Justice For Kennedy

Lifton, The Education Forum, The Mary Bledsoe Story, and Lies, Lies, Lies

2012-01-15T09:04:00.000-08:00

LIFTON,

Why is it stuck in your craw that Oswald was on Cecil McWatters bus and then William Whaley’s cab? Why do you cling to this like a man possessed? I don’t get it. You believe in a conspiracy, you believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, and one to cover it all up, yet, you think there’s absolute truth in the Warren Commission story that Oswald used public transportation to make his get away.

If this doesn’t say Cognitive Dissonance I don’t know what does.

It would be instructive for you to examine the movie “My Cousin Vinny.” Every part of the story as told by the prosecution in the trial, all of the witnesses and evidence were all wrong. All of the misadventures that Joe Pesci’s character, Vinny, has leads him to discover the truth. All of the photos that his girlfriend took he ridiculed. One photo which shows the tire tracks of a car doing something the car the two kids he is defending drove could not possibly do leads to the truth. And it took a keen mind to see the importance of that one photo. Now everyone in that town, all of the law enforcement people, and all of the witnesses presented did not conspire amongst themselves to tell a lie because they wanted to convict two kids that they knew were innocent. Nor was the judge or the prosecuting attorney in on a conspiracy. There were flaws in the testimony, there were other incorrect interpretations of the evidence, there were assumptions made, leaps in logic, that added together, as a cumulative effect, lead to the wrong conclusion.

There’s something very similar going on here.

So, stop your crap that anyone who tells you that Oswald was not on Cecil McWatters' bus, which he wasn’t, or in William Whaley’s cab, which he wasn’t, were all working together to tell a great big lie, and were all in on the plot to kill JFK.

Harold Weisberg and Sylvia Meagher saw the conflict in the testimony and evidence, and both concluded Oswald was not on McWatters bus, nor William Whaley’s cab.

The very same arrogant, aggressive, authoritarian argument you’re demonstrating here could be used against your own work “Best Evidence.” The very same, “Oh, well, if that’s true then dozens or hundreds of people have to be lying, blah, blah, blah.”

Work the problem. Read the evidence You worked your way through the medical evidence. You have to work your way through every part of this case. Compared to Parkland vs Bethesda, the Cecil McWatters’ bus story is pretty damn simple.

I went through this evidence myself and wrote an article on it back in 1998.
( http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/24th_Issue/mcwatters.html )

And I’m happy to do so again. So, let’s examine this and deconstruct it piece by piece.

There are three people the WC uses to tell the story of Oswald on that bus. ( Four if you count Oswald himself, at least the passive voice Oswald that we get from official reports when he is in custody. ) They do not support one another and are in conflict with one another on the key point, was Oswald on the bus? Those three are:

1.) Cecil McWatters, the bus driver. [WC testimony begins 2H262.]

2.) Roy Milton Jones, a teenager, and regular passenger on this bus

3.). An unidentified woman, (actually, if you pay attention there is more than one unidentified woman) who is not Mary Bledsoe, but the WC morphs her into Bledsoe)

4.) Oswald, himself. But, and this is key, not directly from him, secondhand, from officials and their reports, after, well after he is dead.

If you can impeach all sources, and the bus transfer, then there is only one inescapable conclusion, no Oswald on Cecil McWatters bus.

So, why is the Warren Commission straightjacketed into a public transportation getaway story?

The Warren Commission Report states, "The bus ride.- According to the reconstruction of time and events which the Commission found most credible, Lee Harvey Oswald left the building approximately 3 minutes after the assassination, probably walked east on Elm Street for seven blocks to the corner of Elm and Murphy where he boarded a bus which was heading back in the direction of the Depository Building, on its way to the Oak Cliff section of Dallas. (See Commission Exhibit 1119-A, p.158)

Note the quantifiers, “found most credible,” “approximately,” and “probably.” We are on very shaky ground already. Three quantifiers in the first sentence. Why would Oswald take a bus? Well, according to the official WC version of Oswald he doesn’t have a drivers license, he doesn’t own a car. He didn’t hot-wire one and drive off. He didn’t get in a car with someone, that would sound conspiratorial. So, public transport is the only solution. But, why get on one that was going right back towards the crime scene? It makes no sense. Why walk several blocks, in a straight line, along Elm Street, which has three lanes of traffic all facing you, all going back towards the crime scene? It makes no sense.

The Warren Commission Report tells us, "When Oswald was apprehended, a bus transfer marked for the Lakewood-Marsalis route was found in his shirt pocket. The transfer was dated "Fri. Nov. 22, `63" and was punched in two places by the bus driver. On the basis of this punchmark, which was distinctive to each Dallas driver, the transfer was conclusively identified as having been issued by Cecil J. McWatters. ( See WC Report p. 157.)

[ The bus transfer ticket is Exhibit 381-A. It's in Volume 16 p. 974. Oddly, there is no Exhibit 381.]

Sounds like good detective work doesn’t it? It does, but only if you omit, as Paul Harvey would say, the rest of the story.

For example, smart JFK researchers might ask didn’t Oswald go to his room at 1026 Beckley and change his clothes? Didn’t he change his shirt? But he keeps a bus transfer that isn’t good anymore in the pocket of the shirt he wears when he leaves? Why do that? Well, I’m getting ahead of myself. I’ll come back to that point.

There is one and only one incident on the bus that should tie all of the witnesses and the evidence, the bus transfer, all together. District Attorney Henry Wade tells reporters at a press conference, Sunday night, November 24th, 1963, after Oswald has been murdered, that he (Oswald) took a bus leaving the depository and had laughed aloud when he (Oswald) told a woman passenger that the President had been shot. (See Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p. 76; Wade's statement CE 2168.) I’m going to call this “The Laughing Incident.” Sylvia Meagher called it what it is, “an irresponsible invention.”

So, according to D.A. Wade Oswald told a woman while he was on Cecil McWatters bus that the president had been shot and he laughed about it. So, Cecil McWatters, the bus driver and Roy Milton Jones, a teenage passenger on the bus should be able to recall that, right? Well, they don’t.

Cecil McWatters

According to McWatters testimony to the WC he learned about the assassination from a man who got out of a car ahead of him stalled in traffic. This driver got out of his car and informs McWatters that he just heard on the radio that the president had been shot. (2H265)

So, if McWatters story here is correct it’s not Oswald who gets on the bus and is the first one to inform people that the president was shot and then laughs. I’m going to count the points I make here that by themselves destroy the entirety of the Bledsoe story, like this one, thus [Point #1]

[Point #2] Now we’re supposed to believe “The Laughing Incident” occurs while McWatters is stuck in traffic on Elm Street and before “Oswald,” got off the bus. Does it? No. McWatters says this happened after the bus crossed Marsalis St. (See 2H281.)

Now, go to www.mapquest.com, put in 621 Marsalis, Dallas, Texas. That’s where Mary Bledsoe lived. It’s just a few blocks from the corner of where Houston becomes Zangs Blvd. as you take the Houston Street viaduct over the Trinity river and about 5 blocks East of N. Beckley.

The purple pin is 621 N. Marsalis St. Just below N. Houston St is Dealey Plaza.

As you can clearly see Marsalis St. is not on Elm St. It’s not a cross street intersecting Elm St. either. In fact, it’s nowhere near Elm St. We’re not in Dealey Plaza or downtown Dallas anymore. In fact, it’s at least one mile away. See, how geography alone destroys the Bledsoe story?

Geography is Important

Below are a list of the cross streets on Elm St. My 1998 article goes into this in detail.

The Elm street cross streets have changed since 1963. Here is a list of the cross streets starting on Elm and Houston and going East, away from Dealey Plaza. (circa 1963). This is how “Oswald” would encounter them walking away from Dealey Plaza.

1. Record
2. Market
3. Austin
4. Lamar
5. Poydras
6. Griffin (1)
7. Griffin (2)
8. Murphy
9. Field
10. Exchange (Is now gone)
11. Akard

12. Stone Place (I know, it's not really a street. This caused some confusion as it appears to be an intersection on several maps yet does not appear to really be a street for vehicular traffic. Mary Ferrell informed me, "That was an alley running from Elm to Main. A number of years ago (I'm not certain that it was done before 1963/1964) they widened the alley and made it almost like a small park with Mexican tile and benches, little trees and fountains. People use it as a short-cut between Elm and Main but also to sit and eat lunch or just enjoy the sun and open air." Mike Parks agrees, "This is just a walkway and not a street.")
13. Ervay
14. St. Paul
15. Harwood
16. Olive
17. Pearl
18. Central Expressway
19. Hawkins
20. Good Latimer Expressway

(See Notes section for explanation of 1963 and how the streets appear today)

“Oswald,” got on around Murphy and gets off before Houston, neither points being designated bus stops. The entire time “Oswald,” is supposedly on this bus it is already on Elm Street and is going in a straight line, going West, towards Dealey Plaza.

And it is after the bus crosses Marsalis that an old woman got on. Again, I want to emphasize McWatters’ bus is not on Elm Street, and is not in downtown Dallas when this old woman in “The Laughing Incident” story got on. So, this old woman cannot be a part of this laughing incident with “Oswald” as “Oswald” had left long before she gets on the bus.

[Point #3] Additionally, McWatters says that it was the teenager Jones who talked to the old woman and not this guy who got on the bus on Elm St. and about two blocks later got off that authorities want people to believe was Oswald.

[Point #4] Keep in mind that “Oswald” supposedly got on McWatters bus somewhere near the intersection of Murphy Street and Elm St. and got off before the bus got to Houston. Yet, the person they’re telling you is Oswald in the McWatters story gets on and off the bus while the bus is still on Elm St. and yet the woman in the story doesn’t get on until McWatters gets to Marsalis St. which is over a mile away.]

[Point #5] There is no laughing, it’s an interpretation an old woman has who cannot believe the news she’s hearing, she thinks they are fooling her, and it’s not even Oswald, it’s Roy Milton Jones who the unidentified woman thinks smiled. Then McWatters asks this unidentified old woman if she’s heard that the president has been shot. She said she did not. She does not believe McWatters. McWatters asks her to talk to the teenager Jones as he will confirm that McWatters heard this as Jones was on the bus when they both learned of the shooting. This old woman looked at Jones and she thinks Jones either laughed or smiled, who knows if he did or not, and decided that both of them were putting her on so she continues to disbelieve the idea that the president was shot.

So, McWatters story is detrimental to the story of “The Laughing Incident,” on several points, it occurs on Marsalis St., not on Elm. “Oswald” had already left the bus. The person the woman thinks smiled or laughed is Jones, not “Oswald.”

So, staying with McWatters and his story what happens to him? Again I refer to my 1998 article:

McWatters finished his Marsalis St. bus run after 3:30 p.m., returning to his starting point in Lakewood by the same route in which he left. He went home and spent some time watching TV. It was at this time that he saw the face of Oswald broadcast. If Oswald was on the bus, he was not then recognized by McWatters.

[ Point #6 ] This is crucial folks. If Oswald was on McWatters’ bus and McWatters goes home an watches TV and sees Oswald referred to as the assassin of the President of the United States, and McWatters was just with him in an odd incident less than 3 hours ago, if D. A Henry Wade’s story is true, then McWatters should be alarmed, amazed, frightened, and you would think he would immediately call the police to tell them that “Oswald” was on his bus. But, no, there’s no reaction at all. This cannot be over emphasized.

Back to my 1998 article:

[ Point #7 ] Towards the end of the afternoon he goes back to work - this time driving the Piedmont line. The sun had already set when he came to the bus stop at Dallas police headquarters at 6:10 p.m. November 22, 1963.

McWatters is taken through the main entrance and up to the third floor. He even sees Oswald in the hallway. (Weston, "Marsalis Bus No. 1213", The Fourth Decade, March 1995 p. 7; paraphrasing an article by Dr. Jerry Rose "Double Agent Unmasked: A reconstruction, The Third Decade, Sept. 1987 p. 13)

[ Point #8] And again McWatters has no reaction.

Dr. Jerry Rose made a telephone call to McWatters on November 21, 1983 in which McWatters acknowledged that he saw Oswald on TV and at the police station prior to the police line up.

[ Point #9] Dr. Rose points out that that invalidates any identification obtained from the police lineup.

Okay, so the first witness, Cecil McWatters the bus driver, is found by the Dallas police and taken to a lineup.

[ Point #10 ] Now we are told that brilliant police work leads to McWatters, that the bus transfer could only come from him and the police go out and find McWatters. Bull. They grab McWatters right off his bus when his evening bus shift, which is not the Marsalis St. bus, stops in front of City Hall. It gives the appearance that they grab the first one they could, which might be exactly what they did.

(2H 267-268)

Mr. BALL. 22nd. Do you know how they happened to get in touch with you, did you notify them that you.--
Mr. McWATTERS. No, sir; I didn't know anything to that effect.
Mr. BALL. Did they come out and get you?
Mr. McWATTERS. They come out and--
Mr. BALL. What did they ask you?
Mr. McWATTERS. Well, they stopped me; it was, I would say around 6:15 or somewhere around 6:15 or 6:20 that afternoon.
Mr. BALL. You were still on duty, were you?
Mr. McWATTERS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Still on your bus?
Mr. McWATTERS. I was on duty but I was on a different line and a different bus.
Mr. BALL. What did they ask you when they came out?
Mr. McWATTERS. Well, they stopped me right by the city hall there when I come by there and they wanted me to come in, they wanted to ask me some questions. And I don't know what it was about or anything until I got in there and they told me what happened.

[ Point #11 ] Did you catch that last bit? THEY TOLD HIM WHAT HAPPENED! I don’t think this is as innocent as it may sound to some. They told him what they think happened and they need McWatters to verify the story. They think Oswald is the man in the “The Laughing Incident.” McWatters knows it’s not, it’s Jones. So, I think they, the Dallas Police and McWatters, think, incorrectly as it turns out, that they both understand each other and are on the same page. McWatters is asked to identify the man in “The Laughing Incident” story. McWatters picks a man who is similar in appearance to Jones, young, slight build, etc. He picks Oswald. The DPD is happy. But, not for long.

Back to my 1998 article:

[ Point #12 ] Does Cecil McWatters place Oswald on the bus? No.

McWatters testifies, "...he was the shortest man in the line-up...and the lightest weight one...the rest of them were larger men....he kind of had a thin like face and he weighs less than any of them...I really thought he was the man who was on the bus...that stayed on the bus." (2H281) (emphasis added)

[ Point #13] Stayed on the bus? If it was Oswald, he didn’t stay on the bus, he got off after about two blocks. But, Roy Milton Jones stayed on the bus.

[ Point #14 ] McWatters really identified someone whom he took to be the grinning teenager, or someone who looked the most like Roy Milton Jones from the suspects presented to him in that lineup. There was only one candidate, Oswald. Apparently, McWatters was asked to identify the man involved with “The Laughing Incident,” which would be Roy Milton Jones. But, Jones is not there. So, he picks the next best choice, “Oswald.” Oswald was not a teenager but because he was so thin and of sleight build, the autopsy of Oswald said he weighed 134 pounds, McWatters choose Oswald. McWatters thinks he is being asked to ID the person involved in “The Laughing Incident.” (See Weisberg, Whitewash p. 106.)

[ Point #15] Even the Warren Commission noticed that McWatters bungled the identification of Oswald.

Mr. BALL. Were you under the impression that this man that you saw in the lineup and whom you pointed out to the police, was the teenage boy who had been grinning?

Mr. McWATTERS. I was, yes, sir;" (2H281; For more see Meagher, "Accessories after the Fact" p. 79)

[ Point #16] Oh, one other detail, what about the bus transfer? Did McWatters recall giving one to Oswald? No.

Mr. Ball. - As I understand it, neither then nor now are you able to identify or say that you have again seen the man that got off your bus to whom you gave a transfer?
Mr. McWatters. - No, sir; I couldn't. I could not identify him. (2H283)

[ Point #17 ] Despite seeing TV before going into Dallas police HQ and picking out Oswald, not as the person who was on his bus, but whom he thought he was being asked to ID as looking like Jones, by the time the WC talks to him McWatters still does not know who got on and off his bus while it was on Elm St.

[ Point #18 ] McWatters tells the commission a man got on around Griffin and got off near Lamar, which is where a woman with the suitcase got off. (2H271) McWatters gave a transfer to this unidentified man. These were the only two transfers he gave on this run, before the assassination. I think this is vitally important. At no time does McWatters ever identify the man who got on and off the bus before it got to Houston as being Oswald.

He never does this. EVER! NOT EVER!

[ Point 19 ] McWatters saw Oswald on TV described as the assassin a few hours after he supposedly came on his bus. Whoever this man, THIS UNIDENTIFIED MAN was that McWatters gave a transfer to McWatters does not know who he is. The act of getting a bus transfer put him very close to McWatters. It is a short one on one interaction. They are within two to three feet of each other’s faces. There is no way that McWatters could have met Oswald like this, if this man was Oswald, for McWatters to go home and see Oswald on TV, see and hear Oswald described as the assassin of JFK and have no reaction, to then go back to work on another bus route, be taken in to DPD HQ, see Oswald live and in person in a hallway, and again have no reaction, see Oswald in photographs, and again have no reaction, see Oswald in a line up, and have no reaction. Never once does McWatters go, “Oh My God, I gave a bus transfer to the man who killed JFK!”
"The longer McWatters testified, the more he became embroiled in self-contradiction and faulty logic. He was unable to explain how it was that all of his statements and his affidavit on the day of the assassination could have related to Milton Jones, as he now claimed, when Jones had not taken a bus transfer and when it was the bus transfer given to Oswald and found on his person that had let the police to McWatters." (Meagher p. 79)

[ Point #20 ] And this is where Lifton’s mind just has a seizure and can’t grasp simple stuff. It’s not black and white. It’s not they’re either telling the truth or they’re lying. It’s just a little bit more complicated than that, and that simple complication, and yes, I admit that sounds like a contradiction, or oxymoron, but its really not, is the fact that we are dealing with uneducated people here. Cecil McWatters was a bus driver for 19 years, and William Whaley drove a cab for 37 years by the time they talk to the WC. And there’s no record of them or of Bledsoe even going to high school.

Self-contradiction is not a concept that they can comprehend. What is self-contradiction, what is an uneducated mind? I give you people’s exhibit A - George W. Bush’s inability to understand that torture, what was renamed for him as “enhanced interrogation techniques,” meant that what he was so proud of was actually a green light for people to capture Americans anywhere and everywhere they could and do the same to them. That by shredding this American value, "We Don't Torture," he was not making the world safe, he just made it a hell of a lot more dangerous. The moral high ground America had, that we don’t torture, that we were attacked on 9/11, that the world was with us, that article five of the UN charter was invoked for the first time, all of that was pissed away by a dry drunk with an uneducated mind.

[ Point #21 ] McWatters does not understand the illogic of the story he’s telling because it’s really not his story. What they want him to say which will support the story of Oswald on his bus he doesn’t tell because it didn’t happen. He doesn’t understand he’s being used. He couldn’t diagram a sentence to save his life. He doesn’t understand the headaches that he’s causing the DPD. He's causing the WC more problems than he’s supposed to solve.

Senator Cooper valiantly tried to get some useful information out of McWatters (2H277-278). There was great concern that either McWatters or Jones said, or were told, that JFK was shot in the temple. This is mentioned in Cooper’s question to McWatters. The Warren Commission’s over concern with the word “temple,” is a huge red flag because I believe JFK actually was shot in the temple, or forehead, just above his right eye, and from the front. But, this possible location of a wound was merely speculation between McWatters and Jones. No one told either one of them that the president was shot in the temple. The word temple appears in McWatters affidavit ( CE 377 ) and as you can see caused some concern.

Cooper asks, (2H278) “Was the passenger that got on near Murphy Street the same passenger that you later have testified about who told you that the President had been shot in the temple?” To use McWatters favorite phrase, in other words, was the guy who got on near Murphy Street, Oswald? McWatters answer is very interesting.

Mr. McWatters. - Well, they told me later that it was, but at the time they didn't tell me.

Senator Cooper. - Who didn't tell you?

Mr. McWatters. - The police didn't.

[ Point #22 ] Again, I believe the police were trying to guide McWatters into the story they wanted him to tell. How else could you possibly interpret this?

[ Point # 23 ] And the icing on the cake is...McWatters basically disowns his entire affidavit before the Warren Commission. ( 2H282. )

Mr. Ball. - I have a few more questions to ask you, a few more questions, Mr. McWatters. Let's look again at this affidavit.

Mr. McWatters. - Yes, sir.

Mr. Ball. - "I picked up a man on the lower end of town on Elm around Houston," as I remember you didn't stop at Elm and Houston; you stopped at Record and Houston for a pickup.

Mr. McWatters. - Yes.

Mr. Ball. - Do you remember having picked up any man around the lower end of town at Elm around Houston?

Mr. McWatters. - Elm and Houston?

Mr. Ball. - Yes.

Mr. McWatters. - No, no, sir; I didn't pick up. I made a statement here I picked up--

Mr. Ball. - Take a look at it, "I picked up a man on the lower end of town on Elm around Houston."

Mr. McWatters. - No, I didn't. I picked--"I picked a man up at the lower end of town at Elm," no, sir, I didn't pick up no man. No, I was tied up in traffic there. Market Street is the--I must not have read that very good when I signed that, because I sure didn't. No, I didn't.

Mr. Ball. - Did you pick up a man at Record and Houston?

Mr. McWatters. - No, sir.

Mr. Ball. - You didn't?

Mr. McWatters. - No, sir; that is not even no stop.

Mr. Ball. - In other words, this statement is not an accurate statement?

Mr. McWatters. - That is right, sir, because in fact that day the police wouldn't let nobody, in other words they run them buses through but they wouldn't let nothing stop there, in other words.

(The statement referred to in Mr. Ball’s question to McWatters is the McWatters affidavit.)

[ Point # 24] After McWatters testified they must have wanted to kill him. He’s a buffoon, with his incessant insertion of his favorite phrase, “in other words,” rearranging every question put to him and rearranging his own answer he would confuse anyone about anything. He was useless. If Roy Milton Jones was correct the Dallas Police Department spent more than 6 hours with McWatters on November 22, 1963 not letting him go until after 1:00 a.m. And the Warren Commission spent at least an 1 hour with him wasting 30 pages of testimony on him.

[ Point #25] McWatters didn’t know much about anything, but he knew his own bus route. He’s been a bus driver for 19 years. And that local geographic knowledge alone destroys the notion that Oswald was ever on his bus. And even this McWatters does not understand.

Everything McWatters says and does is in conflict with Oswald being on his bus. So, the WC has to dismiss and discredit McWatters, “McWatters’ recollection alone was too vague to be a basis for placing Oswald on the bus. (WCR p.159)” They, no small irony here, throw him under the bus. Not me, them. So, scratch McWatters.

Next, Roy Milton Jones

So, maybe the WC will have more luck with Jones. (See Meagher “Accessories After The Fact” p. 76-77 Vintage Books Edition New York 1976)

[Point #25] Now no one is supposed to know who the hell teenager Roy Milton Jones is. That’s why there is one and only one tiny, small, FBI report on him buried in the 26 volumes. CE 2641. He’s the one in “the laughing incident,” not Oswald. This alone destroys the LHO on McWatters bus story. He is not invited to testify to the Warren Commission

An FBI report dated April 3, 1964 states that Jones was interviewed on March 30, 1964 (CE 2641.) Jones was an 11th grader, or in his junior year at N.R.Crozier Technical High School where he takes half day sessions because he has a part-time job at Buddies Supermarket.

This means he is MASSIVELY better educated than Cecil McWatters, Mary Bledsoe, or William Whaley.

On Nov 22, 1963 he got out of classes at 11:45 and went to his usual bus stop location on Elm Street near where the Capri theatre used to be, which is 1913 Elm Street. McWatters said Jones got on near the Majestic theatre which was right next to the Capri. The TSBD is at 411 Elm St.

[ Point #26 - Where the Capri Theatre used to be] Jerry Dealey provided me with some photos showing the location of the Capri Theatre on Elm Street.

This cropped version of a photo from the Dallas Public Library shows how close the Capri was to the Majestic. It’s from 1963 and shows the two in their neon light nighttime glory. The Majestic is showing "Rampage" and the Capri is showing "How the West Was Won," which used a film technique called Cinearama.

Here’s another in the daytime in 1976. The Capri is showing "The Bedford Incident" and The Majestic is showing "The Ipcrest File." The vertical sign for the Majestic still exists.

Where the Capri theatre used to be is important for you to understand how far back up Elm St from the corner of Elm and Houston it was. Jones got on the Marsalis bus at about 12:15 or 12:20. He knew McWatters by sight but not by name. The bus moved toward Houston and got stuck in traffic about four blocks before Houston, which would be around Lamar.

[ Point #27 ] Jones said a policeman told McWatters that the president was shot and no one was to enter or leave the bus until police officers talked to each passenger. Lee Farley is quite correct when he wrote, “Jones’ statement threw more issues into the mix than it actually solved.” Jones introduces the element of the Dallas Police getting on the bus and questioning the passengers. McWatters did not mention this at all.

[ Point #28 ] If this did happen then Sylvia Meagher wondered if the Dallas Police were looking for Oswald a little too early like before his absence is even noticed from the Depository. (Accessories p. 82)

Now before the police came, and before they got stuck in traffic the last time it picked up passengers was approximately six blocks before Houston. According to Jones, two people got on, a man and a woman, a blond headed woman and a man with dark hair. When the bus was caught up in traffic and before the police came, the man left.

[ Point #29 ] McWatters says Jones got off his bus at Marsalis and Brownley. (2H278) And that Jones lived within two blocks of the busline (2H280.) Again, Marsalis is not in Dealey Plaza. Go on, GOOGLE it. The distance from 411 Elm St. to 621 Marsalis is more than 2 miles.

[ Point #30. ] On Monday, November 25, 1963 Jones catches up with McWatters on his bus again and McWatters tells Jones that the guy who got on on Elm Street and then off again on Elm St. may have been Oswald. ( Emphasis added, Accerssories p. 77)

This was news to Jones who had Friday afternoon until Monday afternoon to think that the guy who sat directly behind him may have been Oswald. But Jones never has this thought. He never goes running to the police, “Oh My god, Oswald sat right behind me!”

[ Point # 31 ] Jones gives a description of the person who might be Oswald as 30 to 35 years, 5 feet 11 inches, 150 pounds, dark brown hair receding at temples, dressed in a light blue jacket. This description does not match Oswald.

[ Point #32 ] Jones told the FBI that the Dallas police held up the bus for an hour. So, let’s go back and do some math.

Jones got on this bus around 12:15 to 12:20. It then gets caught in traffic and is at a standstill for some period of time, this is before the assassination. I think that holding all traffic coming down Elm St. from at least as far as ten blocks back from the corner of Elm and Houston so a presidential motorcade can go by would take at a minimum 30 minutes to clear. And then McWatters bus is held up for an aditional hour by the police as news of the assassination hits. It is pandemonium in Dealey Plaza . So, I think it’s fair to say that McWatters bus doesn’t get to Elm and Houston until after 1:30 p.m.

This is a problem, A BIG PROBLEM.

[ Point #33] Jones tells the FBI that after the police let the bus go and after they crossed the Marsalis bridge then a woman got on. This corroborates McWaters story as to when the lady who is part of “The Laughing Incident” got on the bus. Jones confirms McWaters' story which was that McWatters asked the lady as she got on did she hear about the president getting shot? She did not and did not believe it. The Jones and McWatters stories match exactly here. This woman thinks McWatters and/or Jones smiled or laughed at her so she thinks they are not being truthful to her so and she dismises the idea that the president was shot. This woman is never identified.

Again, this woman got on well after “Oswald” had left. She gets on over on Marsalis Street in Oak Cliff, not on Elm St., not in Dealey Plaza. So, she cannot be someone who saw “Oswald” as he’s left before she gets on.

[ Point #34] And yet the WC / Bledsoe story is that this laughing incident occurs when the bus is on Elm Street. So, neither McWatters nor Jones help to place Oswald on the bus. Scratch Jones.

“Oswald” and the initial version of his public transportation getaway

[Point #35] Okay, we looked at McWatters and we looked at Jones. Who’s left? Well, Oswald himself. Under interrogation Oswald stated that he got from the plaza to the Texas Theater entirely by bus.

[ Point #36] "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after leaving the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he got on the bus he secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination." (Thomas Kelly's Secret Service report, WCR p. 626, quoted in Weston's article, p. 8.) ONLY BUSES, IN FACT, TWO BUSES.

[Point #37] They can’t get Oswald on one bus, so the notion of two is quickly discarded as it strenghtens his alibi. He cannot possibly get to 10th and Patton in time to kill Tippit if he has to be on McWatters bus and then get another one. William Weston noted this in his article. (See William Weston's article "Marsalis Bus No. 1213," The Fourth Decade, Volume 2, Number 3, March 1995, pps. 3-10.)

So, let’s explore that idea.

[ Point # 38 ] FBI SA James Bookhout confirms the above initial story on how Oswald gets from the TSBD to the Texas Theater. "Following his departure from the Texas School Book Depository Building he boarded a city bus to his residence and obtained transfer upon departure from the bus. He stated that officers at the time of arresting him took his transfer out of his pocket." (WCR p. 621) Except he never did any such thing. The Oswald in official documents under interrogation, behind closed doors, the passive voice Oswald, that Oswald is a maleable fiction.

[ Point # 39 ] Fritz reports the same story. "During the interview I talked with Oswald about his leaving the building, and he told me he left by bus and rode to a stop near home and walked to his house. At the time of Oswald's arrest he had a bus transfer in his pocket." ( WCR Appendix XI, p. 599 Report of Capt. J. W. Fritz. The quote I’m using is the second sentence in the first paragraph on p. 6 of Fritz’s report which is page 604 of the WCR.)

[ Point #40 ] All of that is impossible. Why? Think about what we know. McWatters says he was at Elm and N. St. Paul street at 12:36. That is about 12 blocks west of Elm and Houston. To help you visualize this in your mind this means if you go to Elm and Houston with Dealey Plaza behind you walk 12 blocks away from the plaza and you’re near Elm and North St. Paul.

[ Point #41 ] McWatters bus was stuck in traffic for some unknown amount of time, then according to Jones police came onboard and spoke to every passenger. According to Jones they were held up for an hour on Elm with this police questioning of the passengers. Jones got on the bus at about 12:10 to 12:20. Add 10 to 15 minutes perhaps more for the normal and expected stoping of traffic on Elm St. so the presidential motorcade can go by. Then the assassination occurs. There’s pandemonium in Dealey Plaza. Now add an hour. That takes it well past 1:10 p.m. or 1:20 p.m., perhaps even after 1:30 p.m and it’s still in Dealy Plaza. This means Oswald can’t be in Oak Cliff murdering Officer Tippit somewhere between 1:00 p.m. and 1:15 p.m. If Oswald is on McWatter's bus, then McWatters bus becomes Oswald’s alibi. It excludes him from having anything to do with the Tippit shooting.

[ Point #42 ] Opps. Quick, get me rewrite! And Fritz’s report, there was something there. Aha! “During the interview I talked with Oswald about his leaving the building, and he told me he left by bus and rode to a stop near home and walked to his house.” (emphasis added) Bingo, that “and rode,” becomes William Whaley’s cab.

William Whaley, please stand by.

Scratch Oswald, at least his initial story that he got there entirely by bus. Damn. What to do? They modify the story.

Saturday, November 23, 1963

[ Point #43 ] On Saturday, November 23, 1963 at about 10:30 a.m. as related by Inspector Thomas J Kelly of the Secret Service in his report, Captain Will Fritz of the Dallas Police Department’s Homicide Bureau asked Oswald if he had taken a taxi that day. And all of a sudden, SHAZAM! Oswald then changed his story and said that when he got on the bus he found it was going too slow and after two blocks he got off the bus and took a cab to his home." (See WC Report, Appendix XI p. 626.)

How convenient of Oswald to destroy his own alibi for the Tippit murder! How convenient of Oswald to pick up his cue from Fritz. The bus story, in trouble on many fronts had to be changed. And suddenly Oswald solves this problem for them, at least the Oswald we get in the passive voice in official reports of his untape recorded, untranscriped, stenographic notes free interrogation the Warren Commission gives us. [And don’t tell me what the ARRB found about interrogation notes. I know all about it. They don’t change anything.]

[ Point #44] Okay, now we have “Oswald” getting off the bus while the bus is still on Elm St. and before it gets to Houston. He still bothers to ask for a transfer which means he has to get it from the bus driver. This should increase the probability of McWatters remembering this and what this man looked like, but, it doesn’t. If Oswald did change his shirt at 1026 N. Beckley he would have had to remember the bus transfer and place that in his new shirt. That doesn’t make sense. What would he use it for? What second bus would he want and where would he be going by bus? What does he need it for? Why hang on to it after it’s no longer valid? Well, the answer is quite simple. He doesn’t need it. The Dallas Police Department need it. Oswald never asked for a bus transfer, because he was never on McWatters bus. It was never found on Oswald’s clothes. It was found on McWatters bus where it was still attached to the rest of the bus transfer booklet. They got it when they got McWatters.

JFK assassination researcher Walt Cakebread wrote to me on alt.conspiracy.jfk, an early internet forum for discussing the assassination, back in 1998. He sent me a copy of a letter he wrote on March 22, 1995 to Dr. Jerry Rose, publisher of the JFK assassination journal The Fourth Decade in response to William Weston’s article “Marsalis Bus #1213.” ( I include the full letter he wrote to me below this article.) This paragraph is from that letter:

"I would like to point out some of the improbabilities with the bus transfer story and present an alternate hypothesis to the official version of the story. The first and most obvious anomaly is the condition of the transfer. It is like the "magic bullet" in that it is in pristine condition. It just doesn't look like a piece of newsprint paper that has been in someone's pocket, and especially some one who has been running, on a warm, humid Texas afternoon and wrestling with the police. It isn't even slightly wrinkled, not even a dog eared corner?? For the transfer to be in this condition it would have to have been encased in some sort of folder or purse but there is no evidence that this was the case. Detective Sims states that he found the transfer by itself in Oswald's pocket. I defy anyone to hastily place a public transit transfer in their shirt pocket not just once, but at least twice and not even dog ear a corner!"

Walt Cakebread came to the same conclusion I did that the bus transfer is Oswald’s alibi in the Tippit murder. "Detective Sims found a transfer in Oswald's pocket that was punched " Marsalis 23" that had been issued at 1:00 o'clock. He was unaware that this transfer was proof that Oswald had not killed officer J.D. Tippit."

Again, it’s a timing problem. It’s a timing problem throughout the whole convoluted way they investigate, put a story out there to the public, then find problems with it, then investigate it again, amalgamate it, come to a consensus, invent a story to star Mary Bledsoe, finalize it and stand behind how Oswald got to Oak Cliff in time to kill Tippit.

So, is there anyone or anything else on that bus that could help put Oswald on it? Well, there are some unidentified women.

[ Point #45 ] The Unidentified Woman #1 - She is not Bledsoe

So, let’s look at this woman. This is the woman who is supposedly involved in “The Laughing Incident.” They need someone to put Oswald on the bus. Two out of the three characters don’t work. So, they’re left with this woman who they did not identify. She is not given a name by McWatters, nor Jones. They don’t know her name. The police do not identify her to either McWatters or Jones. As noted already she doesn’t get on the bus until after it gets on Marsalis which is in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas and depending on exactly where she got on about a mile away, or 2, or 3, from Dealey Plaza. The simple geography of when she gets on rules out any possibility she saw a person authorities will later say was Oswald.

[ Point #46 ] Unidentified woman #2 - She is not Bledsoe.

McWatters told the Warren Commission, “...there was a lady that when I stopped in this traffic, there was a lady who had a suitcase and she said, "I have got to make a 1 o'clock train at Union Station," and she said, "I don't believe from the looks of this traffic you are going to be held up." She said, "Would you give me a transfer and I am going to walk on down," which is about from where I was at that time about 7 or 8 blocks to Union Station and she asked me if I would give her a transfer in case I did get through the traffic if I would pick her up on the way. So, I said, "I sure will." (2H264) This woman was never identified.

[ Point #47 ] Unidentified Woman #3 - She is not Bledsoe.

This woman, described by Roy Milton Jones as “blond haired” got on with an unidentified man. The unidentified man got off while it was still on Elm St. When this blond haired woman got off the bus and where she goes is unknown. She just disappears and is not referred to again. She remains unidentified.

[ Point #48 ] Unidentified Woman #4 - A lady in Oak Cliff who wants to go into Dallas.

McWatters told the Commission, “Now, as we got on out on Marsalis, along about it was either Edgemont or Vermont, I believe it was Vermont [Avenue], there was a lady who was fixing to cross the intersection and I stopped and asked her if she was going to catch the bus into town from the opposite direction, and she said that she was and I told her that we was off schedule, that the other bus had done went into town, and I asked her did she care to just ride on to the end of the line and come back and she wouldn't have to stand there and wait” (2H267)

[ Point #49 ] Let’s point out some key facts about this woman. It’s well after the assassination. McWatters is now in Oak Cliff. She was going to cross in front of McWatters bus and McWatters thinks she was going to wait on the other side of the street for the bus to go back into Dallas. This implies he knows her or that she looks familiar, perhaps a regular on his bus. This is actually rather nice of McWatters to do this.

Edgemont Avenue or the next street, and Vermont Avenue crosses South Marsalis in Oak Cliff. Google it.

This woman was wanting to go into Dallas. McWatters told her his bus was now off schedule and late. He would have to finish his run and come back around to start going back to Dallas in order to get her. It would be best if she came over and got on now rather than standing there for some time waiting.

[ Point #50 ] Unidentified woman #1 and unidentified woman #4 become Bledsoe. Their stories are combined, amalgamated, and fed to Mary Bledsoe enough so that she can just barely regurgitate it back to some Dallas people. And they think fine, she’s ready for the Warren Commission folks.

Bledsoe
Like McWatters this is a poor, uneducated mind. Her favorite phrase is “I didn’t pay any attention.”

[ Point #51] Oh, that’s how they find her.

Does McWatters bus route even go near 1026 North Beckley? No.

Initially, the passive voice Oswald said the bus left him off at his residence, which is on N. Beckley. Problem, McWatters bus doesn't go there. McWatters bus would drop Oswald off 5 blocks away. (See Weston article p. 8) Guess who lives exactly 5 blocks away, in a straight line, right where this bus would let Lee Harvey Oswald off? Mary Bledsoe.

Someone pointed out that Bledsoe was the daughter of a doctor, as though this meant she was at one time wealthy. Baloney. She was born in a little town 12 miles from Corsicana, Texas. Now you can Google it and find Corsicanna, Texas. But, Google won’t really tell you much of what the area around Corsicanna, Texas was like prior to 1925.

She doesn’t say what year she was born but she got married at age 17, divorced in 1925, and raise two children on her own.

However they say they get to this lady they make damn sure she doesn’t wind up being a complete waste of time like Cecil McWatters was for them.

[ Point #52 ] Bledsoe thinks Marina Oswald is Spanish.(6H408) and that JFK came to Dallas on February 22. (6H408)

[ Point # 53 ] When Bledsoe finally gets to describing Oswald she says he looks like a maniac. That is clearly what the WC wanted to hear. And again, “his face was so distorted.” (6H409) There is no reason for his face to be distorted or for him to look like a maniac. This is clearly subornation of perjury.

[ Point #54 ] Bledsoe describes Oswald’s clothing, especially his shirt. But, McWatters and Jones both said he was wearing a blue jacket. Bledsoe says all of the buttons on Oswald’s shirt were torn off. But that’s the condition of the shirt when he’s arrested, in handcuffs and brought into Dallas Police HQ. But, didn't Oswald go to 1026 N. Beckley and change his shirt? So, how is she recognizing a shirt she didn't see?

[ Point #55 ] She marked things on a calendar. The info for Oswald is on the page for October and her idiot son tore that out and sold it for $5. THIS STORY IS SUPPOSED TO BE EVIDENCE, I WANT TO REPEAT THAT WORD, HELL, I’LL EVEN SPELL IT, E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E, PROOF EVEN, THAT NOT ONLY WAS BLEDSOE A LANDLORD BUT THAT OSWALD RENTED FROM HER.

[ Point # 56 ] “The Laughing Incident” gets a rewrite - 6H410
Now Warren Commission counsellor Ball guides Bledsoe into giving the rewritten “laughing incident” story. This time the woman in the story is Bledsoe.

Mr. Ball. - Now, you say the motorman said something?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Motorman said. "Well, the President has been shot," and I say--so, and the woman over--we all got to talking about four of us sitting around talking, and Oswald was sitting back there, and one of them said, "Hope they don't shoot us," and I said, "I don't believe that--it is--I don't believe it. Somebody just said that. And it was too crowded, you see, and Oswald had got off.

[ Point #57 ] Did Bledsoe see McWatters give “Oswald” a bus transfer? No.

Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; I didn't pay any attention but I believe he did.
Mr. Ball. - Well, what do you mean he---you believe he did? Did you remember seeing him get on or are you telling me something you read in the newspapers?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; I don't remember. I don't remember.

Wow, that sounds like a positive ID! This is what the “I believe Mary Bledsoe,” crowd think is real. Are you friggin’ kidding me? But wait, it gets better

[ Point # 58 ] Is Mrs. Bledsoe telling us what she remembers or what she was told to say?
(6H411)
Mr. Ball. - Can you tell me the location of the bus with reference to a cross street on Elm where Oswald got off?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; I can't, because they have changed that street, so, they have torn down things and I don't go town very much now and so I don't-----
Mr. Ball. - Was it in the middle of the block, or at a regular bus stop?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Well, they said it was.
Mr. Ball. -I want to know what you remember.
Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; I don't remember.

[ Point # 59] So, Bledsoe calls the DPD on November 23, 1963, NOT THE 22ND, THE 23RD (6H412)

Mr. Ball. -When did you first notify the police that you believe you'd seen Oswald?
Mrs. Bledsoe. -When I got home, first thing I did I went next door and told them the President had been shot, and he said, "Why, he has got killed." Well, I turned on the radio--television--and we heard ambulances and going around and there was a little boy came in that room in the back and he turned it on, and we listened and hear about the President, only one I was interested in, so, he went on back to work and they kept talking about this boy Oswald and had on a brown shirt, and all of a sudden, well, I declare, I believe that this was this boy, and his name was Oswald---that is---give me his right name, you know, and so, about an hour my son came home, and I told him and he immediately called the police and told them, because we wanted to do all we could, and so, I went down the next night. He took me down, and I made a statement to them, what kind of---Secret Service man or something down there.

[ Point # 60 ] Allegedly, Porter Bledsoe, Mary’s son calls the Dallas Police Department on the 22nd with information about the accused assassin. If true, you’d think someone would be interested in this. Yet, nothing is done. Not only do they apparently call the DPD once and only once and get nowhere they don’t try to call anyone or anywhere else. They don’t go to anyone else in authority on the 22nd. They don’t even go to the media. They go to the DPD on Nov. 23rd. Why didn’t they go on the 22nd? Why the delay? Because she doesn’t go to them. They go to her, when they know they have problems with Oswald on a bus.

But you don’t believe me, do you Lifton?

[ Point # 61] They brought Oswald’s brown shirt out to her house? What the hell is this?
(6H412, 413, 414) It’s illegal and improper coaching of the witness. An ex parte discussion.

Mr. Ball. - Now, I have got a piece of clothing here, which is marked---
Mrs. Bledsoe. -That is it.
Mr. Ball. - Commission Exhibit 150.
Mrs. Bledsoe. - That is it.
Mr. Ball. - This is a shirt.
Mrs. Bledsoe. - That is it.
Mr. Ball. - What do you mean by "that is it?"
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Because they brought it out to the house and showed it.
Mr. Ball. - I know. What do you mean by "that is it?"
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Well, because I can recognize it.
Mr. Ball. - Recognize it as what?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Yes, sir; see there?
Mr. Ball. - Yes. You tell me what do you see here? What permits you to recognize it?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - I recognize---first thing I notice the elbow is out and then I saw---when the man brought it out and let me see it?
Mr. Ball. - No, I am talking about---I am showing you this shirt now, and you said, "That is it." You mean---What do you mean by "that is it"?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - That is the one he had out there that day?
Mr. Ball. - Who had it out there?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Some Secret Service man.
Mr. Ball. - He brought it out. Now, I am---you have seen this shirt then before?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Yes.
Mr. Ball. - It was brought out by the Secret Service man and shown to you?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Yes.
Mr. Ball. - Had you ever seen the shirt before that?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Well---
Mr. Ball. - Have you?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; he had it on, though.

I never heard of anything like this, police bringing evidence to a witness in the murder of the president, bringing evidence to a witness’ house. It’s unbelievable!

But, no, there’s no evidence she was coached, or prepped, no, no evidence she was used. Oh really?

[ Point # 62 ] Back to Bledsoe and the shirt. At some undetermined time after the assassination Secret Service agents came to her home, bringing a brown shirt which she had recognized (from the hole in the sleeve and the color) as the one Oswald had worn on the bus. (6H 412-413; Quoted in Meagher p. 80)

Oh really? Recognized it did she?

[ Point #63 ] In an FBI report dated December 4, 1963 SA's Carl Brown and Robert P. Butler wrote, "When the shirt was removed from an envelope in which it was contained, Mrs. Bledsoe at first said, 'No, no. That is not the shirt.' She then inquired as to whether the shirt had a ragged elbow. Upon further examination of the shirt, she observed a hole in the right elbow of the shirt, at which time she quickly stated, 'Yes, yes, This is the shirt.' (FBI report DL 89-43 by Special Agent Carl Brown and Robert P. Butler, in William Weston's article "Marsalis Bus No. 1213," The Fourth Decade, Volume 2, Number 3, March 1995, pps. 3-10)

One can only guess exactly what “upon further examination,” really meant.

[ Point #64] Then she claims she recognizes it, but has never seen it before.
(6H413)

Mr. Ball. - It was brought out by the Secret Service man and shown to you?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Yes.
Mr. Ball. - Had you ever seen the shirt before that?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Well---
Mr. Ball. - Have you?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - No; he had it on, though.

As with McWatters, Bledsoe has no clue she is contradicting herself. As with McWatters, Bledsoe too saw TV before she went to Dallas Police HQ, in fact, she saw a lot more.

But, there’s are several problem with Bledsoe recognizing Oswald by his shirt. He’s wearing a blue jacket according to McWatters and Jones over that shirt. So, how does she see torn off buttons and a hole near the elbow? This sounds like the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre, and matches the description of what we see in the TV coverage when he’s under arrest and brought up and down those hallways. But, he went home and changed his shirt. So, he’s supposed to be wearing a different shirt than what Bledsoe claims she saw him wearing on the bus. She shouldn’t be shown the shirt he was arrested in, but the one he wore before, that he had on while on the bus

[ Point # 65 ] Oswald going to 1026 North Beckley and changing his clothes gets a rewrite too!

The brown shirt and grey trousers are listed on F. M. Turner exhibit #1, Volume 21, page 679, the last two items on the page. .

Now wait a minute, didn't Oswald change his shirt at 1026 N. Beckley? See the problem? If Oswald was wearing a ripped and torn shirt all day, though only Bledsoe saw it, and Oswald goes home and changes his shirt, how come he's still wearing the ripped and torn shirt when arrested? Or are there supposed to be two pairs of brown shirts and two grey trousers? Oops.

Moreover, Oswald told Captain Fritz that during his brief visit to his room he had changed his trousers and his shirt, "because they were dirty," and that he placed them "In the lower drawer of his dresser." (WCR 604-605, 622) The police officers who searched the room did not indicate on the police property list that discarded trousers and shirt were found there. So, where did they go?

“Nevertheless, the Commission asserts on the strength of Mrs. Bledsoe's testimony and the bus transfer found on Oswald that "although Oswald...claimed to have changed his shirt, the evidence indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested."
(from Meagher p. 80, quoting WCR 124-125

[ Point #66 ] THE STRENGTH? STRENGTH?

In her 28 pages of testimony she says the following:

Uh-Huh - 63 times as the W.C. leads her through her own story
I didn’t pay any attention - 33 times
I don’t remember - 19 times.

Only the Warren Commission would call Mary Bledsoe a strong witness. Only the Warren Commission would come to a conclusion, “on the strength of Mrs. Bledsoe's testimony...” Give me a friggin’ break.

[ Point # 67] Bledsoe says she gave Oswald a receipt for renting the room
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Yes; and I gave him a receipt on this book.
(6H416)

So, where is that receipt? Where is Bledsoe’s receipt book?

[ Point # 68 ] Bledsoe says a man called Oswald and spoke to him in a foreign language
(6H427)
Mrs. Bledsoe. - This man who called and talked to him in the foreign language. I never did see him.
Mr. Jenner. - How did you know it was a man?
Mrs. Bledsoe. - Well, I just judged that it was.

Why don’t they just get her telephone records?

[ Point #69 ] Her favorite phrase is “ I didn't pay any attention to it.” And after reading her testimony that is my advice to people about her.

So, let’s look at the bus transfer. This is a closeup of the bus transfer.

CE 381A shows the bus transfer, front and back, and an envelope it was placed in, front and back.

The bus transfer is CE 381A. Note that letter “A.”

[ Point #70 ] Why is that “A” there? This is the only exhibit in the Warren Commission where we get a letter quantifier to an exhibit without the original number being used for an exhibit. There is no CE381, in the 26 volumes but there is a CE381A. Why?
In the testimony the bus transfer is marked as CE381 at 2H286. But, for some reason Warren Commission counsllor Ball stated, “What we would like to do is mark a photostat of the, transfer as 381A and substitute the photostat and we can return the transfer to the custody of the FBI.”

But, then they don’t publish a photostat of the bus trabsfer. The actual bus transfer is photographed. So why do they keep the number as 381A?

[ Point #71 ] They show us what they say is McWatters distinctive mark in test punch marks made onto a piece of paper, this is CE372.

[ Point # 72 ] But, where are the rest of the bus ticket stubs, the whole booklet, is not in evidence, nor is the actual punch maker, the tool McWatters used to make his distinctive punch mark. Why?

McWatters mentions his transfer book in relation to the distinctive punchmark that he has, it resembles the man in the moon in profile. A bus transfer ticket with a distinctive punch will tell a person who made the transfer, and thus what bus a customer got a particular transfer from.

[ Point # 73 ] We are shown samples of that distinctive punch maker in CE 372. Yet, we are not shown the transfer ticket booklet from McWatters bus. We are not allowed to compare his punchmark to his transfer ticket booklet to see if it matches what he tells the Warren Commission. We can’t see the transfer ticket stubs. We can’t see if there is a mark at the same time for the lady with the suitcase. We can’t see a stub for any transfer number below #004459 nor above it. Why not?

[ Point # 74 ] McWatters also spoke about a list his Superintendent had of the names of all the bus drivers and next to their names would be the distinctive punch mark each individual bus driver had. (2H268) We don’t have this list in evidence either.

Why all these lies and manipulations?

It has to be explained how Lee Harvey Oswald got to Oak Cliff. Officially, he cannot drive. It would be conspiratorial if he had help escaping, i.e., anyone giving him a lift in a car would raise a hell of a lot of questions, one of the main reasons why the Roger Craig story is discounted, so public transportation is the only way. I'm convinced the real people behind the assassination thought they had it all worked out with the bus prior to the assassination, but someting goes wrong, it falls apart so easily even they realize it and change it the very next day. This casts serious doubts about the cab story too, because the taxi only appears after the bus story falls apart. At no time on November 22, 1963 is there any mention by anyone that Oswald took a taxi to get to Oak Cliff.

So the bus transfer is reduced in importance in favor of a taxi manifest, enter William Whaley.

Oswald doesn’t mention a taxi until Nov 23. Recall, the DPD kept McWatters from a little after 6:00 p.m. Friday evening until 1:00 a.m. Saturday morning.

[ Point #75] There is no mention of Lee Harvey Oswald taking a taxi on November 22, not by anyone. Lee Harvey Oswald does not refer to himself as having taken a taxi cab, no law enforcement official of any kind refers to Oswald as having taken a taxi cab, no taxi cab driver comes forward to say Oswald took a cab, no witness of any kind places Oswald in a cab, and no paperwork of any kind refers to Oswald being in a cab on November 22, until November 23.

The story of Lee Harvey Oswald taking a cab to get to N. Beckley starts on Saturday, November 23, 1963 following a prompting by Captain Fritz after 10:30 a.m.

Whaley says the line-up he went to was around 2:30 p.m. that day. So, between 10:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. they get Whaley.

Lee Farley has done some excellent work on this area. According to
CE 2093 at
24H288, page 8 of T. L. Baker's report ( second paragraph ) :

"At 12:30 AM [ An error that should say PM ] Montgomery and John son were instructed by Lt. Wells to go to The Oak Cliff Cab Co. at Davis and Tyler and contact a driver by the name of William Scoggins and bring him to the City Hall. When they arrived at this location they were advised that he was standing by at the cab station at the Adolphus hotel at Commerce and Akard. The supervisor at this cab station said there was another cab driver we should talk to by the name of Bill Whaley. This driver was contacted, and they went to the cab company at 610 South Akard and picked him up and brought him to the City Hall also."


Note that they didn't bother to get the name of the supervisor. That's a clue that something is suspicious here.

And Lee Farley found it.

Dallas Police Officer Marvin Johnson, one of the two who supposedly picked up Scoggins and Whaley, wrote a two page report which is also in CE 2003 at 24H307. Johnson only picked up Scoggins. Two pages later in another two page report in CE 2003, 24H309 Johnson repeats, he only picked up Scoggins. Why is Whaley absent from the narrative in not one, but two reports by Johnson?

Farley also points out that Fritz asks Oswald about a cab on November 23rd, at 10:25 a.m., yet Mntgomery and Johnson don't learn about Whaley until. after 12:30 p.m. when they are told about Whaley, and don't get him back to HQ until after. So, Fritz is asking Oswald about a cab ride he doedsn't really know about, yet.

[ Point #76 ] As with McWatters, Whaley also screws up the identification process with Oswald in a line-up. Of paramount importance is the fact that the Dallas police prepared a statement for him to which he signed and swore, identifying Oswald before he even views the lineup!!!!! (Weisberg p. 53; 6H431)

[ Point #77] We have a clear pattern here with McWatters, Bledsoe and Whaley or beng told information, of being coached.

McWatters - “Well, they stopped me right by the city hall there when I come by there and they wanted me to come in, they wanted to ask me some questions. And I don't know what it was about or anything until I got in there and they told me what happened.” 2H267 -268

Bledsoe - They bring Oswald’s shirt out to her. They prepare notes for her when she testified to the WC. Notes never introduced into evidence. They provide her with a female lawyer.

Whaley - "I signed my name because they said that is what I said." (6H431)

[ Point #78 ] Yet, even with this someone still screws up because Whaley says Oswald is under #3. Nope, sorry, he's under #2. (Whaley counted from right to left, instead of left to right. The uneducated mind strike again.) Whaley is horribly confused. He seems to realize the importance of what he said identifying Oswald before he even sees him in the line-up, but fails to clear it up.

[ Point #79] He then states, "I signed my name because they said that is what I said." (6H431) Obliging, ain't he?

**********************************

Lifton Shenanigans
[ Point #80] On the John Simkin - Education Forum, Todd Wayne Vaughn pointed out to Lifton that Mary Bledsoe had a stroke and that that is why she was given notes to help her poor memory during her Warren Commission testimony. Therefore there’s nothing odd about it at all, it’s merely humanitarian. Lifton thought this was brilliant.

Todd, this was apparently mentioned, four years ago, almost in passing, and it really doesn't pass my "so what?" test--because no one connected the dots properly.

As far as I can see, and as a practical matter, you're the first person not just to note it, but to appreciate its significance. And that's what counts.

DSL

[ Point #81] Oy Flipping Vey! A stroke is helpful?! A stroke kills a part of your brain!

This “discovery” that she had had a stroke doesn’t rescue her credibility. Nor does it rescue the public transportation get away story either.

A key point of information about a stroke might be WHEN DID SHE HAVE THE STROKE? Before November 22, 1963, afterwards, before she gives a statement, while she was giving as statement, after she gave the statement, after she gives another statement, after she gives a third statement, before her Warren Commission statement, when? A stroke restores credibility, this from the guy who looked at the medical evidence and wrote “Best Evidence.”

[ Point #82 ] Lifton, who like a little boy who was asked to do a book report, and didn’t do his homework work, and got a F-, and yet is proud of the grade nonetheless bullies people on a forum caled THE EDUCATION FORUM. Here’s one example:

Lee Farley wrote:

"Personally I believe Oswald possibly went straight to the Theater. I don't believe he changed clothes, I don't believe he was wearing a jacket and I don't believe he owned a pistol. If those three things are true then he had no need to go back to 1026 North Beckley."

Lifton responds:

"If he didn't go to the rooming house, then who did Earlene Roberts see run in, just around 1 o'clock, and then leave, zipping up a jacket? Are you claiming that that event either didn't happen? Or that she saw someone else??

Putting aside the fact of whether he legally "owned" a pistol, do you understand that, when apprehended in the theater, he had "a" pistol in his hand? (Or do you deny that, too?)

If he didn't "change clothes," then why was he seen leaving the rooming house, zipping up his jacket?"

Well, as I’ve shown, (point #65) the Warren Commission, in order to strengthen Bledsoe’s story of placing Oswald on McWatters bus, and of being able to recognize Oswald by his shirt, which was physically brought out to her, they negate the whole idea that Oswald went to 1026 N Beckley and changed his clothes. They didn’t go so far as to say Oswald did not go to N. 1026 North Beckley at all. That would cause too many problems and pit one of Oswald’s alleged landlords with a real one. You see revisionism can be very tricky.

Ignorant of WCR page 124 - 125 Lifton continued to berate Lee Farley on this point:

I'm sure glad you're in the field of TV script writing, or whatever it is you do. . because all of this attests to your powers of imagination. If you were in physical chemistry, I can just see you standing in front of the class, with your own version of the Periodic Table, waving your arms and telling everyone that the hydrogen atom really has three electrons, that water is really not H2O, but perhaps H5O, and explaining to everyone why your version of physical chemistry and thermodynamics really makes sense--and now if only everyone will be smart and astute enough to recognize your capabilities, why you'll provide the address to which they should send you your Nobel Prize.

[ Point #84 ] Ignorant that in the initial version of Oswald’s esacape by public transport, an idea he thinks Lee Farley created, Lifton wrote:

You’ve made the assertion that Oswald went straight to the theater,

No, that’s in several reports that then had to be revised. See points #35, 36, 37.

[ Point #85 ] - Lifton cannot get it into his head that police lie. He cannot comprehend the concept of the passive voice. So to him the Oswald we get in the interrogation notes is exactly the same as the real, live Oswald we got in the “short and sweet” newsconference, the one with Jack Ruby at the back of the room. And therefore the reason for the inconsistencies, ommissions, and revisonism is Oswald’s fault as he’s not being truthful, not telling the whole truth. Please.

Lifton cannot comprehend the fallacy of circular logic, and how the whole Bledsoe story is the definition of circular logic.
He cannot see that there really is no evidence she was his landlady, and no evidence she was on the bus. He doesn’t see the flaws in each story. His position is merely authoritarian. This unshakeable faith that the first version of the story I heard is the truth, is always the truth, is childish.

Has he ever watched an episode of Columbo? or Perry Mason? Don’t they examine, and cross examine the evidence?

There’s an old movie with Paul Newman, and Lawrence Harvey called “The Outrage.” It’s a 1964 remake of the Japanese classic “Rashomon,” in which a murder and a rape occur. Three characters are involved, a husband, who’s killed, a wife who is raped, ( or was she, ) and a bandit. The story is told to a con artist, played by Edward G. Robinson by a prospector, played by Howard da Silva and a preacher, played by William Shatner. Three witnesses at a trial give conflicting testimony about what happened. It’s a fascinating film, especially if you like plot twists.

Now, does Lifton think that the first version of the story was the real one? Does he scream,”The first version is the ruth! Why would the first person telling the story lie?” What happens to you David as you watch this film? Does your head just explode in your own personal tribute to Z313?

How Fabulous, I've Pissed Off Frenchie!

2012-01-08T23:43:00.000-08:00

Subject: Your are a nut

François Carlier Fra-Carlier@bbox.fr

Jan 6 (3 days ago)

to me

Mister Backes,

Hello,

My name is François Carlier, a JFK-assassination expert, author of a published book on the Kennedy assassination that is going to its second, revised and expanded edition.

I KNOW Lee Oswald was the sole assassin.

I am only writing to you to let you know that I despise liars and disinformation quacks like you. Not only are you very arrogant, but you are a stupid liar. Your posts on the Education Forum are the worst. How arrogant can you be ? Get a life!

Good thing intelligent men like me write about liars like you to inform the public.

Please don't bother to answer, as your message would go to the trash immediately without being read.

New Book on JFK in Ireland

2012-01-08T23:31:00.001-08:00

On the Happy News Front - Pat Buchanan suspended from MSNBC

2012-01-08T22:28:00.000-08:00

From RawStory.com

By David Ferguson

Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan has been suspended indefinitely from MSNBC, according to a statement from that network’s President Phil Griffin. An Associated Press article on CBSNews.com blames reaction to Buchanan’s latest book Suicide of a Superpower for his ouster from the cable network, as well as a campaign by the advocacy group, Color of Change.

The former Nixon aide has long courted controversy. In April of this year he said that President Obama’s path to the White House was the result of “Affirmative Action all the way.” In 2009, he asserted that the U.S. “has been a country built, basically, by white folks.”

MSNBC’s Griffin apparently believes, however, that Buchanan’s newest work has crossed a line. Suicide of a Superpower came out in October and features chapters with titles like “The End of White America” and “The Death of Christian America.”

The AP quotes Griffin as saying, “Because of the content of the book, I didn’t think it should be part of the national dialogue, much less part of the dialogue on MSNBC.”

The network executive said that there has been no decision as to whether Buchanan will be allowed at any point to re-join the network’s political team. He also refused to reveal any details about the terms of Buchanan’s contract with the network or whether it would be renewed.

UPDATE: Color of Change has issued a statement regarding MSNBC’s decision to suspend Pat Buchanan. The activist group says: “ColorOfChange.org welcomes MSNBC’s decision to indefinitely suspend Pat Buchanan. However, it’s time for MSNBC to permanently end their relationship with Pat Buchanan and the hateful, outdated ideas he represents. We appreciate this first step and urge MSNBC to take the important final step to ensure that their brand is no longer associated with Buchanan’s history of passing off white supremacy ideology as mainstream political commentary.”

More on Doug Weldon

2012-01-08T14:33:00.000-08:00

Doug was born August 10, 1953, in Lima, Ohio, the son of Alph and Betsy (Williams) Weldon and passed away January 5, 2012, in Kalamazoo. He was a longtime resident of Kalamazoo. Doug received his Juris Doctor degree from Thomas Cooley Law School, serving as an attorney for Kalamazoo County Court System for many years and was Adjunct Professor at Western Michigan University. He was a member of Westwood United Methodist Church and the Michigan Bar Association. Doug was an avid runner, tennis coach and player for many years, JFK researcher, and was a published author. Surviving are his three children, Amanda (James) Fox of Lebanon, OH, Derek Weldon of Kalamazoo and Erin Weldon of Kalamazoo; three grandchildren, Jazelle, Elyse and Carter Fox; his fiancée, Tetyana Koshmanova; two sisters, Laurie Church and Mary Al-Kethairi; a brother, Dan (Anita) Weldon; his former wives, Dorothy Wray and Joan Crowhurst; and several nieces and one nephew. He was preceded in death by his parents, Alph and Betsy Weldon. A private family committal service will be held in Riverside Cemetery. A Memorial Service to celebrate Doug's life will be held 3:00 PM Sunday, January 15, at Westwood United Methodist Church (538 Nichols Rd.) with Rev. Dr. Wayne Price officiating. Immediately following the service the family will greet friends in the church fellowship hall. In lieu of flowers, the family suggests memorials in Doug's memory be directed to Kalamazoo County Child Abuse and Neglect Council, 420 E. Alcott, Kalamazoo, MI 49001. Arrangements by Langeland Family Funeral Homes. Please visit www.langelands.com for online guestbook, memories and condolences.

Doug Weldon has died

2012-01-08T07:15:00.000-08:00

From Barb Junkkarinen:

Heartbreaking news this morning. Doug Weldon passed away overnight.Doug has been entrenched in a nightmare health battle since early September 2010. It all started with a sore on a toe after a long bike ride. Doug was diabetic. From there it progressed to amputations, infections, and multiple incidences of pneumonia ... one thing after another putting him back in intensive care, or at least back into the hospital, every time it would seem like he was making some progress. I can only recall about 3 very short spans of time (days) over the last 15 months that Doug was not in a hospital or a rehab/nursing facility.

Doctors have been amazed at how strong and determined Doug was able to stay. I was amazed for the physical doggedness, but not the mental. He was so mentally strong and determined. Please keep his family in your thoughts and in any prayers you may be able to offer.

As details become available, including which address to use for cards, flowers, etc, I will post that information.

Dr. Adolph H. “Buddy” Giesecke Jr. Dies

2012-01-06T00:40:00.000-08:00

View more videos at: http://nbcdfw.com.

DALLAS — An anesthesiologist who attached a heart monitor to President John F. Kennedy in a Dallas hospital’s emergency room and interviewed wounded Texas Gov. John Connally for surgery has died. Dr. Adolph H. “Buddy” Giesecke Jr. was 79.

The doctor’s son, Martin Giesecke, says his father died Dec. 24 at his home in the Dallas suburb of Irving.

The elder Giesecke was working at Parkland Hospital on Nov. 22, 1963, when Kennedy was assassinated and Connally was struck while riding in the same vehicle. The son says Dr. Giesecke recalled that the president didn’t flinch while he inserted heart probes into Kennedy’s skin.

Giesecke spent most of his career at Parkland’s neighboring University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. He was chairman of the anesthesiology department from 1981 to 1992.

Hole in Space-Time created. No Tardis yet.

2012-01-04T12:35:00.000-08:00

CNN's Light Years Blog

You've heard of invisibility cloaks concealing people in "Harry Potter" movies, but wrap your head around this one: Scientists have created a way of cloaking space-time itself.

It's still preliminary, but Alexander Gaeta, a physicist at Cornell University, and colleagues are making strides in this direction. He and colleagues report their feat in the journal Nature.

They're not just talking about a device that would make an object invisible.

Instead, the idea behind space-time cloaking is, for a brief period of time, to make an event undetectable by light. So far, scientists can do it for a small fraction of a second, but all kinds of quirkiness would ensue if technology could take the concept to the extreme.

For instance, if you had a surveillance camera filming a person running from point A to point B, the recording would show the person appear to move instantaneously from A to B, with nothing in between. "It is of course an illusion, there is no de-materialization and re-materialization, but it would look a bit like a 'Star Trek' transporter," said Martin McCall, of Imperial College London, who had originally outlined the space-time cloaking concept in 2010.

Just as bizarre, someone could rob a safe while a surveillance camera always shows the safe door locked, since it would appear as if the opening of the safe never happened, he said.

McCall's paper in the Journal of Optics described a theory of space-time cloaking using "metamaterials" - artificial materials that interact with and control electromagnetic waves, and are designed at a molecular level.

Gaeta's team has made this idea a reality, although not the way McCall's group described. Gaeta and colleagues used devices called "split-time lenses," which slow down part of a light beam and speed up another part to create a gap in the beam that can then be put back together. The beam would not detect an event in that gap, and anyone observing would not know there was a gap. "It will seem as if nothing ever happened," he said.

Previously, researchers have explored spatial cloaking - that is, manipulating space around an object to keep light rays away. But Gaeta's group is able to control light to keep it away from a certain instant in time. "Anything that occurred in that instant wouldn't modify the light beam at all," he said.

The gap of time they've achieved is about 40 trillionths of a second, which is shorter than you can imagine. With current technology, Gaeta predicts his group may be able to get to the order of tens of nanoseconds, which is still pretty small.

"We’re not changing time," he said. "What we’re really changing is a light beam."

If the technology were to improve substantially, a person could pass through a light beam without disturbing it - think about a security sensor beam of light in a museum that you could walk through undetected, for instance.

But McCall says it's unlikely that cloaks of this nature could be created to last for minutes or even seconds. That's because, since light travels at about 300,000 kilometers per second, in order to cloak a second, you'd need an apparatus 300,000 kilometers long - and that's more than 20 times the diameter of Earth.

"Whilst sophisticated methods exist to 'slow' light down, these would need to be combined with even more sophisticated methods to modulate its speed at different places at different times," McCall said. "I can't rule it out, but it represents a level of sophistication that we cannot approach with current technology."

Still, there are applications for this technology that are easier to achieve. There's the possibility of sending an emergency signal down an optical fiber without interrupting the data stream that's already there. And other uses may be found in optoelectronic circuits and communications, McCall said.

Gaeta's group is putting the idea of cloaking space-time into practice much faster than McCall expected.

"I had imagined that with best efforts, it would be a year or two before we saw anything like a space-time cloak being made in the lab," McCall said. "How wrong we were! It took Alex and his team just a few months!"

Merry Christmas to All!

2011-12-24T16:37:00.000-08:00

I hope everyone has a Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Serious Solstice, or whatever, celebrating with friends and family.

I hope the New Year brings less car repair ( I own a Saturn, 'nuff said,) or house repairs, or computer problems. I hope you're all be healthy and the world gets a better economy real soon.

Joe

Possible problems with 65,000 graves at Arlington

2011-12-23T04:37:00.000-08:00

Possible problems with 65,000 graves at Arlington

After a year-long effort to account for every grave at Arlington National Cemetery, Army officials said Thursday that there might be problems, some as minor as typographical errors in paper records, with nearly 65,000 sites — or one-quarter of the graves at the nation’s most prominent military burial ground.

In a highly anticipated report, mandated by Congress last year after the discovery of misidentified remains, the cemetery cited monumental challenges in completing the task: missing Civil War-era logs, illegible headstones and burial procedures that changed significantly over the 150-year history of the site.

“In a lot of cases, the marker is absolutely right,” said Army Col. John Schrader, the co-chair of the task force. “The service was conducted flawlessly and someone wrote something on a piece of paper wrong.”

Although the review has not yet found additional people buried in the wrong spots, “the discovery of burial errors cannot be ruled out,” the report said.

Congress ordered the accounting after an Army investigation found widespread problems, including mismarked or unmarked graves, urns that had been dug up and dumped on a dirt pile, and millions of dollars wasted on contracts that produced nothing.

Since then, additional problems have been discovered, including a mass grave that held eight sets of cremated remains, prompting a criminal investigation by the FBI and the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division.

The revelations led to the removal of the cemetery’s leadership. A new team, in place since June 2010, has embarked on an ambitious and exceedingly difficult project to document every grave.

An accountability task force has photographed every burial marker and uploaded the information to a database where it was double-checked against more than 500,000 paper records that have been scanned into the system.

So far, the task force has found no problems with 195,748 sites, according to the report. Of the other 64,230 sites, there have been some discrepancies that warrant further review. Arlington officials emphasized that those problems could be minor, such as typos in names or dates of death, and would not necessarily indicate improper burial.

Schrader said it could take an additional six months before the cemetery will be able to get through those cases. The latest review has just begun, he said, and he could not say how severe the problems are.

Questions persist

In an interview, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), who has been monitoring the progress at Arlington and convened a council of technology companies to help the cemetery digitize its records, said he had hoped for a more complete report.

“We don’t know about this 25 percent — are they typos? Do they have remains in the wrong graves?” he said. “This raises as many questions as it answers.”

But given the age of the cemetery, resolving every discrepancy might be impossible, according to the report, which indicated that there could be additional undetected errors.

“It is important to acknowledge that interment or other errors may well be identified in the future that may not be obvious from the records,” the report said. “If found, the Army is committed to resolving these as quickly as possible.”

Last year, the cemetery faced exactly this dilemma. The paperwork for an Army staff sergeant indicated that he was buried in the correct place. But his wife was not convinced and she demanded that cemetery officials open the grave and check. Only then did they realize that the staff sergeant and two other people were in the wrong spots.

Some of the sections with the most discrepancies date to the Civil War or the 1920s and ’30s, according to the report. Two other sections with the most problems — Section 3, which is near the Tomb of the Unknowns, and Section 12, which is in the middle of the cemetery — are more recent, with the median year of death about 1960.

Large-scale effort

Last year, The Washington Post found that in a section for former slaves and black Civil War soldiers, cemetery maps showed a strip where 70 graves should have been. Today, not a single tombstone is there.

The report acknowledged the problems in that section and older ones like it. “Historically the records and grounds in these sections were not maintained to the same standards as the rest of the cemetery,” it said.

Resolving some of the problems has taken much effort. In one case, the cemetery found a grave site for a couple who died in the early 1900s with the last name “Keiner.” The paperwork for the wife, however, spelled the name “Kiner.” Task force officials spent hours trying to determine the correct spelling. Eventually they found a census roster from 1900 that listed “Keiner.” A regimental muster log from the Civil War also confirmed that spelling.

When reviewing some of the older sections of the cemetery, officials were initially alarmed to find many of the wives’ graves missing. But as they researched the paperwork, they discovered that the “decision to omit the spouse’s information on the headstone was deliberate.”

“Between the 1920s and the 1940s, it was apparently a culturally acceptable practice to inter a spouse in the same grave with her husband without including her name on the headstone,” the report said.

In those cases, the cemetery said it would replace headstones or add markers at the foot of the graves to note the wives’ interment.

Cemetery officials also found that a soldier had two graves: one for his amputated leg and another for the man when he died years later.

Signs of improvement

In recent months, the cemetery has received widespread praise for fixing many of the past problems there and for creating a system designed to prevent such mistakes from happening again. Last week, a review of the cemetery by the Government Accountability Office found that the Army “has taken positive steps to address management deficiencies at Arlington and has implemented improvements across a range of areas.”

On Thursday, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who sponsored the legislation requiring the cemetery’s accountability effort, praised the cemetery’s leadership, saying that Arlington “is now a turnaround story.”

Republicans have neutered the National Labor Relations Board

2011-12-20T21:39:00.000-08:00

The National Labor Relations Board, the government body that oversees labor complaints, is on the verge of being shut down. Under a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from last year, the NLRB must have a quorum of at least three of five members in order to operate. But one member’s term expires at month’s end, and Republicans have meanwhile refused to confirm President Obama’s two replacement nominees. Unless a solution is found, the NLRB would be frozen come January. Without the NLRB, workers would lose their legal recourse to defend their right to organize and to protect themselves against anti-union activity by employers. We speak with Stanford Law School Professor William Gould, former chair of the NLRB.

Air Force to award Francis Gary Powers with a Silver Star

2011-12-20T20:24:00.000-08:00

The Washington Post - Air Force to Award Silver Star to Francis Gary Powers, spy plane pilot shot down over the USSR.

WASHINGTON — The Air Force will award a Silver Star posthumously to Francis Gary Powers, the pilot whose spy plane was shot down in 1960 over the Soviet Union in a defining moment of the Cold War.

The Air Force determined that the U-2 pilot showed “steadfast loyalty” while under harsh interrogation in Soviet prisons. In a report obtained by The Associated Press, it cited his “sustained courage” and gallantry despite “cajolery, trickery, insults and threats of death.”

Powers was swapped for a Soviet spy in February 1962 at Berlin’s Glienicke Bridge. He died in the 1977 crash of a traffic helicopter he was flying in Los Angeles.

His son, Francis Gary Powers Jr., of Midlothian, Va., requested that his father be considered for the medal. He said the Air Force confirmed this week that it plans to award it. “It is vindication of my father 50 years afterwards,” he said. “Dad is one of our American heroes.”

In the aftermath of the downing, some people criticized Powers for not committing suicide using a toxin-tipped needle he was given before the flight. His son said the CIA instructed pilots to surrender and to use of the poisoned pin only if they chose to while under torture.

Pilots were permitted to tell the truth about their missions with the exception of certain specifications of their aircraft.

“While he admitted he was spying, he did not reveal any vital information to the enemy,” said Powers Jr., founder of the Cold War Museum in Vint Hill, Va.

The decision to award the Silver Star comes just a few weeks before the 20th anniversary of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, on Dec. 25, 1991.

Powers wasn’t honored after his return in 1962 because of the “global political environment,” the Air Force report said.

The U-2 case was detailed in declassified data presented at a 1998 conference, and Powers was awarded a military POW medal and a CIA director’s medal posthumously in 2000. The U-2 Soviet overflights were a joint CIA-Air Force program.

Powers Jr. said he requested his father be considered for the higher military honor a few years ago, citing honors given other captured spy plane pilots. He said no date has been set for the award ceremony.

The JFK ambulance is back. How many of these are there anyway?

2011-12-16T17:21:00.000-08:00

Barrett-Jackson to Auction Off JFK's Cadillac Hearse

At last year’s Scottsdale auction, Barrett-Jackson offered a 1963 Pontiac Bonneville ambulance that the seller claimed had transported the president’s remains from Andrews Air Force base to Bethesda Naval Medical Center for autopsy. Except it may not have.

Per Naval records, the actual 1963 Pontiac Bonneville ambulance used to transport Kennedy’s body was donated to the Kennedy presidential library and crushed sometime after 1980. The car offered for sale by Barrett-Jackson was revealed to likely be a fake, although Barrett-Jackson continues to refer to these claims as “unproven.”

Nonetheless, the 1963 Pontiac ambulance sold for $120,000, which is a fraction of the price it would have hammered at had it been verified authentic. When we received word that the auction house would sell another JFK hearse at this year’s Scottsdale auction, we’ll admit that our first reaction was, “not again.”

As it turns out, this one is the real deal (as far as we can tell, anyway). The car in question is a Miller-Meteor Cadillac hearse, purchased by the O’Neal Funeral Home in Dallas, Texas, at the conclusion of the National Funeral Home Directors Association in October, 1963.

On November 22, 1963, the O’Neal Funeral Home was called to transport Kennedy’s body from Parkland Memorial Hospital to a waiting Air Force One at Dallas’ Love Field. The car used is the very same Miller-Meteor Cadillac being offered by Barrett-Jackson at the company’s 2012 Scottsdale auction.

While anything of this value can be faked, the car seems to have a short and traceable history. It was used by the O’Neal Funeral Home until the late 1960s, at which time it was sold to Arrdeen Vaughan.

Vaughan, himself a collector and hearse distributor, owned the car for more than 40 years before selling it to its current owner, who is now offering it up for sale.

It’s not the first time the car has been offered, as it was seen on eBay last January with a “Buy It Now” price of $1.5 million. Unless controversy suddenly descends on this JFK hearse as well, expect the bidding to approach stratospheric levels.

Former Secret Service agent Robert R. Faison has died

2011-12-16T14:47:00.000-08:00

In memoriam: Robert R. Faison 1929 - 2011

In the spring of 1963, Special Agent Robert R. Faison was permanently assigned to President John Kennedy’s Secret Service protection detail. For any agent, rising to this elite level was an undeniable achievement, but for Faison, as the first African American to hold this post, it was groundbreaking. Hardworking and strongly convinced, as he told his son, that a black man must push to be better than average, Faison reached this position by employing the same determination that made him one of the youngest first sergeants in the Korean War at the age of 22.

Faison was hired by the Secret Service in 1962 and by the next year quickly promoted to the ultimate assignment: protecting the president. Still, he was not exempt from America’s harsh racial climate. He received the prestigious appointment the same year that four black girls were killed in the Birmingham bombing; the same year civil rights activist Medgar Evers was murdered. It was also the year the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech.

As one of the first black men ever hired as a special agent, he faced challenges being perceived as an equal among peers. He learned that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover questioned Kennedy on the wisdom of trusting his life to a black man. And for Faison, traveling also proved difficult. The night before Kennedy was assassinated, the protection detail checked into the Hotel Texas in Fort Worth to await Kennedy’s arrival from Dallas. A clerk told them they would have to make other arrangements for the Negro, according to Gerald Blaine, a former special agent and co-author of the book “The Kennedy Detail.” One of the agents informed the hotel clerk that if Faison couldn’t stay, the detail wouldn’t stay, and if they didn’t, neither would Kennedy. The clerk quickly changed his mind.

While Faison had close relationships with his wife and two sons, his professional life was largely a mystery to his family and friends. They asked him about the presidents he protected, but Faison refused to answer. He kept piles of career mementos that begged for accompanying stories, such as a signed photograph of Jacqueline Kennedy or the picture of Faison running alongside President Lyndon Johnson’s motorcade. But his sons learned to be satisfied with shirts brought home from around the world — and no details.

In 1995, cancer claimed Faison’s first wife, Dorothy. Two years later, he married Jacquelyn McGee. “Coming into his life in the last 16 years, I had a lot of questions,” she says. “I learned early on in my relationship with him that there were some things that he was simply not going to talk about.” His reticence, however, never created problems for his conversations; people found him easy to talk to. “He would much rather listen than speak,” Jacquelyn Faison says. “He always gave you the chance to talk about yourself, rather than for him to talk.”

Though Faison was reluctant to share the particulars of his professional life, it was clear that he loved his work. In fact, he had difficulty transitioning into retirement. For weeks after leaving his position in 1982, he continued to get up in the morning and dress for business, sitting around the house in a shirt and tie. It wasn’t long before he returned to the Secret Service, where he spent the next several years as a contractor, conducting background investigations for prospective agents from his basement office.

After several years of struggling with recurring cancer, it became obvious to Faison that he was nearing the end of his fight. He recognized the signs, having lost both a wife and son to cancer; his eldest son, Gregory, succumbed to the disease in 1997. Though Faison’s health was declining, he was reluctant to relinquish his love of traveling, so Faison and his wife embarked on a jazz cruise to the Caribbean in early 2011. But Faison wasn’t strong enough to tour the islands as they had so many times before, and they had oxygen delivered to the cabin. Their new limitations led Faison and his wife to a difficult conclusion.

“I realized then, and I think he realized, that that was going to be our last cruise together,” Jacquelyn says. After their return, Faison turned his energies to a subject he had long tried to avoid: himself. He set to work on his own obituary.

As Faison saw it, he was the only one who could tell his story, since no one knew the details as he did. He worked quietly from their family room, sitting at the round table at which he regularly toiled over the bills and balanced their accounts. Using a yellow legal pad, he began to reconstruct the facts of his life. “Robert R. Faison,” he began, “affectionately known as Bob, was born in Montclair, New Jersey on August 12, 1929. ...”

For weeks he worked on a draft. He wrote about the small Southern town where he was raised (Seaboard, N.C.), and the cousin who took him in and treated him as her own; the university where he graduated from with honors (North Carolina A&T), and the prestigious fraternity that he was an active member of for 51 years (Alpha Phi Alpha). He wrote of his pride in being promoted to chief warrant officer, and acknowledged the church he and Jacquelyn had joined after leaving Silver Spring for retirement in Palm Coast, Fla. He remembered those he loved and lost, and those who were left behind to “cherish his memory.”

Regarding his profession, he wrote, “He was the first African American permanently assigned to the White House and had the pleasure of serving six U.S. presidents during his career and traveled to more than 30 countries until he retired in 1995.”

A month before he died, Faison presented the legal pad to Jacquelyn, who was surprised but relieved. The draft was so thorough that she typed it verbatim, and used it in the programs at two of the three of the services held in his honor. The only addition she made was one her husband, so modest and matter of fact, would never have included. Robert Faison “was the epitome of a gentleman, loving, kind and always good-natured.”
Robin Rose Parker is a writer living in Maryland. She can be reached at wpmagazine@washpost.com.

NYT columnist is plain wrong on JFK

2011-12-16T04:53:00.000-08:00

The Irish Echo take a swipe at Ross Douthat.

The New York Times’ recent obituary of its brilliant former staffer Tom Wicker offered just one direct quote from his prodigious lifetime output. It came from 50 years ago when as White House correspondent and it was offered as an example of how he could be entertaining as well as informative.

“The most familiar voice in Ameriker lahst yeeah warz that of a Boston Irishman with Harvard overtones who sounded vaguely like an old recording of Franklin D. Roosevelt speeded up to 90 r.p.m.’s,” Wicker wrote for the Sunday magazine, summing up 241 Kennedy speeches in his first year as president. “Nor will the Beacon Street ‘a’ and the Bunker Hill ‘r’ fall any less frequently on the American eeah in the coming yeeah.”

Yes, that’s right – 241 speeches, which works out as just about one per weekday. They helped the president, as the Wicker quote suggests, to quickly put his personal stamp on the new decade, which is one reason why those who were young then tell us it was an exhilarating time in American history.

The following day, the 48th anniversary of the president’s murder, the Times’ conservative young columnist Ross Douthat opined that we tend to confuse “rhetoric with results.” He blasted the “false premises of the Kennedy cult — premises that will no doubt endure so long as the 1960s generation does, but still deserve to be challenged at every opportunity. The first premise is that Kennedy was a very good president, and might have been a great one if he’d lived. Few serious historians take this view: It belongs to Camelot’s surviving court stenographers, and to popularizers like Chris Matthews. [His italics]

“The harsher view would deem him a near disaster,” Douthat wrote, at which point, he linked online to a 2006 review article by the always readable provocateur Christopher Hitchens, a former member of a Trotskyist cult currently in vogue with right-wingers, who are free to cherry-pick from among the opinions and prejudices he’s carried over.

But, really: few serious historians?

It’s true that the profession doesn’t place JFK and Ronald Reagan up alongside Lincoln and FDR the way the general public does; however, both poll respectably above the average in those historical rankings. In a Siena poll of 238 presidential historians last year, Kennedy was 11th of the 44, higher than anybody who’s held the office since. Two years ago, C-SPAN’s poll of presidential historians and “professional observers of the presidency” put him at 6th.

I take it that Reagan, love him or loathe him, gets high marks from historians and experts for being a “transformational” president during his eight years. He polled 18th and 10th in the Siena and C-SPAN polls. JFK’s lowest ranking was 18th in a 2000 Wall Street Journal survey that made every effort that it be “balanced” with conservatives – which is a somewhat amusing concern, because if ever there was a bunch that you’re not going to see hanging out with Wall Street occupiers, it’s presidential historians. And yet, JFK still made it into the top half of that particular all-time league table, despite serving just 2 years and 10 months.

Douthat wants it both ways. JFK’s speechifying, specifically his inaugural address, led America into Vietnam, he argued in the column; yet on the other hand, he writes that Kennedy was “evasive” on Civil Rights, a view that can only be sustained, and then hardly, if you exclude from the equation the president’s stirring words on the subject.

I’ve no doubt that commentators like my colleague Terry Golway, author most recently of “JFK: Day by Day,” would take issue with Douthat’s dismissive attitude to the 35th president’s handling of the Missile Crisis. But it was on Vietnam where his comments seemed to me to be entirely drained of any historical context or indeed real knowledge.

Kennedy, who was seen by many in the military and in society at large as being “soft on communism,” was told by the outgoing President Eisenhower that he would probably have to send troops to the worsening situation in Southeast Asia. The new president, though, was convinced by General MacArthur’s advice that a land war could never be won there.

The U.S. took over Western stewardship of the region when the French pulled out in 1954. World War II ace and CIA agent James McGovern and his co-pilot Wallace Buford, killed that year supporting the withdrawing colonial power in Laos, were the first American fatalities. Massachusetts native Richard Fitzgibbon, who died in a friendly fire incident in 1956, was the first official death in Vietnam, and the first names to be put on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial were those of Major Dale R. Buis and Sgt. Charles Ovnand, killed by sniper fire in 1959.

So, Kennedy’s sending of military advisors to aid the South Vietnamese regime was not the first chapter of U.S. involvement as some might imply.

Douthat wrote that the “war’s architects were all Kennedy people: It was the Whiz Kids’ mix of messianism and technocratic confidence, not Oswald’s fatal bullet, that sent so many Americans to die in Indochina.” He was referring to the “best and the brightest,” in author David Halberstam’s phrase about Kennedy’s aides, But some of them, like Robert MacNamara, only became hawks after the president was killed.

In his 2007 book, “Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Presidency,” David Talbot, the founder of the pioneering online magazine Salon, wrote that “a conclusive body of evidence indicates that JFK formally decided to withdraw from Vietnam,” beginning in December 1963 and finishing in 1965.

That view has since been buttressed by more inside information on one of JFK’s key appointees. Scholar Gordon M. Goldstein was hired in the 1990s by a former national security advisor to help organize his memoirs, but when his employer died he continued with the project. His “Lessons in Disaster: McGeorge Bundy and the Path to War in Vietnam” was published in 2009.

William Pfaff wrote in the New York Review of Books: “Goldstein’s book should settle for good the controversy over whether President Kennedy, had he not been assassinated, would have enlarged the war or would have withdrawn the still-limited number of troops.”

Pfaff continued: “President Kennedy had repeatedly asserted privately that a guerrilla war could not be won by foreign troops, even in large numbers. Eventually, foreign troops go home, he said; the guerrillas stay. No lasting ‘victory’ is possible for the foreigners.”

Maybe it’s not settled or won’t be, but the very fact that the 83-year-old Pfaff, a highly respected foreign policy analyst and author of 10 books, thinks that it should be is enough to show that Douthat doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

You can say you what you want about JFK, but the guy arguably knew more and thought more about the world beyond America’s shores than anybody before or since entering the White House. He had a subtlety of mind and a sense of history that eluded most of the nation’s generals, and he had experienced war in a way that most politicians, including his immediate successors, had not.

Everyone is fully aware by now of the Kennedy brothers’ flaws and sins, yet most Americans respect their commitment to public service and their heroism. They see as a huge overreach the effort to depict them as the feckless sons of a rich man and as partiers out of their depth, [There is a comma here, not a period in the original. I don't know why.]

Michael O’Brien, the University of Wisconsin historian and JFK biographer, told this newspaper a few years ago that what struck him most about his subject was how extraordinarily hard he worked during his 1,036 days in office.

And we saw from our recent excerpt from Chris Matthews’s “Jack Kennedy: Elusive Hero” his Herculean effort made to build a national organization and to convince the Democratic Party that it could again choose a Catholic as their nominee.

So, JFK wasn’t lazy, which is a lot more than can be said, it seems, about some of our modern-day op-ed writers.

Listen to Nomi Prins on John Corzine, MF Global, and the whole financial meltdown. She's brilliant!

2011-12-14T19:39:00.000-08:00