuch as the Dallas Agents who listened to the tape of the conversation allegedly of Oswald from the Cuban Embassy to the Russian Embassy in Mexico and examined the photographs of the visitor to the Embassy in Mexico and were of the opinion that neither the tape nor the photograph pertained to Oswald,…..[2]

Edited by unclefred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't claim to know exactly what Bush's involvement was, only that he involved himself in it immediately. Why?

You asked me to prove that he was in the CIA and I did so. I also showed that like many CIA people involved in the covert war against Cuba, he wanted JFK to invade and get rid of Castro. This is very well-established at this point, as is the fact that many of Bush's closest friends and business associates were in the CIA and also involved in the covert war against Castro.

It seems evident that I should not speak of "proof". The reason is that the definition seems to escape people, yourself included.

You did not prove that Bush was in the CIA at the time of the kennedy assassination, or anytime before when he actually was, as Director over a decade later.

Far from being unsubstantiated nonsense, this Cuban connection comes up again and again in the JFK assassination. E. Howard Hunt, Clay Shaw, Bush, Frank Sturgis, and some of these people even admitted that they were involved. William Colby, the CIA director, told Congress that E, Howard Hunt was involved, and Nixon also seemed to know this. In any case, Hunt being employed as one of the White House Plumbers and bringing his whole team of Cuban CIA men from Miami was not an association that could have pleased Nixon.

Whatever else he was, Nixon was not a stupid guy, and at the very least he had grave suspicions about who and what these people were.

No, it's not nonsense with this same group of people keep popping up again and again. If I were looking for the real conspirators, this particular group would be my first stop, and Bush was one of them.

Conjecture and asociating people with circumstances is not evidence. It may lead an investigator somewhere, but it is not proof of anything.

Further, admitting you were involved, especially when you can't be trusted for five minutes, means absolutely nothing either.

it's interesting, but not proof.

Edited by MID

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems evident that I should not speak of "proof". The reason is that the definition seems to escape people, yourself included.

You did not prove that Bush was in the CIA at the time of the kennedy assassination, or anytime before when he actually was, as Director over a decade later.

it's interesting, but not proof.

This type of semantics bores me. I admit that I tend to brush it off whenever I hear someone trying to give me dictionary definitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This type of semantics bores me. I admit that I tend to brush it off whenever I hear someone trying to give me dictionary definitions.

I'm not surprized.

But this would be a matter of law, and of course, that doesn't really matter... :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not surprized.

But this would be a matter of law, and of course, that doesn't really matter... :cry:

There were any number of people who should have been sentenced to death and executed for the murder of JFK, but of course nothing ever happened to any of them.

Law? What law? That's not what we have in this country with the wealthy and powerful always covering for each other, always getting away with it. This is a particularly egregious example of course, because someone who stole $50 from a 7-11 would be punished far more than any of these people were.

What law even exists in this case? Even the House Assassinations Committee recommended that the Justice Department reopen the investigation and we've been waiting 33 years for that to happen.

No, don't talk to me about law or justice because they are illusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you, Silver, and many, many others, agree that this did not go down as advertised.

I am, of course, of similar mind in this matter.

:tu:

However I feel the old saying time will tell does not work with this one. The cover up is just to good. In my Opinion Oswald was not a lone gunman. Can`t say much more nor do I want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Jack that killed Lee has the magic slippers, i always believed Lee wasn't supposed to have hung around after the fact, he didn't expect the assassination to have been a successful operation, he thought it was just shots in the air, somebody got spooked and that's the end of the show.

Only thing was 'somebody' else took advantage of the situation, and a lot of people ended up being caught with the grubby fingers in the pot of corruption, so much so that the truth matters none so much as who was right or wrong, good or bad, guilty or not. All ended up looking bad and worse if any single one wants to point fingers.

Myself personally, every one of those mentioned is guilty of something or another, only not exactly of pulling the trigger, the trigger man, nobody knows who, not the government, not the mob, not the investigators.

The old world died the day that first atom bomb dropped on Japan, the day JFK was shot, the world lost the meaning of integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:tu:

However I feel the old saying time will tell does not work with this one. The cover up is just to good. In my Opinion Oswald was not a lone gunman. Can`t say much more nor do I want to.

I think you may be right, Silver.

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been a long time since I delved into this subject (pr intar-tubes).

IMHO, this was just one battle in the ideological war still being fought (more like waged) today in this country and increasingly more in Europe and Canada.

As I understand the theory goes something like this:

After WWII, as a backlash to FDR's New Deal, a (understandable) fear of communism and hatred of socialism(as it leads to communism) certain leaders of industry, entertainment-media, and politics secretly aligned to ensure things like that would never happen here. They later recruited religious leaders in the 70s and 80s to 'get the poor voters'.

Es verdad? Hell, I don't know. But those who do often claim they believe this cabal produced all sorts of high drama and mystery in this country from JFK to Gulf of Tonkin to the Iraq wars and even John Lennon's assassination.

Edited by Framling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the Magic Bullet, it probably never hit anyone at all but may well have been placed on the stretcher at Parkland Hospital by Jack Ruby--who also never denied that he was part of a conspiracy. To call his behavior around the time of the assassination "suspicious" would be putting it mildly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, what kind of rifle was really found on the 6th floor of the School Book Depository? Was it a Mauser rather than the cheapo rifle that Oswald owned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, what kind of rifle was really found on the 6th floor of the School Book Depository? Was it a Mauser rather than the cheapo rifle that Oswald owned?

McG,

I believe what was actually found was a Carcano rifle.

The Mauser was a much more identifiable and known-brand rifle, and I believe what you're seeing in all this early film was a typical confusion in initial reporting.

A Mauser:

Karabiner_98k.jpg

A carcano:

800px-Carcano_mod._1891.jpg

Oswald's alleged Carcano

CarcanoRifleNARA.gif

they found a carcano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video details a cold war conspiracy involving the Cubans, the Russians, the CIA, Red Mercury, and a cruise ship bound for Hawaii:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems evident that I should not speak of "proof". The reason is that the definition seems to escape people, yourself included.

You did not prove that Bush was in the CIA at the time of the kennedy assassination, or anytime before when he actually was, as Director over a decade later.

Conjecture and asociating people with circumstances is not evidence. It may lead an investigator somewhere, but it is not proof of anything.

Further, admitting you were involved, especially when you can't be trusted for five minutes, means absolutely nothing either.

it's interesting, but not proof.

In 1988 Bush told Congress he knew nothing about the illegal supply flights until 1987, yet North’s diary shows Bush at the first planning meeting Aug. 6, 1985. Bush’s “official” log placed him somewhere else. Such double sets of logs are intended to hide Bush’s real role in the CIA; to provide him with “plausible deniability.” The problem is, it fell apart because too many people, like North and Rodriguez, have kept records that show Bush’s CIA role back to the 1961 invasion of Cuba. (Source: The Washington Post, 7/10/90).

That is exactly how evidence was uncovered placing George Bush working with Felix Rodriguez when JFK was killed. A memo from FBI head J. Edgar Hoover was found, stating that, “Mr. George Bush of the CIA had been briefed on November 23rd, 1963 about the reaction of anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Miami to the assassination of President Kennedy. (Source: The Nation, 8/13/88).

So, would a document from J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI be enough evidence to prove to you that George H. W. Bush was working for the CIA? Or is that also conjecture? Also, Mr. Bush denied that he worked for the CIA at the time and stated that "....it was another man by the name of George Bush..." (his actual words). So...if you are so certain that Bush did not work for the CIA until a decade later, why has this other "George Bush", whom the ex president claims existed, not been identified or come forward? Surely by now this other George Bush would have come forward by now, and he has not.

So my challenge to you is.....find the other George Bush that was working for the CIA at the time of JFK's assassination and I will believe that George H. W. Bush is telling the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This conspiracy had to be a group effort. First, Kennedy wanted to disband the CIA. The CIA could never allow this to happen. The there's the Mafia. The mob helped finance the Kennedy election. Then the Mafia got p***ed off when attorney general Bobby Kennedy aggressive pursued the Mafia. The question is...........who had the most to lose from allowing the Kennedy administration to continue?

In my opinion, the CIA and Mafia were undoubtedly conspirators. I agree that Military/Industrial establishment and Texas oil tycoons were likely bets also. I read a theory that said Lyndon Johnson masterminded the whole thing. I don't agree with this. I think LBJ was enlisted in the plot, of which he gladly participated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.