Roger Stone makes the case against LBJ

Roger Stone ^ | Dec 2, 2014 | Roger Stone

[fishtank]

Published on Dec 2, 2014

Roger Stone spoke recently at the JFK Conference in Arlington, Texas.

[angryoldfatman]

There is no information showing that anyone other than Oswald did it, whether the Warren Commission had it or not.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Except for the unknown fingerprint that was attributed to Mac Wallace by fingerprint experts with flawless resumes.

But that’s not why I wanted to correspond with you. I want to see how much you can think for yourself, and how much you actually know versus what you’ve been told.

Oswald, if he is indeed JFK’s assassin, is different than every other Presidential assassin and would-be assassin.

The FBI knows what the difference is, though not via any conspiracy theory stuff. It became revealed to them in their work after Hoover left, but it had nothing to do with JFK’s assassination per se.

Can you tell me what that difference is? For bonus points, tell me where the difference comes from.

[RooRoobird20]

Roger Stone spoke recently at the JFK Conference in Arlington, Texas.

---

JFK conspiracy books/conferences/movies/TV shows are a HUGE lucrative business—probably in the billions of dollars at this point.

Every conspiracy theory has been thoroughly debunked with facts and evidence. Lee Harvey Oswald, a loser and a nobody, killed JFK and he acted alone. It’s a hard truth to swallow because no one wants to think a lone nut case can alter the course of history. It’s especially difficult to accept the truth if you’re someone making big bucks selling JFK conspiracy theories.

[fishtank]

Excellent reply.

MLO should study up on Mac Wallace and the looooong successful career of Lee H Oswald.

If he was such a “loser”, then how was he able to travel back and forth to the USSR CCCP USSR during the Cold War??

I bet you agree these are important questions.

[sdcraigo]

Check out Carlos Marcello:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9bQinq6-Bo

[angryoldfatman]

I bet you agree these are important questions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes I do.

There are some very strange things that are 100% verifiable about Oswald, some coming from the very top of our government (the LBJ/Hoover tapes, for example).

Then again, that is true not only about Oswald but about numerous things in the assassination.

The problem is that you have some critics who go too far and on too many tangents with regards to the incident. They poison the well for anybody with legitimate and verifiable criticisms of the official narrative.

[angryoldfatman]

Every conspiracy theory has been thoroughly debunked with facts and evidence.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You are correct, every conspiracy theory that denounces Hillary as corrupt and says she hid anything by deleting some e-mails, or intimidated women associated with her husband, or wackily enough having people KILLED (can you believe the nuts out there who would say such a thing?) has been thoroughly debunked with facts and evidence.

She says it, the government says it, and gosh darn it, I believe it.

[Netz]

...too many dead witnesses between 1963-1966.

Also take into account what Jack Ruby said in public and to reporter Dorthy Kilgallen, (before she supposedly committed suicide) moreover, why would George de Mohrenschildt kill himself just before testifying before the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978?? Too many bizarre incidents regarding all parties concerned or related to the JFK asasassination, sorry. Like any other criminal investigation, one has to analyze who gains and who loses from a particular homicide.

[Netz]

Hoover was blackmailed by the mob for many years due to his sexual aberration's, hence he once stated that there is no organized crime in America. Hoover hated the Kennedys very much and was in line with LBJ's perspective on the direction the country was heading in November 1963.

[angryoldfatman]

Yes, Hoover had to be involved, since his organization was the most powerful investigative agency in America. It would have been the most powerful in the world if the KJB hadn’t existed.

One only needs to read the Warren Commission’s findings and compare it with the agents on the ground to see the cover-up, with Hoover’s (figurative) fingerprints all over it.

As an aside, I heard that a photo of Hoover performing a sex act with another man was circulated regularly around mob bosses of the time. None of that has to do directly with JFK’s assassination, though.

[angryoldfatman]

Have you come up with anything yet?

I’ll give you a bigger hint.

It has to do with two of the three considerations that all murder investigators must take into account.

The Warren Commission addressed all three.

[Netz]

Hoover was blackmailed from about 1920-1972 by the mob. He pressed the gangs but not too much. He knew they could, at any moment, spill the beans about his bizarre sexual preferences. When RFK became Attorney General and relentlessly hunted the Mafia, especially James Hoffa, the mob told Hoover to reign in RFK but due to the hate between the Kennedy's and Hoover, he had little effect. Hoover had all the dirt on JFK and RFK and all their philandering while simultaneously, JFK and RFK had the Mafia's dirt on Hoover. These two main blackmailing instruments meant that Hoover, the Kennedy's and the Mob were all in a Chess “check” situation. It was a standoff.

Only when RFK really began to drive the mob crazy did the order go forth from various contacts in the Mafia and renegade CIA personnel to hit JFK. By removing JFK, RFK would lose his job and LBJ would be able to put things “right” which he did.

RFK knew this was the reason and after the assassination, asked Hoover if this was the reason his brother was murdered. The Warren commission was a “stacked” commission that had various JFK/RFK haters on it, like Allen Dulles. Information coming from those very agencies that were involved was all “scrubbed”.

Throughout the Warren Commission investigation, each agency had to cover their rear ends for reasons of their systematic failures to read the signs of a potential assassination and or prior knowledge about LHO and how the FBI (and others) knew about this (in today's terms) “Person of Interest”. So each agency lied, covered up and deleted a lot of evidence in order to cover their rear ends AND the facts that they (or some of them had)prior knowledge about an assassination attempt.

The cover up was twofold:

1) Cover prior knowledge and or involvement in the assassination of JFK and...
2) Cover up for agency failures, oversights, neglect and mistakes.

That is why, there is a definite cover up. The question is, was the cover up for reason #1 or reason #2 or...both?

[angryoldfatman]

It’s like Roger Stone said in the video I posted. There were three big powers that could benefit from JFK being taken out:

1. The mafia.
2. The CIA.
3. And most directly of all, LBJ.

Funny thing is that Oswald didn’t have anywhere near the benefit that these three entities had in the removal of Kennedy.

[Netz]

Funny thing is that Oswald didn't’t have anywhere near the benefit that these three entities had in the removal of Kennedy.

LHO was a low level operative, for whom? I do not know but his role was to act out the role of “Pro-Red” as the newspapers wrote on the morning of 23 November 1963.

He was, in fact a right wing nut job who was filled with delusions of grandeur. He was “schooled” to play the role of Communist by defecting to CCCP and constantly being seen as a “Hands off Cuba” activist. He was actually filmed handing out those leaflets. Why was he filmed doing this? It was documented. He renounced his US citizenship only to come back. He was photographed with the assassin rifle and took a shot at General Walker. When he was apprehended and shown on live TV he was calm, collect, well spoken and did not understand the perfidy brought upon him. In other words, he had no idea he was set up but later in the day began to tell the Press, that he was “just the Patsy”. He called for legal representation, he knew his rights, he was a lot smarter than given credit for as a “Red” hot head with a political or ideological grudge against the US President. Ask yourselves how he quickly got a job with a Defense Mapping Agency position and then a job along the motorcade route. Ask why his operator George De Morenschedlt committed “suicide: in 1979 just before he was supposed to testify before the HSCA?

Too many holes, too many incongruent stories...

[angryoldfatman]

There are many things I can agree with in your comment, but I try to deal only with verifiable, documented facts in order to counter anyone who wants to call us all “conspiracy nuts”, not realizing of course that they themselves will believe in conspiracies when it comes to certain subjects.

For instance, I would not say he shot at General Walker because the only source we have for that is questionable. Oswald was never arrested for doing so, so it is unverifiable and would be only tangentially related to the JFK assassination even if it did happen.

Also, in regards to psychological motives, I would only look at (once again) verifiable, documented facts.

Oswald was documented as giving out pamphlets that were pro-Communist Cuba. Like you said, there is video of him doing so.

Does this mean Oswald was a Communist? On the surface it would seem that way. Also his relocation to the USSR would tend to make one believe that.

BUT, he came back to the US, with a Soviet wife, and neither seemed to have any problems getting back into the US. At the very least there should have been government eyeballs all over Oswald. The fact that he was allowed anywhere near the parade route was either a sign of gross incompetence or bad intentions.

What FORM the bad intentions might have been is the part I would investigate and try to find evidence to support or deny it.

[AU72]

Today Oswald would have been tagged as a ‘person of interest’ by the SS. Dallas was the last time there was an open vehicle presidential motorcade.

[angryoldfatman]

By the way, when I said that Oswald didn’t have anywhere near the benefit that the other three entities had for the removal of Kennedy, I was talking about Oswald’s motive and benefit (or lack thereof) as a “lone nut”.

That’s why I consider it a “funny thing”.

[Netz]

You wrote:
BUT, he came back to the US, with a Soviet wife, and neither seemed to have any problems getting back into the US. At the very least there should have been government eyeballs all over Oswald. The fact that he was allowed anywhere near the parade route was either a sign of gross incompetence or bad intentions.

Let's take this sentence out of your paragraph:

At the very least there should have been government eyeballs all over Oswald.

The truth is, is that there were indeed all kinds of eyeballs all over Oswlad and Marina. He did not just slip in between the cracks and show up in Dallas. They were tracked, interviewed, monitored and investigated by FBI Agent James Hosty (in addition to others including the CIA). Oswald was a known “Person of interest” from 1959-1963 and after he blew up and left a warning note at the FBI office in Dallas, he was still tracked. This is documented even though Hosty destroyed that letter.

In this case, there is a lot of destroyed evidence all over the place. The most interesting thing is that after Oswald was arrested, no notes were taken during his interrogation (or maybe they were destroyed too?) and yet, the next morning, the newspapers were flooded with headlines about him being an “accused Pro-red”. How did we get that information so quickly? Why did we, the public, immediately know that he had defected to the CCCP and that he had worked for the “Fair Play for Cuba Committee”? How & why did Jack Ruby correct a spokesman in the Dallas Police station regarding the name of the “Fair Play for Cuba Committee”???
Oswald, whether he fired a shot or not was not served due process under the law and it was a circus of a show at the Dallas Police Department until he himself was shot & killed.

There are too many unanswered (and maybe never answered, even after 2038) questions. Now, in 2016, it is pretty clear there were many cover ups. The question remains, were these cover ups trying to mask Agency malfeasance or more sinister doings?

[Netz]

Maybe LHO was a loner but “nut”? Not so sure. Just look at him being jostled, tugged, dragged and paraded all over the Dallas Police station on the night of the 22nd. He remains pretty cool, calm, collect and well spoken. It's clear he has been trained for many situations including interrogation and he knew his rights. An amateur would have collapsed under the stresses...

[angryoldfatman]

Thanks for bring all of this to the forefront.

Like I said, I don’t pull a lot out of my holster because I have to back everything up when talking to those who think Oswald alone shot JFK.

I only pull out things that aren’t solidly documented when they OBVIOUSLY don’t make sense, as in they are easily seen but difficult to explain contradictions. Like the thing I asked mlo (an “Oswald did it alone and anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid” type of guy) to figure out, for instance.

Here’s a perfect example of evidence that backs you up about the immediate knowledge of Oswald by newspapers: a conversation between Hoover and LBJ within 24 hours of the assassination showing the details impossibly known about Oswald so soon afterward.

http://transition.lbjlibrary.org/files/original/8af9ccaadd8fdeafa78d5787c60a97b4.pdf

[angryoldfatman]

Of course I was referring to Oswald in the same fashion as the Warren Report does, in not so many words.

The bullet line-up alone in the same report proves that the “lone nut” theory is wrong, since it plus the Zapruder film knocks down the Arlen Specter fantasy quite easily.