Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Books

Blog powered by Typepad
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported

« Deep Throat 3.0 | Main | Assassination Chronicle »

19 May 2007

Comments

TruthMakesPeace

Obviously, some members believed Jim Garrison's arguments about Clay Shaw were true. Otherwise the jury would take a vote and be out in 5 minutes. The jury took 54 minutes, which is a long time to deliberate. All they needed was to establish reasonable doubt to return a non-guilty verdict.

Subsequent evidence has proved Garrison to be accurate, such as the photos of Oswald and David Ferrie in the same Civil Air Patrol unit.

In 1979, Richard Helms, former director of the CIA, testified under oath that Clay Shaw had been a part-time contact of the Domestic Contact Service of the CIA, where Shaw volunteered information from his travels abroad, mostly to Latin America. By the mid-1970s, 150,000 Americans (businessmen and journalists, etc.) had provided such information to the DCS. In 1996, the CIA revealed that Clay Shaw had obtained a "five Agency" clearance in 1949. See sources listed in Wikipedia.

Your attempt to make us believe the trial was "one of the greatest travesties" is not working. It makes you appear to be trying to spread disinformation and propaganda.

David L

Just because someone found some facts on Wikipedia doesn't really mean anything. So, Clay Shaw gave some intel to the CIA, like thousands of others did . . . and so he had 5 agency clearance, but so did thousands of others who may or may not be working for the CIA. Remember, that was post WW2 Cold War time-frame. But whoever posted the above comment doesn't mention the fact that while Oswald and David Ferrie may or may not have known each other well, may or may not have worked on some conspiracy . . . the fact remains that Clay Shaw had nothing to do with that, apart from knowing them, or perhaps even introducing them. I'm sure Charlie Manson was introduced by a lot of Hollywood celebrities to other people. Does that mean they conspired with them to kill Sharon Tate? Of course not. So, you allege a conspiracy without any real proof . . . and aside from coincidences and fuzzy memories, and several honest mistakes or errors in the investigations that have taken place, there really isn't any real proof that someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald conspired to kill JFK. The only evidence we do have is a dead President, a dead assassin, and dead guy who killed the assassin. The only reason it's lasted this long is that people still can't believe it actually happened . . . but it did.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Washington Decoded