Jump to content
The Education Forum

Dorothy Kilgallen


Recommended Posts

Dawn, and then, we have to ask ourselves,; Where do all these impressions that do not distinguish between the guilt of Johnson and the alleged guilt of Robert kennedy come from?

I mean, John is not picking them out of thin air, and I am very sorry to say, that one of the sources that obscurred guilt was Jim Garrison.

I don't have any agenda here as you have been lead to believe Dawn, I just think that this is a very complicated cover up and we just do not understand the extent yet.

I think people like Nixon understand these scandals like Watergate, where everybody has access to a piece of the truth and everybody else struggles to get it. An expert that has followed the wrong path is an expert that misleads, and that tends to make it even more complicated...

An "expert" that deliberately misleads, makes it chaotically complicated.

One of the reasons that the police routinely fail to prosecute criminals is because it is very difficult divine "intent" and that unfortunately gives them an advantage that contributes to the difficulty of exposing the truth.

Edited by Lynne Foster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Looks like John knows enough about Dorotyh Kilgallen to write an entire book about her.

I can see a bestseller on the horizon: Kilgallen and the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Funny, that's what Jim Marrs said in Dallas (I had suggested that he should write a book on Kilgallen). I even told him who murdered her. In return he told me a fascinating story about Kilgallen and Joan Crawford.

I agree that that there is a need for a good book on Kilgallen. Any author will need to take a close look at her relationship with Florence Pritchett, Earl Smith and CIA operations in Miami.

What we really need are good television documentaries about people like Dorothy Kilgallen, Mary Pinchot Meyer, Bobby Baker, Gerry Hemming, Bernardo De Torres, etc. In fact you could have a whole series on characters related to the JFK assassination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There ought to be a whole TV channel, the JFK Channel, devoted to the assassination and related subjects. There could be documentaries, daily talk shows, interviews, all the old news tapes, tours of the sites, regular showings of Stone's film and Executive Action, and even a daily segment of someone just interviewing visitors to Dealey Plaza. The channel could even have its own nightly Late Show, with host Gerry Hemming and sidekick Al Carrier. That would make for some entertaining banter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There ought to be a whole TV channel, the JFK Channel, devoted to the assassination and related subjects. There could be documentaries, daily talk shows, interviews, all the old news tapes, tours of the sites, regular showings of Stone's film and Executive Action, and even a daily segment of someone just interviewing visitors to Dealey Plaza. The channel could even have its own nightly Late Show, with host Gerry Hemming and sidekick Al Carrier. That would make for some entertaining banter!

Who Killed JFK? Featuring this week's guest hosts; G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt. Fire up the Tivo! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who Killed JFK? Featuring this week's guest hosts; G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt. Fire up the Tivo! ;)

Sounds like you pinpointed the problem. Real reporters like Dorothy Kilgallen have been replaced by mouthpieces like Gordon Liddy.

Now please don't take Ron seriously, if he ridiculed investigators like Jim Garrison, I'd be all for it, but Dorothy Kilgallen has been inappropriately ignored, in my opinion.

I do not think that ignoring somebody of her calibre merits a cheap joke, and perhaps it is such preemptive banter which has discouraged the effort to give Dorothy Kilgallen the attention she deserves.

Regardless, she has obviously made a huge impact with or without a book about her.

Edited by Lynne Foster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynne Foster can be the Friday night Grinder Girl ("Will It Float?") on the JFK Channel Late Show. ("Will It Float?" will refer, of course, to a suspect's alibi.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynne Foster can be the Friday night Grinder Girl ("Will It Float?") on the JFK Channel Late Show. ("Will It Float?" will refer, of course, to a suspect's alibi.)

Tune it tomorrow nite, when guest host Gerald Posner demonstrates how to get 3 accurate shots off with a bent Manlicher Carcano in under 6 seconds! Thanx to our sponsor, White Out, the ultimate cover up.

I hope every one of us conspiracy nuts has a wonderful Thanksgiving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynne Foster can be the Friday night Grinder Girl ("Will It Float?") on the JFK Channel Late Show. ("Will It Float?" will refer, of course, to a suspect's alibi.)

Tune it tomorrow nite, when guest host Gerald Posner demonstrates how to get 3 accurate shots off with a bent Manlicher Carcano in under 6 seconds! Thanx to our sponsor, White Out, the ultimate cover up.

I hope every one of us conspiracy nuts has a wonderful Thanksgiving.

I do have a sense of humor, but just to set the record straight here, Gerald Posner is an anti-conspiracy nut.

I don't really think that people who are intelligent enough to oppose the nonsense THEY promote are nuts, especially since the man on the grassy knoll has a real face.

Any photo experts out there, who can prove that the skeletal structure of the face does not change with age?

That way, the anti-conspiracists will prove to be nuttier than the so-called conspiracists and won't that be a relief?

Edited by Lynne Foster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any photo experts out there, who can prove that the skeletal structure of the face does not change with age?

The person someone would want to consult on this question is a forensic anthropologist, one of those people who put faces back onto skulls. They would be able to provide much better advice on this than any "photo expert out there."

Speaking of which (forensic anthropologists), I spoke with one in Virginia some years ago, attached to the Virginia State Police or the Chief Medical Examiner's office, I forget which (if the latter, I forgot to ask to speak with Kay Scarpetta!). What he told me was interesting.

I'd asked how someone could identify a person if all they had was, say, half of a skull or half of a photo. He explained to me that the prevailing presumption or rule of thumb is that one half of a person's face (or facial structure) is very nearly a mirror image of the other.

With that in mind, I took the photo that Jack White made famous, the "Alex Hidell" photo he posited was an amalgam of two faces, pasted together on a diagonal axis. I cut the full photo on the axis Jack had suggested and then made two copies of each half on transparency "paper," then put the two corresponding "halves" together (e.g., the upper-right half with the upper-right half reversed), and found two very different-looking men. With one, I had to draw in a chin, and the other had a pie-slice out of the top of his head, but it was not difficult adding those details to the renderings.

What I then did was to take both composites to the Fairfax County (VA) Police Department and spoke briefly with a detective there. I showed him the "Oswald" half (the upper right portion, as I recall) and asked him who it looked like. He said "Oswald." I told him that that's what I'd thought, too. I asked him if I had other similar questions, could I visit with him, which he (somewhat resignedly) said "sure." Whatever made me happy, I guess.

I came back a couple of weeks later and showed him the "Hidell" half and asked him who he looked like, and again he said "Oswald." I then showed him the first composite and asked if the two images were of the same person and he said that, no, it didn't appear that they were, although there was a similiarity. Clearly, the "Oswald half" was in fact Oswald, he opined, and the "Hidell half" was someone who resembled Oswald.

I then showed him the original "composite" and asked him who it was. Again, he said it looked like Oswald, but it could be someone who merely looked like him. I showed him a photo that was unarguably Oswald (I don't remember now which one), and he again said that the subject of that photo was clearly the same person as the "Oswald half."

Then I explained my conversation with the forensic anthropologist - he agreed, based on his limited knowledge, that that had always been his understanding (both sides of a person's face being basically the same) - and then how I'd made each of the two "photos," from one "official photo of Oswald." He asked for a copy of the original and the transparencies, said he found them interesting, and promised to get back to me.

Unfortunately, shortly thereafter, (at least, as Jack would like to think) The Company (or did I mean "my company?") transferred me back to Texas and I never heard from the detective again (nor did I seek him out, and no longer remember who he was).

Nevertheless, there's your answer: contact a forensic anthropologist ... who is not akin to a Warren Commission apologist, despite the homophonic similarity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took the photo that Jack White made famous, the "Alex Hidell" photo he posited was an amalgam of two faces, pasted together on a diagonal axis. I cut the full photo on the axis Jack had suggested and then made two copies of each half on transparency "paper," then put the two corresponding "halves" together (e.g., the upper-right half with the upper-right half reversed), and found two very different-looking men.

Duke,

That is fascinating. What you say certainly lends support to the two-Oswald theory. Do you still have the images, or could you repeat what you did and post the results here?

Ron

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took the photo that Jack White made famous, the "Alex Hidell" photo he posited was an amalgam of two faces, pasted together on a diagonal axis. I cut the full photo on the axis Jack had suggested and then made two copies of each half on transparency "paper," then put the two corresponding "halves" together (e.g., the upper-right half with the upper-right half reversed), and found two very different-looking men.

Duke,

That is fascinating. What you say certainly lends support to the two-Oswald theory. Do you still have the images, or could you repeat what you did and post the results here?

Ron

Ron,

I don't still have the images, at least I don't think I do. If you or someone will point me toward one of the books that has either this whole photo or Jack's "cut" of it, I will try to do so. I just don't have time to go searching for one myself ....

Once I have it, I'll scan it, cut it, copy and rotate it so that one side overlaps the other and, hopefully, that should reproduce the two photos.

One condition, tho': you can't tell Jack White that I've ever lent any credence to anything he's ever said, okay? B)

Honestly, I did not expect what happened, and the only truly amazing thing is that nobody else that I know of - including Jack - has ever done this little experiment, or published the "proof" it offers. And I did this over ten years ago!!

Scary, isn't it? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duke,

Is this the one you're referring to?

oswaldcomp.gif

There's a print of it on page 40 of The Search for Lee Harvey Oswald. Unfortunately I don't have a scanner.

I assume you've seen this eery image before, a composite of JFK and Tippit:

jfktippit.jpg

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...