Straight from the horses mouth! Anthony Summers writes of Antonio Veciana as seeing Oswald in the company of a CIA agent whose nome de guerre was "Maurice Bishop." Veciana was almost killed one day by an unknown assailant who tried to make him one of the many dead witnesses of the Kennedy assassination. Veciana now says David Atlee Phillips was "Maurice Bishop." Here's the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY-psk_aPhU Here's an older video by that pro-establishment jerk Bill O'Reilly. Among other things O'Reilly says that congressional assassination committee discovered that the government planted 9 CIA agents inside Jim Garrison's investigative team to feed him false information and to report back to the CIA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvdS-1dcVxw
By the way Anthony Summers is in that first video and here he is too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNH-x4Po-l0
Gaeton Fonzi, a congressional investigator discusses David Atlee Phillips https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9LydPyR6fc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaeton_Fonzi
Older interview where Veciana was very coy about revealing "Maurice Bishop's" identity. [video=youtube;zy4MWRKM89E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy4MWRKM89E[/video]
None of which is verifiable or supported by evidence. Like the endless other claims of conspiracy theorists it is therefore meaningless speculation
No. Now you and others provide real evidence for your pompou and uninformed assertions. Listen carefully youngster this is not a thread for his one FEELS it is about discussion of ideas. You have no evidence for your loopy tin foil hat ideas and crying like a baby is all you do when that fact is stated. Now show some evidence
This is the conspiracy theories section not the prove every detail of every conspiracy theory section with hard evidence, he (and others like him) just don't get the purpose of this section. The reason a conspiracy theory is a theory and not fact is because not every part can be proven. Some facts can show a theory can't be or is unlikely to be factual (such as with the OCT) and others lend support to the possibility that a theory may indeed be fact. Many conspiracy theories have turned out to be true. That's because through discussion/speculation, researchers eventually uncover evidence that lead to the truth.
Endless speculation and discussion of hair brained fiction does not uncover a conspiracy. The HUNDREDS of theories about JFK are not supported by any evidence at all. On the other hand overwhelming evidence proves oswald shot Kennedy. So until you can provide some evidence to the contrary you get corrected an called on your zany assertions like it or not.
A troll is not one asking for evidence. A troll would be one who makes mindless assertions and then runs away when asked for evidence. This is your MO
No one wants to discuss anything with you because you are a troll, regardless of your concocted definition of what a troll is. Posters here discuss conspiracies and conspiracy theories, that's what this section is all about. You don't want to discuss anything, you constantly demand evidence from posters who just want to discuss conspiracies and conspiracy theories. You do that with every poster you don't agree with and I don't believe I've ever read a post from you that constitutes a civil discussion of any kind, that makes you a troll.
No that is not a troll sorry and I concocted nothing. Much like the theories you adhere to you simply dream up anything to fit the argument. The forum is open to debating anything and any subject. Therefore the conspiracy section is not about agreement it is about disagreement as well. This means you do not get to dominate and demand others ignore the stupidity of your claims but can in fact challenge you on them. Just becase you hate being challenged does not mean you are right. The evidence proves you wrong and you hate it so deal with it and stop trolling. The definition of an internet troll fits you not me.
How come anyone who opens their mouth about some first hand evidence they are privy to about JFK assassination is targeted like Antonio Veciana??? How many witnesses were silenced or intimidated into silence??????????? [video=youtube;tvdS-1dcVxw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvdS-1dcVxw[/video]
The answer is none. The claims of people like Antonio veciana are baseless and without any supporting evidence.
Alright let's ask the question: Was Antonio Veciana shot 4 times right after testifying to the House Select Committee on Assassination or was he not???? Did not one of the bullets enter his skull or did it not??? Was there police and hospital records attesting to the alleged incident or not??? Policemen, ambulance workers, surgeons, nurses and other witnesses??? Soup Nazi, one of us is crazy.
I'm not aware there were two. Which was the other one? Maybe I was momentary distracted when I saw the videos or something ...
He made several claims including having witnessed Oswald with other significant figures. That is the baseless claim requiring evidence. Being shot proves.......... Nothing.
Vacienda was introduced to DA Phillips some years later and denied that DAB was Bishop. Phillips denied having ever met Vacienda or knowing who he was. That makes the entire episode suspect because Phillips was the head of CIA Covert Activities in Cuba when Vacienda was a member of Alpha 66
Well according to the video Veciana claims that when he first met Bishop (i.e. D. A. Phillips) he promised that he would not blow his cover ever. He died in the late 1980s and so Veciana did not feel bound to keep his promise to him. I, for one, believe Veciana. Also Veciana, when he was working with the artist in creating the composite sketch of "Maurice Bishop", stated the Bishop has sunspots under his eyes just like Phillips did. There are too many coincidences for it to be suspect.