Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 9, 2025 - Jim Fetzer

01:57:20

RBN JFK Debate: Jeff Nyquist vs. Jim Fetzer (8 May 2025)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	You there?
	So...
	I'm going to tell Tyler to scream at the Xbox.
	Nice.
	Yeah.
	Five, two, three.
	Are you there, Jeff?
	Can you hear us?
	I'm showing you connected, Jeff.
	It's got to be your microphone is muted or not.
	Not on the right microphone.
	Well, so Well, we'll get started.
	yeah jeff you're gonna have to check your settings and make sure you got the right microphone selected I'll do some serious chilling for you.
	Just let me know, Mike.
	I can hear you.
	All right, here we go.
	Welcome to In Plain Sight.
	Jeremy here in Kentucky on Republic Broadcasting Network.
	Please go to republicbroadcasting.org.
	Smash that donate button.
	Send the much-needed fundage to keep free speech alive.
	You can make your check or money order payable to RBN.
	Mail it to 2251.
	Double Creek Drive, Suite 302, Brown Rock, Texas, 78664.
	Call in that debit or credit to 1-800-724-2719.
	We have a very friendly operator standing by to take your money.
	This is a special two-hour edition of In Plain Sight.
	We're postponing the William and Jeremy show to tomorrow night, and this two hours is sponsored by Don in Arizona, who asked for a debate between Jeff Nyquist, And Jim Fetzer.
	So I'll be moderating the debate and we'll have opening statements.
	The debate is going to be on the JFK assassination, who is behind it.
	Both of these men take different points of view.
	So we'll do 10-minute segments so that we don't talk each other starting off.
	I'll introduce Jeff first and then give a little bit about yourself.
	Maybe your credentials keep it kind of short, but then get right into your material, your opening statement on your position on the JFK assassination.
	So then we'll kick it to Jim.
	We're skipping the first break.
	That'll take us down to the 30-minute mark.
	We are currently having trouble getting Jeff's audio to come in.
	So just break in Mike and Jeff when you get that ironed out.
	Meanwhile, Jim Fetzer, welcome to the show.
	Oh, thanks very much, Jeremy.
	Did that mean you want me to go first?
	Well, I want Jeff to be able to hear you.
	I want to wait for Mike to break in and tell us that he has Jeff because I can't see the...
	I don't think we're getting Jeff.
	I can just call Jeff and put him on the phone.
	Do that until we iron it out.
	Jeff, you can put your number in the chat there as I can call you or send it to me directly.
	I apologize for this, folks.
	Working out some bugs here on this new system.
	So, Mike, I'm going to have to text you Jeff's phone number.
	Meanwhile, Jim, don't get into your material, Jim, but just tell us briefly about yourself.
	You're the host of Authentic News here on RBN, 2 p.m. Central.
	Tell us a little bit about yourself and what other shows that you're hosting on other networks.
	Can you hear me on the phone?
	Oh, okay, we got it.
	Yeah, go with Jeff.
	Okay, all right.
	Go with Jeff.
	Okay.
	All right, so let me start over then.
	Jeff, what we're doing is we're doing 10-minute segments to start out, and I'll start with you.
	The topic is the JFK assassination and who's behind it.
	So in your 10-minute opening statement, give us just a brief summary of who you are, maybe what credentials you have.
	And then get right into your opening statement and your view on the JFK assassination.
	And then after your 10 minutes, we'll kick it over to Jim.
	And that should take us to the bottom of the hour.
	So I'll start you now at 9.06.
	Go ahead, Jeff.
	Yeah, I'm a political analyst.
	I've been a columnist for WorldNet, Daily Newsmax, Financial Sense, Sierra Times, Epoch Times.
	I write, I've written a number of books.
	I've sort of specialized in questions of ideology and grand strategy.
	Excellent.
	So get into your material on your opening statement on your take on the JFK assassination.
	Okay.
	Of course, the Warren Commission is anything, what is it, 31 volumes?
	Nothing is perfect.
	Try to write 31 volumes and not make a mistake.
	Of course, people are going to pick it apart.
	But the basic conclusion of the Warren Commission was that Lee Harvey Oswald shot the president.
	There were three shots fired from his rifle.
	The first shot missed.
	The second shot went through Kennedy's back in front of his neck and hit Connolly.
	And the third shot was the fatal shot that hit John F. Kennedy in the head.
	Lee Harvey Oswald was firing from the sniper's nest in the far corner of the book depository, building sixth floor.
	He purchased a rifle for $12 and something cents from, I think it was an outfit in Chicago.
	He bought for $7 and so many cents a x4 sight for the rifle.
	He was an excellent marksman in the Marine Corps.
	He was used to using an M1, which he was good at.
	At 200 yards, he could hit the target.
	In the Marines, so it wasn't that difficult to shot for him.
	He had trained with the Italian World War II rifle that he used to shoot the president.
	He had made his escape from the book depository building by running downstairs quickly, by pretending to be in the lunchroom, you know, getting a Coke or something, and then he ducked out before they sealed the building, went home, got a pistol, and then was walking probably to a bus station.
	And he was probably on his way to Mexico because his ultimate destination, he wanted to go to Cuba.
	But we don't know for sure.
	On his way, a police officer came up alongside him as he was walking and he shot Officer Tippett.
	There were witnesses to that shooting.
	He ran and ducked into a movie theater without paying.
	A guy working across the street noticed he'd run in without paying and called the police.
	The police surrounded the movie theater.
	They went in.
	He punched a cop when they came into the theater and came near him.
	He tried to pull his revolver out.
	They grabbed him, wrestled him to the ground, and took him away and arrested him.
	This is not the behavior of an innocent man.
	And the whole assassination revolves around a study in who Oswald was.
	What his motives were?
	Who were the people who knew him?
	What did they think of him?
	What did they know about what he was doing?
	And it's pretty clear whether or not he was prompted by the DGI, the Cuban service, or the Russians.
	He had lived in the Soviet Union.
	He had defected there.
	From the age of 15, he studied Marxism.
	And, you know, he was a committed Marxist.
	And his dream was to...
	His dream at that point was to live in Cuba.
	And why he killed the president, whether it was his own idea or the special services, that's another whole question.
	But I think the Warren Commission, whatever its mistakes, was basically correct.
	The evidence is pretty clear.
	And so is the witness testimonies.
	So we've got about another six minutes.
	So then who are you saying in your statement is...
	Was behind the assassination, like who put him up to it?
	Well, I think Lee Harvey Oswald did it.
	He and his wife, his wife was probably, Marina Oswald may have been a KGB agent.
	She was a classic in the sense that she had an uncle, Uncle Sasha, who was in the security services of the Soviet state.
	She had a Leningrad accent, but she claimed to be from Somewhere around Archangel, one of the towns up that way.
	So there was something not right about her background and her accent.
	So there's the question.
	He met some Cuban people.
	He was in Minsk.
	He lived in the Soviet Union where he met his wife.
	And there was some Cubans training at a KGB school near there.
	He met them.
	One of them became a prominent official.
	In the DGI in September of 1963, Oswald went to Mexico City and when he was arrested, they found a map with him having marked the Soviet and the Cuban embassies which he visited in Mexico City.
	What he was doing there so many weeks before he shot the president, there's a German documentary.
	That was very famous, very well done, interviewing some principals.
	They got into the records of the Mexican secret police and indicated that indeed it's definite that he met with DGI officials in Mexico.
	There was an assassination plot against Castro by the Kennedy brothers.
	Robert F. Kennedy, the attorney general, the president's brother, was running the CIA.
	In a shadow fashion, because after the Bay of Pigs, they didn't trust the CIA anymore, and they wanted to run it themselves.
	And he had signed off on an assassination to hire a Brazilian to shoot Castro with a rifle at the telescopic sight.
	There is evidence in various books that that Brazilian was a double agent.
	He'd been a friend of the Castro's who pretended to be disaffected, and there's good reason to suspect that he told Fidel Castro.
	He actually went to the Colombian embassy.
	You can go and look at the video.
	It's September 1963.
	He goes to the Colombian embassy and he talks to a Colombian.
	He goes to the Brazilian embassy where the assassin was Brazilian.
	He says, "Hey Colombian." He says to this Colombian AP reporter, "I want to tell you the Kennedy brothers want to kill me." You know, I'm paraphrasing and I just want them to know it's a two-way street.
	You know, that's the context.
	LBJ, when the secret White House tapes of LBJ were released in the 90s, there's many tapes in which LBJ expresses the opinion that Castro was behind the assassination, possible involvement of the KGB.
	James Angleton, who was interviewed by Edward J. Epstein, had said that the CIA had, of course, with the cooperation of the Mexican government, tapped the Russian embassy, and they had...
	A record of Lee Harvey Oswald calling to the Russian Embassy and talking to a, what was it, Sergei Kostakov of Department 13. Department 13 was their wet affairs department of the KGB.
	When Oswald went to Mexico City, the head of wet affairs for the KGB, who was a KGB general in London, flew to Havana.
	The one in Havana at the DGI flew to Mexico City.
	The man who had known the Oswalds in Minsk, an intelligence official, on the day of the assassination, he flew to Mexico City, and then he flew to Dallas, and after the assassination, he flew back.
	Now, maybe Oswald was supposed to be on that plane with him, we don't know.
	But probably not.
	And as far as Jack Ruby, that is a very murky business.
	The Romanian defector Ian Pachepe has suggested that...
	That the mob had gotten involved with the Cubans because of the mob in Cuba and that they had somehow gotten Ruby to assassinate Oswald before he could say anything.
	There was great fear in the Soviet Union that they would be blamed.
	So much fear that it wasn't long before Khrushchev was replaced or stepped down for "hairbrained" scheming.
	So there may have been a kind of guilty conscience there.
	As I say, there are stories from defectors like Ian Pechepa that the Kremlin was, that Khrushchev had wanted to kill Kennedy for some time.
	And assassination is one of their games, yeah.
	Okay, so it sounds like you're saying that the DGI intelligence agency in Cuba was behind it, possibly with the KGB and the mob.
	Yeah, it may be.
	We don't know.
	All of this is somewhat murky, but there's this circumstantial body of evidence.
	But Oswald was trained to use a rifle.
	He used a rifle.
	He was training in the former Soviet Union.
	He trained with that rifle.
	Why did he return to America?
	Was he a sleeper?
	Was his wife his partner in that?
	But on that day...
	Whatever was behind it, Oswald was the only person there shooting, and he shot and killed the president.
	Okay, so that's your opening statement.
	So, Jim Fetzer, you'll have until 27 minutes after the hour to respond and give your opening statement.
	Thanks, Jeremy.
	I want to shout out to three friends I'm missing, Victoria, Margaret, and Steve.
	You guys, I hope you're doing well.
	And we do eventually get to talk again.
	Jeff has given a pretty good summary of the official narrative, virtually every element of which is false, apart, of course, from Lee being in the Soviet Union, marrying the niece of a KGB official, returning to the United States, where he was warmly greeted, not treated as a traitor.
	My background, I'm a former Marine Corps officer.
	I am a retired professor of philosophy.
	I had academic positions for 35 years, offering courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning primarily.
	In 19, I served in the Far East.
	I was aboard ship, the USS Iwo Jima, an LPH landing platform helicopter.
	That means it's a carrier with a shallow hull because it's for...
	Helicopters to take off and land, so they don't require that stability for fixed-wing aircraft.
	When I was awakened at 3.30 in the morning by the officer of the deck, who was the executive officer of the mortar battery, of which I was the fire direction officer, to tell me JFK had been shot, he awakened me an hour later to say they'd caught the guy who'd done it.
	He was a communist.
	I thought then that was pretty fast work.
	And, of course, today we know why.
	When I returned to the States, I was assigned to the Recruit Depot in San Diego as a series commander, where I had 15 DIs and 300 recruits under my command going through the training cycle, which at the time was 11 weeks, to produce 8,000 recruits.
	But, well, my second year, I was moved up to regimental headquarters to reorganize the training program so we could produce 11,000 recruits in eight weeks.
	With the same facilities, and of course, this was all to send them over to Vietnam.
	Thus, in retrospect, I had very mixed feelings about it.
	In the Marine Corps, you have three categories for qualification with a rifle.
	Marksman, you fire 190 to 209 out of a 250 point at 200, 300, and 500 yards.
	From 210 to...
	219, you're known as a sharpshooter, and above 220, you're an expert.
	Lee Oswald in 1957 fired 212 on the range, which is required of every Marine, from the lowest private to the commandant of the Marine Corps, which is reasonably good shooting.
	I shot 212 before.
	In 1958, he didn't qualify at all, which is very, very odd, since it is a standing requirement, a general order.
	I believe, as do many others, he was at Monterey studying the Russian language, which he proved to be pretty adept.
	But then in 1959, he barely qualified.
	He was actually known for getting Maggie's drawers.
	That's a white flag they wave when you completely miss a target.
	And it appears his qualification at 190 was a gift by the pits, you know, because otherwise he was going to be unqualified.
	I've also fired expert with a rifle.
	And contrary to Jeff's implication, he was a mediocre shot.
	He was trained with an M1, which is, of course, semi-automatic.
	You can continue firing.
	It was very different than the Mannlicher Carcano, which is a very obscure weapon known in World War II as the humanitarian rifle for never actually harming anyone on purpose.
	He was not trained to use a sight.
	He was not used telescopic sight.
	He was not trained to fire at a moving target.
	He was not trained to use a bolt-action rifle.
	There have been many attempts to replicate the alleged shooting that is attributed to Lee Oswald from the sixth floor by even as expert marksman as Carlos Hathcock in the Marine Corps.
	They couldn't do it.
	At one point, Jesse Ventura, who had me on his shows on four different occasions, in this case flew me out to Ventura County to try to replicate the Oswald shooting.
	And we use bales of hay to represent the vehicle.
	So, of course, they were stationary.
	I was there to make sure he had the right angles and distances and then to clock him.
	Jesse had a far superior man, Carcano, to the one that was attributed to Oswald.
	He is a much better shot than Lee Oswald.
	And in three replications of three shots each, he managed to hit one target one time.
	The whole thing about Oswald having performed these feats is preposterous.
	More importantly, he appears to have been recruited by the Office of Naval Intelligence when he was at the Recruit Depot in San Diego.
	He would subsequently be stationed at Atsugi in Japan as a radar operator, which was the most secure base in the American military.
	He performed a pseudo-defection to the Soviet Union, apparently to give them information about the altitude of the U-2 overflights, which the Soviets knew were taking place, but not the altitude and were unable to shoot it down.
	Now, according to Fletcher Prouty, the CIA was eager to abort a forthcoming summit between Eisenhower and Khrushchev and actually shorted the fuel.
	So the plane was going to come down one way or another.
	Khrushchev would accuse the United States of spying on the Soviet Union, which Eisenhower denied, but then Khrushchev was able to produce the pilot, Francis Gary Powers, who had not taken his cyanide tablet and parts of the U-2, whether it was because of Oswald giving him...
	Altitude information about the overflights or the shorting of the fuel, I think, is unknown, at least to those of us who have been engaged in collaborative research on this for all these years.
	But it did lead to the aborting of the summit, so that an event that was intended to reduce Cold War tensions instead increased them.
	Those who knew Oswald in Russia talked about how bad a shot he was.
	He couldn't even hit a rabbit with a shotgun.
	But as I've observed, he did marry a rather fetching young woman, Marina, and came back to the United States, where he was greeted by a CIA front organization that gave Lee money to relocate to New Orleans.
	Where he would be sheep-dipped, meaning given a new personality as a pro-Castro communist sympathizer, staging various events to build up his character in that role, while Marina went to Dallas and was living with Ruth Payne and her husband, both of whom were CIA assets, unbeknownst.
	To them, Oswald went through a fair process of being provocative and getting a lot of public attention, including even a debate that was put out on radio.
	At one point, he was handing out pamphlets on the street for the Fair Play for Cuba committee.
	This is very well depicted in Oliver Stone's magnificent film, JFK.
	When he got into a fight with, you know, anti-Castro, they thought he was one of them.
	They got in a big fight.
	It was on television, blah, blah, big, big, big play up.
	When he came up to Dallas...
	To join Marina, I mean, he wound up actually in a rooming house.
	Ruth Payne arranged to get him a job at the book depository just a few weeks before the event would take place to put him in position to play the role that he was described so well by Jeff of the Patsy.
	In fact, it's rather interesting to consider what Lee had to say that day after he was apprehended from the Texas Theater.
	Where he had, of course, a black eye, and when he was paraded in the hallway, which may have been for an occasion for Jack Ruby to shoot him, but it didn't occur, he was asked about his black eye, and he explained a policeman hit him.
	He was asked if he shot JFK, and he said no, he was the Patsy.
	While he was talking to Will Fritz, who was a homicide detective who was pursuing the case.
	He was shown one of the backyard photographs.
	There were several.
	And he said that was someone else's body with his face pasted on it, that he knew something about photography and he'd be able to prove it.
	And when he was asked where he was, he said out front with Bill Shelley, who was one of his supervisors in the book depository.
	And we have discovered Lee was speaking the truth about all four of these matters.
	Indeed, it turns out he was actually caught in a very famous photograph by AP photographer James Ike Alchens, known technically as the Alchens Six, in the background, in the doorway, leaning out, looking out.
	Well, we've done a massive amount of research on this to identify him, but where even as early as 1966, Harold Weisberg and his Whitewash II, a series of books he published.
	About the assassination of the cover-up in the last two pages, he explained how the Warren Commission staff was having a terrible time concealing that Lee Oswald had been in the doorway, and therefore, since he was there when a motorcade mass spy cannot have shot anyone, cannot have been a lone assassin, cannot have even been one of the multiple shooters, and as I will explain, there were quite a few.
	This was a very elaborate.
	Orchestrated event to make sure JFK did not survive because after all the worst possible outcome would have been to have a...
	A wounded, but not mortally wounded president who could unleash the full powers of the presidency.
	In fact, the Dallas cops, who appear to have taken the primary role in framing Lee, were so self-conscious about the man in the doorway that he had him take off this long-sleeved, richly textured reddish-brown shirt.
	Which, by the way, Marina remembers having laundered that they brought back from Russia in order to do the mugshot.
	So it's just in the t-shirt.
	We're at 27, Jim.
	Okay, you got it.
	I'm good.
	We're at 27. It sounds like you're making the statement that you were serving when JFK was shot at some time since then to investigate, that Oswald was not qualified to make the shot, and that...
	You're stating that the CIA recruited Oswald as a patsy, and so you're stating in your opening statement that the CIA was behind it.
	No, it's more complex than that.
	The CIA did have a major goal, but I'm going to go into this in depth.
	I mean, we've got a lot of time for this.
	We have been able to confirm Lee was in the doorway, the height, the weight, the bill, the shirt, the t-shirt, and now facial features confirm it.
	Further shill for some sponsors of RVN because we're coming up on the 30-minute break.
	And then when we come back, I'll bring Jeff on to reply to your statements.
	He'll have another 10 minutes approximately.
	So I want to give a shout-out to Extendivite, which you can find on the RVN webpage.
	Extendivite has been wonderful in keeping my blood pressure regular as I work a high-stress job.
	And I'm 49 years old.
	I'm working about, I don't know, 117 over 78 blood pressure.
	So that's not bad.
	Shout out to Extendivite.
	Buy that product.
	Highly recommend.
	Up on the break, back on the other side, we'll just return to Mr. Fester.
	I see a light of cars and they are all in the deep leg.
	Flowers and my love for the message to come back.
	It's impossible but true.
	You're listening to Republic Broadcasting Network.
	Real news, real talk, real people.
	Because you can handle the truth.
	Thank you.
	Do you begin to smell some funky little things going on?
	Let me share this story with you.
	It's not so much a story, it's something I wrote years ago.
	Read your history, people.
	Stock markets collapse on Friday.
	Bank seizures, closures, holidays take place after business hours on Friday.
	Do currencies or governments also collapse on Friday?
	Tomorrow's Friday.
	We'll be in.
	Hey, guys.
	Everything's going well.
	Yeah, y 'all can talk.
	Y 'all may want to do five minutes in the next segment each, unless y 'all want to do ten.
	Okay.
	I've got a question.
	I don't know why my microphone, my good microphone, is not working, and I'm having to use my phone because if the settings are all correct, it has to be something on your end.
	I've double and triple checked everything.
	Any microphones connected in the settings, I've got, and I use this for broadcasting all the time.
	I'm just going to go, hey, Teams, Teams is...
	Seems a little glitchy right now, so it may just be something like that.
	Yeah, I wouldn't worry about it.
	You sound really good.
	You sound good, Jeff.
	I'm on an iPhone as long as the battery holds.
	Okay.
	And how is my sound coming in, Mike?
	Oh, y 'all, everybody sounds great.
	I'm on a phone, too.
	I can't get this thing ironed out either.
	Yeah, it's a little glitchy.
	Yeah, I know you were on with John, and it looked like everything was fine as far as I didn't see any issues in the, you know.
	It's good, and the guy came in with the money for you guys, right?
	I think he's waiting to hear it on the air, but yeah, he said he's going to honor that, and yeah, that'll be a big help.
	Fantastic, fantastic.
	Trust me, trust me.
	If you don't come through, I'm going to do some major donation shaming.
	Don't worry about that.
	Tomorrow night, William and I will do donation shaming.
	But yeah, so maybe we can do 10-minute slots because you guys both have a lot to say.
	Maybe we could do another segment after the break where you each get 10 minutes.
	And I'm not timing it down to the second or even 30 seconds.
	I'm just looking at a clock on the computer.
	But like the last hour, I would like to have a little more back and forth.
	And I think you two are disciplined enough not to talk over each other.
	And maybe it can get a little heated if you want to, because I know you're both not going to do ad hominem attacks.
	But it's been suggested that we open to callers sometime in the last hour, and that might be fun.
	I mean, if Don comes through, whether he comes through or not, we want to make this a good show and give the listener something fun.
	Yeah, I wanted to check in about all that.
	If y 'all want to take calls...
	Last hour or somewhere in there, that's fine.
	Just leave it up to yourselves.
	We're back.
	If y 'all want to jump in, give it the maximum time here.
	Yeah, I'll jump in and bring us back.
	Good.
	Here we go.
	All right.
	All right, guys, we're coming back to In Plain Sight, special two-hour edition.
	Jeff Nocklis and Jim Fetzer, JFK assassination.
	And they've given both their opening statements, and we've had a little bit of time to somewhat clarify.
	So we're going to do two more 10-minute segments.
	And then in the last hour of the debate, we'll do a little bit more of a back-and-forth, because these educated gentlemen...
	We are disciplined enough not to talk over each other, but it could get a little heated, maybe.
	You never know.
	And it's been suggested we open up the Florida callers, so the last hour of the debate, we should be taking callers.
	But I want you to get your debit cards out and your checkbooks out, and let's donate to the station.
	Let's do a fundraiser.
	We already have Don giving 1,000.
	And let's sweeten that a little bit and pay some bills for next week as well as this one.
	So let's go to Jeff now.
	We'll give you 10 minutes.
	I got 34 after, so go to 45 minutes, Jeff, for your 10 minutes.
	All right, sounds good.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, very interesting.
	Oswald was not a good shot, he claims, but he was a marksman.
	He passed that.
	It is a challenge that he was a terrible shot, but a marksman with the scores that Oswald had is, compared to all the rest of the shooters in the country, he's an excellent shot.
	And I think that should be clear.
	As far as Oswald's defection, being a fake defection, first, Oswald was not only a troubled youth, but at one point in his youth, when he was a teenager, he was remanded to psychiatric...
	And his mother fled the district.
	They went back to New Orleans where he was born.
	So he was in and out of schools.
	He was in and out of trouble all the time.
	He acted out.
	He committed violence when they were living in New York with some folks.
	He threw a knife.
	He hit people.
	He was not an easy person.
	He was not the kind of person psychologically who was stable.
	You couldn't really say that about him.
	He's not the kind of person the CIA would have recruited in those days.
	But what's interesting is he does come back from his defection to Russia with a wife much more beautiful than a guy like him would expect to come back with.
	And his wife...
	She was, as I said before, she had this Uncle Sasha.
	He wasn't technically in the KGB.
	He was in, I think, an Interior Ministry Colonel.
	But there was this model.
	Usually when they're recruiting Americans or foreigners that visit the USSR and they use a pretty girl to try to make them an agent, the pretty girl has an Uncle Sasha who really does the recruitment.
	It's very interesting to point out, Marina Oswald was someone who, after she met with Lee in jail when he was arrested, the night before he was shot by Ruby, she came away thinking that he was guilty.
	And this we find out in the account of their close friend, Paul R. Gregory, who wrote his account, The Oswalds.
	And that came out a year ago last summer.
	Very much worth writing.
	Paul Gregory was helping Marina with her English when they came to the Fort Worth Dallas area, when they first came to this country from the USSR.
	And he writes a very disturbing portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald as a person.
	And of course, Robert Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald's brother, was always convinced of his guilt.
	Knew that he was guilty.
	They had a terrible mother.
	The mother had all the traits of a narcissistic, controlling mother, with Lee Harvey Oswald being the golden child.
	In fact, when his mother came on the scene after his arrest, the Secret Service agents, who were then, of course, guarding the family and these immediate witnesses, one of the Secret Service agents said, I know now why Lee Harvey Oswald shot the president.
	And he pointed to...
	To Lee Harvey Oswald's mother.
	His mother had made him in her own image, you could say.
	Then there's in this whole idea of the conspiracy where we go down all kinds of rabbit holes.
	There are too many conspirators in these conspiracy theories.
	There are too many people doing too many bad things about something that we all care about.
	This is the killing and murdering of the President of the United States.
	That many people doing that many bad things, it really boils down to, and saying that Lee Harvey Oswald's a patsy means he didn't pull the trigger.
	But how can that not be?
	Lee Harvey Oswald took that rifle to work that morning, and he didn't drive.
	He didn't have his own car.
	He carpooled.
	And the people that he carpooled with were witnesses.
	And they said he brought this long object to put into the trunk of the car.
	And they said, well, what you got there, Lee?
	And Oswald said, those are curtain rods for my wife.
	Well, of course, it wasn't a curtain rod.
	It was a rifle.
	How did that rifle get up there in that sniper's nest on the sixth floor of the Book Depository building?
	He brought it to work.
	And, of course, he was seen going up there.
	And, of course, everybody was going to lunch.
	The president was coming by around 1230.
	And Oswald built that sniper's nest.
	Who else did it?
	Who else in the book depository building could have built that sniper's nest?
	Where they found the three unspent, you know, shell casings from the three shots he fired from that position.
	With people who were on the windows, on the floor below, who heard it, who the ceiling shook above them, and those, you know, little plaster pieces from the ceiling came down from the shockwave of that rifle going off.
	I mean, there's so many witnesses to this event.
	And a vast majority of the witnesses, I forget, it was around 180 witnesses there on Dealey Plaza, they heard three shots.
	Now, all witnesses aren't reliable.
	There were some that heard four.
	But there's been no evidence of a fourth shot, or a second shooter, or a third shooter, or a firing squad with the Dealey Lama under Dealey Plaza, as one novelist joked about it.
	It was Oswald.
	And it was Oswald who shot Officer Tippett.
	I think there's no doubt about that.
	And even witnesses heard him as he's running away, saying, poor dead cop.
	The fact that he then was arrested and caught, this is not a function of his innocence.
	I mean, why would he even have been pursued?
	Why was he running?
	Why was he resisting arrest?
	And of course he's going to claim he's a patsy.
	Of course he's going to declare his innocence.
	He kept saying, I know my rights, I know my rights.
	Look, he was a communist.
	He studied communism from the age of 15. He was one of those alienated personalities, a troubled youth, who found this as his outlet.
	A lot of people turn to ideologies, extremist ideologies, because of their personal psychological angst.
	He was one of these people.
	When he was in the Marine Corps, he had these views.
	He didn't really like the Marine Corps that much.
	That's one of the reasons he got out.
	And, of course, the people that were in the Marine Corps with him, if you go to what they said about him, it's very clear the testimony about him.
	This was not an upstanding patriot.
	This wasn't a guy.
	Look, in the Marine Corps, he wasn't that successful.
	You know, his nickname initially was Rabbit.
	And, you know, some of them said he had sort of feminine traits.
	He was not the kind of Marine Corps guy that you would expect.
	But he was proficient with an M1.
	And he went there having trained with his Italian World War II rifle.
	And the amount of time for those shots, he had plenty of time to make those shots.
	And his first shot, remember, missed.
	His second shot went through.
	Wounded Kennedy and wounded Connolly, and his third shot was the fatal shot.
	And he had three seconds between the first and the second shot, and five seconds before the fatal shot.
	And with that rifle, that is plenty of time at that distance.
	And remember, he could hit a target with an M1 at 200 yards.
	He could easily have made that shot with a telescopic sight.
	So this claim that he couldn't do it, it just doesn't stand up to the basic facts of the case.
	And the claim that he was recruited by the CIA, where's the evidence?
	And the claim that Ruth Payne and her husband were CIA agents, where is the evidence?
	He hid the rifle in Ruth Payne's garage without telling her.
	She was, of course, shocked.
	Living with, he and his wife were separated.
	They weren't getting along very well.
	She was pregnant, you know, and I think the baby came in October of 63. And, of course, he would come on the weekends to be with his wife.
	And, of course, Ruth Payne, if you've ever listened to Ruth Payne, she's a very good witness.
	She's a very sensible person.
	And she really, she kind of took Marina Oswald under her wing.
	And, of course, when the law enforcement came to the House, it was with great shock that they'd realized that the murder weapon used on the president had been kept in her garage.
	And really, it was, I think, a shock to Marina as well.
	Lee had also taken a shot at one of the leaders of the John Birch Society through a window.
	I think that's pretty well understood that he did that.
	So how is he a patsy?
	And where is the proof that he was ever in the CIA?
	He just wasn't the kind of person in those days who they would have looked for to recruit in the CIA.
	Okay, so, yeah, so the DGI, the KGB behind it, possibly the mob, and Oswald's own communist ideology, Motivated him as well.
	And you're saying that Oswald and Marina, who was a CIA agent, were...
	No, no.
	Marina was his wife.
	And she has the profile.
	She has the profile.
	I'm not saying she was a KGB agent, but she has the profile of one.
	And it's basically alleged by the former head of the Romanian intelligence service, Ian Pachepa, that she was.
	He makes the argument in his book about her coming from the Archangel area.
	Not having the proper accent, having the Uncle Sasha.
	The fact that she was born in such a remote area, there's no way to really look at her birth record to find out who she really was.
	And the people that knew her, as I think it was Posner who pointed out, that her accent was the Leningrad accent, not one from that Archangel region.
	So there's these questions about Marina Oswald, and there's questions about, you know, the inner workings of the DGI and KGB, that trip to Mexico City he took.
	And anyone can go and look at Fidel Castro's statement.
	It's on YouTube.
	You can go find it.
	Fidel Castro's warning to the KGB.
	Why did Fidel Castro, weeks before the president's murder, make that threat in September 1963?
	And why did Oswald meet with Cuban intelligence officials in Mexico City in that same month?
	All right, and that's 10 minutes.
	Jim Fetzer, your response.
	Take it to 56 minutes into the hour, and then I'll set us up for the break.
	Thanks, Jeremy.
	Well, I don't want to suggest that Jeff is gullible, but he seems to believe everything the government's put out about the assassination, where they spent more time on the cover-up than they actually did plotting the shooting itself, which was highly elaborate.
	He trades on the ambiguity of the words marksman.
	Yeah, in casual discourse, the word marksman means you're a pretty good shot.
	But in the Marine Corps, to be a marksman is really rather pathetic, and especially with Lee, who barely qualified in 2009 with a 190.
	I mean, that's as bad as you can get and still qualify, not have to go back to the range.
	Now, he's misdescribing Lee's personality and character pretty comprehensively.
	Lee's favorite radio show when he was growing up was I Led Three Lives, Herb Philbrick.
	And Lee Bright came out to be about the closest thing to that, as one could imagine.
	He was even an informant for the FBI at the time of the assassination, which is why his W-2 forms weren't available.
	He was being paid $200 a month by the FBI.
	As an informant.
	But of course, if that came out, it made the whole scenario of him supposedly being a communist sympathizer, Bro Castro, and all that ridiculous, which is the case.
	Judith Vary Baker has published about her relationship with Lee the Summer in New Orleans before the shooting.
	In her book, Lee and Me, Judith has stayed in my home.
	I know her.
	Rather well interviewed her multiple times before the world had caught up with who she was, where Ed Haslam's book, Dr. Mary's Monkly, confirms how Judith, who was a science prodigy in high school, had gone to New Orleans with a promise of a medical career by a fellow named Ochterer, who was very prominent.
	A CIA-related physician and was involved in developing a rabid-acting cancer with David Ferry and Lee Oswald.
	Ferry had all these mice.
	They were doing all this stuff.
	They actually seem to have had some success.
	It appears to have been used on Jack Ruby.
	Now, to turn to the scene of the crime.
	No shots were actually fired from the sixth floor window, as we've already established.
	We even have photographic proof that Lee was in the doorway, and therefore not only cannot have been the lone demented gunman, but he cannot have been one of the multiple shooters.
	If you look at where the county records billing, the Dow Tax, Book Depository, Grassy Knoll, Triple Underpass, those are all significant when we sort out what actually happened.
	Now, in Oliver Stone's film JFK released in 1991, he posited that there'd been three hit teams.
	There actually turned out to be many more.
	Let me just point out.
	If one wants to maintain that Lee Oswald was the lone shooter and there were three and only three shots from above and behind, how can we account for anything as elementary as Malcolm Kilduff, acting press secretary, coming out before the public to announce to the world that the president is dead, saying it was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head while pointing to his right temple?
	Is Jeff suggesting Lee Oswald fired a shot into JFK's right temple from above and behind?
	In fact, the day, the afternoon of the shooting, two shots were being widely reported on radio and television because Malcolm Perry, MD, had performed a simple tracheostomy incision through a small, clean puncture wound to the throat.
	Reported it three times during the Parkland press conference as a wound of entry that the bullet was coming at him.
	It actually transited through the windshield en route to its target.
	So you have these two shots, widely broadcast the whole afternoon.
	Chet Huntley is there, other famous newsmen of their time.
	They talked about...
	The small, clean puncture wounded the throat as a wound of entry.
	They talked about the wound to the right temple, which seemingly caused a blowout to the back of his head, attributing that to Admiral George Berkeley, who is the president's personal physician.
	So later in the evening, when the stories start to trickle in that the Secret Service and the FBI have agreed, there were three and only three shots with three hits.
	This was Jack hitting the back, five and a half inches below the collar, just to the right of the spinal column, shallow shot.
	Connolly was hit in the back by a separate shot, and Jack was hit in the back of the head, allegedly killing him.
	That was the initial report.
	The idea that there'd been a miss only showed up later when a distant bystander by the name of James Tague appeared.
	He'd actually been injured by a fleck of concrete from a curbing where a bullet that did miss had hit.
	But the fact is, those three shots they were reporting were all legitimate shots.
	They were all hits on Jack and Conley.
	But not by Lee Oswald in the doorway, but by three separate shooters.
	And when you take into account those three shots to the back, and the fact then you had a shot to the throat, a shot to the right temple, and now David W. Mantic is a leading expert on the medical evidence.
	As concluded, there was a third shot to the head from the side just shortly after the shot to the right temple near simultaneous.
	It was a combined effect that blew his brains out the back of his head so hard that when debris hit the motorcycle officer, Bobby Hargis, riding to the left rear, he initially thought he himself had been shot.
	Now, what we're talking about there is six different shooters.
	The shot to the back, Jim Mars and I discussed this extensively, was fired by a deputy sheriff, a Dallas deputy sheriff by the name of Harry Weatherford.
	He was using a.30-06 to implant a Mandelker Carcano bullet.
	In other words, it was a bullet that had been previously fired from the weapon they were going to use to frame Oswald.
	Using a sabot, it's a plastic collar, to fire it from a larger caliber weapon, which may be why the bullet was so shallow.
	Now, it turns out, let me add, that the driver of the Secret Service limousine was instructed to take a bucket of water and a sponge and clean up the blood and brains out of the back seat, and he found a whole bullet.
	It appears to be the bullet that worked its way out of the back of Jack's, and he took it inside, left it on a stretcher where it would become the alleged magic bullet.
	But there was nothing magic about it.
	It was simply the back of the back.
	And when you take into account that we had the shot to the back of the head, that actually occurred after the limousine was brought to a halt.
	It's something that was removed from the Zabruder film, which was massively edited and revised because it was such an obvious indication of Secret Service complicity.
	So Jack had already been hit twice.
	The shot to the throat, by the way, and you can actually see the whole...
	We have a hole in the windshield in the auction 6 photograph and we have a Frema Zapruder, where you can also see the impact, was fired from inside the triple underpass by Jack Lawrence, who was an Air Force expert.
	He was using a weapon that had been given to him by Curtis LeMay, a very special weapon of which Remington only made a small number.
	He was using that weapon given to him by Curtis LeMay to know, be assured, that he was performing this action at the behest of the American government.
	We're giving a phony story to him about Jack having been a communist and all that when he was anything but.
	Then we have the shot to the right temple.
	Matt was actually fired from the intersection of the triple underpass in the bigot fence by Frank Sturgis, who may have been the best shot in the world.
	Sturgis was there as the mafia shooter.
	We had the shot to the side that was fired by the Israeli shooter, a fellow named Clyde Forshaw, who to the best of my knowledge is the only one among all the shooters who remains alive.
	He came down from Toronto.
	The Bronfman family is very tight with Israel.
	We can go into motives for all this, but of course, Jack was at loggerheads with David Ben-Gurion, who was the first prime minister and the founder of the state of Israel, who wanted to develop nuclear weapons, which Jack opposed because he felt it would lead to a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
	So, in addition...
	We have this CIA shooter who has actually become a Dallas cop just a couple weeks before, so he's in uniform on the grassy knoll, and he has a pistol.
	He could have hit Jack.
	It was the easiest shot, but Jackie would have been harmed.
	They were under strict instructions that Jackie should not be harmed, so he actually had to pull his shot.
	It wound up in the grass opposite the knoll, where it was picked up by a Dallas police lieutenant by the name of they have never seen again.
	Now there were...
	The shot to Connolly was fired from the west side of the book depository.
	The only shot fired from the book depository by Malcolm Mack Wallace, who was Lyndon Johnson's personal hitman.
	Lyndon had him kill a dozen people for him, including one of his own sisters, because she was talking too much.
	He was a wonderful shot, but he was firing at Connolly in the mistaken belief it was Ralph Yarbrough.
	LBJ had a huge fight that morning, Linden trying to get his...
	His crony and former campaign manager John Connolly out of the vehicle and Ralph Yarbrough, a liberal senator, he despised in.
	But Jack overrode him on the ground that the chief executive of the state should ride with the chief executive of the United States.
	There was, in fact, an eighth shooter who was representing the Fed who was behind a tree on the grass opposite the knoll.
	You wouldn't think anyone could even hide there.
	But I've seen two photographs in the hands of two experts showing him standing with his rifle, two different photographs.
	He was there.
	He's the only one for which I do not know the name, rank, serial number, the shot they took and the effects they had.
	There were eight different shooters.
	It was a combined affair, very carefully orchestrated with a plot originated with Lyndon Johnson at the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles in 1960 when Jack beat him out for the nomination.
	We're at 10. Yeah.
	I'm okay, Jeremy.
	We're coming up to the break for the second hour.
	And you both provided some very interesting insights, histories, even psychological profiles.
	What I want to focus on in the second hour, and I want to have more of a back and forth, maybe we'll limit this down to five minutes or so, and do a back and forth.
	I want to focus on who exactly...
	Like, narrow it down to who's responsible and how did they benefit from this?
	And for sure, I'm going to bring up the American Zionist Council because that topic has been breached.
	Back for the second hour of the Nyquist debate with Jim Fetzer here on In Plain Side.
	singing
	All right, guys.
	Do we still have Jeff?
	Jeff, do you need us to accommodate?
	We're off air, by the way.
	I sure would like to get my other thing going.
	I'm going to have to try to figure out.
	I've got to get this thing plugged in so the battery doesn't die.
	What do you have, a laptop or a computer that's your usual?
	I have a computer with a Yeti microphone and it's all set up.
	Have you tried just unplugging the microphone?
	Let me put the computer and I'll try that to get back on.
	How does that sound?
	Before you go, Jeff, did you get to hear most of James?
	Presentation there?
	The phone lost the connection, but I heard most of it.
	I think I missed three minutes.
	I think I heard most of it.
	Can we get a song, Jeremy?
	What do you want me to play for the intro here?
	Just do Last Day Under the Sun, just keep it standard.
	Okay, we've got to jam that in there.
	Hang on.
	Please, no death metal.
	Yeah, no death metal.
	No death metal.
	Yeah, last day of the sun.
	All right.
	Because I don't have anything really programmed for this hour, so I'm going to need...
	Yeah, just throw that in there, man.
	That's cool.
	Or we can just run straight through, guys.
	I mean, if y 'all can handle it, you should have some breaks.
	I think everybody, we can handle not taking breaks.
	Oh, we've got to do an opening song.
	Oh, come on.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Here we go.
	Well, it's up.
	Okay, you're talking about skipping the 30-minute break?
	Sure.
	I mean, come on.
	It's overtime, baby.
	Yeah, I'll be doing some shilling, my nigga.
	Yeah, if you want to throw a few shills in there, that's fine.
	I had some stuff programmed, so if we want to take the half hour, I've got what we need there.
	You don't have to do any big shilling.
	Yeah, we'll see what kind of fall we get.
	Yeah, the audience is looking pretty strong, a little up and down, but stronger than usual, so that's awesome.
	Well, I want to get Jeff settled in.
	I don't want him having to scramble around over there.
	I'm rebooting now.
	There we go.
	No, I'm on my phone still.
	Oh, still on the phone.
	I'm trying to, because the phone, I've got a backup.
	A battery pack thing that I just plugged into the phone to keep it going.
	Yeah, that should keep the phone at least from dying.
	Can you text Mike your cell phone number, Jeff?
	And if you lose all connection...
	If that's all you have is your cell phone, Jeff.
	Oh, yeah, that's right.
	Yeah, it's kind of the same.
	Or any number or a landline or something.
	707-599-7629.
	Yeah, right.
	I mean, if I have to call you, I mean, I don't know if that's really going to make any difference.
	If you can get that computer...
	Yeah, no, it's better quality on Skype than it is on a phone line.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	So I'm coming back here.
	I'm going to try to join.
	I'm going to put this on mute so I don't end up wrecking the...
	I'm breaking my eardrums here.
	Hang on a second.
	Okay, can you hear me?
	Yeah, there we go.
	Is that your normal system?
	Yeah, that is...
	Yeah, you're good.
	Okay, it worked.
	I just needed a reboot.
	Yeah, that's another thing.
	A lot of times, just if you can just...
	Restart either the program, like Teams or whatever, or your whole computer.
	Yeah, it's glitchy because evidently it needed a reboot.
	Okay, good.
	That's just Teams, man.
	Yeah, that's Teams.
	We're all set.
	All right, here we go.
	There you go.
	All right, we're coming back.
	Second hour of noon 20th Sight debate with the assassination of JFK.
	We're getting really bogged down into some awesome details, and I've taken notes.
	But what I really want to focus on, gentlemen, is who exactly was behind it and how did they benefit?
	Jim breached the Israeli connection, and I've often wondered, you know, you had the American Zionist Council, which later became AIPAC, and JFK was known for...
	Not wanting Israel to have nukes and also having the American Zionist Council be a foreign lobby, like registers a foreign lobby.
	So that could play a part in the discussion.
	Let's do some shorter segments here where we're not doing full 10 minutes, but maybe do more of a back and forth.
	Let's kick it to Jeff.
	Try to keep it closer to five minutes.
	And then, Jim, you can break in.
	And I think you guys are disciplined enough to do that, and if anyone wants to call in and have questions, we'll have time for that as well.
	Jeff, go ahead.
	Yeah, I find it, having studied assassination, I find it a fantastical scenario with a firing squad of six attackers of the president in synchronized fashion, all firing in the same nine seconds, yet we only have bullet fragments for Miles Waltz's gun.
	With Oswald's prints on the rifle, Woodstock, with three cartridge cases found on the floor.
	We know that Oswald was there on the sixth floor.
	We know that he fled it.
	We know that he shot Officer Tippett.
	We know that he resisted arrest.
	In order for all the witnesses and all the people involved and all the different law enforcement agencies, the Secret Service, to the Dallas police, to the FBI, to the CIA, for them all to be conspiring.
	And for six assassins, imagine all the different organizations involved and the people that would have had to know to have kept this secret without anybody, any reliable witness or testimony showing otherwise.
	It's fantastic.
	I find it so difficult to believe.
	It's too many conspirators.
	It's too much complexity introduced.
	There is at some point Occam's razor to consider.
	You know, it is like the Dealey Lama under Dealey Plaza, where everybody gets to take a shot at the president in the same eight-second period.
	And yet, the actual evidence, it all points to one guy, Lee Harvey Oswald.
	And what was his motive?
	He trained himself to be a communist from the age of 15 by his own words.
	He defected to the Soviet Union.
	He was a misfit from a very early age, remanded to psychiatric care at one point, a real juvenile delinquent at the time.
	His own brother, Robert, believed that he was guilty.
	He had a motive on the president.
	It wasn't that he personally disliked the president.
	The president was the leader of the imperialist world.
	He was the leader of the capitalist world.
	He was the enemy.
	He was the main enemy guy.
	And, of course, we don't know why the DGI and KGB were involved with Oswald, both in the Soviet Union and in his visit to Mexico City.
	Again, they found a map in his possession.
	He had been to Mexico City this September before that November, and he had marked on that map.
	The locations of both the Cuban and the Russian embassies.
	And again, as Edward J. Epstein's interviews with different personalities, especially James Angleton, that Oswald had been in touch with DGI and KGB officials in Mexico City when he came there.
	Okay, so Oswald was motivated by audiology.
	But the DGI put him up to it.
	Could it be in response to the CIA planning to shoot Castro?
	Yes.
	Well, that is a strong theory.
	Again, there's no absolute proof here, but this is very suggestive from what Castro said.
	Anyone can go to the web and watch Castro, speaking in Spanish, of course, saying, hey, Colombian, and wanting to actually put it on the record.
	This is caught on film.
	Jim, give us a direct response to that, then.
	Well, Nikita Khrushchev and Fidel Castro were the most disappointed.
	They were virtually reduced to tears by the death of JFK because he really was working for peace.
	I mean, I've given you identification of six different hits, each of which was fired by different marksmen.
	So how anyone can persist at this point in time in claiming that there was one shooter above and behind?
	In fact, it was later in the evening, as I said, when the reports started to trickle in from the FBI, that there had been three shots with three heads, that Jack had been hit in the back, that Conley had been hit in the back, that Jack had been hit in the back of the head.
	Those were all three real shots by three different shooters.
	When you combine that with the reports of the shot to the throat...
	And I've got diagrams from physicians who were there at trauma room number one who drew it for me.
	I've got the blowout to the back of the head.
	We know the shot to the right temple already.
	Malcolm Kilduff, acting press secretary.
	I mean, I don't understand how Jeff can make this claim about Lee firing shots from behind from the very first report we had of his death was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head that entered the right tampon.
	So Frank McGee, where they've been reporting all day about these two shots, the shot to the throat and the shot to the right tampon, when the reports from the FBI and Secret Service concluding three and only three shots from above and behind says, This is incongruous.
	How can the man have been shot from in front, the shots they've been reporting all day, from behind?
	And I dare say Jeff hasn't even begun to address that because he can't.
	There's no answer to it.
	And when he talks about the magic bullet going through the neck, David W. Mantic, MD, PhD, who's a leading expert on the medical evidence, took a CAT scan of a patient with similar dimensions at JFK and plotted the official trajectory where it's supposed to have entered at the back of the neck and exited at the throat to convert.
	Convert the wound of entry to the throat to a wound of exit, it's not even anatomically possible because cervical vertebrae intervene.
	So Jeff is giving us a story that's a house of cards.
	When you get serious about the wounds sustained by JFK, you find it's absolutely impossible that it could have been one shooter.
	There were six shooters from the shots I've described.
	There was a seventh shooter who was a CIA guy who fired the shot, wound up in the grass, was picked up by Lieutenant Day, and disappeared.
	Then there's the eighth shooter who was behind the tree on the grass.
	Each of them represented a different organization or group that wanted Jack out, mostly for reasons of policy, except for the case of the anti-Castro-Cuban, Where he was in the Daltex, believe it or not, supervised by George H.W. Bush, firing from the window of a broom closet for a uranium mining company that was a CIA asset.
	His name was Nestor Tony Escadro.
	Has been talking about the Mexico City visit, which of course was used the way he's using it here to imply that Lee was in fact a communist and trying to escape to Cuba.
	They have in the past only released obscure versions of his passport.
	Well, it turns out that in an earlier release of these new files, the Dallas police had actually done clean passports of Lee Oswald, and it turns out...
	It's not valid for travel to Cuba.
	It's stated right on it.
	The whole trip to Mexico City was a fabrication.
	It was a CIA op.
	Three of their assets in Mexico were presidents of Mexico.
	They have photographic and audio, and it's not Lee Oswald.
	In fact, J. Edgar Hoover put out a memorandum to all the station chiefs that someone was in Mexico City impersonating Lee Oswald, and if that's all you knew about the case, you'd recognize he was indeed the patsy he claimed to be.
	So, Jim, evidence can be faked.
	Medical records can be tampered with, evidence tampered with.
	What's the motivation of the CIA, LBJ, and possibly the Israel lobby?
	What's the motivation for them taking out an American president in a nutshell?
	And then we'll kick it to Jeff.
	CIA, Jack was threatening to shatter the agency into a thousand pieces.
	They wanted to retain their power.
	The Joint Chiefs were upset because he'd not invaded Cuba against their unanimous recommendation.
	He'd signed an above-ground test ban treaty with the Soviet Union, which they had opposed, and now he was pulling our forces out of Vietnam, where they felt a stand had to be taken against the expansion of international godless communism.
	The anti-Castro Cubans believed falsely.
	Jack had betrayed them at the Bay of Pigs.
	The CIA knew better, but it was convenient to them for the anti-Castro Cubans to...
	Focus on Jack, their hatred, rather than on them themselves.
	The mafia was upset.
	They may have had an agreement with Joe, but not with Bobby or Jack, that if they assisted in his election, that the administration would lay off.
	Bobby, as Attorney General, was bringing more indictments and convictions than ever before in history.
	And just as Edgar...
	The mob had sex dossiers on members of Congress.
	The mob had a sex dossier on Edgar, who wasn't even able to admit the existence of organized crime until after the Joe Vellacci hearings, where it was laid out in such detail that it could no longer be denied.
	The fed, the eastern establishment surrounding the fed.
	That's the one shooter whose name rank and serial number.
	The shot he took and the effect it did or didn't have, I've been unable to identify.
	We're concerned because Jack had instructed the Department of Treasury to print United States notes.
	He thought it was absurd that the government should be paying a consortium of private banks to print the currency of the United States when it could be done.
	By the government itself, the Department of Treasury, for no interest at all.
	The Texas oilmen were upset because Jack was proposing getting rid of the oil depletion allowance.
	It was a huge tack-off write-off, like 23.5% for pumping oil on the ground, claiming it was a finite resource, and therefore they were putting themselves out of business.
	He was going to do all these things.
	He was opposing Israel.
	Where Ben-Gurion appears to have He resigned in anger after assigning Mossad to participate in the assassination.
	And most important of all, Lyndon Johnson, who wanted to become president of all the people.
	There was going to be a vote in the Senate that day on the Bobby Baker scandal, where Bobby was Lyndon's bag man.
	That was going to so tarnish Lyndon that it was expected Jack wouldn't run with him again.
	Jack had already informed his secretary, Evelyn Lincoln.
	He was not in a run with Lyndon again, and he was thinking of Terry Sanford of North Carolina to be his running mate.
	Lyndon was in deep trouble.
	He was a source of the plot, but it appears that he brought in Alan Dulles to help to plan it and coordinate with the various parties, where Edward Lansdale, an Air Force general, is responsible for assassinations around the world, especially.
	Project Phoenix in Vietnam appears to have positioned the shooters and determined the sequence of shots.
	Okay, so Jeff, if you would, take until 28 minutes into the hour, and then we'll go to break and respond to Jim's points there.
	Yeah, he keeps adding to everyone who had a motive to kill the president had someone there to shoot at the president.
	That's sort of the structure.
	Of his argument, and again, this is a fantastical scenario.
	With high-level political officials like presidents, you have lots of people who have a motive who you could say they had a policy disagreement, maybe a very strong policy disagreement, whether it's the Fed or the Israelis or the cattlemen or the oilmen or the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the CIA.
	They were all there.
	To shoot the president.
	The mob didn't like it because Bobby was prosecuting the mob.
	No, no, this is not proof of anything.
	This is not the way to look at an assassination.
	So let me just go through these three shots that we know were fired at the president.
	The first of all, Oswald's three shots missed.
	And we know that this was already pointed out.
	The origin of the second and third shots is established by the projection from that sniper's nest.
	As the president's motorcade turned and down Elm Street from the Book Depository building, the shot was set up for Oswald.
	The first shot missed probably because the downward angle was stronger.
	The Zapruder frames from the Zapruder film, the moments of impact of Oswald's second and third shots can be established by analyzing the frames of the film.
	And the second shot hit both the President and Connolly just as the limousine emerged into Zapruder's view from behind the freeway sign.
	And careful analysis points to the impact of Oswald's second shot at frames 223 and 224.
	That shot...
	Mocked as the magic bullet, it did go through both men.
	And this is the analysis.
	Now, of course, the last shot hit Kennedy in the back of the head at frame 313.
	Now, to go again, the second shot, which was the first to strike to hit the target, is, of course, the most contentious.
	It's been called the magic or pristine bullet by conspiracy theorists who contend that no single bullet could have seriously wounded both men.
	The bullet needed no magic, though, and it was not pristine if you look at the photographs of the bullet.
	Its trajectory, based on the failure analysis computations and the Zubruti film, has been reconstructed.
	So it's not an incredible notion that this bullet could have gone through both men.
	It simply isn't.
	By frame 226, the president began to show neurological reflex, known as the foreburn position to spinal injury.
	So it did nick his spine.
	His arms jerked up to a fixed position, hands nearly on his chin, elbows pushed out.
	You can see that in the film.
	And of course, the entry wound in the right shoulder was one...
	And a quarter inches long, the exact length of the bullet, indicating the bullet was tumbling end over end when it struck the president.
	The exit wound below the right nipple was large, nearly two inches in diameter and ragged.
	The bullet was still tumbling.
	And, of course, it traversed the chest and, of course, in Connolly.
	So the bullet, when it went through the president's back, it hit Connolly as it was tumbling.
	And, of course...
	Rifle bullets, you know, you're in the Marine.
	They're made to tumble so that they can actually hit multiple people.
	That's one of the things that the tumbling of a rifle bullet can do.
	And, of course, the real key thing is that there's nobody else.
	I mean, there were all these policemen there, all these Secret Service.
	Are you telling me that all these six assassins, these six shooters, none were caught?
	You know?
	Yeah.
	He was saying, again, though, are you saying then that the CIA, LBJ, and the Israel lobby could have had means, or they could have had motivation?
	Could they have had means then?
	Is that what you're doubting?
	There were probably a hundred people who had reason to kill the president that day.
	It didn't mean there were a hundred shooters there.
	The thing is, is that there was one person we know that was there that bought the rifle.
	That brought the rifle to work.
	That set up the sniper's nest.
	That fired three shots.
	We've got the shell casings on the floor.
	The president was hit from behind.
	It is not that he got hit from the front.
	There's no real evidence showing that.
	These are misunderstandings if you really look at things carefully.
	And we have a lot of witnesses.
	And if you collate all the hundred and plus witnesses and everything that Was done in the context of Lee Harvey Oswald's erratic, unstable, problematic, violent personality traits.
	Oswald was the guy.
	He's the one that did it.
	There really isn't.
	These are theories, but there's nothing substantial.
	There's no bullet fragments from their guns.
	There's no shell casings from their pistols.
	There's no witnesses at the moment on that day saying, I saw this guy shooting and then they're chasing that guy.
	These things kind of were invented or remembered later, much, much later.
	And this calls into question, I mean, human memory is notoriously poor, especially when you add years and years to it.
	What's best is what's freshest and what's written down at the time.
	So I just feel very uneasy about the theorizing about the motives and how many people were there.
	It just sounds so improbable when you have people who are intimate with the Oswalds.
	I mean, the claim that Ruth Payne and her husband were CIA, that's fantastical.
	I'm just amazed.
	At this claim, I can't imagine there's any real solid proof for that.
	I'd like to know what that is.
	And also, of course, Robert Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald's brother, and the very erratic behavior of Oswald's mother.
	And of course, the fellow that wrote the book The Oswalds, and I hope you will read it.
	I hope people will read it.
	I hope they'll read Gerald Polsner's case closed.
	Paul R. Gregory, The Untold Story of Marina and Lee.
	It is really clear when you know these people really well, when you get into Oswald, you realize he really did do it.
	He had that character, and he had that intention.
	And the people around him who were closest to him, his brother, his wife, his family's best friend, they all believed he did it.
	What about the, do you think that the American Zionist Council had the power, the means, and the motivation to have participated in this?
	Oh my gosh, it would have been too dangerous for Israel if they had been caught doing that, or if it had gotten out that they did it.
	It would have destroyed Israel.
	Israel would have been finished.
	How would you take a risk?
	I mean, to be a participant in assassinating the President of the United States, if that was ever known, if that was ever proven, Israel would have ceased to exist not long after then.
	I can tell you that for a fact.
	Nobody tolerated that.
	Jim, can you respond directly to that?
	Oh, look, this is...
	Jeff has a story he likes to tell.
	He's very well rehearsed.
	He's not responding to even the most elementary evidence.
	How can you deny Malcolm Kilda, the acting press secretary, coming out announcing the death of the president, saying it was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head while pointing to his right temple?
	How can anyone confront it with that evidence?
	Insist all the shots were from above and behind.
	I mean, this was the feat of the Warren Commission to pull the wool over the eyes of America.
	But they were watching it on television that afternoon.
	Two shots.
	The shot to the throat which passed through the windshield, which Malcolm Perry, MD, reported during the Parkland Press Conference as a small clean puncture wound, a wound of entry.
	The bullet we know actually passed through the windshield en route to its target.
	And the shot to the right temple.
	Those are two more shots, both of which were fired from in front.
	And now David Bantig, the world's leading expert on the medical evidence, has established a third shot from the side.
	So we got three from the back, the one to Jack's back.
	The one to Connolly's back.
	The one to Jack's back of the head.
	Three different shooters.
	We got three more shots from in front.
	The one to the throat.
	The one to the right temple.
	The one to the side of the head.
	That's three more.
	That's three plus three equals six.
	So there may be some who can't add two plus two.
	Well, this is three plus three equals six.
	And then I got this CIA shooter who'd become a Dallas cop firing where the bullet went into the grass because he couldn't hurt Jackie.
	That's a seventh shooter.
	The eighth was the Fed guy by the tree.
	And about the Pains being CIA.
	I just wonder how much research Jeff has ever actually done beyond re-leading, for example, case closed.
	My review of Mrs. Pains' garage can be found on my first blog, assassinationscience.com.
	Just scroll down to the bottom to the left.
	You'll find it there.
	John P. Costello, Ph.D., and I, by the way, have edited assassinationresearch.com where you'll find some of the best.
	Reports ever on the assassination, including his collation of all the eyewitness reports, which are being falsely depicted here by Jeff.
	If you actually go and read Costello's summation of the eyewitness reports, you'll get a very close proximity, consistent with what I'm reporting, and utterly inconsistent with what Jeff is claiming here today.
	By the way, guys, we have a caller.
	Can I say something about the windshield?
	Yes, please.
	Let's do a back and forth here.
	It's been on the windshield.
	Look, the President's skull was struck by a bullet from behind.
	Fragments of those bullets struck the windshield.
	And that was the damage to the windshield.
	Not a complete bullet hole coming through the windshield and striking anyone from the front.
	That just isn't...
	You know, consistent with any of the ballistics or any of the really careful analysis of the assassination.
	Let's get it back and forth with Jim.
	Jeff, you appear not to be familiar with the serious research.
	You appear very familiar with the Warren Report and Gerald Bosner, but not with the real evidence.
	Have you ever read, for example, David Lifton's Best Evidence?
	Have you ever read?
	That was 1980.
	Have you ever read Assassination Science?
	That was 1998.
	Have you ever read Murder in Dealey Plaza, 2000?
	Have you ever read The Great Bruder Film Hoax?
	Have you ever read Inside the ARRB?
	That's five volumes.
	Have you ever read David Mannix's latest book, which I reviewed in uns.com?
	New book, Nails How JFK Was Taken Out in Dallas.
	Have you read any, even one of those, Jeff?
	Did you read all 31 volumes of the Warren Commission report?
	Omar explained long ago, Jeff, that the supporting volumes contradicted the report of the Commission, the 888 pages.
	I mean, this is such old news.
	This is why I faulted.
	Oliver Stone, when he came before Congress to talk about the new files and he talked about evidence that was 60 years old.
	He doesn't know anything since his film was released in 1991.
	That is when I...
	Began collaborating with the best experts to ever study the case, including a world authority on the human brain, who's also an expert on wound ballistics, a PhD in physics, who's also an MD and board certified in radiation oncology, who's gone into the archives about 10 times and discovered that...
	The way they'd altered the x-rays, concealed the blowout to the back of the head.
	He's now reported none of the x-rays in the National Archives is an original.
	They're all...
	Altered or fake.
	I've got a witness report.
	One of the physicians who was there drew diagrams for me to the blood at the back of the head and also of the small clean puncture wound to the throat both before and after.
	Another PhD in physics who's done an extensive tutorial on the Zapruder film and proven that while it's 98% Excellent.
	The other two percent give it away.
	It's a fabrication from original sources that was altered to conceal the true causes of death, but the way they did it was sloppy in the respect that anyone who looks at the extant version of the film sees this violent back and to the left motion, implying a shot from the front, which no one in De La Plaza observed.
	Jack, when he was hitting the back of the head, remember, he was wearing this back brace because he had a back injury, a tight corset.
	He had very limited mobility.
	When he was hit in the back of the head after the limousine was brought to a halt, he slumped forward.
	Jackie's the backup was looking at him right in the face.
	When he was hit in the right tempo by that bullet, which near simultaneous side of the head, he slumped to the left.
	This is when Jackie climbs up on the trunk.
	She's going after a big chunk of Jack's skull and brains, which he holds in her hands all the way to Parkland.
	And after they pry his morbid body out of her...
	She composes herself, walks into trauma room number one, turns to Pepper Jenkins, the anesthesiologist, extends her hand and asks, will this help?
	Okay, let's Jeff break in and then we need to get to our call.
	Look, authors like Lane were kind of assisted by this group that he refers to as experts, but Calvin...
	Trillin dubbed them as Buffs in his 1967 New Yorker article on all this as it was coming out in the 1960s.
	And you can compare this to a kind of public relations program where there's this desire to believe that this event, the assassination of the president by this...
	By Oswald must have had more meaning.
	It must be something more to it.
	It can't be that this nobody, Oswald, could kill somebody like JFK.
	It's just too tragic.
	It's very hard for the national psychology to accept.
	And I think if you go to these different books, David Lipton, Marjorie Field, Shirley Martin, And her interviews that she gave to Lane, some of these other people, I can't...
	The conspiracy literature is so vast you could spend your life plowing through it.
	It is massive.
	There is a desire to confabulate, to multiply evidence, to claim more things, to become more and more intricate until you're completely lost down a thousand rabbit holes, six to eight assassins, ten different organizations plotting Kennedy's death.
	It becomes a kind of madness.
	You have to stick to the most basic facts and the idea that the Warren Commission was somehow involved in a cover-up, that these were not men of goodwill, that all these people were conspiring against the American public to hide the truth.
	I think this is really cynical.
	It comes from a perspective of deep alienation to come to this conclusion.
	Let's get to a caller.
	We have Layla.
	Layla, if you would, please try to direct specific questions and try to keep it to a few minutes if you could so we can get some more calls.
	Yeah, actually, I'd like to mention to Jim that, first of all, he kept referring to extraneous people.
	Lee Oswald's brother, Lee Oswald, when he was supposedly a juvenile delinquent, I assume you've heard of the assassination of Julius Caesar?
	Yes, of course.
	Very famous.
	How many stab wounds did Julius Caesar have?
	23. How many men were in the Senate that day?
	Up to 70. Yeah, but not all of them stabbed him.
	Pardon?
	Not all 70 tried to stab him.
	That's what I'm saying.
	That's exactly what I'm saying.
	There were others who were conspirators that were scared and ran or watched and ran away.
	But they knew about it and then, oh, no, don't know nothing.
	Saw nothing.
	Wasn't me.
	Well, Julius Caesar was, Julius Caesar's assassination was, of course...
	There were 23 stab wounds and there were 70 men in the Senate.
	It took only two to enlist all the others.
	Whether or not they had intense desire to kill Caesar.
	Many of them simply went along for whatever reason.
	But if you don't understand the concept of a conspiracy, I'm bewildered that you would even present yourself as someone worthy to debate with someone like Jim Fetzer with the work that he's put into it and his qualifications.
	But let me ask you one other thing.
	Do you think the conspiracy to steal Palestine?
	It's only recently that all the documentation has been uncovered.
	For 75 years, it was just the poor little refugees that survived the Holocaust.
	It's only recently that people start looking at the photos of the so-called refugees who came off the boat, fat, well-fed, and smiling with glee because they were about to take someone's home.
	And there's documents now that have been released from the archives.
	I mean, for you to say that it was hard, the CIA, Israel, of all people, after having stolen a country with the help of the British, would have the greatest chutzpah to kill Kennedy, especially if he was going to try and limit the power they had just been given by Britain, the great empire.
	And the CIA, they pretty well owned the country.
	They could do whatever they wanted.
	They were already a criminal gang.
	I'm really stunned by your comments.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm really surprised.
	But anyway, it's enjoyable.
	I'm enjoying it very much.
	Nice for both of you.
	Let's let Jeff respond.
	Yeah, thank you.
	My point isn't that people can't get together and conspire.
	It's that they can't keep it a secret.
	All assassins of Caesar, their names are written down.
	Everyone knows their names and the blows they struck.
	They went out and raised their daggers, their bloody daggers, and went out in front of the Roman people and declared freedom for Rome.
	There's no question about them hiding what they did, doing it all in secret.
	What we have here is the claim that there were seven people there, and Oswald, who had a rifle, who was on the sixth floor, who had bought the rifle, he didn't fire any shots.
	It was the six other people that killed the president.
	Oswald was just a patsy.
	I mean, it's really very difficult to believe.
	When you have this evidence, and the thing is, is that nobody then came up and held their rifles and said, "We did it, we did it like the assassins of Caesar did." This is very strange.
	Okay, back and forth, guys.
	Yeah, what's very strange is how Jeff repeatedly misdescribes my position.
	I reaffirm.
	He can't even get through past the first announcement of the death of JFK.
	Where Malcolm Kilda points to his right temple.
	He can't account for that wound with his absurd, simple theory of Oswald being the lone shooter when we've proven Oswald was in the doorway and didn't fire any shots at all.
	Now, there are two books I want to add here to the mix.
	He said repeatedly nobody talks about it.
	Well, in his brilliant book, Noel Twyman, 1997, explained people were talking about it all the time.
	Carlos Marcello bragged that Kennedy would be killed.
	Santo Travagante bragged he would be killed.
	Joseph Miltier bragged Kennedy would be killed and how it would be done.
	Johnny Rosselli told Jack Anderson years later Ruby was their man in order to silence Oswald.
	David Atlee Phillips suspected of being Maurice Bishop.
	He was Western Hemisphere CIA.
	Talked about it.
	Lyndon Johnson.
	Madeleine Brown, with whom I had conversations, concluded that Lyndon had been involved.
	Marita Lawrence was anticipating it was going to happen.
	Tried to warn.
	Frank Serges talked about it.
	Sam Giancana talked about it.
	Chauncey Holt, with whom I had conversations, where Chauncey prepared 15 sets of Ford Secret Service credentials for use in and around Dealey Plaza.
	Talked about it.
	Charles Harrelson, who was also there.
	He was the tallest of the three tramps.
	Chauncey was, by the way, the third.
	And let me mention, too, E. Howard Hunt, who was in Dallas but didn't participate in the shooting, on his deathbed, he thought he was going to die.
	He actually survived.
	But he told his son St. John, the chain of command, had gone from Lyndon Johnson to Gord Meyer, who was then CIA covert ops, to David Atlee Phillips, who was Western Hemisphere CIA, to William Harvey, who was assassination worldwide, to David Santana.
	I mean, that was E. Howard Hunt, given that report to his son.
	If you go to Noel Twyman's book further, you'll find in this brilliant piece, he saw the most perfect combination with the greatest probability of success was to bring together CIA military.
	Service.
	The Mafia.
	LBJ and Hoover.
	And that was more or less how it was done.
	And if you want to get a really spectacular insight into the character of Lyndon Johnson, look at Phil Nelson's book, LBJ, Mastermind of the Assassination of JFK.
	You won't get through a couple chapters without realizing he had the character, the ruthless, that's the drive and determination to do precisely what happened.
	Okay.
	Yeah, phones are blowing up, guys.
	Let's get to Don and some sponsor debate.
	Again, Don, with all due respect, keep it short if you can and respectful.
	Hello.
	Can you hear me, Jeremy?
	Yeah, we got you, man.
	Go ahead.
	Okay.
	Yeah, one thing Jeff said that Oswald resisted arrest.
	I think what actually happened in that movie theater was Oswald stood up and announced in a loud voice.
	I am not resisting arrest because...
	Apparently because he was afraid they were going to kill him there because he knew what the whole...
	I think he had an inkling at least what the whole deal was.
	May I interject?
	He said, I am not resisting arrest.
	Stop beating me.
	That was after he had punched a police officer and tried to pull a gun out to shoot another one.
	So yeah, they were beating him and subduing him because he'd been violent.
	But yeah, then he wanted them to stop.
	So that's what he called out, yes.
	What about the entrance wound to the throat?
	There was an entrance wound to the throat, and everybody that worked at the hospital there said it was an entrance wound to the throat.
	And by the way, when I originally sponsored this, I wanted to be a little bit about Ukraine.
	Do you still think Ukraine's going to win the war over there?
	I'll let you go.
	I don't know if Ukraine's going to win the war, but I believe that the throat wound is an exit wound.
	If you look at where the bullet entered in the back of Kennedy and his spinal injury, I think it's pretty clear that that bullet came from above and behind because it entered him higher up and it exited him lower down in the front.
	I've got a couple more callers.
	By the way, I had Don Moore announce this debate today on his show, or Mike did, so we should have callers from both sides that support both Jeff and...
	Jim, we got Murr in Wisconsin.
	We still have Murr, Mark.
	I'm here.
	I'm here.
	Hi, guys.
	Thank you.
	This is very interesting.
	But as you know, Brian David Anderson and Mark Anderson have done deep research, and he's been on my show.
	I've been on his.
	You can find this in the archives.
	And this is one reason I donate liberally to RBN, because truth can be told.
	The fact is, it was an incident on Elm Street.
	Kennedy was not killed.
	He was shot by crackshot Robert Oswald in his right arm.
	And this is well-researched, and you can prove it.
	You can see all these things in the archives.
	But if you go to Internet Movie Database and look for My God, I'm Hit, and watch that, and then more recently, JFKX, Solving the Crime of the Century.
	And then to find about details, who comes to still the conclusion of an assassination, which it wasn't.
	He got to live.
	He was taken to a Polish-speaking area of Russia.
	But it's called JFK to 9-11, Everything is a Rich Man's Trick.
	Britt narrates this, and it goes through so many details.
	And the two corpses, neither of them were Kennedy, but they, you know, like I said, came to the same conclusion.
	See, this is the thing.
	Everyone says JFK assassination as if it's a first and a last name.
	And so that blunts investigation into what really happened.
	And look at the many things this country has done, this government has done, that are just pure lies.
	And they continually do it.
	And so to unwind them, we need to keep talking about the truth.
	And the truth was, he was not killed that day.
	Thank you very much.
	Bye-bye.
	Okay, if we could, Jim, let's let you respond quickly to Mer's call.
	Oh, look, Mer's a good person, but this is rubbish.
	I mean, I've got the physicians at Tech's who dealt with a body at Bethesda, Gerald Custer, Paul O 'Connor, Dennis David.
	I mean, these guys I've had conversation with, sat down, talked with them in Dallas.
	They all saw the body.
	They all saw the fist-sized blood at the back of the head.
	Charles Crenshaw was the last physician to observe the body when it was wrapped in sheets and put into a bronze ceremonial casket and actually closed JFK's eyes.
	He was among my contributors.
	I think Jeff doesn't understand.
	Those books were my books.
	I edited those books.
	I've been doing this collaborative research, bringing together...
	The best experts to sort out the difference between the real evidence and the fake.
	That's what we've been doing for 30 years.
	And it's just astounding to me that a guy who poses as an expert is unfamiliar with our work because it shattered the cover-up.
	Even Vincent Bugliosi, who did this 1,500-page tomb that I think he was paid a million bucks to try to defend the Warren Commission, just as Jeff is doing here tonight, admitted mine were the only exclusively scientific books ever.
	Yeah, I have read some of the conspiracy books and found them difficult to believe.
	Take an analytical approach to things.
	Like I said, this idea that so many people have been involved in covering this up when Kennedy was so beloved.
	And it only takes one person to blow the whistle to come forward, let alone many of these assassins.
	Well, why would they do it?
	Why would they agree to follow such an order, such an egregious order?
	These people are Americans.
	This is the American president.
	And this is 1963.
	This is not the more cynical, demoralized country that we've come to know since then, since the late 60s and 70s and all that transpired in that time.
	I mean, I'm old enough to remember the Kennedy assassination.
	I remember my mom crying when I came home from kindergarten, what had just happened.
	You know, she'd just seen Walter Cronkite.
	She was watching As the World Turns.
	People had this...
	This was a deep wound in the American psyche.
	The idea that they could cover it up, the idea that the Warren Commission was a cover-up, you really have to have ironclad proof.
	And I don't think anything I've heard, a lot of talk about this expert and that expert, but I don't know who these people are and how they could possibly show that...
	I mean, how do you deal with the evidence that Oswald...
	Came there.
	He bought the rifle.
	His fingerprints were on it.
	His shell casings were there.
	I mean, we haven't heard any of that evidence dealt with.
	We haven't heard anything about, well, why did he shoot Officer Tippett?
	It's unaddressed.
	His fingerprints were not on the rifle.
	They had to take it into the morgue after he was dead to get a palm print on it.
	This is all very well known, Jeff.
	And I just can't believe how you just stick to your script.
	I mean, I understand it.
	Better than you would imagine.
	But the fact that you've not been able to deal with anything, even as elementary, as Malcolm Kilduff coming out and saying it was a simple matter of a bullet right through the head while pointing to his right temple, tells me you're not being an honest broker here, Jeff.
	I'm sorry to say.
	All right, let's get in with Paul.
	I'm sorry, Jeff.
	Paul in New Jersey, we're going to have some more time for some back and forth.
	Let's get Paul in while we're still doing calls.
	Now, take a few minutes, Paul, if you would.
	Hello?
	Do we have Paul in New Jersey?
	Oh, go ahead.
	Hello?
	Yeah, you got you, Paul.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah, no, one of the dead giveaways that it was a conspiracy is just that they murdered Oswald.
	I mean, you know, when they killed Aquino, remember that, how he was like...
	There's a Filipino, I think, president at the time.
	And the way you murder him is, you know, Kino walks off the airplane and there's some military guys and bam, bam.
	And there's the guy who did the murder.
	And then there's the guy you wanted to assassinate.
	And it's like, there's the body.
	See, that guy did it.
	The dead guy did it.
	So just killing Oswald enough and letting that happen on purpose, that's everything we need to know.
	You know, there's no way they would have let somebody in there with a handgun.
	And the way they carried Oswald out to let him get shot is just so obvious.
	May I ask you a question?
	If Oswald was innocent, why did they need to kill him since they'd framed him already?
	That's the whole point.
	So the dead guy, the person, can talk.
	Yeah, but he was innocent, right?
	There's nothing for him to talk about.
	He wasn't part of it, right?
	He was a patsy.
	Right, exactly.
	And that's the whole point.
	He said he was a patsy, so why would they need to shoot him?
	He already had his say.
	Because the guy you're blaming, the patsy, is dead then.
	He's the guy who did it.
	I mean, come on.
	That's why they killed Timmy McVeigh so quickly, right?
	The way they brushed him right to his gallows.
	It's so those people won't talk.
	And what's the evidence that Jack Ruby was prompted by someone else?
	And who else prompted him?
	How did they let even Jack Ruby near a guy on being arrested and let the public access to somebody who just supposedly murdered the president?
	I mean, come on.
	It's well known that Jack Ruby hung out in the police station all the time and he always carried a revolver in his pocket.
	So that's well known.
	He was always in and out of there.
	He's such a high-profile person, you put that guy in, you segregate him, and you don't expose him to the public.
	Paul, thanks, thanks, thanks.
	Look, they had to silence Lee.
	He could have told his whole story.
	He was recruited by the Office of Naval Intelligence in San Diego, where I myself served as a series commander.
	He served at Atsugi, our most secure base.
	He did a suit of defection at the behest of the CIA.
	When he came back, they gave him money to relocate, and he was working with the FBI.
	It was faulted because on the flyers he was handing out for Fair Play for Cuba Committee at the address of the FBI office there in New Orleans.
	He was a patsy.
	He was still serving as an informant for the FBI.
	If any of that had come out, the whole story that Lee had been the lone gunman would have fallen apart.
	Jeff, surely you can see that.
	None of those sources that you cite are credible.
	You haven't done any research.
	You don't know anything about what's been done in the last 30 years or even before.
	There's a huge amount of research on Lee and the CIA.
	It's really a stunt, Jeff.
	I love how you keep that calm tone of voice as though you really know what you're talking about.
	When you haven't read any of this significant research of the last 30 years, that's what I have been doing, Jeff, I have brought together the best experts to ever study the case, and you don't know any of it.
	I think it's more convenient to stay with the script by not knowing more, by not reading the books, which explains to me why you haven't done it.
	You're not seeking the truth.
	Who is the source for Oswald being recruited by the CIA?
	Where do you get that from?
	What's the documentation?
	Try a book called Oswald and the CIA.
	I'll bet you can probably find it.
	There's tons of stuff about this, Jeff.
	Jeff, Jeff, Jeff.
	There's tons of stuff out there.
	Just go to Amazon.
	Oswald and the CIA is a month.
	There's a whole lot.
	Philip Melanson has also got a book about Oswald and his government entanglements.
	Judith is reporting it in her book, Me and Lee.
	You don't know any of this stuff, Jeff.
	You can answer.
	You can say you don't know any of it because you haven't looked for it.
	I know about Judith's book, and it's just these people, a lot of these people are just trying to make money off of this famous thing.
	Jeff, you don't know anything about any of this.
	Why don't you deal with the problem of being CIA?
	Oswald was doing a pseudo-defection for the CIA.
	There isn't any question about it.
	He didn't even actually renounce.
	He didn't renounce his citizenship either.
	The embassy was closed on Sunday when that happened.
	He was bringing the information at the request of the CIA so the Soviets would know the altitude of the U2s to shoot it down.
	How do you know?
	Where's the source?
	Where's the documentation on Oswald working for the CIA?
	I've already given you two books.
	Oswald and the CIA as one, Phil Melanson as another.
	See, you haven't read any of this stuff, Jeff.
	You just are deliberately, massively ignorant of the most important research to preserve your role for promoting the script.
	It's embarrassing, Jeff.
	It's embarrassing.
	You know this so well.
	What is the source that this information came to this book from?
	How did they get the information?
	Why don't you try reading some of these books?
	Start with Assassination Science.
	Start with David Lifton.
	Jeff, when you can't even account for...
	Malcolm Kilduff coming out and saying it was a simple matter of the bullet right through the head.
	Why should anyone believe a word you say after that?
	Because the bullet entered the back of the head, and the way the bullet sticks works is they had exploded.
	Okay?
	This is ridiculous.
	There was a bullet that entered the back of the head, but it didn't come out at the right tempo.
	You're reversing the trajectory.
	This is just like...
	You know, the bullet was five and a half inches below the collar just to the right of the spinal column that it is back.
	It was Gerald Ford had changed the location when James Tang came forward, and they had to count all the wounds with only two bullets.
	That way they came up with a fantasy of the magic bullet.
	And I've already explained to you that David Manning demonstrated the magic bullet theory isn't even anatomically possible.
	See, you're making declarations that are ridiculous.
	Where does the book source for saying this?
	How did they find this out?
	Read my books and get some clues.
	Well, no, just tell me.
	There's a book by Philip Melanson, and there's the additional book.
	Oswald and the CIA is the title of the book.
	That's the title of the book.
	What's the book sourcing?
	You can play that game.
	You're well taught.
	Let me break in, guys.
	We're coming up at the end of the hour.
	I can go for some more if you guys are down for it.
	We've had a good structured debate in the beginning.
	We had a good back and forth.
	I think that...
	Is going to be, you know, good for the audience to take.
	But look, here's my question.
	We witnessed during the COVID response, right?
	And I think both of you can agree.
	We witnessed the majority of the governments of the West conspiring on this COVID lockdown thing.
	So is it too far-fetched that big conspiracies can happen because we saw it with our own eyes five years ago?
	When all of the governments of the West, just about, were on the same talking points.
	It absolutely staggered me to witness this.
	Jim, you reply and then go to Jeff.
	Yeah, three big ones have occurred of late.
	You know, we had the moon landing hoax.
	We didn't go to the moon.
	We didn't have the ability to escape low Earth orbit.
	We didn't have the navigational ability, the communication ability, JFK, and of course 9-11.
	Everything we've been told about 9-11 is fake, too.
	Alright, so what are we doing, guys?
	Are we going into the third hour?
	I don't know.
	It's kind of late for me.
	Let's come back to these topics, and maybe we can focus on government conspiracies.
	Thanks, guys, for coming on.
	It's been a great two hours.
	I liked the back and forth as much as I liked the structured debate.
	So I think that it was an audience pleaser.
	Please donate to RBN and you got to stay classy.
	We're off air, guys.
	Hey, really appreciate it.
	I know it's heated.
	Thank you so much.

▲