Ochelli Effect JFK Myths Episode 1 - 3-26-2015

At the post. So don't touch that side us a funny. Don't touch down side bunny branches. So test my sadun don just t dust us try n guy spot time type dust or snow days tis very body guys back snap got time start a start try g dscus type a sky track din start type stop side to the black starts nail shin up and we are alive and continuing. We're getting down to the points. Oh whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on, there we go, there we go. Okay, little technical

glitch right at the beginning. The o'celly effect is live. That's why you hear stuff like that. Okay. It is March to twenty sixth, twenty fifteen. Okay, so you know, look the new intro. I'm happy with it. I wanted to make sure that Jefferson Morley wasn't a liar when he said I had a spooky kind of intro. So there you go. Anyway, tonight we're doing something that I've been wanting to do for a very long time. Okay, we all know if you've listened to my show that

JFK is one of those areas of interest for me. The assassination the intrigue that surrounded the situation, exactly what caused it, exactly what happened to our country as a result of November twenty second, nineteen sixty three. Of course, that has to do with the adventures of going into the Vietnam War, et cetera, et cetera, and all of the other divinations that did occur

afterwards. And we can argue about that, and we can discuss it, and we can say that maybe Kennedy was the last actual president we had. We could say all those kinds of things. But here's what the problem is. Not only does the mainstream media and the apologists for the Warrant Commission like to perpetrate their fictions upon us, but there are those who are more conspiracy minded who seem to be perpetrating all sorts of wonderful fairy tales on us.

Now, this isn't an attack on any particular person or any particular set of people. This is an attack on the nonsense, the absolute garbage, which has been absolutely counterproductive to the work that you know, a fool like myself spends half of his lifetime sinking money, effort, time, energy, heartache, aggravation and health. That was just reading Bugliosi's book. And that laugh right there comes from a return guest, Carmine Sabastano. How are you I'm

doing okay? Uh see, it's not all about the vowels though. Don't worry, because we also have a couple of other people on with us tonight, and I'm really happy. This is the first time they've been on. And that's Trish Fleming and Zach. You know what's funny about Zach is I actually don't know how to pronounce his last name. I've only ever read it, I've never said it. And I realized that when I was going to air. So I'd like it if you guys introduced yourselves. Go ahead and

on mute. Hey, how you doing. There's Trish, Tris Fleming and yes, where's Zach Ahi, it's Zach, It's Jendro Kedro thank you. Yeah, yeah, just as it looks well. You know, it's a surprise, because sometimes you look at somebody's name and it's not you know, the jay is silent, that he is actually an a you don't know. You know, they're not a problem, not a problem. They're nice to

hear from you, Chuck, good to be here, absolutely see. This goes to show you that I don't script a damn thing on this show. I never do that because it's good. It fresh. Listen, I believe in the organic conversation. And I know it sounds like I'm in a jovial mood, but really I am irritated beyond belief and have been dying to do this show. Okay, well, we're happy to be part of it,

Chuck oh Man. And I'm so glad that I have allies here to do this with, because otherwise, you know, it's just Chuck screaming about you know, certain people. Yeah, and the nonsense that they push, and it's just well, you know, they disagree with Chuck, so therefore no, no, no, no, they just stop it with reality. Yeah. Anyway, I'd like you to go ahead and speak your mind about why

it is we're doing this and everything. I know we're starting off a little slow, but I wanted to lay the groundwork so we make sense of this. No, that sounds great. I actually would like to start with a definition of myth for everyone. Perfect. A myth is a traditional or legendary story concerning an event with or without the terminal basis of fact or natural explanation can't say it any better than that, and this is the area we're going

to cover, and they can. People are free to disagree. We're not saying these are definitive. We are saying we've looked at a lot of evidence and none of these things stand up. So we believe that they are a waste of our time and our community's time. Now people can pursue them as much as they like, but until they get some evidence, they don't mean anything exactly. And I don't know Zach Ortrish, either one of you if you want to add to what it is that is, it's like the motive

behind why you wanted to be involved in this show speak for yourselves. I'd like I'd like to divide in the research community to stop. I mean, you know, there's there's so much left and right going on that at the end of the day, we're all just spinning our tires. No one's going to solve this by themselves. We need to work together. There has to be some sort of mutual understanding and mutual respect amongst the researchers. And it

can't be loan that are against conspiracy theorists anymore. It's more about solid research versus myth makers. Yep, m h yeah, yeah, I would totally agree with that. I think that, you know, go ahead, Carmine, Oh, I'm sorry, Zach No, no, no, I talk enough you you I'll go after well. I think that it's important. I

have a historian background, and I think it's important. One of the main things I learned is that when you're first starting research, as you continue down that path, is that you have to eliminate things that are you know, stumbling blocks, things that don't add up, because all it's doing is is

preventing you from getting to the truth. And that goes with any topic, but something that involves so much mystery and intrigue, you have to be especially careful and try to you know, I don't want to use the word garbage, but you have to toss out what isn't as useful as the other bits. You have to or you're going to be sitting there forever spinning your wheels. See there you go, and I'll tell you something. I'm going to dedicate my portion of this little show to a very seldom heard name in the

research community, which is doctor Roger Remington. Okay, because this is the guy who I have had many conversations with over the years who has kept me in check regarding a lot of this about trying to rely on tangible things as opposed to the theoretical, as opposed to the fanciful. He's basically a warrant commission deconstruction is for the most part. Okay, But he's also a historian, you know, retired professor from Aquinas College. I don't know if you

guys have ever even heard of him? What four books out on the assassination? Uh? The best, the best known one is probably Biting the Elephant. Okay, Well, that's why I like your show, Chuck It. I'll help you find some new stuff. I'll look him up, definitely look him up. Self published and actually is working on his final book on the case, so a new, a new volume will come out from him shortly.

And believe it, when this guy says something, he backs it up not only with documentation, but with actual you know, attempting to and speaking to and going to the sources as best he can and things like that, you know, actual research. A man after my own heart. You got it, you got it, and I mean and the guy doesn't make a statement without you know, having not one reference for it, but probably four for each statement. Fancy that facts who knew, facts that are verified and

reverified. A strange world, isn't it. I know, I don't understand why we even have to discuss this. Oh, but unfortunately it is because especially in the electronic age. And and see, this went on before the Internet. Okay. I know you guys might not realize this, but this kind of stuff was going on long before the Internet. And I don't know where you want to start exactly. I know that Carmine and I kind of came up with a bullet point list of places to start with, the like

we picked the worst stuff we could think of. Okay, And but here's the thing. Just I have an ex discussion with Zach and I've had no discussion with Trish. I'd like you guys to pick something. I guarantee you it's on this list. Well, let's see. I mean, you could start with something. In my mind, I mean, the things like Badgeman and you know, the umbrella man and what he meant at the scene and things like that. I mean, where do you go with that in the

long term of it. There's no fact to really support any of that, And people kind of like to build their stories around this. All of a sudden, Badgemen went from a shadow to becoming the assassin. And I mean that would seem to be somewhat mythological. I would think, you know, based upon the fact there's no evidence of anything to back that up. Please take the pictures out first. I argue about those so much. Okay,

let's begin there. The first statement I want to make is that primarily the original mistakes made on this stuff were made in a time when the technology was not there to verify a lot of things. You would end up with blurs. You'd end up with reprints of things that created greater shadows. You know, you'd end up with all sorts of interesting anomalies and photographs. Okay.

And some people seized upon them because they were looking, they were digging, they were going through piles of you know, needles, looking for the needle, all right, and I understand that, right. But as we evolved, Okay, as we went from the sixties to the seventies and so on and so forth, I lost my taste for this kind of stuff. Because what happened is every time, you know, you went and did a scientific analysis to see if it was even physically feasibly possible for half of these things

to exist. Doesn't work. Yep, they're guessing. They're doing their best guests off of most of the time a copy or at best something they took from a site that never had an original in the first place. That's like when you said you have the Fox originals. Those are solid, Those are from a source that can be authenticated. They mean something, they're evidence. But when I hear people say, well I have this picture and if there's fifteen shots, I just want to kill myself, It's like, now,

it doesn't It doesn't prove any of that. You're just going on about nothing and wasting everyone's time. See. I had that terrible experience on a show which I'm not going to name here, but on a show with somebody who was discussing Doorway Man with me. For the listeners who don't know, there was an associated press photographer there, okay, whose name is Altkins. Therefore

his photographs have been named thereafter the Alkins photographs. In Altkins six, if memory serves me correctly, there is a portion of the photograph which is position just above the limousine on the print where the doorway of the school book depository can be seen. For many years, people argued that Oswald was in the doorway at the time of the shooting because the limousine is in such a position that there is no way if Oswald was in that doorway, which seems logical.

If Oswald was in the doorway, he could not have fired to shots from the sixth floor. That's fine and dandy. The problem is the evidence. The evidence doesn't work, none of it. None of it, I mean absolutely none of it. Now, I was on a show and somebody was presenting me with an internet photograph taken from the John McAdams website. Okay, I'm not kidding. I'm not kidding. Now there are Let me say this for our friends on hopefully what will not long be the other side,

and those who use evidence will join us. I think everybody has something to contribute, but people need to be more honest about the politics. There's a lot of politics in this that have absolutely nothing to do with the case, and Professor McAdams is one of the people who spins those politics. Now, I respect some of his work, but I do not respect the way that he plays around with people. No, absolutely, and I would say the same thing. As a matter of fact, he's probably one of the least

nasty guys that I've had to deal with from that side. Now that's a strange statement, right, the one you have. Yeah, but he's probably one of the least nasty guys from that side. Okay, again, I don't want personal discussions. But meanwhile, this is a reproduction of a reproduction of a reproduction on mcadam's website. Okay, fine, I yank out of a folder while I'm sitting there talking to this individual on his radio show, my copy of the one that I got from the Chicago Tribune archives. Okay,

secondary source beats tertiary source. That's what I thought. And I examined it under magnification and can't find the same anomalies that he sees. And then he corrects me about you know, I use the word distortion because he says, well, notice this year, this person's face is coming out of a wall. And I looked at it and I said, well, that's a

distortion in the photograph. And then I was corrected by being told that distortions are only characterized as things like barrel distortion, pincushion distortion, and I'm like, no, if you understand optics at all, there is all sorts of distortions that can occur in the image. Pincushion and barrel distortion are two types of distortion. They are not exclusively the only types of distortion that can occur

in a photograph. That's the wrong person to argue with it here. Well, you know, I thought so. But again, you know, I'm one of these guys who obviously just has this crazy agenda about looking at something as close to the primary source as possible. You know, I know, we're mad man madman evidence. Who could think, well, anyway, the photographic evidence, well, you know it's yeah, good, Oh, I'm

sorry, this is Zach. It's really vital to understand. With my background, I worked with a lot of archives and I've tried to focus mostly on photographs, and it's really important that you have as close to the original source material as possible, and if possible, you could, you know, do

a high resolution scan off of the original negative. And what you know, what people don't quite understand sometimes, and you know, is that the more like you're saying, the further you get from the original, the more deluded the quality gets. And you don't know what you're looking at anymore. Now, speaking of photographic evidence where you don't know what you're looking at, just really quickly. There's been a lot of mistakes and a lot of shadows that

people have turned into people in a lot of different photographs. And I mean in depository windows, on the grassy, no, everywhere. There's a huge amount of them. But let's talk about one of the most famous misdirections in photographic evidence where you have a delusion of the image. Okay, and that would be, Hey, the limo driver shot him. Yep, uh, okay, anybody, I'll throw it out there, any one of you, go right ahead. Cooper, this is the the Bill Cooper synopsis where he

or synopsis, excuse me, the Bill Cooper hypothesis. I was being nice, But this is the Bill Cooper hypothesis where he says that he knows for sure that the limo driver shot him in the face, and then goes on to tell us that it was with a certain kind of gun and that was poison and all this other stuff. Okay. The problem here is that not only does he say that, but he says it's backed up by documents that he saw while he was working with the Pacific Fleet somewhere, which has nothing

to do with the Secret Service in the nineteen seventies. So it was verified by that wrong, there's no reason for that documentation to have passed over his desk, even if he was in such a position to see such classified documents. Okay, so that's the end of that story. But the real problem here is that there was a misrepresented it zu Bruder film, which anybody want to talk about the condition of that film. I think that Zach's the expert.

I'm willing to weigh in once they do. Well, what version are we talking about? What would generally be called the Cooper version of this Zabruter film? Oh? Yes, you know, I've tried to attract that down. I might have some friends that have, you know, a lot of faith in Bill Cooper. He's got quite a reputation among conspiratorial minded people. And does it it appears in his film? Isn't it something like There Rides

a Dark Horse or something like that. Well, actually, I'll tell you what the history is without a problem, because sad say, somewhere around nineteen ninety, and I do believe it might have been more like nineteen eighty nine. When I first got involved in the case, I used to do something called videotape trading, where I would trade videotapes of all sorts of rare things with other people through the mail. I know it sounds like a really crazy

arcade idea, but believe me, it used to happen. Work we thankfully do not have to do anymore. Right. But the thing is that I actually received one of the Bill Cooper productions during that time, which means that I got probably the second or third version that he put out from him. Okay, wow, So what that was called was Assassin Unmasked. Originally that

was the graphic that he put on it with. I figured it out later was a gold Star VCR that you could actually insert graphics into videotapes with if you used it properly. Okay, anyway, this is what he used, and he had a very very like I don't know how many generations removed from

a broadcast of the Zubruder film that he utilized in his presentation. So what happens to a videotape when you keep recording it onto another videotape A copy of a copy of it grades and the image begins to blur, the colors begin to melt into one another. A lot of odd things happen, and this film, again is not exactly the highest quality to begin with. Yeah, okay, but the problem is, of course, technology being what it was

in the late eighties. This is what he presented as. And if you look at this thing, and you know, at a glance, at an undeducated glance, you could almost believe that there is a gun in the film. Okay. The problem is if you look at a clear version of the film, you know there's no gun. You know exactly what that shiny thing

is. You know why it seems as though, you know, the hand goes one way when it doesn't actually go anywhere, and everything else, if you look at a clear copy of it, if you look at even a remotely clear copy of the Suppruter film, you won't see this. It's not there. Yeah, And I think that's the unfortunate case of a lot of these things, is that people want to believe there's something there, but without evidence of it, it doesn't matter. We're just arguing endlessly about things we

cannot prove, So why are we add about them? No? I hear you, and I want to hear from Trisha on some of this stuff too, So please get involved, Trish, because I'm I appreciate that, thank you, because I'll talk way too much yourself under the bus, buddy, It's okay. I think it's important to follow the history of whose hands actually touched everything. For example, Uh, and this is just my opinion, but Robert Groden was the first one who brought it out obviously a Good Night

America. And I don't know if people are familiar with his technique called rodentscoping, but it seems that every film that came out at some point went through his hands one other. And I think it's important because again, your information is only as credible as your source, and if the source is in question, then you have to question everything. So again I think with all the

photos, whether it be the MARIANN. Mormon photo, the Zapruder film, the nixt film, et cetera, I think it's a extremely important to follow where the original film went in the history and who made copies and what generation that goes ampfold with dickta Belt for example, I mean Gary Mack brought it at during the HSCA committee and you know later on Steve Barbara later disputed it with acoustics findings, and I think that it's very important to follow the history

of the physical film itself. Yeah, and Trish raises a good point about the Groden scoping, which is basically like an animation technique, and when they aired it on Goodnight America, he basically interspersed it with different clips and he wasn't explaining where it came from and what he did, and people were trying to you know, oh, is this really what we're seeing here? And then you know, in reality, no, that wasn't it. It was he you know, it was altered. And I not the point, you

know, point blame, but that happened. I mean even to the point where he had taken quite a few films and basically spliced them together, so you have a moment by moment from the time he turns off me Street onto Houston Street, there's different films that he is spliced, which to a certain degree, again is modifying it to make it as a one solid running film.

And again you have to take that into account. He may not have manipulated in the sense where he's actually changed things on the film, but at the end of the day, you're not viewing the original film, and I think that that's really important that the actual physical film needs to be followed, not only with just the pictures, but who had their hands on it.

I mean, you know, the more you dig into how many copies were made, who got copies of any of the films, it's really quite astonishing to realize that, you know, it could have been tampered with with multiple different sources. And just the fact that the Zebruder film has been spliced is evidenced that it was modified some way. And again I'm not saying that anything in regards to the actual headshot and making his head go backwards versus forward,

et cetera. I'm saying that at the end of the day, basically, because there is splices on it, somewhere along the line, it was tampered with, right And that, you know, that could be one of the bigger myths itself, is that, you know, people believing that the Zapprouver film is a legit, you know, historical record of what took place, and like Tris said, the fact that even if one or two frames were removed, someone had a motive to do so, and it is it's not

accurate anymore. I totally agree. I think that this also goes into other evidence as well, with the chain of custody. How trist said, you have to keep track. If the chain of custody is broken, the evidence is no good. You have to then verify it with other evidence. And so it was still verifiable. No, absolutely, Yes, that's exactly it.

And the whole thing about exactly what Groden did. We discussed that with cale Nick Jackson on this show actually because she said, for the first time anybody realized that, you know, part of what Goroden was presenting that night on Good Night America was actually a part of her grandfather's film. She said, I didn't think anybody else saw it. I knew it right away. That's exactly it. And he didn't even make that clear as he was presenting it. No, he said. And again, just how he got access

to all these films is also very unruly. I mean, there's no fear cut indication of how Groden got these films. Well, yeah, that's well, the Supruder film itself, there's kind of a decent trail of of how you can figure out how he got his hands on that mechanics copy and all of that, that's reasonable, but when you get into the rest of the nexus of Groden's collection, there's another story. Wow exactly. Okay, Well, I think that since you guys brought up Groden so they can't blame me

one of my problems with him. He seems like a lovely fellow when I met him in Daily Plaza. Seemed pleasant. But he was one of the attendees at what I like to call the Judith Barry Baker Grave Party, where they all went to Oswald's grave and basically threw a party and took pictures. I have a problem with that. I don't care about anyone in this case personally, I don't know them. I wasn't alive when they were. But have a little respect. Don't go to someone's grave and take pictures and make

an event out of it. How about take your story, your myth, as I like to call it, and present it somewhere else where a dead body isn't buried. I don't know who could argue with that. You know, I didn't understand that when I heard about it. I have not understood a lot of the exploitation of a lot of people that have since passed on and have had their words twisted around. Yeah, but that's I think part

of our deal. I think, you know, people be like, what drives you, Carmine, Well, one of the things is all the dead people that so many people can plume that the dead people deserve some respect from both sides. I didn't agree with Jim Garrison, but he doesn't deserve to be treated like scum. And I'm tired of people doing it. I'm tired of people treating people on the other side like scum too. We're either going

to solve this together or we're going to argue forever about nothing. And I take this time to say to everybody who is interested in the truth about nine to eleven, you need to take a lesson from this, because although the technology is improved, believe me, the same thing can happen there. You know, if you legitimately believe that a new investigation is required, take the lessons from the JFK research community and understand you can be held off for half

a century and on into perpetuity. Okay by stuff like this. Well then well, another thing that you know you're hitting on, and this goes right in with nine to eleven two, is that these are people, and Carmen hinted at this is that these are people's memories. This isn't just some fantasy story that's a detective story that we can sit and, you know, nitpick about for our own entertainment. There's people's feelings, memories, family members involved

in this, and you need to be treated with respect. You're right. I totally agree with all of you, and I hope that it starts to carry across the community because I'm tired of people, you know what. I love the joke, as I'm sure some of the people who debate me now, but I'll joke about subjects. I don't joke about people. I don't go after people directly, though they do love to come for me. Well, and you know what, while we're another, go ahead, don't go

ahead. Sorry about that. Oh it's okay. I was just gonna say, beyond the you're good, beyond the memories of the beyond the memories of the deceased, we have to take into account the legacy of the people that are still with us and how they were affected. I mean, one of the things of sat Trician Eye a lot was the way that sometimes Marina Oswald is being portrayed, and the way that the memories of her and Lee Oswald

are being scattered about. I mean, you see, you know, fifty year old rumors of their love life being bandied about like it's just some sort of barbershop gossip. And I mean I find that offensive. I mean, the Marina is still with us, and obviously and her children and they that's her, that's right, that's their fami and their father, and I mean, goodness, it's just seems to, you know, get quite ugly at

times. I just think a lot of this A lot of people don't understand that, you know, fifty years have passed, and people that are completely innocent, for example, Marina's children, Marina Lee's children, this impacts them daily, I mean, you know, and to have not only their fathers smeared, but their mother being smeared has to be difficult. And at the end of the day, we need to respect the fact that, you know, whether Lee was innocent or guilty, his children are innocent bystanders in this

as grandchildren. And I think that it comes down to just respecting the children. I mean, again, they weren't around when a lot of this was happening, and if they were they don't remember it, and I think it's very important and I think that people lose sight of that. Like Zach was saying, these are real people, a real situation. It's not just some sort of movie that we're following. And you know, it needs to be recognized as traumatic event for a lot of people, whether they were witnesses to

the actual assassination or you know, indirectly involved with it. People need to respect that there are people that are still attached to the memory of these people that are being trashed and it's that was personally. What alarms me is how petty and how insignificant that these conversations have become knocking everybody. And I'm not saying that I agree with everything Marina says, and she's a saint by any

means. What I'm saying is, at the end of the day, whether you respect what she had to say in her testimony or not, at the end of the day, her children deserve that respect. Yeah, And it's one thing I think to discuss it in Facebook or informs that I don't have a problem with people criticizing, but criticized with some evidence. Don't just criticize

the criticize otherwise is waste this one's time. Well, exactly. And Marina is one of those people though that I view regardless of what everybody else thinks of her. I view her as an absolute victim because you know, look at what she was faced with. You know, immediately the government turned on her. The whole country was going to turn on her. You know, she's the wife of the assassin. She's the COMMI wife of the assassin,

first of all. Then ever after she's being chased down by people that are trying to you know, elicit all sorts of details from her that were really inappropriate, and most of the time she had no knowledge of. You know, she's continuously called on the confet for things. And though she's remarried, she's forever Marina Oswald, you know, and pretty much, I mean,

her children don't even have a public life for the most part. Based on this whole thing, exactly it, Yeah, I think this might lead us perfectly into somebody else you and I wanted to put on the list, Chuck, Well, go right ahead, Carmine, because I know where you're going. If I may start, then Judith very Baker, she to me, represents one of the largest feasible myth makers in our community, someone who has

wasted fifteen years of everyone's time. Go ahead, Zach and Trish, because good well, you know, I really don't want to make this a personal attack on Judith, But in my opinion, I think that if you're going to a plain a story such as she has, again, not only is evidence required, but on the same token, of course, people are gonna pick it apart. I mean, people are gonna analyze what she says,

They're going to look for new clues based off her statements. And I really do feel that sometimes the attitude from her and the people that believe her and are basing their belief solely on faith that she's telling the truth, really do end up making more of a divide in the community than really what's necessary. I mean, you know, it's really a line drawn in the sand that either you're with us or against us. If you know, for myself,

I've said this many times. You can believe in a conspiracy and Lee's innocent without believing her story. And that's personally how I feel. I don't believe Judy Baker at all. I really don't. I really find that her story is very well fabricated and woven in to historic facts, but at the end of the day, she doesn't have anything to back it up other than some wts and she worked with all world. I think that people need to really

analyze everything, and that's not just with her story. That's with a lot of researchers. You know, we're still discussing the same stuff that was brought up twenty five years ago. You know, there's got to be more information out there, and I think that people need to really kind of dig in their heels and start analyzing everything from square one. And I'm even talking about the Warm Commission, the HSCA, and everything else that has been officially documented.

People need to go through every statement with a fine toothcomb, and they have to be unbiased about it. If you go in with the attitude that Lee's innocent, of course you're not going to notice anything else. Same versus if you go in it holdheartedly that Lee's guilty. You have to go into each piece of evidence and statements and look at it with unbiased eyes. And you have to follow both sides as far as they take you. Yeah, and you have to go to the primary evidence. Don't go to books.

Books are actually want to check out people's opinions on the evidence. But books are not definitive. Books are secondary sources, right, And I've said several times that what I usually do with the book is I read through at once to see, you know, if it even seems remotely possible that anything is valuable in it, I go through it a second time and begin to break down exactly there's citations where they come from. You know. This is why I'm not a fan of Lamar Waldron. But anyway, yeah, I don't

mean to. Sorry, I deviated from the topic. Now let me let me just do it quick. Greatest hits the reasons why I do not believe Judith Baker. She has no primary evidence, her name never appears in any single file she has ever been able to present since the first time I asked her months ago till now. She claimed that she made anthrax on the education for him. Anyone can go there and check it. And I suggest that

you read my article, Trisha's article, Matthew Solfell's article. There's quite a few articles about her and why her story another work now the anthrax thing. She needed training that she didn't have time for her Once again, timeline problems like the Commission, because she said she was nineteen and she was doing these things. It takes years. She was a lab assistant at best. She never made a cancer bio weapon because there's no evidence of it. There's no

evidence that the technology even existed at the time. So when I hear her repeat it over and over, you can repeat something so much as you like, just like the Commission did, it doesn't make it true. That is part of the problem. But every time you begin to break down even the smallest thing in one of her you know, in one of her stories,

it seems to me it falls apart. Based on the context. A really great thing that Zach and Trisch did recently, I wonder if you guys would like kind of give people the idea of that article you guys just put out. Reverend Jim. Reverend Jim, Yes, because I pointed to the very same I pointed to the very same situation in an article years ago. Okay, But my whole thing was the the ridiculousness of misprinting the word new I'm sorry, that's not something that a dyslexic would do. Who hails from New

Orleans? Okay, find me anybody who is knowledgeable on the on the subject of dyslexia, and tell me that they're going to get a subject who does that as a grown male. Go ahead and find one, Okay, but okay, we'll leave that alone. You guys came up with something though that I thought was just wow. So please tell everybody. Well, when we started into this again, we were more interested in We started looking up Lillian Morett's testimony and what jumped out at us was this lettering job that Lee had

basically not received. He had been practicing his lettering and Missus Morett had stated that her six year old neighbor's daughter could do a better job at lettering. So we started looking into that a little bit, and then we ended up looking into the Warren Commission and finding that two individuals were interviewed at a place

called the Ad Shop, and that was located on South Rampart. When we started doing a little bit more digging and pulling up newspapers, we actually found the ad for the lettering job that Lee had applied for, and it was for a large advertising company, which was very interesting. So, just on a fluke, we were reading through jud Barry Baker's book and she had mentioned it eighteen times that they had been doing some lettering and some painting at this

shop. So we started looking into the shop a little bit more in the area and the history of the area, and basically it just came back that it wasn't possible. It just wasn't possible. The segregation and the tension in that time, especially with the Freedom Writers that were doing their bus tour from Washington to New Orleans. That was a good indication of the tension that was

building up in that time period. And when we started looking into Reverend James, who she refers to his Reverend Jim, and again James is his last name, so I don't know why she was short and his last name as Jim. But aside from that, we discovered that he was in fact a

black man. So we started researching white people working for blacks back then, and that came directly into the Jim Crow laws of that time and the segregation and how you know, for example, a black child could not play in a baseball diamond within two block radius of the white community, so that started setting off Bell. So again we did as much research as we could,

trying to find pictures of this location. Unfortunately, we were never able to find an actual picture of this shop, but we were able to find some history dating back to the nineteen hundreds and the Jewish community and a lot of stores that were run there. And then once we started realizing how rough of the neighborhood this was, and how how to put this slightly, how two white individuals would stick out like a sore thumb in this neighborhood. And again

they would literally be breaking the law by working for a black man. And again they needed separate bathrooms, they needed separate eating areas for the white employees, if this was possible. And to be honest, we couldn't find one example of white people working for the colors. Back then. There was a lot of information about how employers would have to sign off and take responsibility for black employees and that sort of thing, but we couldn't find one example of

Caucasian people working for colors during that time period. Right, and Judith neglected to mention in her books she and you know, to her credit, seemed to be you know, foreard minded about civil rights. But no, not at a single time did she mention that, you know, the gem was an African American and and you know, I think that would be a very

significant thing for her to mention. And and like the way that the laws were worded is basically that they would have had to have provided these expensive accommodations. And from all historic references, Reverend James's place was quite a small place and and we can't determine how this would have ever taken place well, right, And and just just to clarify really quickly, Uh, the fact that you guys are using the term colored is because that was contemporaneous with the time.

Yeah, it's in the documents. Yeah, I mean that's exactly what they cite. There was you know, white and colored. This was the definitions of the separation. That's the root of what was going on. So this is why you gots using that term. We want to ourselves some attacks. Yes, That's another thing I'd like to discuss too, is that, yes, all of us have received threats. All of us and I'm talking

right now, have received you know, people swearing at us. That goes to the other box for me now, because I started a block list that I'm more than happy to pass out to anyone listening. Yeah, because that's the way I think that this is my opinion, and everyone can disagree with

me all they like. But the only way, it seems in some cases that we are going to raise the conversation above these people who do not wish to talk about evidence is to get rid of them, to put them in a part of Facebook where they can rent by themselves, away from the rest of us who use evidence, and not just Facebook, car Mine. I mean, you know there are the various forums, all right, there are the various areas where they comment, they go after you on I mean YouTube.

Believe me. I had a history of these people on YouTube that you would not believe. Back when YouTube had a you know, like an email type system. Man, I could not go three hours. Yeah no, and we're not I just want to state that everyone listening to we are not Judith Baker. We are not saying, oh we're part victims. Please, no, we'll fight you, but bring the evidence, pal, because we're

not just gonna sit there and argue with you about poetry. Well yeah, there you go, and you know, and and and the ignorant arguments and attacking people personally and all this other stuff, you know, for whatever ails them. I mean, look, I don't talk about people that have nervous conditions which you could only do, uh, you know, things like that. Yeah, yeah, no, yeah, we're not saying we're well, yeah, we're not saying I'm sorry. And please press that time in after.

I promise I'll make this quick because me and Chuck will go forever because we like to talk to each other. But but you know, the bottom line is is you're here to do research and you're here to do evidence, and you're here to progress this case or you're in the way. Those are the only two types of people here, right, And just really quickly, the phone callers, please hold off until I ask for you, because I've

already had to dismiss a couple and I'm sorry about that. But I'm not quite ready for you because we got a few more things on the list that I want to make sure we hit. I'mbody in a movie on Baker. Whenever you are, I just hope the community is ready to as well. No, that's just a taste of what's wrong. Okay. There are a myriad of circumstances, Problems with the historical context of what she's saying, difficulty believing, a whole lot of other things. You know, take note of

interviews where she's completely upset by homosexuals. But meanwhile, whether people realize it or not, there are some people who have been outed in the case, and there are still people to this day that it is not public knowledge we're homosexuals that she claims to be surrounded by. Yeah, okay, that's an oddity that I don't think anybody brings up. And I have a little theory about that, but it's only a theory because Oswald seems to move in circles

where there are closeted homosexuals. Yeah, but anyway, well, we love this thing new with the reality of his movements though, And I mean to tell you that that's an international thing. Okay, So yeah, go back and look at that. Anybody who's researching Oswalt, please and see if you can explain it, because I have an explanation, but I don't feel confident enough to really settle it out in public yet. Do you mind if I

I plug Rob Clark real quick? Oh no, absolutely, the Lone Gunman, Yes, sir, if you get a chance, everyone, please listen to Rob Clark's I Believe I Was Episode fifty one, The Evidence and Documents episode we talk about another thing. Judith, apparently being such a supposed close friend of David Theory, forgot to mention which is a document I found that shows that he was running feasibly a child sex cult called Omnipotent. So this is not the person in her latest book that she presents. Is not a

good person. He's not jovial, he's not nice. He was a lunatic. He was a madman who had militaristic dreams and was trying to use boy scouts for his sexual desires. Well, and see, now, I don't know that I can even go that far because I haven't seen all this stuff, to be honest with you, No, I'll show you. I'll show

you everything. And even here's the thing, it's a matter of how many of these documents, because there's that one I found one where he tried to go into a hospital to convince a young boy not to testify against him. Now, how many times does the evidence have to indicate something until this woman realizes she's wrong? Right? Well, like, like we've all said, though, we don't want to spend the whole time. Oh yeah, I mean you know we could. I mean, you know, look if we

do four two and three, Hey, we'll do it again. I can doing the documents, I promise. I see devoting an episode to this and spending some special time on how it is you derive five hundred pages after knowing somebody for a summer. But yeah, well someone said Judas is kind of like a slow train wreck, and I said, well, there's plenty of room on the train for all the mythmakers. Absolutely true. Let's move on to a couple of other myths, if that's okay with you, guys,

Trisian Zach. Sure, And I'm sorry it's three months of repressed owner. And I understand because, as I told you, I tried warning people about this years ago, that this was going to become a bigger problem, and they did not take me seriously. They really did not, because you know, after all, I'm not the most highly educated guy who studied this, so I don't really know what I'm talking about. Nobody's ever going to take that seriously. It's just another one of those you know, things that Nigel

Turner did and don't worry about it. And you know what, that's another myth in my opinion, because I'm proud to work with people who bring evidence. I don't care about titles. I don't care about their education. If there I'll take a reasonable man over an educated fool every day of the week. Amen to that, brother. So let's move on to a couple of other things, okay, that are constantly bandied about, especially in alternative media.

And I don't know who wants to jump on this one. I'm hoping that either Trisi or Zach grab this first, because I know this will be fun for you, Carmine, but i'd like to hear from them. Yes, I'm sorry, I promise, I want to talk again to they're done. George H. W. Bush in Daley Plaza. Well, yeah, that's that's always been an interesting one. And this gets back once again to uh trying to identify people in less than christine photographs or images that are not

quite clear right. And there's been, you know, a picture taken of showing a guy, you know, it's not exactly quite certain who this gentleman is, and then people say, well, look at this hairline, look at this posture. This has to be George Bush, I mean, and that's quite responsible. I mean, and you know, people have gone so far as to try to statistically prove that, you know, Bush was there

and he had this has to be Bush. And I'm not naming names as a certain gentleman who loves the statistics that I've talked to you about this several times. But I mean, you what and but it gets back to what would it prove if he was there? I mean, he's not holding a rifle. I mean, and what what what? What is it going to

solve there? I just dropped the comparison photo because I put that in the chat room for you guys listening, and in the chat room, Uh so you can see from another angle the figure that is alleged to be George H. W. Bush and the same figure from another angle. Just I'd like to go ahead. I'd like to make a point. Good, I'd like to make a point. I'd like to make a point here. And in some of the archival work I've done, I am. Part of the job

that I had to do was identify individuals in photographs. And sometimes you'll get photographs of people that from families and some family member later on down the road will write a name on the back of the picture. These are people that they knew, and they'll write a name on the back of the picture, and you can prove that it wasn't even the proper person that they're identifying, that they that they were misidentifying somebody that they knew face to face in a

photograph. So how is it that people are so certain that they know who an individual isn't a photograph that a they've never met and be it's they don't even have access to the original photograph to begin with. I mean, it's absolutely it's it's a waste of time, right, But I mean, like

I said, one of the really great methods is to cross reference. If you have a multitude of photographs you know, of a body of people from particularly different angles, which we do have and nexus of photographs here in Dealey Plaza, you can compare one figure to another and sort of begin to play match game with them and you can see them from different angles. I mean, much like that whole you know, Jack Ruby is in front of the

book depository thing that was incorrect as well. You know, It's just exactly is this should ultimate if you if you're going to go that route, it should be ultimately left to a like forensic experts or be experts in anatomy, people that understand exactly what they're looking at lay people trying to identify people based on, you know, a hairline or something like that. That's it's you don't it's it's beyond the scope of what a lay person should be able to

accomplish. I think a big part of it, too, is hypothetically, if George Bush was involved with this assassination in any form of way, do you really think that he would put himself in that position to be photographed? Do you really think that he would be on site? I mean to me, that doesn't make sense. He was attempting to run a Senate campaign at the time, would he put himself out there? Yeah, you guys are totally right. I waited. You guys are totally right, because that's my

contention with everybody that ever says they see someone there. If you want to plot the go off, you don't show up at the crime scene. Only a moron shows up at the crime scene. Yeah, and the you know, the over the years, I believe I saw a graph one time compiled by somebody who decided to figure this out. They they alleged something like I don't know, five hundred historical figures have been accused to have been at Dealey Plaza. In one way or another through somebody's work over the years, and

I imagine that they didn't actually get to all of the literature. Okay, so if I may quote the Commission, which I am loathed to do, but when they get it right, they get it right. Credit where credits do go ahead, there is still another category of speculation and rumor that complicated and broadened the work of the Commission. Numerous people claim to have seen Oswald

or Ruby at various times and places in the United States are abroad. Others insisted that during those days the following the assassination, they had to detected significant actions on television that were witnessed by no one else. Well, right, I mean, including people that swore up and down that they actually saw the assassination broadcast live that day. That was actually an assertion for many years,

and there is no way that that happened. It did not happen. Yeah, but they still go on and hopefully this will help the movement to start the stoppage of that. Well again, I know we could treat these subjects to long discussions, but I'm trying to jump around so that we can and actually get to some of these phone calls next James Files if you don't mind,

oh Files, you guys the Grassy Knolls. For those who don't know Sutton, mister Sutton is the Ji Jim Sutton, who is you know, prisoner at Juliet I think still right anyway, been interviewed a few times, has confessed to being the shooter on the Grassy Knoll. Go ahead, trash Well, I have a couple of things I'd like to bring up about Badgeman. First and foremost, it has been documented that Gary Mack and Jack White weren't actually the ones that first found the badgeman. It was actually Ruth Carter

Stapleton, who was Jimmy Carter's sister. Correct. She was the first one who actually pointed out that there was an individual in the Mary Anne Mormon photo. The first story that went around was, of course Rosciale White, his son came forward saying that everything was in his diary, it was all documented, so on and so forth, and then through analysis of the ink used in the diary, it was then established that his wife, Missus White,

was actually the one who wrote up that diary. Once that story basically became dead in the water, then all of a sudden, Files comes into it, and for myself, I find that very intriguing, especially considering Beverly Oliver had stated that she did in fact see Rosciale White that day. So again, the story evolves once something is knocked down, and I think that's really important. And I think eventually, in my opinion, I think the James

file will be another one of the Roscallle White stories. Well, it will eventually just fade out because again it comes down to evidence and proof, and I think that there's just too much pointing. And again this is just my opinion that the didn't come from the Grassy Ole. I do believe something happened there, whether it was a diversion or something to get people to run up

there, I do holdheartedly believe that. But if you look at I believe it's called the KGB Secret Files of the Kennedy Assassination, Robert Groden and amongst others, and I'm sorry I can't recall who all was involved with it at this point, but they actually blocked off the plaza and did a laser test of it. And when you see how Robert Groden tries to match up the headshot with the grassy Old, it's impossible the bullet could not have done a

U turn in JFK's head. And by all accounts, it appears that the shot either came from the front or from the back. And again, when you take into an account Custer's testimony, and again Custer's obviously one of those people that either you believe them or you don't, it seems to make a lot more sense given the information that he stated in his testimony. So again, I do believe, holdheartedly something happened on the grass that got people's attention

and got them running that way. And again, in my opinion, I

believe it was a diversion. But if you actually look at how the bullet entered the head from the right side and then exited the right side as well, I mean that that's you know, physically impossible, right, And for trajectory information, I would say, you know, take a look at somebody like Sherry Feaster, who's also been a guest on this show, exactly exactly, an actual crime scene investigator, Yes, an actual exa definitely hands down right, And as far as the final sorry, as far as the files

thing goes, though, I just want to say one thing about that. The Roscoe White timing is a lot longer than you guys probably think. You guys think of the Ricky White thing as the first time the Roscoe White thing came out, But no, that was introduced earlier. That was introduced earlier, and it all, it all actually came from the fact that that Roscoe White's widow turned over one of the backyard photographs to the House Select Committee at

one point. Yes, and she had she had a copy that nobody else had. Right now, that's easily explainable, believe it or not without adding Roscolle White to the conspiracy. Uh. The fact, the fact of the matter is is that pieces of evidence seemed to disappear from the police station in Dallas, and if Roscoe White was a cop and being around there, that would make perfect sense. A lot of evidence was being taken as souvenirs, right, thank you exactly. My reasoning which is, you know, which

I knew from actually speaking to Dallas police officers. But okay, but where would they know, Well, they wouldn't know much. They were just you know the Yeah, I know, I know. But anyway, the Jimmy final story, the problem is that it doesn't line up with the existing evidence. It doesn't line up with reason. You can't find the figure that Files would be in any of the photographic evidence, and it falls apart. On

the face of it. Bob Vernon is the guy who actually sold it to Whim dank Bar, and Wim does this thing with it, and that's the world according to Whim. I don't want to say, well, and that's fine if the same category to me, I'm sorry, I'm sorry Files and Baker fall into the same category for me. Yeah they did it. Well, no, they are, as far as I'm concerned, they're the same thing. They both go back to dank Bar. You know. That's That's the issue, is that not only do we have these myth makers, we

have people funding them, which is a whole other interesting issue. But anyway, let's continue to tackle this stuff because, believe it or not, we're through the first hour. Guys, I know we could go all day, I'm sure, so get onto. This is one of my favorites. By the way, LBJ is the mastermind of the assassination. Ooh, now, this is a long drawn out mythology. Okay, why do I say that? Well, it's kind of logical considering in the nineteen sixties. If you

think to yourself, Well, you know, he became president. He you know, if you're talking about nineteen sixty six, nineteen sixty seven, you might think to yourself that LBJ might have something to do with it. First of all, it was public knowledge that the guy had all sorts of corruption charges around him. Okay, it was the whole Bobby Baker scandal, not something that was discovered, you know, by bar McClellan. Okay, The

fact is that the Bobby Baker scandal. If you listen to broadcasts of local radio in Dallas and Fort Worth that day, you can hear the headlines about the Bobby Baker scandal while JFK is visiting Dallas. Okay, if you don't believe me, I'll send you the file. Moving on, Yes, he's assassinated Kennedy in the state where Johnson's from. So it's not a it's not a horrendous thing to imagine that LBJ could be involved. He benefited because he

became president. He obviously had control of certain things in that state. I mean, after all, John Connolly is directly relatable to him. The other guy was wounded in the car. Okay, a whole lot of other people that are involved in the motorcade, the choice of buildings, all these kinds of things. It makes kind of sense. But there's a problem, well

a problem, that's funny. There's a lot of problems here. And I have given people the context and Carmine, if you want to start, go ahead, but I want to make sure you hear from Zach and Trish on this too. I'll get you. I'll let them go first if they wish. I want to be more. They are the people I would like to be, the stars. They are the new guests. Oh no, no, no, no, you're gonna want to thank you guys. Well, this is a special place in my heart because it relates to a guy.

I'm sure that everyone in the Garrison group wanted me to give a shout out to Dave Sharp. Dave is an interesting fellow who has constantly shadowed most of our forums trying to push the LBJ myth and I tried to explain it to Dave, but he wouldn't listen. So hopefully if he's listening now to listen this time. It is highly improbable that Lyndon Baines Johnson was part of the conspiracy. He was part of the cover up. I will give everyone that

he was totally part of the cover up. He didn't want any of this to escalate into something he couldn't control, So that I think is fairly established by evidence and most reasonable people can accept. Lyndon Johnson, like all the other politicians, didn't want this to turn into something else. However, he likely had no part in the assassination. Now what you said, you said. People say, well, it was in Texas. Yeah it was, which would obviously link back to him. So why would he do it where

it would link back to him. That's a big problem, isn't it. Yeah, you know, And here's the thing. I am willing to accept the idea. And I'm gonna let you know, Trician and Zach get on this, But I'm willing to accept the idea that somebody tapped him on the shoulder and said you're going to be president soon. I'm willing to accept that. I'm willing to accept that he might have even had some foreknowledge, although he wasn't ducking at the time and all that other nonsense. But that aside,

I'm willing to accept that possibility. I'm willing to accept that a completely corrupt politician got swept up in something, tried to control the investigation, especially through his personal relationship with or Hoover. Okay, so Hoover again, who you know, basically framed and let go anybody he wanted to, and controlled loads of dirty information on people from the inception of his office with the FBI.

But okay, okay, I'll accept all of that, But him planning it hell of a reward to only have one shadow presidency of his own, to wind up a broken man and to have his legacy destroyed exactly. Okay. And how about the shooting gallery. Why wouldn't he be there if there was a miss, anyone could be hit. Yeah, and I'm sorry. I absolutely believed the phone call where he's talking to Hoover and he says,

you know, were any of those bullets intended for me? That sounded like an honest question, especially considering there was no way in helly had any idea that anybody in the public would ever get to hear that tape that was for his private use. Yeah, whenever I hear people talk about the tapes and the things that he could have said, he wouldn't have been using as many racial epithephs if he thought that these tapes were going to be listened to,

much like Nixon. Yeah, I'd like I'd like to bring up I'd like to bring up interesting anecdote that relates to this, and it's the story of Godfrey McHugh who is in the Air Force and he was originally supposed to ride in the presidential limo and got moved incidentally, but after the assassination, Godfrey McHugh wanted to track down Johnson and get permission to take off, and they

couldn't find him. And they found Johnson evidently in the bathroom of Air Force one, crying and telling McHugh, look out, this is a conspiracy. And you know why if he was the mastermind of it, would he be crying and telling one of his generals that this was a conspiracy. Yeah, Johnson had doubts two for years. I have documents that I'm more than happy

to share with you guys and those who are interested. Where Walter Jenkins, his personal assistant, told Hoover that Johnson was having a moment of doubt where he said he knew that CIA were somehow involved. I mean, this isn't Johnson was not the villain that so many have wasted time trying to portray he was a villain. He wasn't a good man, But that doesn't mean he was the leader of the assassination. Oh yeah. Let me let me be very clear. I'm not saying that this guy was innocent in any way,

shape or form. What I'm saying is he's not the planner. He's not the architect of what happened here. Smart enough, all all all of the all of the you know, all of the like you're saying the recording saying that he thought when the bolts was, you know, wondering if one of them was meant for him, and him being upset about this seems to me to indicate that he knew that something was going on, but he in no

way was the one that planned it. And I also think by him being in the parade, I think that he was close enough to hear the shots, you know, and that that's a very powerful thought if you think about it. He just witnessed the man above him being murdered, and I think it's very powerful that he knew that potentially that could happen to him too. And again I like to use the expression he heard the shots, he knew what potentially could have happened to him, and I think that's really important.

And at that point, he was expendable in the sense that he was easy to maneuver the way that they wanted him to. But isn't that the case with all these guys post Kennedy and I believe that also, believe it or not, Nixon was removed for the same reason that he wasn't cooperating. I agree, Yeah, fascination is not their only tool, right absolutely, you know, and they had already decapitated, they already fed them. You got it, you got it. I I am so glad to be on the

air with you. Guys. You have no idea. I'm gonna tell you what now, I'm going to open those phone lines. I'm going to open those phone lines, though, and I don't know what we're going to get. But I invite anybody who wants to call in now to ask about any of the subjects we covered or anything else related to the case. And you know what, if I've got any sort of clue, or any of my guests have any sort of clue, will be more than have be to give

you our ideas about what's what okay, And let's not forget that. You know, there are the major myths and there are also the minor myths. Okay, the whole Well, there were fake Secret Service agents everywhere that was bandied about for many many years. The sewer shot from X files, the sewer shot, which is an impossibility. And let me just back up with a little bit of evidence on the fake Secret Service agents and how so many witnesses saw them. Okay, the first thing is there is a Secret Service

agent named Lem Johns. If you could just turn down your radio, there we go. Yeah, oh, thank you man. Hold on, just a second secret Service agent, Lem John's. Take a look at his testimony and just imagine for a moment that he's not lying. It is very easy to see how a secret Service agent running around with his credentials open at that time could be spotted by various people in the crowd who are frozen, some

of which have thrown themselves on the ground. So there ends a whole lot of that speculation, maybe not all of it, but let's try and trace these things back to the evidence. Okay, So I have one caller on, I have another one coming in. Uh Charles, first though, how you doing, man, I'm doing good. How are you guys doing doing

all right? I'm doing good, folks, for finally talking face to face after messaging back and forth with the last god knows how long, and you are live on the air, so no doubt, please go ahead and contribute

to the conversation. All right, Well, basically, I've been listening since you just after you guys started about an hour ago or whatnot, and you guys have been knocking them off all my next getting sore from nodding from what you guys keep saying, because one after another after another is like bang on. I mean, you've got doorway man, You've got LBJ did it?

You've got uh bring up JVB. And the one that really bugs me the most because I run, as a lot of you may know a JFK site is the limo driver that just bugs me to no end because if we get it constantly, and it just bugs me because it's so easy to disprove. But you get these stubborn people on there, and this is true with all of the subjects. You get these stubborn people on there, and they don't want to admit that they're wrong, even when you can show straight up that

they're wrong. It just nos sense. Yeah, they personalize it unfortunately. Yeah, why do people get so personal over this? I mean, it's one thing to have a disagreement. You can disagree with someone and still be respectful towards them, But so many people make it so personal that you disagree all the sudden, insulting them what for? Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right. Bugs me when people do that, and I'm I mean, I'm not one to do that. You guys have dealt with me long enough

to know that, But there's so many people out there that do. And it just even like I'll even say, if there are people that I discussed and I think you guys know them, two guys like you know Fred James, Steve Rowe and so on, most of these people are alone. Gunman Oswald did it on their own stuff, and I completely disagree with that. But there's no reason why even though we disagree with them, we can't talk to them in a respectful manner. Yeah, there's an other parble that are

the same opinion where you can't you know, and just really quickly. Of course, David von Pine has an excellent video collection. O. Yes he does. Anyway, he doesn't like to debate much with me. But yeah, he's got a real nice sponge of videos. Yes, that's true. True. Okay, two things. First of all, unknown caller, I can't accept you because if I do, it will knock us off the network. Okay, so you're gonna have to unblock your number if you want to

get in. Next thing is I wonder who they're from. But I wanted to make that announcement. Plus, we also have another call around six seven. How you doing, I'm great, I'm great. I just want to say, nice show. I want to shout out to my three favorite researchers out there, which is the hit Man. Nice, hey hit Man. How you doing, Hey, gug, Thanks for the shout out. I appreciate that. I just wanted to touch based on something Karma said earlier.

When you really start digging into what authors are writing and you start looking at the primary sources, very often you're going to find they're just listing someone else's sources and they've never looked at the actual documents, and that leads to a

continued mythology that is really frustrating. When you're you've got people citing other people's books and you when you as a researcher start digging and you find the actual document that people are quoting, and it said nothing even remotely close to what they're using it for. So, Carmine, would you like to cite an example of this, Oh, the documents? Oh yeah, I think I

might be able to think the one. Yeah. Mark Lane has a document that everyone loves the site, but no one really looks at the exact document. They just cite his movie or they cite his books. Now, the document does say the word Mauser, as Lane contends. However, if you read the whole document, the only thing that sounds like Mauser is that word Mauser. Everything else goes with the Karkano and it's from two days later, before they even knew what street Kennedy was hit on. So they made a

mistake like they made so many other times. Instead, Lane sup that and forever has bandied it as there was a Mauser, there wasn't. I also have a document of Roger Craig's original interview with Mark Lane. Guess what they don't mention a Mauser. One other document, Misrepresentation, which is one of my favorites, which is out there and is part of the mythology in the alternative media is Executive Order number one one one one zero. Now, anybody

want to tackle that really quickly? The Federal Reserve thing, Yeah, I leave that open to you, guys. I've done it enough. Play somebody else. I've heard this one so many times. The whole JFK was going

to end the FED. Well, first of all, let's examine what it is they show for proof, which is the United States note okay, which existed long before Kennedy took any sort of office, which existed post Kennedy, all the way up to nineteen seventy one, when there was a change in the monetary policy in this country because Nixon finally took us the rest of the way off the gold stand. Hello. Okay, but read the executive order

for a moment. What does it actually do? Anybody know? No, I, after I saw the claims, I just sort of you got this one trip. No, You're doing a great job. Okay. It's actually an augmentation of a previous executive order. Okay, And it looks like Hitman dropped off the call. You know, you can call back in if you want, Man, I have no problem as long as you can, you know, kind of not not make a whole lot of noise. You're good,

so you can hang out. But here's the thing. It actually is an augmentation of a previous executive order, and what it does in reality is turn over the presidential privilege of deciding how many of these notes are issued to the Secretary of Treasury. That's what it actually does. And once again, unknown caller, I cannot accept you. You will have to unblock your number in order to call in. I'm sorry, that's just the way things work. It's not my rule, it's just the way things work. Can I

make a quick joke? Sorry, Judith exactly, thank you. You know she has to go back. Okay, yeah, So please, first of all, read the document, and you know what, don't believe me. Don't believe me if you want to read a similar analysis of this, and this should have been dispelled many many years ago. If people accept the the UH, if people accept the authority of somebody like you know, G. Edward Griffin on the subject of the Federal Reserve, go ahead and enter G.

Edward Griffin and the JFK myth into a search engine. Just go ahead and do that. See what you come up with. You'll find that he printed an article in two thousand and one explaining this away once and for all. Now, maybe you don't believe the whole Jackal Island thing, but I do. And I'm going to tell you right now, if you understand the way that this guy did his research on that, and you also read the documents, I can't argue with g Edward Griffin. So go ahead and look

at that if you like. Anyway, Sorry, go right ahead, guys, but do read the executive order. It is possible to get a copy of it. So what's next? I leave the floor open. We didn't really get too many suggestions from Zach and Trish. I mean, what didn't we cover, guys that you really want to get to. One thing I'd

like to mention is Dennis Morsett and his work with the Babushka Lady. I think that he's uncovered quite a few interesting topics regarding that, and I really do hope at some point you do get him on your show to take a listen to. He's uncovered quite a few different things, including information regarding the camera, which of course Zach had a part of helping him with. And

I think that that's a very important topic. And I don't want to step on any toes by any means by bringing him up, but I do hope that at some point you do consider bringing him along. Yeah. I think that all of us agree that, like we said, the lines need to be redrawn. They shouldn't be pro an anti conspiracy because that infers a bias.

They should be pro and anti evidence. And I'll tell you what, if you look back at at Richard Sprague's work, and I'm not talking about Richard Sprague, who actually was you know, removed as the as the chief counsel for the House Select Committee, I'm not talking about that Richard Sprague. I'm talking about the other one, Okay, the guy who did photo analysis. If you take a look back at him trying to track down who the Bebushka lady was, that sounds a hell of a lot more plausible than Beverly

Oliver. I'm sorry. I told Brett Holland the same thing on this show that you know, although I agree that he had some very good sources in his book, one of the ones that I would have absolutely advised him against using was Beverly Oliver because I simply don't buy her story. It's that simple, you know, and gee, there's there's reasons for this. But you know, I'm wondering if anybody doesn't know. By the way, just I always got to rewind this because you know, I forget you know, I'm

speaking to people that understand all this stuff like I do. And once again, blocked number caller. Do you think I'm kidding that this is? Like we learn learned five or six of these now blocked numbers cannot be accepted. Okay, if you allow your number on, I can bring you into the show. Otherwise it doesn't work. I wonder why they're not letting the number. And it's not like they don't have anything honest to say, do they? I don't know because I didn't speak to them anyway. See, see

there you go. I had to put you back into the I hope. I'm sorry, Chuck, please go on. I just wanted to respond real quick. Well, okay, the bat Bushkae lady. Just a quick explanation.

There is a woman who is easily seen in the Ubruder film and also the next film, the you know, the alleged copies that we have now at this point in time, that is wearing a scarf over her head and a coat and all of that, and she's standing in the vicinity of well, let's see, now, let's think about this, Charles brem Mary Mormon. She's on that side of the road, okay, opposite from the grassy

knoll, and she seems to be holding something up to her face. And for many, many years now, people have accepted that this is a lady named Beverly Oliver. I have reviewed her accounts of things, I have reviewed the photographic evidence. I simply do not believe her. Now. Could I be wrong. It's a possibility, but that is where I stand on the subject. But just so everybody knows, this is who we're talking about.

And Beverly Oliver used to make a very big deal out of when she was on the Heraldo Show or whatever, which did remind me just now that we did not touch on Madeline Duncan Brown. But anyway, we that before before the party time, because the assassination party is important, isn't it. Okay, but hang up on the call here, like the only people in the world that weren't active party, because at one point or another everyone seemed to

be there. Yeah, absolutely, even people who were documented as being an ass h for for instance, jadg ro Hoover. Yeah, yeah, too many people saw. Yeah, I'm sorry. I don't want to cut anybody off. I was just gonna say too many people saw an executive action and then made that happen in their mind. Yep. I mean it's not that it isn't feasible that a meeting occurred with some people at some point. But

once again, Johnson had no I think they're trying to call again. No, that's just a little bit of noise coming off with Charles there real quick. I don't know what about that. My phone slipt on me. But but Johnson likely wasn't there. Hoover likely wasn't there because Hoover wasn't dumb enough to go to that meeting. I mean it's people don't understand. That's an implication, and then that's where it begins. This has to be a small,

compartmentalized operation. This can't have tons of people knowing about it. Otherwise someone's gonna talk, right. No, nobody's gonna have parties where they invite you know, mistresses and random people uh to appear and actually see for their own you know, see with their own eyes the meetings that occurred. This is Oh, you want to know the best part is it's supposed to be at Clint Murchison's house. Funny enough, there are documents showing that Clinton Murchardson

sold that house in nineteen sixty two. Now I decided, let's throw a shindig at my old house. You're exactly that's right, You're exactly correct, Charles. That is one of the major major issues with this. Another thing too, is it's third party too. In a court of law, they wouldn't accept hearsay. And in the documentary they have a maid that is discussing what the limo driver had said that apparently drove Hoover to and from the airport, so on so forth. What another major holder in a court of law,

that wouldn't be accepted. And I think that's it's very important to remember as well. If it's not accepted in court, it shouldn't be accepted in the court of public opinion either. Yeah. No, I totally agree with that. I get an argument for people all the time telling me this isn't a court. No. But see a lot of people always talk about how they want to reopen the case. Well, let me tell you a little

thing. If you want to reopen the case. You need evidence. You can't just guess, right, right, And you know what, I didn't even bother. I don't even remember giving out the phone number, by the way, that's the funny part too, uh seven one eight seven one seven eight two nine six seven one eight seven one seven eight two nine six And you can't block your number, which, okay, I think it's safe to say that we're not paranoid anymore. No, no, absolutely not. But

anyway, thanks guys, I appreciate the house. Well, you know, listen, you gotta have a little bit of fun with this because after a while, man, it'll it'll make you really crazy. Yeah, it's laugh a cry and like the laugh, yeah, exactly, And and you know, and the sad thing is that, you know, again, like I said at the top of the show, we take this seriously for our own reasons. And you know, it's not about solving the great crime mystery for

a lot of people. It's not about correcting history for a lot of people. It's not about you know, it's all sorts of different motives. But here's the thing. If we can all agree to deal with the realities what exists, what's left of the evidence anyway, okay, and the best documentation we can get our hands on, the best testimony we can get our hands on from first hand accounts. You know, this might become a whole lot more simple to deal with, and it wouldn't have to be something that requires

a thousand volumes, okay or better. At this point in the literature of all sorts of mainstream published books, which of course we didn't touch on the biggest mythology of all, which is sort of a oh a composite of the O'Reilly's posners and uh, Dusty all of the other Warren Commissioner defenders that have been out there, you know, starting with David Bellin of course, uh, moving on well beyond that, of course. I don't know if you

guys ever read David Bellin's book about this. No, no, okay, Well, when when you have time and you feel as though you want to lose a few IQ points go writing it's not I think I lost enough read? Yeah, how about Juda's book? I want my money back. I didn't pay for it, so I got to get I got an autograph copy given to me for free. Who didn't want it anymore? We don't why they didn't want it. If we're lucky as the mistate into obscurity, that'll

be a rare collector's item. Yeah, no, I'm hoping so. And I told you the story Carmine off the Air about how I got hold of my U my Boogliosi book. Right, good one. This is a good one, okay, two thousand pages, all right, two thousand pages from Boogliosi. And I won't even get into all the allegations about whether he did his own work or anything else. Nope, I don't need to do that.

But let me tell you this. A fifty dollars book is sitting in a bookstore discounted on top of discounted, and it became two dollars and fifty eight cents. So I decided it was tiled by the book slash Steed Ram. And this was not long after its release, Ladies and gentlemen, This book stop, this doorstop of a book failed almost right away despite all its pre orders. But anyway back to it, and they released their you know, a smaller version of it, you know later, the four Days of

November deal. But I got mine, and I decided to go back to the rack and buy the other four that were sitting there because it was two dollars and fifty eight cents with tax, by the way, which is seven percent in New Jersey. So I'm not sure exactly the math right this moment, but you can do it in your head. So I walk away with

this cumbersome stack of books. I went outside to the nearest dumpster. I tore out CD rahm and and an illustration section of one book, threw four of them into the dumpster, and walked away with my one copy and proceeded to torture myself for the next oh at least a month trying to get through

this boring thing. Thank you, Vince Bugliosi. I would really like my two dollars and fifty eight cents at any time now, sir, But I would more, you know, since you have such great uh uh, you know, analysis about the universe and the nature of God in your later books. I would really like that portion of my life returned to me, if you can, so I can relive it without your book. Interest interests would

be nice, but I'm not demanding interest anyway. So many guys, I just felt like I needed to say that, because I don't know if I ever said that on the air. But I told Carmind that story and he said, you got to you gotta remember to tell people that. Yep, I learned an absolute lesson because the author of Helter Skelter, or the alleged co author of Helter Skelter and Methology, also provides us with an overwhelming, boring volume of crap. In the JFK case, so something too. It

case closed. Yes, if you want to do a little bit of damage to your frontal lobe, find next kill kill, killing Kennedy, killing Jesus, killing Patton. I think now, well, yeah, my thing with Posner and O'Reilly I think is fairly well known. With O'Reilly, it's another myth maker. And he finally got caught, which is awesome. And I credit the family, I credit Jefferson Morley, I credit everyone that came out against him. People argue with me about why I liked an article where Hugh

Ainsworth came out against him, because he's pro commissioned. I don't care. It's the truth. Either you want the truth or you don't. See that's the thing. If the truth is the truth, that's the end of it. And even even with a guy like McAdams, who has been extremely you know, divisive over the years. I'm sorry. When he's right, he's right. Yeah, we're all right. Sometimes we're all wrong sometimes, and people need to start realizing that. Yeah. Absolutely, Okay, So again

seven nine six and blocked caller, I cannot take your call. I'm sorry. I think we have fans. Is that seven? I think that's seven? It opens now, all right? Got a government persistence eight for persistence for evidence. There you go, and we're actually an hour and a half deep here, so man, oh man, I'm now just gonna throw it open and shut my mouth as best I can. I'm sorry, guys. I know I talk a lot and I kind of pushed the subjects along,

but I wanted to make sure we covered a lot of ground. You're great, suck, don't worry about it, Okay. So if you guys feel as though something was left out, especially you know, because you and I kind of dictated the topics a lot here, Carmine, I'd love to hear from Zach and Trish about whatever it is that they think we left out.

Okay. Well, one of the things that it pops into my mind, maybe we touched upon it briefly earlier is door Man, and you know, haul peoples tend to think that this is it's going to be or did, and some people still do. I mean, we have a whole Oswald Is Innocent committee that tends to think that this is the piece of evidence that's going to solve this or did solve it in their minds, but in reality, it's really just nothing more than that. As we were talking about before,

it's just you're staring at blobs. I mean, I Trician I put out an essay about, you know, our analysis of Judith Baker's Doorman pixation analysis, which in reality was really and I you know, don't mean to criticize her particularly, but I guess this is a criticism. It was a really poorly thought out study. It was extremely juvenile, almost I hate to say. She backed it up with pretty much nothing, and she said this was the most important piece of evidence that she's found to date. And this is

just a tip of the iceberg. With this movement. I call it a movement because it is they've basically taken this extremely You refer to Elpkins, it was that photograph, and it's they take the blobs of what you can barely make out an image of a face and and and a body, and they're and they're turning it into Oswald and using it as the touchstone, the Rosetta stone for the entire case. I can't begin to say all you're responsible,

that is m yeah, yeah no, And and she's not allowed. Other people do it too, black dog man, hole man, prayer man, blah man. They make up new names, They come up with a myth and they try to sell it. What what is the name for that day? I always forget go go ahead, no, go ahead, sorry, no, go ahead, go right ahead. I'm okay. You you just you keep you you. You have to almost wonder what sort of psychological mechanism comes into play that allows people to do with this and then carry this torch

until then end of their lives. Almost, I mean goodness, you can present evidence that says that you know, well, I think you're wrong here, and they just don't want to hear it. What it almost borders on some sort of I don't want to say, you know, mental illness. Almost. Actually, religion is what I like to use. It's like religion they've convinced themselves. You're putting faith into it. You're putting that right, Trista, You're putting faith into something that's really what it is. I'm myself,

I'm a faithful person. I'm a religious man, but I definitely see comparisons in the way that you know, there there is no quote unquote evidence, you know, hard empirical evidence that God exists. It's faith. But once again, there's no hard empirical evidence that Oswald was Doorman. But yet people still just stick to their guns and no matter what, and even Oswald

stated that he wasn't in the doorway. So again going with you know, Oswald spoke the truth all the way through his interrogation and people need to believe him, but they don't believe him on this. He's wrong, he didn't know where he was. You know, it seems silly to me. You know, it's cherry picking the information that fits the story. Yep, no consistency, absolutely, And uh okay, So we got a question from the chat rooms regarding the Don Adams from an office building with a high powered rifle.

Uh scenario, what was militier? Yeah, the whole militier thing. Yep. I'll go or one of you guys can go, whatever you want. I'm sure we all know this one. And then after that we have another caller, So you want me to go, are you guys? Okay? Miltier, in my opinion, is a possibility. I think that there are some credible researchers out there looking into the nationalist movement angle. I think that they could have been part of it. But once again, like the

mafia, they were not in control. It had to be a rogue agent or it had to be somebody with the CIA tactics of the Guatemala documents through fifty four to set this up properly. Right. Uh five four oh area code. You're on. I'm getting to schmutz the out of the the chat room. Oh well, hold on a second. I was trying to get to the five four oh caller. Hold on a second. Uh five four oh, you're on? How you doing shows? All right? How you doing good? Your boys a part to the loneom and tie can shut up?

Hey, I just wanted to call and tell you all what a great job you're doing, and I am thoroughly enjoying the show and it is much needed and much overdue. That's great, man, I'm glad to hear from you. Yes, thank you much talk. H I'm gonna go eat dinner. You'll have a great night and I'll still be listening. Thank you, Rob the four oh two area code. You're Ron all right, Yes you are. Hey, guys, I really appreciate this show. This is Fred James. Actually wow, yes you did. You were one of the good

ones. I thought I thought there was something that something. Derogats were negative, but on this on the thread for the one, I think it was actually mean. I think it was actually mean. This is Charles Fred.

I think they was actually mean that brought up your name, and what I was just saying was basically that you know that you seem to be pretty, you know, pretty much into the Osbald was a lone shooter opinion, and I just brought up that there's guys like you, and the other guy brought up was like Steve Rowe who have these beliefs, but yet you still speak to everybody in a respectful manner and you don't take shots of people just because

they have different opinions of you. And that's kind of funny because there's a caller that couldn't get in m M. I heard the suggestion that maybe that could have been Judith Baker, but that was actually Steve Rowe we're communicating with each other and talking about the show. I mean, you guys are doing a good job. Trician Zach are some of my most favorite researchers ever.

The on Judith Baker, the pix of the Generation, the analysis that she did, I mean, it just totally shows it doesn't give her any credibility whatsoever because it's just one more points in these points to just add over and

over and over again. It just keeps adding up. And if he keeps a bunking the person in different areas of her, you know, to let allegations she's making, how can you how can you be considered by anybody to be credible when you have so many things that just continues to get knocked down. So I don't, you know, it's just one of those things. And I just wanted to show my appreciation for, uh, the work they've

done on that and Carline are the premium that you put on evidence. I mean it's just like very strong everywhere that you put it, and I really appreciate that. It keeps me on my toes. I mean, you you guys have seen me in the threads debating things. I'm kind of nervous. So just you're doing great. I don't worry about it now, Fred kind of like, take take it. Take a breath for a second. Man, I want to say something. You're you're a guy who believes Oswald did

it. Yeah, actually, uh a twenty two year journey. I actually did think that there's room for a conspira seat until a little over a year ago. I made a little bit of a transition. In my opinion. If there was a conspiracy, it would have to involve Oswald as a shooter. Okay, well, then the conspirators who would have been involved would be unknown at this point. In my opinion, that's the only way I think. I think that's wholly reasonable. Fred, I don't. I don't think

that we can attribute innocence to Oswald utterly. That's that's a bias. So that's why I think we can get along is because he has he's a pass. That means some sort of connection somewhere. Now, whether he was set up early or whether he was part of the engineering of the plot, I think is the question that remains. Yes, I think that's possible, but right now I don't think it's probable. It's it's a possibility in my mind, but I just don't think that's what happened. But that's not why I

called you to talk about that. But I just wanted to make one comment though about the the Bushy Lady. Okay, I actually a conference last November, and I saw the shoes barely purports to be the shoes she wore on that day. Those are not the shoes of the bubusk Lady. The shoes that you can see clearly in the the skags and allan photographs. Mm hmm. The shoes that she says that are those, those are clearly not the

same shoes. Well, you know, you know what happens, Fred in the fringe end of this stuff is obviously the photographs and the films of the Bubushku lady wearing those other shoes have all been drawn in. You know. This is the and and believe me, I'm saying this sarcastically. This is not my viewpoint, okay, but this is gonna not exactly what you're saying to be saying. This is the nonsense that will be generated when you present

them with the contradiction. And here it is, you know, And I just want to SA say really quickly, and I you know, I apologize because it is my show. So I want to say this to you. I'm really happy that somebody that thinks Oswald did it called in. I really am, because I'll tell you what, I would believe that a whole lot faster than I would ever buy a tenth of what's in that Me and Lee book. Okay I would. I would gladly accept that a whole lot faster

than that. And in fact, I'll tell you a funny thing too. And I know I've never said this anywhere, but the realistic way that I started this journey was to disprove conspiracy theory. I really felt as though it was very strange what happened, because when I was nine years old, I thought it was very weird that a guy was killed while in the custody of the police. Okay, that shook me. But then I thought the kookie conspiracy theories are ridiculous, all of them. Problem is, then we have

we have common ground there. Yeah, and that's the one thing that needs to be pointed out. That's somewhere where we can come together. And the funny thing also is actually, up until about a year ago, is. It was people like Zachtory and Trish and some other friends that I consider them. I really do consider them friends of mine now and now Kimi, who I've gotten to know over the past several months, actually people who make me

look at the case from an everydentuary point of view. That's actually what caused my transition. The only room I leave for a conspiracyal is as I previously described, But actually it's these people who are you know, who I considered some of the greatest researchers, who have shown me that the way to look at this is through the eyes, through the scope of evidence. That's what made me the way I am now. I mean, I'm just giving you

a little bit history about myself. That's not the reason why I called. Just wanted to point out the thing about the Bush collect But I didn't make a transition. I was conspiracy theorists since the early nineties until last year. But because of this show and it shows like in the research that's going on that I can totally agree with, it makes me want to call in and

talk to you guys. It makes me want to chat on the sides because we have common ground, We have a place where you know where we all agree that there's some ridiculous things slowed around out there, and to me, it is disrespectful to the history to have such things out there trying to cause division and trying to distort some things that we can come together and know as fact. Some people are just trying to distort them and in my opinion,

those things need to be pointed out. That's why this show is very important, and people need to look into these things on their own, do their own research and find out for themselves. I mean made trips to Dallas, I've talked to Eugene Boon in person. I've done things. I mean, I look at things, I measured things, I go and delie positive and do things on my own so I can find out for myself. I want to be. I don't want to just rely on someone's words or someone's book

or someone else's research without checking some of the things out for myself. And you know, that's that's my transition. I just a little bit of a something I just wanted to put out there and and realistically that's how I started out. That that's exactly how I started out. Is let me start to verify because I happened to be in proximity to somebody who had been there, so I see, and they mentioned in a book I happen to know that they're in a particular city, and I would just pick up a phone book.

I know that's an old reference at this point, but there used to be phone books in every city file, yes, sir, and I remember those days, yes, you know, And I would pick them up and I would say, gee, you know, I heard that a couple of the guys that used to work at Bethesda are now in Pittsburgh. Hmm, guess what. Let me look them up. And a lot of times their

phone numbers were listed. And I've said this on the air before. Some people just hang up on me because who gives a crap, I was a kid, whatever, But some of them would talk to me and tell me, well, you know, that's not exactly what happened, or you know, you got to understand this or that. And thus the journey began, you know, actually comparing what what people are saying, witnesses said as opposed to what they have to say, you know, big difference in a lot

of cases. And I see Fred's call too, is important because it's showing that both sides can agree on some things, and I think that the most research development, and the most progressive research was done when both sides were able to work together at times instead of always being at each other's throats because they disagreed. Oh right, I agree with that. Yeah, you got to realize too that you're not going to agree on everything. It's just not going

to happen. That's the nature of human human nature, I mean, and that's the real meaning some people are some people are Red SOX fans. That doesn't mean that you can't, you know, still get along and have constructive discussions just because you're not, Oh well this, If you don't disagree with me, I don't want to talk to you. That's not the way to

go about things. And all it does is create bad feelings. I can give ample examples of that with the base I've had with Trish, with Carmen, Carmine, and with Zachary where we didn't agree, but we always can come together and find something where we do agree, and we the thing that we all want for sure. We want accurate history. We don't want people making up things about this tragic event that affected this the world from the point

that it happened. It affected not just the United States, it affected affected the whole world, and we take it serious. We don't want distortion being made. We want we want to find the truth. We're all with the the truth, and there's truths on both sides where we can come together and find them. Yep. One of the one of the better examples of that part of the two is sorry, tris one of the better examples. I

was going to say A big part of go ahead, tris. I was going to say that was part of the big downfall with the Garrison investigation was he didn't have the resources of the man power. And if you think about it, the most powerful world leader was assassinated. This is a world stage thing. And if there's so many people throughout the world that are investigating this on their private time, they're not getting paid to do it, et cetera,

et cetera. And if you know, everybody's heard different legends, different stories, they have access to different information depending on where they are. And if we could bring that all together and harness that and work together, I think that we could move mountains together. Yeah, exactly, Well, And

I was going to say that one of the best examples of that. To be honest with you, and this is often forgotten, is the universe still agreement between people that absolutely believed that Oswald is the guilty party and the only guilty party, and those of us on the other side of that issue. Okay, who came together after the Oliver Stone thing happened. Okay, and the ARRB happened. Now, I know it's a big, old but document dump and it's a hell of a daunting thing. And I can't even say

that I've been through all of it myself, but wow. Yeah, that's one point at which we all came together and said, listen, if this is the truth that he did this, then there's no reason to keep withholding all of this stuff. Right, Let's have the files. Let you prove that Oswald did it. You know what, if that's the way it comes out, if there is absolute proof and government hands that shows without any question, or not without any question, but just to a reasonable certainty that that's

the answer, I might accept it if and verify it. Yeah, there there's a There was a good point. I think it was Walt Brown, researcher there, Walt Brown who came out and he said, if it's such cut and dry pace or cut and dry case, and Oswald is the one that did it. Why is there even one piece of paper being withheld from people? If I could in real quick the castro plots among others. There were lots of the legal operations woven into the assassination and peripheral to it that

they don't want us to know about. But the bottom line is it's going to come out, so holding off on it just makes you look worse. Right, right, and and all the other position on aarb and and any information that may potentially come out. I want the truth. I can be influenced back to the other direction if the if I figured that the end has gone that way, Yeah, if there's a conspiracy, I mean it's clear and plain to me, I'll go back to the other ways. I'm the

way I am now because of what I see it. So if there's no you know, I don't have any biases. I do have biases, and I do have emotion about the whole thing. I'm more emotional about the truth now than anything else because after a while, after a while, that's exactly where it goes. Fred, is that you know you don't any longer care about being married to a theory. Okay, you actually want to know what happened. That's it, that's exactly. So let's get I started to find

things out like I never believed. I thought was doorway man. But there are some other things that I did believe both. Oh, here's an example, the parade roup being changed at the last at the last minute, which I do not believe happened. When I found out that that was not true, I mean I because I was such a follower of Jim Garrison and other things similar to that. When I found out that those things weren't true,

it made me like really angry and emotional. Well fin finding those things out, I did not I want I want it so passed to believe Oswalt was completely innocent. Was set up. I understand, I understand completely. And Garrison did very well with what he had, but he didn't have that much. That's what the problem was. Amazingly he got some of the things that he did, but still it's not a complete you know, we can't deify the guy. It doesn't work that way. Listen, we've got less than

five minutes left, and Schmutze from the chat room added back in. So I'm wondering, smutzy, what you got to say, because somehow I don't know I've lost you before. Yeah, no, you must have dropped me. But that's either humor there. The recently, what I wanted to just throw out there is I remember years ago I heard of a guy named Don Adams. He was supposedly an FBI man, and I think he wrote a

book I guess with his take. I just wanted to know, throw it out to the panel and ask them what you no they thought about you know, that particular account. There's also a well on YouTube video with that guy on it as well. I threw a link to his I think books that his website into the chat for anybody who's interested. They could just scroll up.

But you know, yeah, I'll be honest, I haven't seen that, so I will definitely review it. So thank you very much for adding that, Smithy, I do appreciate that, Chuck, you were telling me a little bit about him. Well all right, Well, the Don Adams thing is largely based again on the Milty Air story, and the problem with that is that it doesn't really go anywhere unfortunately, and there's a lot of things that FBI agents retired FBI agents have come out and said, and it's

really all over the mast. Don Adams in some ways revisits a lot of very old sort of ideas about the assassination. Because this guy who was literally involved in fundraising for extreme causes, especially racial causes, literally taking money from people at certain points to promote the idea of the assassination of doctor Martin Luther King, Okay, to try and collect money for those that would want to support his assassination. This guy's literally guilty of that kind of stuff, and

Adams had a little bit of direct knowledge about this particular individual. Now, as for his involvement in the Kennedy assassination, I think it's a little far fetched because they've sort of tied it to another one of these very blurry images in Dally Plaza. It is, however, remarkable that it seems as though he had some advanced knowledge. But then again, this type of advanced knowledge

was in a lot of different cities. This is again another reason why I don't buy the whole it's a Dallas plot and it's the oil men and all this other stuff. I don't think that Miltier was a player personally, but he's definitely a figure worth researching because the guy was involved in all sorts of chicanery regarding uh racial politics and and support of that kind of stuff at that very Yeah. Now, I think I think that Milkier Milkier largely was a

mid level leader in the racist movement. Yeah, he was a mid level leader. He was. I'm not saying that it isn't possible that he could have heard wind of something somewhere, but he had no direct knowledge in my view. And I also think that it was more of a response to Hoover utilizing illegal methods to destroy the Klan. You got it, that he would want to kill JFK, not any of the reasons people try to attribute, right, right, and look, it's just the timing issue. Yeah,

absolutely, it isn't it. And it's an interesting subject worthy of study all on its own. Okay, uh uh had what Stu x lare on and we discussed this, you know, regarding the MLK assassination and the different plots that arose, and Miltier is tied to that. Whenever you want to do MLK or jfor RFK, you let me know anytime I think we're going to have to revisit this subject though, because guys, we're just about out of

time. I want to thank first of all Carmine Sabastano, who is you know, a recurring guest here now, and also first time guests Trish Fleming and Zachary Jandro right jendro see, I knew, it's great. It's okay. You should hear what people do to my names. It's amazing. It looks pretty simple to me, you know. But anyway, so I want to thank everybody who decided to tune in, and of course all the people that are going to catch this later on down the line on YouTube or if

you've downloaded and shared it with your friends or whatever else. The Ocelli effect is just about done, and you can find the archives at the at uc y dot tv slash toe archives are there, Links to the YouTube playlist are there. Plus I will post this show on the blind JFK Researcher channel on

YouTube. Uh for the I don't know how many subscribers are over there now, but I'm not very active, except I do post these shows because I think they're valuable and I think that we did some serious damage to the mythology tonight, although there is more to go oh yeah, so schwitze Man, thanks for calling in, and a big thank you to Fresh Thanks, thanks, thanks for putting up my nervousness. Not a problem, brother, The truth is the thing. Thank you, Charles. Also for calling in.

Dot Gun absolutely man. And you know what, maybe we'll have to well I don't know when we're gonna plan it, but we're gonna have to do this again. I think us bat like us, don't comes down sideway stains, come of g comes down side y grant chust so does so does branchas has telegrays does go past set. The guy got t w n type n y dost or snow dot n y s n g L everybody does sound block down or SnO side by side siding. The sky's got like a sky turned t d scot