Peter McGuire

A good study in absolute power. The secret US abduction of a suspected terrorist leads to a wave of terrorist attacks in New York that lead to the declaration of martial law. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133952/

Peter, FWIW, Robert and I agree on many points of the JFK controversy, and I'm grateful that he helped me become a member of this FORUM about fifteen months ago. Yet I continue to differ with Robert on the topic of the involvement of LBJ in the assassination of JFK. I read three books written in 2011 that attempt to blame LBJ, namely, Blood, Money & Power (416 pages) by Barr McClellan, also, LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination (658 pages) by Philip Nelson, as well as, LBJ and the Conspiracy to Kill Kennedy (344 pages) by Joe Farrell. All these books are flawed by melodrama, bias, one-sided logic and a substitution of shock value for evidence. IMHO these are made-for-money books of historical fiction. The template for all books that blame LBJ for killing JFK was written in 1991 by Craig Zirbel, namely, Texas Connection (323 pages). In my opinion this is still the best of the lot. Zirbel is biased, yes, but he is also openly emotional and does not pretend to be objective about his hatred for LBJ. Barr McLellan himself summarized things best when he said that LBJ knew nothing at all regarding the details of the JFK assassination, because he left everything to his lawyer, Edward Clark. Yet, allegations that Ed Clark orchestrated the JFK assassination amount to hearsay and rumor. But McLellan at least admits -- while blaming LBJ for the JFK assassination, that "LBJ knew nothing at all" about what was entailed. Some mastermind. The book by Craig Zirbel is an emotional outburst of the first caliber. It is worth reading for its entertainment value. As for proving a case against LBJ, it is even less effective than the Warren Commission case against Oswald. That said, I would like to return to Joesten's theory that the DPD was deeply involved in the crime itself. Would you care to comment about that? Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos> I bought MBP when it first came out I believe around 2004 when I was living in Korea. Things were different then, especially when one was living abroad. I am not much of a reader, but I have finished several good books lately - but MBP - I fell asleep after reading not much more than a chapter as I recall. And as I said, I owned and read the rare Joesten book we are talking about and remember Joesten accusing Curry of taking a bribe if I memory serves me. This is what I think - that it is possible, that the Dallas Poice Chief assisted in the assassination and even accepted a bribe ( $100,000 ) according to Joesten. Just like it is possible that Tippit was involved - actually there is a LOT of evidence linking Tippit to the murder of President Kennedy. It is hard to accept that the Secret Service shut down their assistance to the President of the United States during the heart of the shooting - yet it happened folks. This is not even open to debate people, since what they did was in plain sight.

In reference to your later post, I owned the book for some time and while I do not have that sentence at the top of my head, my concern with you is this; You hold yourself out as a so called "conspiracy theorist" ; a term I hate but that is what they call us. Then , you devote an enormous amount of time blaming LBJ for the crime - like he had the power to put this into motion. Finally , when push comes to shove, you absolve the Secret Service , who had everything to do with allowing this to happen, and now DPD - who Joesten was right on in blaming, and early in the game. And now I will address your objection as to what Joesten wrote and this is my response - I have noticed that I do not agree with everything that a private researcher says and sometimes it conficts with later research. We have the luxury of decades of research that early researcher Joesten did not have. Allen Dulles will be found to be a low level player in the crime to beat all crimes, while you push a low life , low level player such as Johnson as the one who thought this Coup D Etat up and carried it out - to this day.

I watched RFK jr , if that is who you are referring to , recently on LINKTV, which I posted about here previously. He actually has done something important in his life. He is also a big goomer - facing up to some big ass mountain men regarding the issue at hand. ( about mining in Tennesse or some place like that ) He also appeared in my email from some online venue who said he "had doubts" about he WC. Oh how radical. doubts about the WC from a nephew at this late date. MAN UP RFK jr! to the grandson / nephews DO something about your Grandfathers / Uncles government murder rather than piss and moan about some irrelevant issue. I personally think the Kennedy clan are a bunch of moochers who JFK/RFK/MLK would be ashamed of . Although JFK ( who suffered from a lot of painful ailments) enjoyed his short life - he did not deserve to die in service to his country. ( in a Coup d Etat ) by elements of his own government - chief of which were Allen Dulles and Kennedy's own military. But I guess if I were a Kennedy I would prefer the status quo because I would not have to bear the shame that my family member was executed in broad daylight next to his wife for something he obviously did ( that crossed the line )

As I wrote earlier, I owned this book and sold it for a song. Joesten was an intelligent man who I would believe anytime before you Robert. You have been pushing a Johnson did it theory , which is almost as bad as being a Greer shootist. Both discredit real research. It is time for you to go.

Thats right - there can not be many viewers , Dish and Direct do not pay anything to Link, hence the constant ads for donations. Regarding the 1953 Iran Coup; there is an interesting clip of Allen Dulles denying that the U.S. would ever be involved in assassination or nation building. Quite hilarious. And although the Coup has been available for reading , getting it on TV would widen the number of people aware of the 1953 Iran Coup, the players, and the implications on the Middle East. The episode ends by speculating that the government under Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh could have evolved peacefully in Iran which would have put a Democratic government right in the heart of the now troubled Middle East! Great job CIA and Kermit Roosevelt et al! These same people were likely involved in Dallas just a decade later - so maybe if Link has more shows like this they will come after the station after all! The following is from Spartacus - Amy Goodman is a frequent guest on Link TV. http://www.spartacus...FKroosevelt.htm 3) Steven Kinzer, interviewed by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now (4th March, 2004) The story of how the C.I.A. overthrew the government of Iran in 1953 is really an object lesson in how easy it is for a rich and powerful country to throw a poor and weak country into chaos. The CIA sent one of its most adept operatives, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt, to Iran with the mission of organizing the overthrow of the government. One reason I was so interested in writing this book is that I have always asked myself, how do you go about overthrowing a government? What do you do? Suppose that you are sent to a country with that mission. What do you do on the first day? How do you start and then what do you do? Well, now I know. Kermit Roosevelt set about trying to create chaos in Iran. He was able to do that very quickly by a series of means. The first thing he did was, he started bribing members of parliament and leaders of small political parties that were a part of Mossadegh 's political coalition. Pretty soon the public started to see the Mossadegh ’s coalition splitting apart and people denouncing him on the floor of parliament. The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing newspaper editors, owners and columnists and reporters. Within a couple of weeks, he had 80% of the newspapers in Tehran on his payroll and they were grinding out every kind of lie attacking Mossadegh. The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing religious leaders. Soon, at Friday prayers, the Mullahs were denouncing Mossadegh as an atheist enemy of Islam. Roosevelt also bribed members of police units and low-ranking military officers to be ready with their units on the crucial day. In what I think was really his master stroke, he hired the leaders of a bunch of street gangs in Tehran, and he used them to help create the impression that the rule of law had totally disintegrated in Iran. He actually at one point hired a gang to run through the streets of Tehran, beating up any pedestrian they found, breaking shop windows, firing their guns into mosques, and yelling -- "We love Mossadegh and communism." This would naturally turn any decent citizen against him. He didn't stop there. He tired a second mob to attack the first mob, to give people the impression that there was no police presence and order had completely disintegrated. So, within just a few weeks, this one agent operating with a large sum of cash and a network of contacts and various elements of society, had taken what was a fairly stable country and thrown it into complete upheaval.

http://suite101.com/article/the-iranian-coup-of-1953-and-kermit-roosevelt-a134760 Kermit Roosevelt, Leader of C.I.A. Coup in Iran, Dies at 84 By IRVIN MOLOTSKY Published: June 11, 2000 Sign In to E-Mail Print Single-Page Kermit Roosevelt, who was a member of the famous American political family but who made his contributions to the nation in the shadowy world of spy craft, died Thursday at a retirement community in Cockeysville, Md., near Baltimore. He was 84. Mr. Roosevelt's best-known exploit was as director of the 1953 coup that overthrew the leader of Iran, Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, a nationalist who concerned Washington because he was supported by the Iranian Communists at the height of the cold war. Earlier this year, the Central Intelligence Agency's secret history of the coup surfaced, providing a detailed account of the overthrow, which brought Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi to power. Mr. Roosevelt, the chief of the C.I.A.'s Near East and Africa division, spent much of his time in Tehran, trying to get the shah, depicted in the history as a vacillating coward, to summon the courage to dismiss Mr. Mossadegh. ''On Aug. 3rd,'' the secret history says, ''Roosevelt had a long and inconclusive session with the shah,'' who ''stated that he was not an adventurer, and hence, could not take the chances of one.''

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php A short account of 1953 Coup Operation code-name: TP-AJAX Pages: 1 2 3 Page 1 Coup 53 of Iran is the CIA's (Central Intelligence Agency) first successful overthrow of a foreign government. But a copy of the agency's secret history of the coup has surfaced, revealing the inner workings of a plot that set the stage for the Islamic revolution in 1979, and for a generation of anti-American hatred in one of the Middle East's most powerful countries. The document, which remains classified, discloses the pivotal role British intelligence officials played in initiating and planning the coup, and it shows that Washington and London shared an interest in maintaining the West's control over Iranian oil. Dr. Donald N. Wilber, a CIA spy, with the cover of Persian architectural expert, who planned the coup in Iran. The secret history, written by the CIA's chief coup planner, says the operation's success was mostly a matter of chance. The document shows that the agency had almost complete contempt for the man it was empowering, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. And it recounts, for the first time, the agency's badly tried to seduce and force the shah into taking part in his own coup. The operation, code-named TP-AJAX, was the blueprint for a succession of CIA plots to foment coups and destabilize governments during the cold war - including the agency's successful coup in Guatemala in 1954 and the disastrous Cuban intervention known as the Bay of Pigs in 1961. In more than one instance, such operations led to the same kind of long-term animosity toward the United States that occurred in Iran. The history says agency officers orchestrating the Iran coup worked directly with royalist Iranian military officers, handpicked the prime minister's replacement, sent a stream of envoys to bolster the shah's courage, directed a campaign of bombings by Iranians posing as members of the Communist Party, and planted articles and editorial cartoons in newspapers. But on the night set for Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq's overthrow, almost nothing went according to the meticulously drawn plans, the secret history says. In fact, CIA officials were poised to flee the country when several Iranian officers recruited by the agency, acting on their own, took command of a pro-shah demonstration in Tehran and seized the government. Two days after the coup, the history discloses, agency officials funneled $5 million to Iran to help the government they had installed consolidate power. Dr. Donald N. Wilber, an expert in Persian architecture, who as one of the leading planners believed that covert operatives had much to learn from history, wrote the secret history, along with operational assessments in March 1954. In less expansive memoirs published in 1986, Dr. Wilber asserted that the Iran coup was different from later CIA efforts. Its American planners, he said, had stirred up considerable unrest in Iran, giving Iranians a clear choice between instability and supporting the shah. The move to oust the prime minister, he wrote, thus gained substantial popular support. Dr. Wilber's memoirs were heavily censored by the agency, but he was allowed to refer to the existence of his secret history. "If this history had been read by the planners of the Bay of Pigs," he wrote, "there would have been no such operation." "From time to time," he continued, "I gave talks on the operation to various groups within the agency, and, in hindsight, one might wonder why no one from the Cuban desk ever came or read the history." The coup was a turning point in modern Iranian history and remains a persistent irritant in Tehran-Washington relations. It consolidated the power of the shah, who ruled with an iron hand for 26 more years in close contact with the United States. He was toppled by Iranian Revolution of 1979. Later that year, "Students of Imam Line" went to the American Embassy, took diplomats hostage and declared that they had unmasked a "nest of spies" who had been manipulating Iran for decades. The Islamic government of Ayatollah Khomeini supported terrorist attacks against American interests largely because of the long American history of supporting the shah's suppressive regime. Even under more moderate rulers, many Iranians still resent the United States' role in the coup and its support of the shah. Former US Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, in an address, acknowledged the coup's pivotal role in the troubled relationship and came closer to apologizing than any American official ever has before. "The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons," she said. "But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs." The history spells out the calculations to which Dr. Albright referred in her speech. Britain, it says, initiated the plot in 1952. The Truman administration rejected it, but President Eisenhower approved it shortly after taking office in 1953, because of fears about oil and Communism. The document pulls few punches, acknowledging at one point that the agency baldly lied to its British allies. Dr. Wilber reserves his most withering asides for the agency's local allies, referring to "the recognized incapacity of Iranians to plan or act in a thoroughly logical manner."

Link TV is only available on Satellite based Dish Network and DirecTV. They seem to dig deep into some very controversial subjects. But would they openly discuss the Kennedy and King assassinations? I submit it would be their downfall. Link TV broadcasts programs that engage, educate and activate viewers to become involved in the world. These programs provide a unique perspective on international news, current events, and diverse cultures, presenting issues not often covered in the US media. SENIOR MANAGEMENT Paul S. Mason, President & Chief Executive Officer, is an award-winning broadcast journalist and documentarian. A 28-year veteran of ABC News, Mason served as senior vice president and the executive-in-charge of several ABC News shows, including Nightline, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and ABC News Radio. He also directed all political coverage at ABC News and served as executive producer for the weekend edition of World News Tonight. Through the course of his career, Mason's work earned an Emmy (plus 14 Emmy nominations), four Cine Golden Eagles, and the New York Film Festival Grand Prize for his one-hour news documentary, Judgment at Midnight. He was a member of the ABC News team that won the DuPont Silver Baton and the Peabody Award for coverage of the events of September 11, 2001. For more information, please see Paul's full bio. Kim Spencer, Chief Content Officer, is an award-winning producer of over 50 documentaries and television specials. His 1983 documentary The First 50 Years, on the history of U.S.- Soviet relations, won a DuPont-Columbia Award. A pioneer in using satellite links to foster global dialogue, Kim produced a series of fifteen international “spacebridges” including The Moscow Link, a live TV exchange that changed USSR attitudes on nuclear war, the Five Continent Spacebridge, and Capitol to Capitol, a series of live debates on ABC between the U.S. Congress and the USSR Supreme Soviet (winning two Emmy Awards in 1989). Subsequently Kim became coordinating producer of ABC News’ Prime Time Live. In the 1990s he produced the innovative Vis à Vis documentary series on PBS: transcontinental video dialogues linking people from their homes and workplaces. He was a founder and executive director of Internews Network, an international non-profit organization that fosters independent media in 40 developing countries. Spencer is also executive producer of Link TV’s original productions, including Global Pulse, Bridge to Iran and Mosaic. Keith Chreston, Chief Financial Officer, has over 25 years experience as a senior financial executive and consultant with businesses and non-profit organizations. He is the General Manager of Chreston Consulting LLC, a financial consulting firm. His non-profit background includes prior service as the Chief Operating Officer of the Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy in San Francisco, California, as well as interim COO and CFO of the East Bay Community Foundation in Oakland, California. Keith was formerly a senior financial executive for several businesses, and a CPA and auditor with Ernst & Young. He holds an MBA degree from St. Mary’s College in Moraga, California. Hannah Eaves, Vice President/Digital & Engagement, oversees Link TV's Internet operations, managing design, engineering, and new technology development. Prior to Link TV, Hannah worked for 10 years as an interactive multimedia producer, video producer, and video editor for clients including Tower Records, Kaiser Permanente, and Blockbuster. Her web management experience has brought her onto projects for Sam Goody, HP, and Altera, as well as into long term positions with several Bay Area VOD start-ups. As a journalist she has covered the convergence of film, TV, and the tech world for publications including SOMA Magazine, the Santa Cruz Sentinel, Imagining Reality: The Faber Book of Documentary Film, Alternet, GreenCine, PopMatters, and most recently as an expert tech columnist for SF360. Ben Fuller, Vice President/Business Development, was co-founder and president of eBizApps.com, an e-business solutions consulting company acquired by Framfab of Sweden. Ben previously worked at DaimlerChrysler and Global Business Network. Fluent in six languages, Ben holds a master’s degree from Stanford University and completed a Fulbright Scholarship. In addition to overseeing development of new web products, Ben is responsible for Link's PEG and alternative cable distribution. Ben manages Link’s operations in Los Angeles. Wendy Hanamura, Vice President/Strategy & General Manager, oversees the network's on-air operations, post-production and pledge drives. Hanamura also serves as host of many pledge specials, and originated Mosaic Special Reports, Link TV's Middle Eastern news analysis program. Wearing several hats, Hanamura also executive produces series for Link TV, including the One Nation, Many Voices Online Film Contest, and she is part of the development team for the Global Pulse News Service. Hanamura has been an award-winning documentarian and television journalist for more than 23 years. Her programs have been seen internationally on PBS, CBS, the Discovery Channel, and NHK-TV in Japan. Her documentaries often focus on the personal story as it exemplifies larger issues in our society and collectively they have been awarded an Emmy, a Cine Golden Eagle and a Chris Award for Best Social Issues Documentary. Hanamura began her career at Time magazine; she has been a nightly news reporter for KPIX-TV in San Francisco, as well as a Tokyo-based television and radio correspondent for World Monitor on the Discovery Channel, an anchor for NHK, The Japanese Broadcasting Company, and a series producer for PBS station, KQED. Lorraine Hess, Vice President/Programming, has been a key member of the programming and acquisitions department since the channel’s inception in 1999. Prior to working at Link TV, Lorraine worked for over 13 years in international production and documentary film. Her roles ranged from series and executive producer to field producer and post-production producer. Lorraine’s work, both in the television and production realms, and in her prior work as a teacher, has taken her all over the world. It has also solidified her passion for world cultures and people, as well as her compassion for the underdog and for people whose voices can reach a wider audience through television and film. Lorraine has a degree in French Language and Literature from the University of Sheffield in the UK. Janet Pailet, Vice President/Development, is responsible for spearheading the organization's fundraising and sponsorship efforts. Pailet has over twenty years of fundraising experience in both the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors of entertainment, media, and health care. She has raised more than $25 million for theater, film, and entertainment projects from high net worth individuals as a commercial producer. She is a graduate of the State University of New York where she earned a B.A. in Political Science with Magna Cum Laude. She also holds a J.D. from the American University's College of Law in Washington, D.C.

Hindsight bias is real and it gives me the opportunity to say that given all this hindsight, anyone who believes Oswald did it ( alone if you will ) is the real idiot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j5xgNH-P6M Excellent explanation by Groden of how Warren was manipulated into heading the commission by suggesting there would be " WWIII if the public knew Oswald was sent by the Cubans."

Robert , you do know Kessler blames Kennedy for the Agents not being on the running boards which "led to his own death" don't you? around minute 5

Very often, great posters on this board reply and clarify what I was trying to say in a way that I was just not able to do. This is the most fantastic example of that!! Very well done , Cliff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unbelievable double talk .... if it not were this case! I for one am so used to this nonsense that it doesn't surprise or disturb me anymore.

Obama says the buck stopped with him, so I should have not voted for him since his administration lied to cover up a massive mistake. My questions are: What was an Ambassador doing at a Consulate which are always less secure - much less in that war torn country? Did the Ambassador have some kind of Kennedy style death wish? Again why was he there and why did he not get out of there sooner? ( it seems he delayed his departure to destroy documents!) Finally. I am sick of these outright lies in the face of an obvious alternative explanation! AND this is WHY letting the Kennedys' be decimated was not a good idea since it or any other lie can be repeated. Why because it can be repeated.

Got hip to Joesten several years ago. Bought his book on Johnson for around $150 and sold it in a weak moment for about the same. I had figured I could get a bunch of money from the Johnson Estate then foolishly let it go. Joesten, as has mentioned , was as about as early a researcher as you could be. He was not a native English speaker, yet moved around in top circles - getting what could be done in interviewing Aristotle Onassis - who he briefly called upon in New York according to Joesten. No offense people- but this brings up a soar subject of mine that posters on this board do not read much - just regurgitate other online writings. To get up to speed on Ari , you can view http://www.biography.com/people/aristotle-onassis-9428627/videos

Pamela, You are really one pathetic human being for pursuing this matter the way you are. Try looking at the evidence, rather than manufacture some idiotic recreation of a scenario that never even happened.

"It is impossible for most people to imagine exactly what went through the minds of Japanese soldiers and officers as they committed the atrocities. But many historians, eyewitnesses , survivors, and the perpertrators themselves have theorized about what drove the naked brutality of the Japanese imperial army. Some Japanese scholars believe that the horrors of the Rape of Nanking and other outrages of the Sino - Japanese War were caused by a phenomenon called "the transfer of oppression." pg. 216 Epilogue The Rape of Nanking. Simply put, the Japanese soldiers were treated poorly from about the age of 14 and let loose their rage on the Chinese. "It has often been suggested that those with the least power are oten the most sadistic if given the power of life and death over poeple even lower on the pecking order." http://www.irischang.net/ "I want the Rape of Nanking to penetrate into public consciousness. Unless we truly understand how these atrocities can happen, we can't be certain that it won't happen again.” “If the Japanese government doesn’t reckon with the crimes of its wartime leaders, history is going to leave them as tainted as their ancestors. You can’t blame this generation for what happened years ago, but you can blame them for not acknowledging these crimes.” Iris Shun-Ru Chang (March 28, 1968 – November 9, 2004) was an American historian and journalist. She is best known for her best-selling 1997 account of the Nanking Massacre, The Rape of Nanking. She committed suicide on November 9, 2004. Chang is the subject of the 2007 biographical book, Finding Iris Chang, as well as the 2007 documentary film Iris Chang: The Rape of Nanking. Reports said that news of her suicide hit the massacre survivor community in Nanjing hard. In tribute to Chang, the survivors held a service at the same time as her funeral, held at the Gate of Heaven Cemetery in Cupertino, California on Friday, November 12 2004, at the victims' memorial hall in Nanjing. In 2005, the victims memorial hall in Nanjing, which collects documents, photos, and human remains from the massacre, added a wing dedicated to Chang (Wikepedia).

I am only interested in the Coup D Etat of president John F Kennedy because of interest in human nature and behavior . When Good Men Do Nothing by Wayne Greeson "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke) So much of the history of the struggle between good and evil can be explained by Edmund Burke's observation. Time and again those who profess to be good seem to clearly outnumber those who are evil, yet those who are evil seem to prevail far too often. Seldom is it the numbers that determine the outcome, but whether those who claim to be good men are willing to stand up and fight for what they know to be right.

In 1997, while working in a suburb of Taipei, I presented this book to a Chinese ( Taiwanese ) co-teacher who I was working with . The book was just out, and the horrors of this event have been in my mind ever since. I went to the Chinese mainland a year later and my family were on Lake Tai ( Tai Hu ) which was one the routes that the Japanese took on their way to the wartime capital of China. ( Nanjing ) I never imagined Ms. Chang would let this book get to her in such a way - but as a Chinese ( American ) she must have been burdened so much. If you do not think that something could get to you in such a way - learn all about - one of the stories of absolute barbarism on the part of any peoples. It will be the Japanese last chance since they will never have a military again. This has got to be humiliating to the Japanese. Read the story of The Rape of Nanjing and give honor to Shun-Ru Chang "Iris" Chang. RIP Iris Chang

That sounds pretty passive-aggressive to me Pamela, since I do not agree with what you say, and you have got to be aware of it.

JFK: Inside the Target Car, Part Two Or, The Discovery Channel's Idiot Conspirators By James DiEugenio See Additional Reviews of Inside the Target Car By Dr. David W. Mantik By Pamela McElwain-Brown Part One of James DiEugenio's article. Part Three of James DiEugenio's article. After his (planned?) false statement about Jackie Kennedy being in the line of fire, Gary Mack makes another observation. This one is more superficially credible—until one thinks about it. He observes that the bullet path from this particular position on the Grassy Knoll leaves an exit on the left side of Kennedy's head. He then says that this was not evident at autopsy. He then uses this to discount a shot from that position. (He will later unwarrantedly aggrandize this into discrediting any shot from the right front at all!) He's correct about the autopsy not showing this kind of exit. But he is wrong in the deductive logic of this eliminating any shot from that particular point. Let me explain in detail what I mean. Since the program's Curtailed Alternative doctrine predictably ignores it. Clearly, something was happening behind the stockade fence. All you have to do is review the record. Let's begin with the startling testimony of Lee Bowers, a worker in the rail yard adjacent to it and behind. From his vantage point in a 14-foot tower, he talked about the three cars he saw driving behind the fence about 25 minutes before the assassination. (Jim Marrs, Crossfire, p. 75) The first car looked like it was searching for a way out or checking the area. (ibid, p. 76) A second car came in about ten minutes later. The driver looked like he was speaking into a phone or a mike since he held something up to his mouth. This car probed a little deeper into the area than the first car. Then a third car came in: it was muddy up to the windows. It was occupied by what appeared to be a white male. This car spent a little more time in the area and then cruised back toward the Texas School Book Depository. At the time of the shooting Bowers saw two men standing between his vantage point and the mouth of the triple underpass. This would seem to approximate the spot, which I described in part one as being the best shooting venue. We all know what Bowers described next: "At the time of the shooting, in the vicinity of where the two men I have described were, there was a flash of light or ... something I could not identify ... some unusual occurrence—a flash of light or smoke or something which caused me to feel that something out of the ordinary had occurred there." (ibid p. 77) It is interesting—compelling actually—to couple this testimony with that of Sam Holland. In a 1966 interview that will live as long as people study this case, Josiah Thompson talked to Holland in Irving, Texas. He was reluctant to talk to Thompson. Why? Because as I mentioned in part one of this review—and what Gary Mack leaves out—many witnesses complained about what the FBI or Warren Commission did with their testimony. Holland is one of them. He told Thompson that the Commission "had not transcribed his testimony as he had given it." (Thompson, p. 83) So now, three years later, he told Thompson his whole story. While standing in Dealey Plaza, he acted out what he did on 11/22/63. And those photos are memorialized in Six Seconds in Dallas. To anyone looking at them, they become almost seared into one's sub-conscious. Holland told Thompson that he was originally standing on the overpass as he watched the motorcade come toward him. He then heard four shots, with the last two very close together. (ibid) Holland said the third shot sounded like it was from a different class of weapon than the others. Holland also said he saw a puff of smoke beneath some trees on the knoll area. (ibid, p. 121) Thompson then notes seven other witnesses who saw a puff of smoke in that area. (ibid) Three of these—Holland, James Simmons, and Richard Dodd—were so sure the shots came from over there that they ran off the overpass to an area behind the fence. When Holland got there, he could see scores of footprints in the soft ground behind a car. Looking at their pattern, it didn't make sense to him. Why? Because they were all concentrated in a very narrow area, like a lion pacing in a cage. (ibid, p. 122) To cap this fascinating story, Thompson noted another witness named J. C. Price. Price saw someone running from this area with something in his hand, which he said could have been a headpiece. (ibid p. 123) This reminds us of the driver of the car Bowers saw, holding what he thought was a phone or a mike. Need more? A woman told Dallas Patrolman Joe Smith that the shots came from the bushes up on the knoll. Smith ran behind the fence and smelled gunpowder. While he was there he had his gun pulled. As he was replacing it a man in the area showed him Secret Service credentials. Yet, as Thompson notes, every Secret Service agent had gone to Parkland Hospital with the motorcade. (ibid, p. 125) So who was this guy? Finally, as more than one author has noted e.g. Richard Mahoney, John Davis, and Lamar Waldron, there exists an FBI report which states that two police officers saw some men standing behind the wooden fence on the knoll on November 20th. The men were engaged in what appeared to be mock target practice. They were aiming what looked like a rifle over the fence. When the patrolmen made their way up the knoll, the men disappeared in a nearby parked car. The policemen thought little of this episode until after the assassination. They then reported it to the FBI. The Bureau made a report on this that is dated November 26th. Yet this report was never made part of the official FBI record of the assassination. And it was not declassified until 1978. (For a depiction of the episode, see Ultimate Sacrifice, p. 704). Of course, this program notes the Warren Commission evidence for there being a sniper's perch on the sixth floor of the Depository e. g. the boxes and shells near the window. And, at first, the show implies it was Oswald at this post. Then later—when all semblance of objectivity has disappeared—it calls the shot from this position "Oswald's shot". Yet, further indicating its agenda, when it comes to the stockade fence on top of the knoll, the program mentions none of the above. Not Bowers, not Holland, not Smith, not Price, not the policemen. Not one word about any of it. Because Gary Mack and the narrator are strangely mute about all the above, let us give voice to it. One obvious way to interpret it all is like this: Two days before the assassination, a hit team was testing out a firing point behind the fence. On the morning of the assassination, the team was transported behind the fence via a staggered three car caravan, leaving two men in place who were being communicated with by radio. This ended up being one of the firing points in Dealey Plaza as evidenced by gunshot sounds, a flash of light, and a puff of smoke. The hit team was furnished with fake official ID to protect themselves after the fact, because they knew their shot would attract witnesses to the area.

Oath I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. Stop Lying to me people. 5 U.S.C. §3331

"And that brings us to "JFK: Inside the Target Car", and my participation in it." JFK: Inside the Target Car, Part One Or, How to Rig an Experiment By James DiEugenio See Additional Reviews of Inside the Target Car By Dr. David W. Mantik By Pamela McElwain-Brown Part Two of James DiEugenio's article. Part Three of James DiEugenio's article. Whenever I hear of a new scientific approach to the John F. Kennedy case, my first reaction is to shudder and then run for cover. I don't think it is hard to understand why I feel that way. Actually, it's quite simple. Its because whenever someone says they are going to treat this case with scientific rigor, sooner or later, the rigor dissipates and the so-called natural laws of the universe somehow fail. So suddenly, as with President Kennedy's violent rearward reaction, Newton's laws of motion don't apply anymore. Or as with the trajectory of the Single Bullet Theory through Kennedy's body, gun shot projectiles don't move through soft tissue in straight lines anymore. Further, alleged "authorities" suddenly get thoroughly confused and confounded by the evidence. As Pat Speer has shown, Dr. Michael Baden didn't even know how to orient one of the most important autopsy photos. NASA scientist Tom Canning moved Kennedy's back wound up to make the Single Bullet Theory (SBT) work, and then shrunk Kennedy's head to make the head wound trajectory work. Dr. Vincent Guinn "proved" the SBT theory with his Bullet Lead analysis—which we now know, through the work of Pat Grant and Rick Randich, is nothing but "junk science". Its so junky that the FBI will not use it in court anymore. At other times, we even get the spectacle of people who should not be approaching the case at all acting as if they were qualified in a certain field of scientific endeavor. Vincent Bugliosi used a chiropractor whose office offered massage therapy—Chad Zimmerman—as an authority in radiology. Robert Blakey hired statistician Larry Sturdivan to show films of goats being shot to illustrate the so-called neuromuscular reaction. (And then they both failed to tell us that Kennedy's reaction does not match what happens in the goat films.) Urologist John Lattimer was the first "independent" doctor admitted to the National Archives to report on the extant autopsy materials there. He somehow missed the fact that the president's brain was missing. Lattimer then gave us the Great Thorburn Hoax, which was thoroughly exposed by Milicent Cranor. And, of course, who can forget Dale Myers' computer 3D simulation, which turned the SBT from theory to "fact". A "fact" that was ripped to smithereens by Milicent Cranor, David Mantik, and Pat Speer. The point of this partial list is simply to show that when the scientific method encounters the Kennedy case, it somehow loses all semblances to what most of us expect about that rubric. So for people like me who have become jaded by the above hijinks, I was not excited about another heralded and pretentiously headlined story. Especially after what ABC said in advance about the "indisputability" of the Myers debacle back in 2003. (See our critique of this fiasco.)

Inside Inside the Target Car: My Experiences as Limo Researcher for the Show By Pamela McElwain-Brown See Additional Reviews of Inside the Target Car By Dr. David W. Mantik By Milicent Cranor Part One of James DiEugenio's article. Part Two of James DiEugenio's article. Part Three of James DiEugenio's article. The JFK Assassination Aftermath and TV Shows One would think that once the Warren Report (WR) hit the stands in 1964 the government would have said, "there you have it", and moved on to something else. However, there were so many flaws within that it invited a fair amount of criticism. Although the critics were quickly pointed out to be un-American, they continued to grow in number and volume. Their voice threatened to drown out that of the Warren Commission. Something had to be done. Some on the Commission, like Allen Dulles, actually believed the American public would not bother to read the WR. Apparently, they believed that their appeal to authority, dictated by those supposedly the most revered in our government, would be sufficient. They thought that the American public was merely 'sheeple', and would do as they were told. They were wrong. In order to quickly cover their tracks, a special posse was formed behind the scenes devoted to stomping out the growing Critical Community (sometimes called Conspiracy Theorists, or CT's). New books were quickly written to re-emphasize the 'conclusions' of the WR, while some new CT books were written in order to confuse the CT community. And someone in the posse (which we will refer to as the Ongoing Cover-up, or OC) had an 'aha' moment when it came to pushing the WR agendas on that new media called TV. So into the fray jumped the networks, anxious to please; most of them probably co-opted by the OC even prior to the JFK assassination. The sheeple believe our newscasters. So, of course, they would believe what these people had to say about the assassination. This spewing of TV jargon would be more persuasive to the sheeple than any doubts they might have had. Quickly, a TV show on the WR was developed. Others followed. The Jim Garrison investigation was decimated by the NBC White Paper propaganda show against him. The OC had hit the big-time, and television had become the new means of controlling the public. Which brings us to the present. Fairly recently, the Discovery Channel decided to fund shows on the JFK assassination. Their ultimate conclusion, after allegedly looking 'objectively' at all the facts, was—you guessed it—a recrowning of the Warren Commission. On the other hand, in 2004 the SPEED Channel did a one-hour documentary on the Presidential Limousine,. This was called Behind the Headlights: JFK Presidential Limousine (currently .) This program, for which I helped develop the script and was interviewed for, was conspiracy-based and contained new information about what happened to the limo after the assassination. It clearly demonstrated that the limo was the primary crime scene and that there had been a cover-up. How could this be allowed to stand? So somebody at Discovery Channel had a bright idea to do a program focusing on the limo as the crime scene. And that brings us to "JFK: Inside the Target Car", and my participation in it.