James Earl Files

[Dealey Joe]

What is it about the name Files that turn a lot of researchers off.Is files so unbelievable?Is it easier to believe that someone popped out of a drain and fired a shot?Or is it more romantic to think some Corsican group fired the fatal shotsWe have some great minds on this forum. What do you all think can be done to change this phenomenon ?I am baffled by this. Is it true the more you know the more sceptical you get?I have sent the DVD The Grassy Knoll to three different researchers and can't get a responseof any kind.Just think of the power if the whole community was to get behind James Files and Judyth Baker.Do you have any ideas?

[Phil Dragoo]

JoeWhen the digital picture on the television screen breaks up during a thunderstorm suddenly whole swaths of pixels disappear and reappear amidst stop-action freeze-frames and odd color inversions.Just as the Warren Commission, Katzenbach, Johnson, Hoover and Cronkite have rushed to cover our windshields with posters of the backyard photo, so, too, have many Americans crystallized images of what the Grassy Knoll shooter(s) ought to have looked like.E. Howard Hunt's deathbed croakings insist it was some French or Corsican or Sicilian international hitman.Dunkelian analysis has given us Badgeman.Hoffman saw the shooter break down his weapon and hand it to another; some discussion of workman's clothes, railroad coveralls, or some such.I think it's fashionable to pooh-pooh the Jimmy Files confession as farfetched and ludicrous, to claim he's made mistakes in his descriptions, confabulated details, a lot of nitpicking by armchair chatterboxes who have shot nothing but bull.I found his video interviews compelling and credible, found the man making the understatements to have a studied modesty, an absence of flamboyance.And to me it is damned clear he cannot get out of that box one minute earlier for anything he may say, nor likely profit so much as a pack of cigarettes. And would have much to lose, judging by those revealers who have gone before.He is counterintuitive to an established image in parallel fashion to the problem posed by the 35th president he shot.From the proper line of reasoning he is the logical embodiment.Braden/Brading was in Dal-Tex. Why. To aid Roselli and Nicoletti—who were the back shooter counterparts to the front shooter—for the crossfire.Many references to the right temple shot: references popping up in Horne like Redenbacher's corn.And Jimmy made that shot. And the consequent occipital blowout observed by over forty competent medical personnel at Parkland and Bethesda. Created the trail of mercury on the lateral.Is seen cutting out through the Memorial Arcade at a good clip.Was at the motel where Ruby was, Braden was.There are ample connectors. Does someone think there would be a guy in shades wearing a CIA jacket?Jimmy says he makes the shot and a guy near him produces Secret Service credentials to intercept the onrush of LEOs and civilians.And Weitzman identified Bernard Barker as one of these on the Grassy Knoll.And Barker with Hunt torpedoed Nixon with the sabotaged Watergate folly.And Hunt dies framing LBJ. And sparing Jimmy and the boys with that Soutre croak.Company. Family. These are men of honor. According to their code, according to their rules.CIA has used plausible denial since its statutory inception 1947 in the National Security Act, through the laying of the cornerstone at Langley, Virginia, November 3, 1959, to the shots in Dealey Plaza, November 22, 1963.Hoover denied the existence of organized crime until the Apalachin conference in 1957. Robert Kennedy started making trouble for organized crime. Jack Ruby called Hoffa's enforcer Baker for a total of a half hour in two calls November 7 and 8, 1963 among his 101 long distance calls that month. Lansdale was there. Hunt was there. Phillips was there. But somehow it's odd that a Chicago soldier of Nicoletti (who was taken out the same day as DeMohrenschildt, Oswald's handler) is outre, bizarre, a bridge too far.Shakespeare would tell these experts, there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.Theirs is the steep learning curve. Another ballistic lesson.

[neab]

Obviously people will be sceptical to anyone who comes out claiming to be jfk's killer. Doesn't matter who, much less a person who claims to have done it at such a tender age. I think alot of people dont buy into files cos there's no strong evidence showing his presence there really. The stuff he says are almost all things that could be fed to him by a jfk researcher. That eaglesham fella disproved the rademacher thing, they think he has changed his story several times( I dont beleive this though), and I dont think people trust someone affiliated with bob vernon and to an extent joe west who was apparently always lookin for any excuse/reason to crack the jfk case.Also, to people, he never actually said to joe west he was the shooter, only coming out with his confession afterwards which could be viewed as just a money making endeavour with promoter bob vernon. Rich della rosa's forum pretty much discard judyth baker and files now and they're one of the most respected forums on the jfk assassination. So it's understandable in a way why people dont believe.I believed him at the start but i trust him less and less, the big part being what he says doesn't fit with eye witness testimony of what was behind the fence. That and the fact you cant readily trust a man that claims all the faces that were there, when there's not one photo I've seen showing sturgis,ruby et al in the nearby vicinity. You'd have to beleive all the photos were altered to trust his word on that, which might be the case, but thats a big leap of faith in my opinion.

[ChristophMessner]

Dealey Joe wrote: ... phenomenon ? I am baffled by this. Is it true the more you know the more sceptical you get? ... There is a big truth above this all: People DON'T WANT to know about the full truth! They want to keep hopes, to have illusions, to let the military/ss do their security job without disturbance, to have small paradise inside their homes without caring much about what's going on outside .... Look to all the animals, do they want to KNOW about the full truth? About their mind and acting is so limited, about their soon being eaten up by another animal, about every now and then a big catastrophe will make some species extinct? No, they DON'T WANT to know, what this universe is all about, they want to have something to eat, a shelter and that's it. The same with the humans ... It's about robbery and the fastest gets the price and the slower ones who think about get empty hands and doubts ... Phil Dragoo wrote: Dunkelian analysis .... Great summary of it all, Phil!

[andries]

Exelent point joe, and it leads to the question is james files for real or not ?in the old west man needed just one good bright simple clue to justifya hanging tree,the story of james files so far has missed that target.unlike mark lane,s sober but magnificient rush to judgement the fundamentsoff the james files statements or story are totaly different watching rush to judgement makes cristalclear what mesage and intentions lane had, in particilar the interviews with del gado,bowers and holland areuniq,it leaves no doubts or questions and are alway,s relevant and every second the hamer hits the needle right were it should.the film is a stand allone and victory for us all, and can only be believed i ques we all agree on that.The presentation alone of james files leaves people digging how files came on the scene, and has never done any good for his credibilityeven with jim mars,mark lane,jim garrison and robert groden on his side to pledge quilty he would run into difficulties ,not so mutch because of his own performancethe man is not telling us all crap i ques, but he could be far more interresting to give relevant information wich could be suported one way or another.instead off all the other irelevant informationpeople dont like this kind of confesions wich leads to more questions,and a guy who is first telling part 1 on a selling dvd and and thana part two on a selling dvd or whatever,,,way out off line in this matterpeople want things to become clear for instance a nicolleti or rosseli who states that files was there,that,s sadly impossible nowbut perhaps there is still time for instance to get him for a live camere foreign or domestic and not on a dvd or pay pall showtaking straight from the heart,we should always tell and not sell the thruth.

[Dealey Joe]

All you gentlemen raise more questions for me.The first thing that comes to mind is something my old dad always said. " A lie can always be made to sound better than the truth" and I believe this might hold true in the Files / Baker stories, they jusy don't sound good.Phil your analysis is right on beam. The Oswaldians have but one story to tell and we tell that story for them. They just stand there with their hands out writing book, making documentariesfor entertainment purposes and to honor our fallen leader.Why does Ed Hoffman's story muddy Files' story? What does it mean when what someone says they saw from a mile away, and not really believed by anyone overshadow Files and the people who were closer? a number of witnesses say they saw smoke from the fence. Why not take all their storeys and put them together see if it could all work?NeabI don't know Vernon or West. To me everyone involved is selling a story. Why would we not believe West and believe a list of politicians like Marrs, Dunkle, Groden, Perry, Posner, Lifton on and on? the producers of all that is holy in the research community.People have purchased the theory of a known fraud, a possible fraud and their cohorts about something they pulled out of blurry 2X2 Polaroid picture when Badgeman and two or three other figures were discovered.The only evidence we had of a conspiracy and that gives Files credibility is now being shown by experts to be a fraud. Jack White is willing to accept verbal unprovable evidence to prove the film is a hoax. Why do we not question his past record of picture manipulation to discredit him?I fail to see where Files has made any money, I suppose he might have been paid by someone but who knows for sure?As for Eye Witnesses which one can you believe? Do you believe Ed or Sam?Do you believe the Limo stopped or do you believe the world stopped for a minute?Chris there is truth in what you say the people do not want truth. Fiction sounds better.i hate to think we need to be compared to Rats, but I know it is true, its all about what is perceived to be comfort, physical things, numb lazy minds that will believe anything that is easy and requires no action be taken.Andries it is interesting you bring up Real, what is real. If is not a cartoon is it real?Is what someone says they saw real? what if 100 saw something different, is that Real?Just what constitutes Real? is Badgeman Real?When files says he was alone what exactly did he mean?Did he mean there was absolutely no one else in the train yard or parking lots?Could he merely have meant there was no one there associated and to help him?Would he be stupid enough to mean there was no not one other person anywhere in the area?There are different ways to proffit.I don't know of a person in the research community that gives their books away or can afford to.Did Jim Marrs give his books away for free? does he teach conspiracy and extraterrestrial beliefs for nothing? Can Robert Groden afford to stand in Dealey Plaza and give his books away?Is he making big money there? If so why can't he come up with the 65 Grand to publish his new book? and is he expected to give them out for free?Gentlemen everything is backwards in this world. What is real?My daughter is a finalist to be on the popular Survivor TV program. It is called Reality TV.Is it real? What is Real?If Files said that, behind the picket fence there were 20 or 30 people would that have been believable? Bowers said he only saw two people, is that the truth? I think there must have been more that two? Did he mean when the motorcade came by there were only two that were in sight?Files and Holts stories do not sound like they jive up. is it because they have not conspired to tell the same exact story so they would be believed?just how much does Files owe us? What would it cost for us to believe him?If he committed suicide in prison and left a confession letter could we take that as being real?more questions, no answers?

[dankbaar]

The same questions of Joe apply to Chauncey Holt, Tosh Plumlee and Judyth Baker.Wim

[Dealey Joe]

Wim you have been around the horn on this.What do you think is the real problem.Is there anything that can be done to change this?I seems to me they just don't want to believe anything that can be proven.Seems like everyone has their own agenda they are promoting.I think we are playing to the wrong audiences.We need to talk about Dallas in November (DIN)

[dankbaar]

Joe , the problem is partly WITHIN the so called JFK research community. To some researchers, even the more educated ones, these subjects are too contaminated to touch. Take for instance James Fetzer. He finally came around on Judyth Baker, we have been in agreement on Chauncey Holt, but when asked, he maintains James Files is not credible. The other way around I maintain that his Zapruder alteration hoax is hogwash. Similar things can be said about Bill Kelly, Jim D'Eugenio, Len Ozanic, etc. As long as the so called research community is quarreling about its views, the opposition, like Posner, McAdams, Epstein and Perry is in good shape .... Just life as it is. They know better than we do the game of divide and conquer...Wim

[Dealey Joe]

Yes that is my whole point, we just are not together on things.Do you see any solution to this?If Fetzer believes Judyth then we can use him for that purpose and hope he might come around on the others.He would be a strong allie.Maybe we should get this out of the research community and into a different medium.I was hoping for Dealey but that looks like it has fallen through.