Petition to open Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 2013

John Judge continues to circulate his petition at change.org calling on Dallas Mayor Mike Rawling to allow Coalition on Politics Assassinations to hold its annual Moment of Silence in Dealey Plaza on the 50th Anniversary of the JFK’s assassination next November.

The city of Dallas plans to shut off public access to Dealey Plaza on November 22, 2013, and hold a ceremony in which all discussion of the causes of JFK’s death will be banned from the very spot where he was killed.

“Nothing could be crazier or sadder,” says Dallas Observer columnist Jim Schutze.

 

41 comments

  1. Jonathan says:

    I signed, but I believe it’s a good thing D.P. will be closed to the public. Here’s why.

    If well-meaning individuals were to gather in the plaza on Friday, November 22, 2013, there would be without doubt agents provocateur present, who would disrupt the proceedings and cast a bad light on the well-meaning individuals. And on all Warren critics.

    I hope Mayor Rawlins prevails. I imagine he represents the interests of persons such as George Herbert Walker Bush in this matter, persons who have a person stake in keeping the lid on the JFK assassination story. Let a little disinfecting sunlight into these dark corners. That would be sweet victory.

    • leslie sharp says:

      I’m sure the opening of the GW Bush Library and Museum at SMU was not timed as a balance to 2013.

      I tend to agree about the possibility of a staged disruption. And I wish that COPA had walked their talk a bit better and held their hotel reservations in a venue other than the Adolphus. I guess it could be said that they are reclaiming the venerable old dame, but . . .

      • JFK Lancer as at the Adolphus, a hotel that I like. I actually prefer staying at the Adolphus.

        COPA is held at the St. Lawrence Hotel on the edge of Dealey Plaza and very conveniently located. COPA spillover is at the Aloft Hotel.

  2. JSA says:

    Here’s my prediction: The current mayor of Dallas and his police will probably do a more thorough job of sealing off Dealey Plaza than Cabell, the Dallas Police, the Secret Service, and FBI did on November 22, 1963.

  3. Zebulon says:

    I know that GHW bush was a CIA agent but why is he interested on keeping the lid on this?
    Is he trying to cover-up the role of Prescott Bush?

    • Jonathan says:

      GHW Bush has been accused of lying several times, at least. For example, about working for the CIA in the early 1960s, about having knowledge of Iran-Contra, and about taxes.

      If he was working for the CIA in his Zapata Oil days, maybe he doesn’t want to be shown to be a liar. That’s an innocent explanation, consistent with his obligation to maintain his cover story.

      There are sinister possibilities as well.

      Problem is, GHW Bush is a liar. And that makes him sinister, unavoidably.

    • leslie sharp says:

      There are a number of reasons, not the least of which is Jeb Bush.

      • GHW Bush is absolutely a prime suspect in the JFK assassination. Btw, Ray Lee Hunt, the son of oil tycoon H.L. Hunt, another prime JFK murder suspect, is very close to the Bush family and donated $25 million to the Bush Library.

        The Johnson family is still prominent and has a lot to lose for legacy reasons over JFK truth telling.

        In 1963 both GHW Bush & H.L. Hunt had very close ties to anti-Castro Cuban radicals – the ones that hated JFK as much as they hated Fidel Castro.

        As for Jeb Bush, please google “Jeb Bush Barry Seal” or read my write up on the 1986 murder of CIA drug smuggler Barry Seal:

        http://barrysealmurder1986jebbusholivernorth.blogspot.com/2013/04/jeb-bush-and-murder-of-cia-drug.html

        • Here is a key point I want folks to understand: GHW Bush helped to organize the Bay of Pigs invasion when he was age 36. The JFK assassination occurred when he was age 39.

          Jeb Bush was at the epicenter of Iran-Contra when he was the Dade County (FLA) Republican chairman. 1985 & 1986 were peak years for Iran-Contra (criminal) activities and Jeb Bush age 32 and 33 in those years. Barry Seal (just one of many) was murdered on Feb. 19, 1986.

          With the Bushes, business, intelligence, politics and crime are all tightly interwoven.

        • leslie sharp says:

          Robert, Ray Hunt’s aunt (by the first marriage) had a brief marriage to a man whose family were founding investors in Bell Helicopter.

          • leslie sharp says:

            and in the 1960′s he lived on Travis St., not far from George deM it so happens. Bell Aircraft Corp board members in the late ’50′s include this man, as well as PB Garrett of Texas Bank & Trust in Dallas, and Rockefeller affiliated DM Milton of Great Southwest Corp connections, developers of Six Flags. Milton’s Equity Corp included Garrett as well.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Garrett also sat on the board of Bell International with former CNO Robert Carney. The presence of George Hamden Olmsted in these entities should not be overlooked because it was he who put together the banking empire, a portion of which found it’s way into the hands of Agah Hasan Abedi and BCCI. Bush trusted friend Henry Catto was on the board of the DC bank that was targeted during the initial negotiations.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Jean Davison commented at the previous thread (“unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts”): “It is easy to find “connections” between people, as in the 6 Degrees of Separation game. They are meaningless unless you have evidence to show what they mean.”

            A portion of my response: Each fact taken out of context is meaningless just as a thread pulled from an intricate weave would be. However, when woven tightly, the threads create a tapestry. In my limited experience with you, it seems you have a tendency toward looking at facts through a microscope without understanding what you are actually seeing. That is your prerogative obviously. But the ‘six degrees of separation’ argument is a canard, particularly when applied to what Allen Dulles called the Great Game and specifically when applied to the intelligence game which by its very nature would be rather tight knit. (pun intended).

          • Jonathan says:

            Leslie,

            re your last post in this thread:

            I don’t know why Jean and Paul come here. They do not add facts to the discussion. They seek to divert the discussion into blind alleys using John Mcadams techniques.

            For example, let’s say you or I point out that Person X did Y. Let’s say this is an ascertainable fact.

            Paul will not scream, “irrelevant!” He’ll plead speculation.

            Jean will pretend to be an honest investigator. Then she will question your or my statement by appealing to the authority of some denier.

            leslie, I don’t want to be a bore; but I am a student of logic. Paul and Jean fail, IMO, not because of their opinions. I’ll buy LHO did alone if the facts support that view. No they fail because their logic fails, in a tedious way.

          • Great posts, Leslie. Often in JFK assassination research on the LBJ angle there is one degree of separation from the key players!

    • John Kirsch says:

      Zebulon, you said you know GHWB was a CIA agent. How do you know that? It’s one thing to say you believe or suspect something. It’s something else to say you KNOW something to be true.

  4. Jonathan says:

    “Nothing could be crazier or sadder,” says Dallas Observer columnist Jim Schutze.

    Not sure I agree. Dealey Plaza today is a museum. Except in some important forensic ways, it’s as it was in 1963. While the rest of Dallas has grown.

    Any 50th anniversary activity in Dealey Plaza would be purely symbolic at best. It wouldn’t change any minds and would surely bring about talk of “conspiracy buffs” on the part of the MSM.

    There’s serious work to do on several fronts. IMO, one effort should aim to distill the clear indications of conspiracy found in the records of the Warren Commission, HSCA, and ARRB. The facts are there, like low-hanging fruit, I have found quite easily.

    Another effort, which will take financial backing, is to go directly to the public, with well-made and tasteful “quick hits” that get the public to ask: Why if Oswald did it alone does the government continue to withhold millions of pages of assassination-related documents?

    This case can still be broken wide open.

    I’m heartened as I read John Armstrong’s “Harvey & Lee.” Heartened not by his conclusion, which he states up-front, but by the meticulous research he has done despite assiduous efforts on the part of the FBI to obscure and blur the historical record.

    • leslie sharp says:

      Jonathan, I agree with you about John Armstrong’s efforts. I also agree that a well-planned campaign addressing the flaws in the official investigation(s) would have its impact, and I believe that it would be incomplete without drawing attention to the history of our country post-assassination. The files being withheld may well identify precisely who benefited from Kennedy’s removal from office.

      • Jonathan says:

        Hi, leslie.

        I think it’s pretty clear who benefited: LBJ, the military, the CIA, and the civilian warhawks. Some would argue the oil guys and the Fed as well. The non-winners were the mafia and the anti-Castro Cubans. The power of both those groups waned in the years following the assassination.

        What would the withheld documents reveal? I’m guessing [1] clear documentation of CIA and FBI use of Oswald, and [2] clear documentation of how the CIA and the FBI strove to cover up the facts of the assassination.

        • leslie sharp says:

          Jonathan,
          . . . and hopefully more leads in the Joannides angle which I believe will expose a grander scheme involving more than poor ol’ Lyndon Johnsn. And to limit the beneficiaries in the private sector to ‘warhawks’ is, well, limiting. The US was on the brink of international expansionism and war was the tool.

          • Jonathan says:

            Leslie,

            I support completely Jeff Morley’s suit against the CIA. Go Jeff!

            The documents Jeff seeks would reveal sources and methods, as well as identities. Go for it.

            I want the truth.

            I also want to know more about Oswald’s relationship with Marina. Did he love her? Did he love their children?

            I want to know why there are conflicting school, work, and military records regarding the person Jack Ruby shot.

            I have a big appetite for the facts, leslie.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Jonathan,

            “I want to know why there are conflicting school, work, and military records regarding the person Jack Ruby shot.”

            I’m thinking you might be referring to Armstrong’s “Harvey and Lee?” If so, I think this is a valid area for discussion, particularly when one studies the various photographs of the alleged Lee Harvey Oswald. Early on, I remember thinking, “I should accept that these are all of the same person,” but from the outset – and with the naked and uninformed eye of a novice to JFK assassination research – I couldn’t reconcile the differences.

            I did some research around Armstrong’s theory and noted that the very small town where Harvey is alleged to have been from is aligned with deGolyer/MacNaughton drilling operations in one of the Dakotas. Then, the two young lads seem to converge in NY where Lee of New Orleans is alleged to have been truant and became the ward of Youth House which I am certain was an extension of Columbia University, a bastion in the day of the burgeoning study of social research.

    • Jean Davison says:

      Jonathan,

      You claim:

      >>>
      Jean will pretend to be an honest investigator. Then she will question your or my statement by appealing to the authority of some denier.
      >>>

      I don’t pretend. I don’t appeal to anyone’s authority. I’ve posted links to documents/testimony on John McAdams site, as well as links to Rex Bradford’s sites (MaryFerrell and History-Matters). I’ve quoted experts like the HSCA Firearms Panel. If you think those experts were wrong and a conspiracy author is right, fine with me. But disagreeing with you isn’t evidence of dishonesty. You do know that, right?

      Why don’t you stop the personal attacks and show that anything I’ve said here is actually false? Or just drop the insults and talk about the issues?
      Jean

      • Jonathan says:

        Jean,

        I want verified facts. The Warren Commission 26 volumes are dripping with facts that scream conspiracy.

        Expert opinions are worthless unless based on verified facts. So, for example: Fact [1] — Oswald’s cheek tested negative for nitrates. Fact [2] — Robert Frazier testified to the Warren Commission that the barrel of the alleged murder weapon was rusted and that even one round fired through the barrel would have cleaned the barrel of rust. Any opinion of the HSCA firearms panel that does not take into account these two facts is irrelevant to the assassination.

        You apparently believe there was no conspiracy to kill JFK. Fine. I ask that you argue from verified facts that you present. Not from some author’s opinion.

        • Jean Davison says:

          You didn’t address the issue. You’ve made a serious charge that you’ve failed to support in any way whatsoever. I’m asking you to stop claiming that I “pretend to be an honest investigator.” It’s a claim you can’t support because it’s not true.
          Jean

          • Zebulon says:

            That’s pretty disrespectful to a Viet Nam veteran.Why the need to attack him?

          • Jonathan says:

            Jean,

            If you were an honest investigator, you would cite original-source facts. Instead, you cite authors. This is the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.

          • Jean Davison says:

            Reply to Zebulon who says,
            >>
            That’s pretty disrespectful to a Viet Nam veteran.Why the need to attack him?
            >>

            Are you serious? I didn’t attack Jonathan. He attacked me.
            Jean

          • Jean Davison says:

            This is your definition of dishonesty, Jonathan?

            >>>
            If you were an honest investigator, you would cite original-source facts. Instead, you cite authors. This is the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.
            >>>

            Who was it that cited “The Gun That Didn’t Smoke”? That would be you. Many of the “facts” you post come from conspiracy authors like Lane. Does that make you dishonest? Not in my opinion, but maybe you’d better revise your definition!

            And I have no idea what “authors” you think I have cited as authorities. I’ve repeatedly cited “original-source facts.”

            Jean

  5. Jonathan says:

    Gerry,

    They have no Mcadams talking points for the topic of the day.

    • leslie sharp says:

      I’ve always been curious how McAdams became the authority in certain circles. Tenacity? Or strong support in the most literal meaning of the term?

      • Jonathan says:

        leslie,

        My bet is by default.

        Imagine you are John McAdams. Your goal is to refute every Warren critic argument.

        Person A comes to this site and states the HSCA found it probable that JFK was killed as the result of a conspiracy. This conclusion is based on a last-minute acoustical study.

        The simple refutation is that Myers’s computer animation destroys the HSCA conclusion.

        Of course, the Myers computer animation is not given a proper foundation. Moreover, Myers’s clear bias is not revealed in the refutation.

        But by this time, McAdams has befuddled everyone.

        He is a liar, a deceiver; and I don’t know why Jeff Morley lists his site on the recommended list.

        • leslie sharp says:

          Jonathan,
          Your specificity is not only enlightening but critical toward identifying the machinations employed to distract from and distort the truth about the assassination. Whether or not the efforts of McAdams are intentional is beyond my scope of understanding, and buying into paranoia only feeds the beast. I will say that if Jeff Morley is committed to encouraging debate and attracting viewers, listing McAdams site might serves that goal On that note, I would still like to see an enumeration of goals and objectives for this site.

  6. Jonathan says:

    If you want truth, don’t be biased and don’t be susceptible.

    In Viet Nam, I was susceptible. I was naive.

    You can become stronger in the Nam.

    You also can find mystery, in Saigon.

    You can find language school classmate dealing with drug dealers coming through the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

    You don’t want to know the rest.

    • leslie sharp says:

      Whoa. Ferlinghetti of City Lights and Ginsberg would certainly have had their collective noses to the ground. But Richard Helms’ role in Iran post Watergate leads me to think it was not Ginsberg who informed him of drug trafficking, whether Southeast Asia or Latin America.

    • Zebulon says:

      Yes we do ! I just saw “American Gangster” and was fascinated by the whole SE Asia drug pipeline.
      Where the drug dealers coming down the Ho. Chi. Minh trail associated with the Lucas operation?
      Thank you for your service. When were you in Viet Nam? Do your experiences color how the assassination may have contributed to your having to go, particularly in view of the fact that Kennedy was going to pull out?

      • Jonathan says:

        Zebulon,

        Drug couriers coming from Laos into South Viet Nam were an important source of information on American POWs, some of whom were being held in prison camps along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

        I’ll leave it at that, lest I start getting into methods.

  7. john crites says:

    Does anybody here know the actual last day one can enter the Plaza before it closes this November?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more