Umbrella Man: Suspicious

[Jerry Freeman]

  The protest was just getting started in late-1963.

Right...and I guess the guy with the walkie-talkie was just radioing his wife to find out what was on for supper

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I would assume lone TUMs would not raise their umbrellas in the crowds along Main. They might encounter some opposition' or be taken for weirdos. As it was, Witt was standing back from the sparse crowd, out of the sightline of those nearest him.

There was a mention on a Dallas blog (I have no link) that men carrying umbrellas were spotted at the Trade Mart. This would be a good area for multiple UMs to open their umbrellas in protest when the motorcade arrived. Maybe there was something about Love Field that didn't suit them.

Several white-power members known locally were arrested at the Trade Mart (it took the assassination for that to happen). The Umbrella protest was going to be a thing (like MAGA hats in 2016) for Republican Goldwaterites in 1964. The protest was just getting started in late-1963.

Witt said he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. It happened to JFK and the PT109.

Witt testified that someone at work (he was a supervisor at a local insurance company) told him that people in Tucson or Phoenix had displayed umbrellas at members of the Kennedy family at an airport and they, the Kennedys, got upset. So apparently among some Kennedy opponents/haters/critics it was a "thing" to do. Or consider. The idea that the display of umbrellas as protest was unheard of is just flat out wrong. It was done.

Recall that the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, most notably Eleanor Roosevelt, came out strongly against Kennedy's nomination. They thought he was too young and were upset at his work with McCarthy but were particularly worried about the influence of the father, a man who was viewed very critically over his support of appeasement. It's interesting that JFK is viewed as a great liberal hero when in reality liberals at the time were suspicious about him and the influence of Kennedy Sr.

It's also interesting that the chief author of the Warren Report, Norman Redlich, represented clients called before McCarthy's committee. I can't find evidence of it but I wouldn't be surprised to see that there were some terse exchanges between JFK and Redlich over questioning of his clients. Anyone who thinks Redlch would coverup for a right wing murder of JFK is thinking some foolish things.

[Richard Smith]

The idea that the "City of Hate" didn't have it's fair share of rabid Republicans is a non-starter.

No one said that.  The fact remains that in the 1960s Texas and most of the south were states in which Dems won elections.  They were in the majority in Texas.  JFK won Texas in 1960. He won most of the southern states.  To suggest that Dallas was a city of republicans is not correct.  And, of course, JFK was not assassinated by any person with such a political affiliation.  He was assassinated by a left wing loon.

[Richard Smith]

If my premise..... is false then how come I can prove what I had claimed? I am well aware that JFK won in Texas so why all your gaslighting?
 
Wiki shows 1960 election by Texas county...see the big red one in the northeast? = Dallas County....Nixon was over 62% just like I reported.
Time to learn how to absorb the facts. 
 Source------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Texas

LOL.  Fact:  JFK won the 1960 election in Texas.  Fact: He was assassinated by a left-wing loon not a republican.  Fact:  Your premise is demonstrably false. 

[Steve M. Galbraith]

No one said that.  The fact remains that in the 1960s Texas and most of the south were states in which Dems won elections.  They were in the majority in Texas.  JFK won Texas in 1960. He won most of the southern states.  To suggest that Dallas was a city of republicans is not correct.  And, of course, JFK was not assassinated by any person with such a political affiliation.  He was assassinated by a left wing loon.

FWIW, I'll wager that most of those Bircher types in Dallas were registered Democrats. There really wasn't much of a Republican Party in the South at that time. Voting Republican was throwing away your vote. You may have voted for Nixon but you were still a registered Democrat. That's just a guess admittedly.

Any far right candidate would run as a Democrat since winning the GOP nomination was a dead end. As Edwin Walker did the year before in the gubernatorial race that Connally won. He finished near the bottom on the Democratic primary.

On the other hand (there's always at least one of these): Eisenhower won Dallas County in 1956 with 65% of the vote and in 1952 with 62% of the vote. So the Nixon vote/win was not an anomaly.

[Zeon Mason]

There once was a theory for Umbrella man raising the umbrella to signal a gunman on the grassy knoll positioned at the far sewer drain that the JFK limo was soon to be in LOS of that gunman.

However this theory kind of fell by the wayside for the following reasons:

1. The angle for the LOS picture for the far  sewer drain gunman is so narrow between Gov Connally in front of JFK that it’s incredible difficult and highly improbable to score a hit at the head (8” diameter moving target)

2.The entrance/exit wound path of JFKs head turned leftward and his leaning left, does not line up with the far sewer drain position.

3. The head of JFK moves forward at impact In frame 312-313.

4. The blood spray appears to be all going forward and up and there does not appear to be any resultant spray ejected from the rear of JFKs head.

5. Fragmentation of an 6.5mm ball nosed MC bullet fired into the front of the skull would have all exited to the rear of limo and none would have bounced backward hitting the windshield causing a crack or making a dent on the rear view mirror frame.

Therefore the only probable  CT reason (imo) for Umbrella man to raise the umbrella must have been to distract the SS agents in the follow up car to look forward at both umbrella man and his comrade DC man who was raising hand and moving towards the JFK limo, to aid a gunman from behind the limo to not br inadvertently detected by DS agents who SHOULD have been covering a 360 degree area with each agent observing approximately a 72 degree arc of area.

[Richard Smith]

FWIW, I'll wager that most of those Bircher types in Dallas were registered Democrats. There really wasn't much of a Republican Party in the South at that time. Voting Republican was throwing away your vote. You may have voted for Nixon but you were still a registered Democrat. That's just a guess admittedly.

Any far right candidate would run as a Democrat since winning the GOP nomination was a dead end. As Edwin Walker did the year before in the gubernatorial race.

On the other hand (there's always at least one of these): Eisenhower won Dallas County in 1956 with 65% of the vote and in 1952 with 62% of the vote. So the Nixon vote/win was not an anomaly.

Yes, no state is all republican or democrat.  To suggest JFK's death has something to do with the fact that some republicans lived in the Dallas area is absurd.  JFK won Texas.  Oswald was not a republican.  He lived in the Dallas area.   He was a radical leftist Commie.  It's unreal to suggest that republicans somehow were responsible for JFK's death.   Don't tell CNN, though, or they may run with it.  I don't blame Dems for JFK's assassination simply because the assassin was a left wing nut and lived in a state where Dems were in the majority.
The responsibility belongs solely to Oswald himself.   

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Yes, no state is all republican or democrat.  To suggest JFK's death has something to do with the fact that some republicans lived in the Dallas area is absurd.  JFK won Texas.  Oswald was not a republican.  He lived in the Dallas area.   He was a radical leftist Commie.  It's unreal to suggest that republicans somehow were responsible for JFK's death.   Don't tell CNN, though, or they may run with it.  I don't blame Dems for JFK's assassination simply because the assassin was a left wing nut and lived in a state where Dems were in the majority.
The responsibility belongs solely to Oswald himself.

It's a reminder that, although it's worse now, we've always had people willing to use tragedies for political benefit, to gain an advantage over their opponents using these deaths of people. Maybe they're sincere but it's still cheap wrong. And yes, sometimes - sometimes - it's fair to make a connection. Sometimes.

We see this with the Garrison followers: Oliver Stone, the risible DiEugenio. They use JFK's death as a political weapon to go after those who opposed the Soviet Union. Stone thinks the Cold War - all of it - was due to US's policies. Moscow had nothing to do with it. And those Cold War militarists killed JFK because he was going to expose their corruption. It's hooey.

Dallas didn't kill JFK. Even Marxism didn't kill JFK. One angry lost guy for whatever reason - there likely was a political factor involved - killed JFK.