National Enquirer claims Cruz's father was standing alongside Oswald

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
Add Rafeal Cruz to the CIA element involved with the conspiracy to murder JFK if you have not already...

Clay and David were there that day in new Orleans too...Along with an ex president named George or should I say Gog?

Nah let's call him shooter...

It explains why he's so close to the Bush family.

His dad being CIA does not surprise me.

I guess this issue is going to fade away without much comment.

I thought at least a few major JFK researchers would do their own photo analysis but it doesn't look like anyone is interested.

I'm not 100% or even 50% convinced they are the same people but my instincts say there is something here.

My major flag is that Cruz's father didn't came out with the exact place he was at the time of the shooting - along with the names of a bunch of witnesses.

Everyone alive at that time knows exactly the where they were and who they talked to - but nothing was mentioned.

Another flag is Cruz's rise to the top despite his personality. It's just not the typical magnetic personality. It would make sense that the children of people involved in a cover-up would be given opportunities other people don't get. As a reward to the parents and also because they would have been raised in a specific manner.

But I guess we will never really know.....

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: namelesss

are you really going to pretend that the enquirer has never been caught in a lie?

Yea, they push an actual, true story now and then. But let's not shift the goalposts and turn that in to "beacon of truth" status, yea?

Caught in a lie?
Probably no more or less than any other media outlet.
My experience is as I have described, they break many new stories, and present the 'news' in an entertaining and dramatic form, totally unlike the TV news, right?
I do not believe anything that I read, but I can smell the reality behind the glitz.
A bastion of 'Truth'?
There is no such thing!

a reply to: namelesss

So they lie, but no more so than anybody else, so pointing out that they've lied is slander?

What a strange path of logic.

originally posted by: Daughter2
My major flag is that Cruz's father didn't came out with the exact place he was at the time of the shooting - along with the names of a bunch of witnesses.

Everyone alive at that time knows exactly the where they were and who they talked to - but nothing was mentioned.
..

This photo wasn't taken at the time of the assassination. It was months eariler. Could you come up with the exact place you were on a given day 53 years ago and the names of those who were with you? How about three years ago?

Cruz can't crawl back into the rotten woodwork he scurried out of fast enough for me but this is sleazeball tactics from the Trump camp.

a reply to: DelMarvel

Cruz can't crawl back into the rotten woodwork he scurried out of fast enough for me but this is sleazeball tactics from the Trump camp.

Would Trump even stoop this level of Micheivelleian gamesmanship?

www.psychologytoday.com...

a reply to: olaru12

I don't know if Trump himself has personal involvement in this but he's pals with the Enquirer CEO who flies back and forth between NYC and Florida on Trump's jet. The Enquirer has endorsed Trump. There are all kinds of juicy and legit stories they could run about Trump but instead they're publishing unsubstantiated rumors about Cruz.

Pretty easy to see what's going on.

And--I've been living real life and haven't been here for a while so I don't know if this got discussed but:

One of the women implicated in the National Enquirer Cruz mistresses story was Katrina Pierson who now happens to be Trump's head spokesperson who has been tirelessly carrying water for him on cable news.

Instead of saying "I know for a fact that at least one of the five women accused did not fwack Ted Cruz" he instead totally threw her under the bus by publicly implying the entire story might be true without qualification.

That's the level of douchebaggery of his campaign.

Daughter2, the rabbit hole goes far deeper than most are willing to admit. It would force them to rethink everything they have ever learned, and maybe even take action...

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: namelesss

So they lie, but no more so than anybody else, so pointing out that they've lied is slander?

What a strange path of logic.

Perhaps balance and fairness and equality is a 'strange path of logic'?
Quantum mechanics has clearly shown all that we hold dearly logical is false; all of Aristotle's 'laws of logic' are built on chocolate-pudding!

But it is considered a logical fallacy to take that which is in all and make an example of just one, in an attempt to denigrate and deny that one.
It is called 'bias'.
Such 'bias' leaves the field of 'logic' and gains emotional/egoic momentum.

a reply to: Daughter2

I guess this issue is going to fade away without much comment.

The reason is a majority of posters on this site are establishment GOP backers and are performing mental gymnastic to keep the taint of scandal from besmirching their chosen nominee - even when there is photographic proof of Cruz's Cuban-born pappy hobnobbing with CIA-backed JFK-assassin Oswald.

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Daughter2

I guess this issue is going to fade away without much comment.

The reason is a majority of posters on this site are establishment GOP backers and are performing mental gymnastic to keep the taint of scandal from besmirching their chosen nominee - even when there is photographic proof of Cruz's Cuban-born pappy hobnobbing with CIA-backed JFK-assassin Oswald.

Personally, I have my suspicions about every candidate. All. Of. Them.

I'm not surprised but I don't believe it's a problem that's unique to Cruz's family.

National Enquirer and partisanship aside, but on a JFK Assassination story level, this is worth a closer look if only out of curiosity. I have been studying JFK since 1997 and am fascinated by this claim. When I first heard this days ago, the first thing I did to debunk this was look up R. Cruz Sr. When I saw he had lived in New Orleans around the time all I could say to myself was "son-of-a-b*tch!, maybe it is him."

The picture is not great, so you can debate that all day.

The key is finding out if Cruz Sr. has any ties to Carlos Bringuier and/or his friend Celso Hernandez. I haven''t had a chance to really look into this, but here's a quick snippet off the internet:


>>The story begins on August 5, 1963, when Lee Harvey Oswald "visited a store managed by Carlos Bringuier, a Cuban refugee and avid opponent of Castro, and the New Orleans delegate of the Cuban student directorate. Oswald indicated an interest in joining the struggle against Castro. He told Bringuier that he had been a marine and was trained in guerrilla warfare, and that he was willing not only to train Cubans to fight Castro but also to join the fight himself. The next day Oswald returned to the store and left his 'Guidebook for Marines' for Bringuier."

A few days later, a friend of Bringuier's (Ceslo Hernandez) saw Oswald passing out his pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee leaflets on Canal Street, not far from the store Bringuier managed. Bringuier and a couple of like-minded friends proceeded to the site of Oswald's mini-demonstration, and Bringuier was enraged to recognize Oswald as the wannabe anti-Castro activist of a few days before. Though no physical violence resulted, some heated words were uttered, a crowd gathered, and Oswald was arrested along with the three Cubans for disturbing the peace.

Oswald didn't seem too fazed by the ordeal. "When I saw that was Oswald and he recognized me, he was also surprised, but just for a few seconds," Bringuier testified. "Immediately he smiled to me and he offered the hand to shake hands with me.">>

Here's link to above: mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

Looks like I've got some more searching and reading to do!

Are we next going to hear that Carly Fiorina and Frank Sturgis (Fiorini) are somehow tied together?

This story was out before the National Enquirer published it , so what better way for the powers that be to discredit it then put it out in the National Enquirer...

CIA purchased National Enquirer to discredit

Gene Pope bought the New York Enquirer in 1952, and relaunched it as The National Enquirer in 1954. Pope was listed in his Who’s Who biography as being a former CIA intelligence officer and being involved in “psychological warfare

And now Trump has jumped on the band wagon with accusations against Cruz.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

This *+*+ just got real!!

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: C8H10N4O2
a reply to: Daughter2

The reason you can find anything is because the Enquirer sells lies and trash. This really isn't a story.

ETA: no, i don't support Cruz

Actually, of all the 'checkout rags', the Enquirer actually pushes real stories, dramatically and colorfully presented.
I'd like to see the evidence in support of your ignorant de-rigeur slander?

The National Enquirer has been sued several times for false stories. I think they're a lot more selective and make sure whatever's smoking really is on fire.

I have no idea if this source is reliable, but it is interesting
milfuegos.blogspot.com...

Some of this seems to agree with other sources regarding Oswald contacting Cubans in New Orleans.

I think I will do some reading on the subject. I'm sure there is some interesting information on ATS, although I have not delved into that. I do really enjoy history.

I think I will do some reading on the subject

Read the New York Times , They get lucky sometimes.


Was the father of presidential hopeful Cruz involved in the JFK assassination?

originally posted by: DelMarvel
This photo wasn't taken at the time of the assassination. It was months eariler. Could you come up with the exact place you were on a given day 53 years ago and the names of those who were with you? How about three years ago?

True...but take a look at the organisation that they were working with and look for connections to the CIA. I would say that there were very few anti-Castro outfits that weren't riddled with CIA, let alone outright fronts.
Should be easy to connect those dots...question is, was it him? Documentation should be out there, if so.