Communist salute
Anthony Marsh
A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
as a sign of defiance.
LTG
So, you think (Marxist) Oswald was giving kind of a French Revolution
type salute, eh?
Right on! Seven weeks earlier he was displaying all of his pro-
communist "credentials"
to Soviet and Cuban officials in a failed attempt to return to the
"workers' paradise." He
really showed those bureaucrats, didn't he?
Good night, Tony...and don't forget your Robes Pierre.
Martin Shackelford
degree.
It was also a black power salute. It was also a student power salute. Etc.
Martin
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:46f08cb8...@news.alt.net...
> On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
>
> .John
> --
> The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Peter Fokes
McAdams) wrote:
>On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
><anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
Certainly it is quite possible it was a Communist salute.
Oswald could also have been showing the world that he was handcuffed.
>
>.John
PF
Anthony Marsh
> On Sep 18, 8:05 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
>> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
>> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
>> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
>> as a sign of defiance.
>
> So, you think (Marxist) Oswald was giving kind of a French Revolution
> type salute, eh?
No, he was not giving any sort of salute. As I said we had discussed
this before.
Anthony Marsh
>
Not exclusively.
tomnln
"Peter Fokes" <jp...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:q642f3deoin03mf0a...@4ax.com...
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
> John McAdams wrote:
> > On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> >> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
> >> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
> >> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
> >> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
> >> as a sign of defiance.
>
> > Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
>
> Not exclusively.
>
> > .John
> > --
> > The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
He could simply have been giving the bras d'honneur (an immemorial
gesture, probablement...)
I always associated the upraised fist with Black Power, but that was after
Oswald's time. It does seem more a general expression of insurrection and
(what the user regards as) righteous struggle than anything ideologically
specific.
Thing is, I'm not sure what arguments the semiotics of Oswald's gesture,
depending on the interpretation, are meant to bolster here. Is Oswald's
upraised fist supposed to betray his true ideological bent or the role he
was so assiduously playing (since there are actually people who think that
Oswald was really a right-winger--even an informer for the CIA)? In either
case, it's evidence of hardly anything at all. If Oswald were only
pretending to be a Marxist--a totally baseless supposition, but just for
the sake of argument--the gesture fits in just as well as it does if your
opinion is that (as all evidence bears out) he was sincere in his
allegiance to his *own idea* of what Marx meant by communism.
However intellectually undeveloped Oswald was, and however much his
initial interest in communism stemmed from disaffection with the society
around him and his rather willful nonconformism--and however much his
dissatisfaction in the Soviet Union stemmed from purely personal
circumstances--he was at least astute enough to realize that the USSR was
a long way from Marx's concepts and to refuse to equate the two. This is
more ideological sophistication than many right-wing commentators have
ever attained. (I wonder what Oswald would eventually--in a few
months?--have thought of Cuba if he had managed to relocate there.)
Sandy
Anthony Marsh
> On Sep 19, 1:24 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> John McAdams wrote:
>>> On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>>> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
>>>> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
>>>> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
>>>> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
>>>> as a sign of defiance.
>>> Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
>> Not exclusively.
>>
>>> .John
>>> --
>>> The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> He could simply have been giving the bras d'honneur (an immemorial
> gesture, probablement...)
>
> I always associated the upraised fist with Black Power, but that was after
> Oswald's time. It does seem more a general expression of insurrection and
> (what the user regards as) righteous struggle than anything ideologically
> specific.
>
In fact Oswald was not making any sort of gesture. It is just a WC
defender myth to try to convict Oswald without any evidence.
John McAdams
<msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>It was also used by others, John. Please don't oversimplify history to this
>degree.
>It was also a black power salute. It was also a student power salute. Etc.
>
Yea, but later in the 60s. And both those movements were leftist
radical -- although by that time literal Stalinism was out of fashion
on the left.
John McAdams
wrote:
Tough call on that, and I think it could be either.
Anthony Marsh
No tough call. Oswald did not initiate the action.
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
> gwmccros...@earthlink.net wrote:
> > On Sep 19, 1:24 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> John McAdams wrote:
> >>> On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> >>> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
> >>>> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
> >>>> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
> >>>> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
> >>>> as a sign of defiance.
> >>> Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
> >> Not exclusively.
>
> >>> .John
> >>> --
> >>> The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
> >>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> > He could simply have been giving the bras d'honneur (an immemorial
> > gesture, probablement...)
>
> > I always associated the upraised fist with Black Power, but that was after
> > Oswald's time. It does seem more a general expression of insurrection and
> > (what the user regards as) righteous struggle than anything ideologically
> > specific.
>
> In fact Oswald was not making any sort of gesture. It is just a WC
> defender myth to try to convict Oswald without any evidence.
>
"Without any evidence"?
Without contriving such a myth about what could indeed have been no
signifying gesture at all, there is so much *evidence* against Oswald that
even you--as you wrote on September 7--"leave open the possibility that he
was involved."
Jean Davison
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6t6dnWLibeP7c2_b...@comcast.com...
Prove it.
Jean
tomnln
What do you make of Oswald wearing his Marine Corps ring & Bracelet on the
day he was arrested?
Do you think it Strange if he was a Marxist?
<gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1190337144....@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"Jean Davison" <walter.jeff...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GhGIi.737$6p6...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
tomnln
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
Not so cut & clear guilt until you do.
<gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1190306530.1...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 20, 11:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> I agree that it is entirely plausible that he just happened to be raising
> his arm.
>
> Maybe he was just trying to readjust the cuffs. As I said, it seems futile
> to try to argue anything from this...and who, anyway, needs to contrive
> evidence? After all, there is *even* enough clear evidence against Oswald
> to *almost* convince (even) Anthony Marsh of Oswald's guilt! (To say
> nothing of the impartial observer...)
wig...@xit.net
LHO might have found himself in a bind once he found out he couldn't
collect unemployment checks in Cuba. I also don't know if the Cubans
kicked in extra wages for non-citizens as he'd enjoyed in the USSR.
Jean Davison
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> Look at the films, Jean.
> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
Do you have a copy of the Peter Jennings "Beyond Conspiracy"?
About a third of the way in, after Hosty's comments, Oswald comes through a
doorway at the jail and raises his right fist. No one raised his arm for
him.
If you can produce a film clip that shows a cop raising his arm,
please do so. I'm not "averse."
Jean
>
> Martin
>
> "Jean Davison" <walter.jeff...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:GhGIi.737$6p6...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>>
Anthony Marsh
Oswald was well cared for in Russia. Same thing would happen in Cuba for
a defector.
Anthony Marsh
> Oswald was showing his Marine Corps Ring & Bracelet.
>
>
Nonsense. It was not a voluntary action.
Anthony Marsh
> Sandy;
>
> What do you make of Oswald wearing his Marine Corps ring & Bracelet on
> the day he was arrested?
>
You keep asking questions filled with misinformation. It was not a
Marine Corps bracelet.
A lot of people wonder why Oswald kept wearing his Marine Corps ring.
Anthony Marsh
If they had evidence they would stick to the evidence instead of
inventing myths.
Anthony Marsh
> On Sep 20, 11:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> On Sep 19, 1:24 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> John McAdams wrote:
>>>>> On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>>>>> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was giving a
>>>>>> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
>>>>>> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History Detectives
>>>>>> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French Revolution
>>>>>> as a sign of defiance.
>>>>> Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
>>>> Not exclusively.
>>>>> .John
>>>>> --
>>>>> The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
>>>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>>> He could simply have been giving the bras d'honneur (an immemorial
>>> gesture, probablement...)
>>> I always associated the upraised fist with Black Power, but that was after
>>> Oswald's time. It does seem more a general expression of insurrection and
>>> (what the user regards as) righteous struggle than anything ideologically
>>> specific.
>> In fact Oswald was not making any sort of gesture. It is just a WC
>> defender myth to try to convict Oswald without any evidence.
>
> his arm.
>
Not just happened. His elbow was being held onto by a cop.
> Maybe he was just trying to readjust the cuffs. As I said, it seems futile
> to try to argue anything from this...and who, anyway, needs to contrive
> evidence? After all, there is *even* enough clear evidence against Oswald
> to *almost* convince (even) Anthony Marsh of Oswald's guilt! (To say
> nothing of the impartial observer...)
>
WC defenders rely on myths like this instead of looking at the evidence.
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
Anthony Marsh
> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>> Look at the films, Jean.
>> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
>
> Do you have a copy of the Peter Jennings "Beyond Conspiracy"?
> About a third of the way in, after Hosty's comments, Oswald comes through a
> doorway at the jail and raises his right fist. No one raised his arm for
> him.
>
> If you can produce a film clip that shows a cop raising his arm,
> please do so. I'm not "averse."
>
You are a broken record. You keep reciting the same old myths and refuse
to look at the evidence when I present it to you, hundreds of times.
Jean Davison
> Jean Davison wrote:
>> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>>> Look at the films, Jean.
>>> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
>>
>> Do you have a copy of the Peter Jennings "Beyond Conspiracy"?
>> About a third of the way in, after Hosty's comments, Oswald comes through
>> a
>> doorway at the jail and raises his right fist. No one raised his arm
>> for
>> him.
>>
>> If you can produce a film clip that shows a cop raising his
>> arm,
>> please do so. I'm not "averse."
>>
>
> You are a broken record. You keep reciting the same old myths and refuse
> to look at the evidence when I present it to you, hundreds of times.
What rubbish. You've presented nothing at all except a caption
from a book, which is zip. Don't say "Google it." It's not there.
Check the film clip in ABC's "Beyond Conspiracy," Tony.
Jean
Anthony Marsh
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F4ednb0jHuqcwWnb...@comcast.com...
>> Jean Davison wrote:
>>> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>>>> Look at the films, Jean.
>>>> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
>>> Do you have a copy of the Peter Jennings "Beyond Conspiracy"?
>>> About a third of the way in, after Hosty's comments, Oswald comes through
>>> a
>>> doorway at the jail and raises his right fist. No one raised his arm
>>> for
>>> him.
>>>
>>> If you can produce a film clip that shows a cop raising his
>>> arm,
>>> please do so. I'm not "averse."
>>>
>> You are a broken record. You keep reciting the same old myths and refuse
>> to look at the evidence when I present it to you, hundreds of times.
>
> What rubbish. You've presented nothing at all except a caption
> from a book, which is zip. Don't say "Google it." It's not there.
>
I never said Conover Hunt's book is online. Are you claiming that my
message is not on Google Groups? Do you know that for a fact only because
you personally deleted it so that no one would see that I answered you?
Conover Hunt was in Dallas at the time, wasn't she? And knows the real
story, not your myth.
> Check the film clip in ABC's "Beyond Conspiracy," Tony.
> Jean
>
Which is WC defender propaganda.
Anthony Marsh
>> Your grasp of history is perhaps the reason you are teaching political
>> science instead.
>> The salute was far more widespread than you seem to understand.
>> In addition, there is no evidence Oswald was even giving the raised fist
>> salute--the films taken at the same time as the "salute" photo show the
>> detective handcuffed to Oswald raising his arm, and Oswald's with it.
>
> Martin, Oswald wasn't handcuffed to anyone. The cop who was
> with him was on his left. Oswald raised his right arm. Nobody raised it
> for him.
> Jean
>
And why don't you show us your CROPPED photo where you said there was no
cop anywhere near Oswald and he was roaming around all by himself?
>
>
>
>
Anthony Marsh
> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:c7LIi.28084$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>> Your grasp of history is perhaps the reason you are teaching political
>> science instead.
>> The salute was far more widespread than you seem to understand.
>> In addition, there is no evidence Oswald was even giving the raised fist
>> salute--the films taken at the same time as the "salute" photo show the
>> detective handcuffed to Oswald raising his arm, and Oswald's with it.
>
> Martin, Oswald wasn't handcuffed to anyone. The cop who was
> with him was on his left. Oswald raised his right arm. Nobody raised it
> for him.
> Jean
>
>
>
>
>
Yeah, and where was the cop's right arm and hand? Or are you going to
claim that he didn't have any because we can't see them in this
particular photo?
Jean Davison
> Jean Davison wrote:
>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:F4ednb0jHuqcwWnb...@comcast.com...
>>> Jean Davison wrote:
>>>> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>>>>> Look at the films, Jean.
>>>>> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
>>>> Do you have a copy of the Peter Jennings "Beyond Conspiracy"?
>>>> About a third of the way in, after Hosty's comments, Oswald comes
>>>> through
>>>> a
>>>> doorway at the jail and raises his right fist. No one raised his arm
>>>> for
>>>> him.
>>>>
>>>> If you can produce a film clip that shows a cop raising his
>>>> arm,
>>>> please do so. I'm not "averse."
>>>>
>>> You are a broken record. You keep reciting the same old myths and refuse
>>> to look at the evidence when I present it to you, hundreds of times.
>>
>> What rubbish. You've presented nothing at all except a caption
>> from a book, which is zip. Don't say "Google it." It's not there.
>>
>
> I never said Conover Hunt's book is online.
Who said you did??
>Are you claiming that my message is not on Google Groups?
No. I'm saying that your message didn't support your claim.
A caption isn't evidence of anything. Your message is still
there:
QUOTE:
>> The uncropped photo is published on page 70 of Conover Hunt's book JFK
for a New Generation. Her caption on page 71 reads, "Detective Elmer Boyd
has grabbed Oswald's arm, forcing his clenched, handcuffed hands into a
position some television viewers interpreted as a communist salute."
>>
UNQUOTE
The detective on Oswald's left in the photo I posted is Elmer
Boyd, and he is not grabbing Oswald's arm.
Captions are often inaccurate, as you have pointed out:
QUOTE:
>>>
The caption for the UPI photo reads, "...Oswald shakes his fist at reporters
inside police headquarters...", an unlikely description of Oswald's actions.
>>>[Jul 14 by Anthony Marsh]
UNQUOTE
I agree that Oswald wasn't shaking his fist at reporters. Elmer
Boyd wasn't forcing his arm up, either.
>Do you know that for a fact only because you personally deleted it so that
>no one would see that I answered you?
Oh please. As if!
> Conover Hunt was in Dallas at the time, wasn't she? And knows the real
> story, not your myth.
Who needs Conover Hunt's caption when there are photos and film
showing what happened?
>
>> Check the film clip in ABC's "Beyond Conspiracy," Tony.
>> Jean
>>
>
> Which is WC defender propaganda.
It's a news film taken at the jail, for Pete's sake. Where
is *your* film clip or photograph backing up your claim? Bring it on, Tony
(or Martin). The myth is yours. Please, if you can't back it up, you
should stop making this claim.
Jean
Jean Davison
Catch up, Tony. I posted the UNCROPPED photo yesterday.
The uncropped photo supports my argument, not yours, or haven't you noticed?
I didn't say there was no cop near Oswald or that he was
roaming around by himself. Yet another claim you can't back up, alas.
Jean
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Jean Davison
Ah, the Invisible Arm Push (IAP).
By "this particular photo," are you implying there's some other
photo that shows what you claim? If so, where is it, Tony?
Jean
>
Anthony Marsh
I am contrasting it with YOUR cropped photo where you said that were no
cops near Oswald.
>
>
>
>
Anthony Marsh
You. You wording meant that you thought I would tell you to use Google
to find her book and the caption. Obviously you don't have her book.
>> Are you claiming that my message is not on Google Groups?
>
> No. I'm saying that your message didn't support your claim.
> A caption isn't evidence of anything. Your message is still
> there:
>
A caption is evidence. It is a statement of fact by a reporter on the
scene.
> QUOTE:
>>> The uncropped photo is published on page 70 of Conover Hunt's book JFK
> for a New Generation. Her caption on page 71 reads, "Detective Elmer Boyd
> has grabbed Oswald's arm, forcing his clenched, handcuffed hands into a
> position some television viewers interpreted as a communist salute."
> UNQUOTE
>
> The detective on Oswald's left in the photo I posted is Elmer
> Boyd, and he is not grabbing Oswald's arm.
>
> Captions are often inaccurate, as you have pointed out:
>
> QUOTE:
> The caption for the UPI photo reads, "...Oswald shakes his fist at reporters
> inside police headquarters...", an unlikely description of Oswald's actions.
>>>> [Jul 14 by Anthony Marsh]
> UNQUOTE
>
> I agree that Oswald wasn't shaking his fist at reporters. Elmer
> Boyd wasn't forcing his arm up, either.
>
>
>> Do you know that for a fact only because you personally deleted it so that
>> no one would see that I answered you?
>
> Oh please. As if!
>
>> Conover Hunt was in Dallas at the time, wasn't she? And knows the real
>> story, not your myth.
>
> Who needs Conover Hunt's caption when there are photos and film
> showing what happened?
>
Because that photo does not show Boyd's right hand.
tomnln
This is>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
Aren't you satisfied with the Official Warren Commission Records Either?
<gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1190349834.8...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 21, 12:22 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Care to address these Questionable official records Sandy?>>>
>>
>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htmhttp://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htmhttp://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
>>
>> Not so cut & clear guilt until you do.
>>
>
> You keep throwing these same links around. Everything on those pages
> has been explained, debunked or is of no consequence.
> I must assume that by this time this has been pointed out to you many
> times before.
> For just one example, go to page 1054 of Vincent Bugliosi's
> "Reclaiming History" for the explanation of how that beefy guy in
> Mexico City (caught on the sporadically working embassy surveillance
> camera) was erroneously identified as the Anglo who visited that day.
>
>
>
>
>> <gwmccros...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1190306530.1...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Sep 20, 11:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> gwmccros...@earthlink.net wrote:
>> >> > On Sep 19, 1:24 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> >> John McAdams wrote:
>> >> >>> On 18 Sep 2007 21:05:59 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>> >> >>> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> >>>> A while back some WC defenders were claiming that Oswald was
>> >> >>>> giving
>> >> >>>> a
>> >> >>>> Communist salute. Some of them think and claim that a raised fist
>> >> >>>> originated with the Communists. But a recent PBS show History
>> >> >>>> Detectives
>> >> >>>> pointed out that the raised fist originated during the French
>> >> >>>> Revolution
>> >> >>>> as a sign of defiance.
>> >> >>> Sure, but by the mid 20th century is was a Communist salute.
>> >> >> Not exclusively.
>>
>> >> >>> .John
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
>> >> >>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>>
>> >> > He could simply have been giving the bras d'honneur (an immemorial
>> >> > gesture, probablement...)
>>
>> >> > I always associated the upraised fist with Black Power, but that was
>> >> > after
>> >> > Oswald's time. It does seem more a general expression of
>> >> > insurrection
>> >> > and
>> >> > (what the user regards as) righteous struggle than anything
>> >> > ideologically
>> >> > specific.
>>
>> >> In fact Oswald was not making any sort of gesture. It is just a WC
>> >> defender myth to try to convict Oswald without any evidence.
>>
>> > I agree that it is entirely plausible that he just happened to be
>> > raising
>> > his arm.
>>
>> > Maybe he was just trying to readjust the cuffs. As I said, it seems
>> > futile
>> > to try to argue anything from this...and who, anyway, needs to contrive
>> > evidence? After all, there is *even* enough clear evidence against
>> > Oswald
>> > to *almost* convince (even) Anthony Marsh of Oswald's guilt! (To say
>> > nothing of the impartial observer...)
>>
tomnln
I posty that every time you make excuses for the WCR.
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:TMqdndqReMuoUm7b...@comcast.com...
tomnln
It's indictative of a Patriot.
<gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1190351045.5...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 21, 12:21 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Sandy;
>>
>> What do you make of Oswald wearing his Marine Corps ring & Bracelet on
>> the
>> day he was arrested?
>>
>> Do you think it Strange if he was a Marxist?
>
> Nope. It's no stranger than it would be if he were a secret right-
> winger pretending to be a Marxist!
> Oswald applied the label "Marxist" to himself, but such a label
> (however Oswald understood it) can't explain everything he did.
> I don't think there is a *rational* explanation for the final decisive
> act of his life.
> People perform such irrational acts of violence every day.
>
>>
>> <gwmccros...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
Jean Davison
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> Look at the films, Jean.
> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
Still waiting, Martin, for you to tell me where to find a film
clip showing a cop raising Oswald's arm. I firmly believe that you've
misremembered this.
CTs like to think of Oswald as a puppet, but arguing that he was
*literally* a puppet is going too far.
Do you have a copy of "Beyond Conspiracy"?
Jean
Anthony Marsh
> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:CaLIi.28087$eY.1...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>> Look at the films, Jean.
>> Too many newsgroup posters on both sides seem evidence-averse.
>
> Still waiting, Martin, for you to tell me where to find a film
> clip showing a cop raising Oswald's arm. I firmly believe that you've
> misremembered this.
>
So, in your limited thinking if there is no film showing something
happening then it never happened?
> CTs like to think of Oswald as a puppet, but arguing that he was
> *literally* a puppet is going too far.
>
He was handcuffed.
> Do you have a copy of "Beyond Conspiracy"?
> Jean
Do you have a copy of JFK For a New Generation?
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
> Wearing a Marine Corps Ring/ID BRacelet is NOT an act of Violence.
Come again? I didn't say it was!
>
> It's indictative of a Patriot.
Or indicative of someone who wants to be seen as a patriot.
/sm
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
So it would seem--but of course I must be mistaken about this!--that we
agree that Oswald's "political analysis" (as it were) was ultimately
determined by such less than objective (let alone altruistic)
considerations as how well a particular country might treat him,
personally (individually).
Cuba didn't want him before the assassination. I seriously doubt if they
would have taken him afterward!
Sandy
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
> I LOVE pointing out to you my friend that Bugliosi is NOT Official.
>
> This is>>>http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
Yadda yadda yadda.
"Official"? You define that as it pleases you, I guess. Like Humpty-
Dumpty. "`When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a
scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more
nor less.' `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words
mean so many different things.' "
And now for something completely different: MISSING/REMOVED MESSAGES.
The one this amusing fellow is replying to, I never saw appear on
Google, though I keep checking, and now it can't be found with the
Google message number that has been unaccountably attached to it.
And yet here it is again, being quoted at least, so it must have
appeared briefly.
I'm pointing this out because there have been a lot of accusations
flying around here about removed posts:
Google loses things.
This isn't even a Beta version, it's more like Gamma...or Delta.
Notice how the number of "New" messages always matches the total
number of messages (the exception seems to be when something has been
deliberately removed). Cute.
Check out the discussion group about Google goofs. Missing messages is
Situation Normal, All F*ed Up.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled program--a rerun of my message
that somehow got dropped:
> > On Sep 21, 12:22 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> Care to address these Questionable official records Sandy?>>>
>
> >>http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htmhttp://www.whokilledjfk.net/Wa...
>
> >> Not so cut & clear guilt until you do.
You keep throwing these same links around.
Everything on those pages has been explained, debunked or is of no
consequence.
I must assume that by this time this has been pointed out to you many
times before.
For just one example, go to page 1054 of Vincent Bugliosi's
"Reclaiming History" for the explanation of how that beefy guy in
Mexico City (caught on the sporadically working embassy surveillance
camera) was erroneously identified as the Anglo who visited that day.
Sandy
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Jean Davison" <walter.jeff...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:46f8266e$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Anthony Marsh
Do you remember the guy who assassinated Trotsky? Where did he go after
he got out of prison? After all these years and supposed release of KGB
files no one has come forward with the true story?
> Sandy
>
>
Jean Davison
>I have a copy of that and many other documentaries, Jean.
>
> Martin
>
Martin,
Good. Would you please, please look about 17 minutes into the
film, and tell us what you see? Notice that the detective in the photo I
posted was already in the room (with his back to the camera), when Oswald
entered.
Jean
Jean Davison
Tony, I said no such thing.
Jean
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
Clearer:
"...that beefy guy in Mexico City was erroneously identified as Oswald
because he was the only Anglo shot by the Soviet embassy's sporadically
working surveillance camera on the day Oswald visited."
/sandy
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
What do you mean? Didn't he go to Havana and then to the Soviet Union,
where he was given a national medal for putting that axe into Trotsky's
skull?
Oswald might have told himself something like this could happen to him.
But, like I said, I don't think Castro would have seen it as in his
interests to give haven to the assassin of the US President. That would
only be courting his own destruction, if not even World War III. Nor do I
think assassinating the President of the US would have fit into the Soviet
Union's strategy. When it came to such things as assassinations and coups,
they--like our own CIA--preferred to pick on some country not quite their
own size (so to speak). The communists would not, moreover, have had any
ideological reason to expect a drastic change in US policy from the offing
one figurehead of the capitalist system, who would merely be replaced by
another.
Sandy
Anthony Marsh
That's what I am asking. Can you tell us the inside story and prove it
with documents? It appears that the Soviets welcomed back their assassin
with open arms. Didn't start WWIII with Mexico.
> Oswald might have told himself something like this could happen to him.
>
That's what I am wondering.
> But, like I said, I don't think Castro would have seen it as in his
> interests to give haven to the assassin of the US President. That would
> only be courting his own destruction, if not even World War III. Nor do I
Exactly. Castro said it would be suicide for them to have anything to do
with Oswald.
tomnln
HSCA believed Sylvia odio (HSCA report page 139)
<gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1190862801.6...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
I don't know why there is any doubt about this, but I certainly have
no inside track on this case.
>It appears that the Soviets welcomed back their assassin
> with open arms. Didn't start WWIII with Mexico.
That's an odd remark, for more than one reason. Trotsky was not the
President of Mexico. It's true that Mexico's president had extended
every courtesy to Trotsky, but it's obviously absurd to imagine Mexico
declaring war against the USSR.
> > Oswald might have told himself something like this could happen to him.
>
> That's what I am wondering.
...if he killed JFK. Right.
Martin Shackelford
Trotsky's assassin, with family photos and rare interviews, "Storm the
Skies."
Martin
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:doednbabEv-w-Wfb...@comcast.com...
Martin Shackelford
film clip out of context.
Martin
"Jean Davison" <walter.jeff...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:46fab409$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Anthony Marsh
We assume that we know the story, but my point is why we don't have the
documents to prove it after so many years.
>> It appears that the Soviets welcomed back their assassin
>> with open arms. Didn't start WWIII with Mexico.
>
> That's an odd remark, for more than one reason. Trotsky was not the
Not an odd remark. It's called sarcasm.
> President of Mexico. It's true that Mexico's president had extended
> every courtesy to Trotsky, but it's obviously absurd to imagine Mexico
> declaring war against the USSR.
>
Yeah, that's the point.
If Johnson really knew that Castro was behind it, why didn't he declared
war on Cuba? Because he did not want to be responsible for starting WWIII.
Jean Davison
>I evaluate matters based on the totality of evidence, not some individual
>film clip out of context.
>
> Martin
Okay, where is this "context," Martin? Would you please provide
something specific? I'm not "averse" to the evidence, I'm eager to see it.
Here is the online version of "Beyond Conspiracy":
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=jfk+%22beyond+conspiracy%22&so=0&num=10
Oswald enters on the right at about 17 minutes, and you can stop/start it by
using the shift key. Do you see a cop raising his arm?
Jean Davison
QUOTE:
"That is the stupidist thing I have heard. A newspaper caption is not
evidence."
UNQUOTE
Remember writing that, Tony?
Jean
Jean Davison
Anthony Marsh
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7184933155238761777&q=google+videos+%22beyond+conspiracy%22&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
>
>
>
Any chance that you'll ever admit that it is only pro-WC propaganda?
Anthony Marsh
Apples and oranges. The caption from JFK For a New Generation was written
by Conover Hunt herself and explains the facts that she knows. She was
there, you were not.
Anthony Marsh
> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:Vk5Li.9363$JD....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>> I evaluate matters based on the totality of evidence, not some individual
>> film clip out of context.
>>
>> Martin
>
> Okay, where is this "context," Martin? Would you please provide
> something specific? I'm not "averse" to the evidence, I'm eager to see it.
>
> Here is the online version of "Beyond Conspiracy":
>
> http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=jfk+%22beyond+conspiracy%22&so=0&num=10
>
> Oswald enters on the right at about 17 minutes, and you can stop/start it by
> using the shift key. Do you see a cop raising his arm?
>
> Jean
>
So, your point is that if you can't see something happen, it never
happened. You fell asleep during the moon landing, so no one ever landed
on the moon!
Jean Davison
> Jean Davison wrote:
>> "Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:Vk5Li.9363$JD....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>>> I evaluate matters based on the totality of evidence, not some
>>> individual
>>> film clip out of context.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>
>> Okay, where is this "context," Martin? Would you please provide
>> something specific? I'm not "averse" to the evidence, I'm eager to see
>> it.
>>
>> Here is the online version of "Beyond Conspiracy":
>>
>>
>> http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=jfk+%22beyond+conspiracy%22&so=0&num=10
>>
>> Oswald enters on the right at about 17 minutes, and you can stop/start it
>> by
>> using the shift key. Do you see a cop raising his arm?
>>
>> Jean
>>
>
>
> So, your point is that if you can't see something happen, it never
> happened. You fell asleep during the moon landing, so no one ever landed
> on the moon!
So, are you saying that you know of no film or photo that shows
a cop raising Oswald's arm, Tony? Please answer that. You're relying
entirely on the Conover Hunt caption, aren't you?
Again, I'm not arguing that it was a "communist salute." Only
Oswald knew what he meant by it; others can only guess.
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
> If Johnson really knew that Castro was behind it, why didn't he declared
> war on Cuba? Because he did not want to be responsible for starting WWIII.
"If Johnson really knew..." !
Is this Castro theory an alternative to the one involving Helms or do
you reconcile the two in some incredible fashion?
sandy
Anthony Marsh
I have explained it in full. It was a hoax, but everyone fell for it.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top US
officials thought that it was a conspiracy. Because of Oswald's defection
to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro, the suspicion was that he was
acting on behalf of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a
series of hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer sympathetic
to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on
September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban consulate employee give $6,500 in cash
to Oswald to assassinate the President. Because his story was so elaborate
and because it fit in with the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence
community it was widely believed to be true. But under intense questioning
by the CIA, Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been
at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the
cash, because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no red-headed Negro Cuban
intelligence officer working at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado
admitted that he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be
prompted to invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of a head of
state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to confirm
Alvarado's story. A Cuban named Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had
been contacted in Nicaragua by a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of the Cuban Exile leader
Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false rumors were the virulent
anti-Communist journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their
stories alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in contact with a Cuban
intelligence officer. It turned out that the source of their story was CIA
operative Frank Sturgis. None of the facts checked out and Oswald was
never in Miami. It was yet another hoax.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of the JFK assassination and
the formation of the Warren Commission. President Johnson was concerned
that rumors of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to
invade Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson was convinced that the
assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if that fact ever became
public, it might lead to WWIII and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It
was for reasons of national security that the public had to be convinced
that Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid by the Cubans to shoot
President Kennedy. But the decision was made to cover it up rather than
retaliate. LBJ blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members
into serving on the commission by telling them about the rumor of Oswald
being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public it could lead to
WWIII and the death of 40 million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's
November 29, 1963 phone conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax appeared
which could have been even more devastating. A series of letters were
mailed from Havana, Cuba which suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1963 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald. It was signed by a "Pedro Charles"
and dated November 10, 1963. It appeared to discuss the upcoming
assassination. In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references
to Oswald's great markmanship, the job that he was going to do, the money
he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S. intelligence
considered the "Chief" to be a reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a
few tip-offs which indicated the letter was not genuine. The letter was
sent to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in Cuba. A second letter also
postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from Havana, Cuba to Attorney
General Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had
met with Oswald in Miami several months previously and paid him $7,000 to
assassinate the President. This letter was signed by a "Mario del Rosario
Molina." But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the
Pedro Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter, a Remington
Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the same batch,
postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type of pen and
ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario Molina. Later
analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique characteristics of
the typewriter used for both letters. In particular they noted that the
"a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was presented at a conference
in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent from Havana, postmarked
December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban Lopez." One was addressed
to Voice of America and the other to the Editor of the "Diario del New
York." Both letters announced that it was Pedro Charles who paid Lee
Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President. The FBI examined all four
letters and concluded that they probably represented a hoax by anti-Castro
groups to blame the assassination on Cuba. But the most amazing thing is
that it took Hoover so long to catch onto the fact that these letters were
a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the very day that his lab was informing him
that the Pedro Charles letters were a hoax, he was citing them to his
closest aides as the reason why he felt that the FBI report should not
conclude that there was no conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally
satisfied that Oswald alone had fired all the shots, he still suspected
that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in particular Castro, based
on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone, but because they
thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if that fact ever
became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Anthony Marsh
I have not seen any film or photo taken from behind.
And yes I can rely on Conover Hunt rather than you.
Jean Davison
No, she was not there. She was a high school student in
Virginia at the time. So much for "the facts that she knows."
What else do you have to back up this claim, Tony?
Anything?
Jean
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
Oh, that's old news.
You should've written "If Johnson really *thought* that Castro was
behind it."
Jean Davison
Thank you. I hope Martin hears you say that.
> And yes I can rely on Conover Hunt rather than you.
I'm asking you to rely on the photo and film clip I've
presented. Conover Hunt was not there.
Can we please give this myth a decent burial?
Jean
Anthony Marsh
Why did you start this myth in the first place? Appeal to Emotion?
Paint Oswald as a Communist?
Anthony Marsh
Well, call him whatever you want, Johnson really did think that Castro
was behind it and told that to others around him.
>
gwmcc...@earthlink.net
Then I'd call him "wrong."
Jean Davison
trying again.
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:k8KdneLfPe9wC57a...@comcast.com...
Lame answer, Tony, and untrue.
I've never started a thread on this myth. You and Martin have
repeatedly claimed that a cop raised Oswald's arm, but neither of you has
supported it with anything other than an author's erroneous photo caption.
The author was not there, and the photo shows no such thing.
The film clip and photo, taken together, indicate that no one
raised Oswald's arm. Det. Boyd was not in position to raise it when
Oswald came through the door and walked in front of Boyd with his fist
already in the air.
But I have no illusions. This myth will come up again, and it
won't be started by me.
Jean
Anthony Marsh
But you will perpetuate it because you are a die-hard WC defender. Deny,
deny, deny.
> Jean
>
Jean Davison
You bet I'm denying that a cop raised Oswald's arm, since that's
not what the photo and film clip show. What do you have in rebuttal?
A photo caption by someone who wasn't there. Who's perpetuating a
myth here, Tony?
I enjoy tap dancing as much as anybody, but this is ridiculous.
Jean
Bud
<snicker> I predict Tony`s next move will be to say that Jean is the
one dancing, and claim it was she who orginally said that the cops raised
Oz`s arm. What the hell does he have to lose...?
>
> Jean
Jean Davison
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1192061528.9...@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Thanks, Bud. I'll bet you're right.
Jean
Anthony Marsh
I was just told by a moderator that I am not allowed to predict what
another poster will do. But YOU are because you are a protected WC
defender. So much for fair debate. No level playing field because you own
the playing field.
Jean Davison
You never are going to admit that a cop didn't raise Oswald's
arm, are you, Tony? Deny, deny, deny.
As for the playing field, I have nada to do with it. Why
don't you post whatever it was on alt.c.jfk? Say whatever you like, as
far as I'm concerned.
Jean