Jump to content
The Education Forum

Gene Kelly

Members
  • Content count

    546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gene Kelly

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 07/05/1950

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Philadelphia PA

Recent Profile Visitors

9,854 profile views
  1. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    Joe In the context of whistle blowers (and Steve's response), Galileo was persecuted by the powerful Catholic Church's Inquisition. His Heliocentric theory was presented as a 'truth' which rankled the powers that be, and he suffered persecution as a result. After many years, history and science ultimately vindicated Galileo. I'd think his case is similar to what Robert Groden has experienced. So, it matters not what the "official" or popular story line is, as some believe ... the facts are undeniable. Perhaps - as Galileo was purportedly saying to his inquisitors - Gary Mack didn't really believe what he was being forced to say. Gene
  2. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    This is for Steve and Joe: The phrase Eppur si muove is attributed to the Italian mathematician, physicist and philosopher Galileo Galilei in 1633 after being forced to recant his claims that the Earth moves around the immovable Sun. The quotation is attributed to when he was being investigated by the Inquisition. Under pressure, he supposedly said (against his beliefs) that the Sun did indeed move around the earth then added, sotto voce, Eppur si muove. Its use in modern language is for when we acknowledge what someone else is saying, but we want to convince them otherwise. As such, the phrase is used today as a sort of pithy retort implying that "it doesn't matter what you believe; these are the facts." What Galileo was purportedly saying to his inquisitors was, he didn't really believe what he was being forced to say … that he hadn't changed his mind after all. Some historians believe that it was upon his transfer that Galileo actually said ‘Eppur si muove,’ rather than at his public abjuration following the trial. Scholars however recognize the story as probably apocryphal. It is noted that Galileo was Tuscan, so he likely would not have used the word "muove". This quote was first publicly recorded in the questionable work “The Italian Library” written by Giuseppe Baretti more than 120 years later. Baretti states that, the moment Galileo was set free, he looked up to the sky and down to the ground, and, while stamping his foot, in a contemplative mood, uttered the famous quote, referring to planet Earth. The central dispute between Galileo and the Church was whether Galileo could assert that the Earth really did move around the Sun (as a scientific fact) or whether he should present the idea as merely a hypothesis. Church officials admitted that Galileo’s observations gave the appearance of moving around the Sun, but argued appearances could be deceiving. Galileo, on the other hand, thought it was ridiculous to take poetic passages from the Bible literally. Galileo’s problem arose when he stopped proposing it as a scientific theory and began proclaiming it as a truth. But, despite his friends’ warnings, he insisted on moving the debate onto theological grounds. There is a painting attributed to B. E. Murillo and his school in Madrid that represents Galileo in prison. When cleaned, in 1911, it turned out that the painting was larger than originally framed. When unfolded, it revealed that the figure of Galileo was gesturing toward the words “Eppur si muove.” The painting was commissioned sometime between 1643 and 1650. The painting is not historically correct, because it depicts Galileo in a dungeon, but nonetheless shows that some variant of the "Eppur si muove" anecdote was in circulation immediately after his death, when many who had known him were still alive to attest to it, and that it had been circulating for over a century before it was published. Scholars doubt that Galileo actually said this, and attribute incredible popularity of the quote to widespread animosity against the Catholic Church, prevalent in 18th century, bound with efforts to create martyr-like figures from the Church’s past adversaries and victims. John Heilbron’s 2010 biography of Galileo associates the statement with Archbishop Ascanio Piccolomini, who had supported Galileo, and with whom Galileo spent some months after his trial. Archbishop Piccolomini had few friends in the Vatican and continued to annoy the Church hierarchy by reportedly providing a safe place for Galileo to discuss his opinions. Baretti’s account from 1757 remains the first statement of the myth. Baretti, like Piccolomini, was living in a foreign country where he could safely express his displeasure with the Church. Reference: Darin Hayton (June 3, 2012) “Toward a history of Eppur si muove” Gene
  3. Gene Kelly

    New Article by John Armstrong

    Jim I have a friend who has read H&L and would like to contact and talk with John Armstrong when he visits Hawaii. Is there an address or contact that you would be willing to share Thanks Gene
  4. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    The comment by Garrison is right on. I'd submit that - to this day - it is not popular to ascribe to any theories that deviate from the Warren Commission's official account, as revised by the HSCA. Those - like the talented researchers on this Forum, who dig deeper and aren't satisfied with the historic account - are not universally well received. My own personal experience (and I'm not an author or serious researcher) has been that - when folks find out that I'm "into" the JFK thing, they are simply not that interested. I might get a few minutes of discussion, and some mild fascination, but most don't have the patience or interest to hear it out or take the story on. I cant put my finger on it, but it may have something to do with not wanting to doubt one's government, or simply a disinterest in JFK as a leader and president. Or that its something that can't be known, so why endlessly speculate. Plus, such events become old news pretty quickly (much less 50 years later) and put into the rear view mirror. My professional experience with whistleblowers has been that - while sometimes right and typically courageous - few end up happy or satisfied. They are shunned by their peers, avoided by the management structure, and marginalized by the government authorities who they think will make them whole (which they will not). Some receive generous settlements, but end up losing their jobs and families. Standing up for what one ideally believes is unjust or wrong can be a very painful and unsuccessful experience.
  5. Gene Kelly

    Encountering the Ghost of JFK in Dallas

    Joe Understood and don't disagree. The more obvious reaction to the Beatles was the hysteria expressed by teenage girls. But I would also point out that many (young and old) came to be curious or appreciative of the Fab Four. The Beatles made some courageous statements when they refused to go on at certain venues unless blacks were allowed to attend. And while some parents disapproved of the long hair, their impact (on their children) also captured the interest of adults. The press coverage was unprecedented; the entire world was fascinated with them. Many point to their timing as the reason for the phenomenon, an era of postwar, worldwide, mass-media ... coincident with the emergence of teenage pop-culture. Beatlemania was also an example of the right act hitting the right generation at the right time. In America, when the Beatles broke through, the children of the baby boom were teenagers ... so they had a massive audience (i.e. about half of the US population was younger than 20 years old). Some point to the Winter of 1963 as one of the worst/coldest of the 20th century. People therefore stayed inside - fixed to the television - which was fairly new at that time. The were young and iconic, glib and funny, and they were also fortunate to have Brian Epstein as a manager. They were flat-out charming ... handsome, witty, cool, fun people to be around. Some would argue that their breakthrough occurred during a depressive period; one of the few positive things found in the news. Of course they had talent - two of the greatest songwriters ever (in one band) ... and as one fan wrote "a musical ethic that was devoted to originality, not imitation, and yet could imitate with the best". Music at the time needed a facelift ... the Billboard Top Five in October 1963 was pretty tame, and rock & roll was in remission: Jimmy Gilmer & the Fireballs: "Sugar Shack" The Ronettes: "Be My Baby" Bobby Vinton: "Blue Velvet" Garnet Mimms & the Enchanters: "Cry Baby" The Jaynetts: "Sally Go 'Round the Roses" There's a 1996 posting by Paul Robertson entitled "Why the Beatles?" that is a good read. In it, he states: They made the coolest sounding records anybody had heard in a long, long time, and backed it up with a breathtaking sense of fun and adventure. In the early 1960s, man, we were ready for this; not because of Kennedy being shot, but because the whole scene was just getting so darn grey and dull. For their part, they were a pop group that wanted success; but what they found waiting for them at the end of the road was a whole impassioned generation who went HooRAH!! at their arrival. We wanted something new, fresh, young, and un-parent-like. And, rightly or wrongly, we lay our collective hopes with a vengeance at the feet of the Beatles ... The world of teenagers would never again be united as they were in 1962, primed for great things to happen, and willing and able for it to be the same great thing for everybody. Personally, my first favorite was the Dave Clark Five. I loved Motown, and later became a huge Stones fan. But I don't think it was the music, per se, that alone made the Beatles such a welcome force. In a June 2012 BBC article, Adam Gopnik wrote that The Fab Four's music endures because it mirrors an era we still long for: There is something eerie, fated, cosmic about the Beatles - those seven quick years of fame and then decades of after-shock. The Beatles' gift was for harmony, and their vision was above all of harmony. And harmony, voices blending together in song, is still our strongest symbol of a good place yet to come. Art makes us alive and aware and sometimes afraid but it rarely makes us glad. Fifty years on, the Beatles live because they still give us that most amazing of feelings: the apprehension of a happiness that we can hold, like a hand.
  6. Gene Kelly

    Encountering the Ghost of JFK in Dallas

    Something that I've always pondered ... the contemporaneous ascent of the Beatles, right at the time of the JFK assassination. I was 13 years old when the British Invasion hit the USA ... what a phenomenon. Obviously there was musical genius to the Beatles and they were well on their way before JFK's murder. But I would argue that America was in need of a happier story and a serious pick-me-up. Writers point out that A Christmas Gift for You From Phil Spector and With the Beatles both came out on the same day as the assassination of President Kennedy ... one of the "twisted ironies in the history of popular culture". Lester Bangs, in a famous essay on the British Invasion from The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll, wrote that “it was no accident that the Beatles had their overwhelmingly successful Ed Sullivan Show debut shortly after JFK was shot”. Critic Ian MacDonald, argued that: “When Capitol finally capitulated to Epstein’s pressure and issued "I want to hold your hand' in December of 1963, the record’s joyous energy and invention lifted America out of its gloom, following which, high on gratitude, the country cast itself at the Beatles’ feet.” No event has endured more than the Beatles’ arrival in the United States in February of 1964, where they performed before 70-some million Americans on the Ed Sullivan show, soothed an injured nation in the wake of the assassination, and saved rock and roll in the process (Ref: "The Questionable Connections Between Camelot’s Demise and Liverpool’s Ascent" by Jack Hamilton 11/18/2013 Slate). In an NPR article “Remembering JFK and The Beatles' perfect timing” by Mike Flanagan written by Mike Flanagan in 2013, he stated that by November of 1963, the Fab Four had basically conquered England. Ringo had joined in August of '62, “Love Me Do” was recorded that September, “Please Please Me” was released in January ’63, “From Me to You” in April, and “She Loves You” followed in September. The second album With the Beatles was released on November 22nd and “I Want to Hold Your Hand” comes out one week later. He goes on to write: But one week after the assassination, America was in a deep, grieving funk. America was in dire need of some serious joy. The Beatles did come along at a perfect time, but what they brought would have happened with or without the American tragedy. The atmosphere was ripe for fun, no question. But more than JFK’s murder, the stagnant music business in general was in need of an overhaul.
  7. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    To return on point and the topic of the thread (not John Armstrong, and not Gary Mack), Robert Groden was courageous and a pioneer in exposing/exploring the Zapruder film and influencing subsequent reinvestigations. I note with interest that he settled in and hailed from Boothwyn PA, not far from where I live and work. Given the subject matter and powerful opposition to the simple/historical Oswald story (absurd on its face), it took courage to do what he did for so long. Not many folks have that persistence and strength of character. For the record, I do not find John Armstrong's premise as "nonsensical" nor was he the first to suggest such. I also disagree that his work is not believed by the majority of JFK researchers.
  8. Gene Kelly

    Encountering the Ghost of JFK in Dallas

    Joe/Steve Thanks for the compliment. I think our experiences as sons (both good and bad) somehow may have prompted our later day interest in JFK and his murder. My dad was no saint either, but he surely loved JFK. I'll also share that, in 1960, I was ten years old and a 5th grade 'safety' (if you recall that role) at a Catholic school in Philadelphia. JFK was campaigning in October 1960, just before the election. His motorcade came down Route 30 (Lancaster Avenue), right past my grade school in West Philly, on the way to a speech at Temple University. All of the Catholic nuns were out and cheering wildly (something that JFK sometimes tried to avoid given the religious biases of that time) ... he was the unprecedented first Catholic President and a source of extraordinary pride and excitement for our community. I was out in the street - ensuring students didn't cross or get hurt - when the motorcade drove by ... close enough to touch him. How exciting, and I can still feel the energy of the crowd today. I have never seen more enthusiasm for a presidential candidate since. What a great loss for all of us. Gene
  9. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    What a fascinating JFK curriculum vitae that Bob Groden has: In 1973, Groden showed the Zapruder film to a symposium of assassination researchers at Georgetown In February, 1975, Groden and Stephen Jaffee, an investigator for Garrison, testified before the Rockefeller Commission On March 6, 1975, he and Dick Gregory appeared on Good Night America and showed Groden's copy of the Zapruder film (prompting the HSCA) In 1975, Groden co-authored JFK: The Case for Conspiracy In the 1980s, Groden was a consultant for Oliver Stone's 1991 film JFK appearing in cameo roles as a Parkland doctor and the courtroom projectionist at the Shaw trial In 1989 Groden co-authored High Treason During the OJ Simpson trial, Groden appeared as an expert witness and testified that a 1993 photograph of Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes at an NFL game was a forgery
  10. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    In Groden's July 1996 AARB interview, he reveals some interesting facts about the Nix film: When the films were delivered to them, what they received was the original Nix film - the color original Nix film. But the copy of the Muchmore film that they got was a black and white copy. It was a duplicate. It wasn’t the original. And they called me about that-And I said, “No, no. The original film was color. It was not black and white.” And they went back, and they searched and searched and searched, and they finally found it. And what they found was that the film was in two pieces. Somebody had physically cut the film at the frame of the head shot. What Mr. Weisman had done at that point, in order to save the film-to prevent it from m losing frames is, instead of doing a professional cement splice, which would have cost them at least two frames, he Mylar spliced it - took Mylar tape to it and spliced it. The alignment on that particular frame is not exacting. And because of the cut, there is a white bar - a space that exists in that frame. But he was able to save the film without losing the frames on that.
  11. Gene Kelly

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    Excellent article by Frank Cassano ... an excerpt: In 1995, Bob Groden left his home, wife and family in Pennsylvania. Alone, he moved to Dallas from the small town of Boothwyn. His objective was to give the Warren Commission critics a voice against the Sixth Floor Museum’s unalterable promotion of the Warren Report. By that time, the Museum was well on its way to its current status of treating hundreds of thousands of people per year, at sixteen bucks a crack, to what Michael Morrissey once called the Biggest Lie of the second half of the twentieth century: namely, that Oswald killed Kennedy. When Groden arrived is when the battle was joined. This gunfight has taken place at the intersection of Houston and Elm Street. Gary Mack was firing a bazooka, tossing out grenades, scorching the earth, using psychological warfare, setting boobytraps and snares from his walled fortress with its drawbridge and moat at the museum. On the other hand, Robert Groden was sitting out across the street on the legendary Grassy Knoll. He was exposed, out in the open, armed only with his books, magazines and DVDs. Talk about bringing a pea shooter to a gunfight. Bob Groden showed up armed with nothing but a deck chair, a folding card table and his research, which showed that just about everything that Mack and The Sixth Floor stood for was wrong. I doubt that’s where Bob thought this would all lead: a David (Groden) vs. Goliath/(Mack) mismatch. After all, as depicted in this film, he and Gary used to be friends. In fact, at one time, he considered Gary his best friend. They went on vacations together and he stayed at Gary’s home. But something happened. That something was two offers of employment; both by the Sixth Floor. One was to Groden; he was offered the directorship from a man named Robert Hayes and the salary was $235,000 per year to start. There was one qualification ... Bob had to stop saying anything about that conspiracy that killed Kennedy. Bob said, well, I can’t do that, so he did not get the job. Gary Mack was offered the opportunity to replace Conover Hunt as curator. That job did not pay as much as the one offered to Groden. But it didn’t matter to Mack; he had no reservations about reversing field on just about everything he had previously said about the JFK case. So now, the former friends became enemies. As the film shows, this went as far as the Sixth Floor having the police arrest and ticket Groden many, many times. It was a Battle Royale.
  12. Gene Kelly

    Encountering the Ghost of JFK in Dallas

    Robert Wonderful essay ... expressing so many thoughts that all of us hold, plus painting a vivid picture. It reminds me of my first visit to Dealey Plaza in the early 1990's and how I was struck by the smallness of the layout and its cold stark features. I share your curiosity about Zapruder ... how he got on that pedestal, why he was there in the first place, and what became of his controversial film. Something feels very wrong about Zapruder's entire story and the film's subsequent provenance. I too was disappointed and unimpressed by the TSBD Museum. I have never seen the Memorial and appreciate you pointing out its origin and story. Being 13 years old at the time of JFK's death - and watching my father cry in sorrow (he took me by train from Philadelphia to JFK's inauguration and to his funeral) - I can only imagine what a better world it would've been with him as our leader. JFK had extraordinary charisma and gave us so much hope ... more so than any President since. America is a big and complex country, one that sorely needs the leadership and vision exemplified by John Kennedy. Thanks for sharing, Gene
  13. Steve If you ready the Garrison transcript closely, it seems that Boxley (William Wood) interviewed Dinkin ... that is what fascinates me here, that he actually spoke to him in Brooklyn in 1968. I believe that this is where he gets the cipher clerk ('crypto work') legend from. Several Forum members have been asking how/where Garrison got the Dinkin/OAS connection from; I think it originated from Boxley's conversation with Eugene Dinkin. If you read the February 2018 Ronald Redmond article in Kennedy's and King, Eugene Dinkin comes across as an intelligent and responsible individual ... portrayed as an idealist (and a bit paranoid), a social worker with a degree in psychology from Chicago University. I could envision the Army training him in cryptographic duties, and he did have a secret clearance of some level. I get the impression that Dinkin was smart enough to avoid any direct discussion of what he actually did, or how he came to discover the plot, as him making that information public would be a felony and grounds for imprisonment ... so, he therefore put together the story of psychological "message sets" from military publications such as Stars and Stripes. Dinkin later told the FBI that it was his study of these "psychological sets" which revealed to him both an anti-Kennedy bias as well as a military plot in the works. Boxley believed that these were essentially a cover story. It appears that using these public documents was a way for him to avoid any legal complications or retaliation by the Department of Defense, although he remained persistent in his protests in the 1970's. Curiously (but not surprisingly), Dinkin disavowed seeing any such traffic in a February 23, 1977 letter to HSCA member Jacqueline Hess, wherein he provided 23 exhibits ("media demonstrations") as evidence: He noted to Hess that he had never decoded any illicit cryptographic message that appeared to relate to the JFK assassination. I would not characterize Eugene Dinkin as unbalanced; rather, he seems careful and intelligent. Boxley himself was interviewed in September 1971 and told his interviewers (Rennar and Mary Ferrell): B says it is a very interesting story, including how DINKIN turned up in New York. B's basic reaction in that DINKIN's "paranoia" deserves a second look. For one thing, they do not take people like DINKIN into crypto work, the importance of which is second only to nuclear topics. He was in Europe handling coded Algerian traffic, when he came rushing into the next room saying that the President was going to be killed in Dallas. Gene
  14. Steve In a November 10, 2017 EF thread on Dinkin, you responded to Steve Hume with the following: Here's a copy of the relevant pages from that New Orleans research conference. If they don't show up here as attached file, I'll try to copy and paste them. Dinkin Garrrison Papers New Orleans Conference 9 21 1968 Pages 73 to 75.pdf This captures a conversation amongst Garrison investigators (in September 1968) where Bill Boxley indicated that he interviewed Dinkin in Brooklyn NYC, and - while he seemed a bit crazy - Boxley thought that there was something to Dinkin's story. Boxley indicates that the Stars and Stripes explanation is a cover story that Dinkin "memorized" (i.e. 'they got to him') and that he had actually been monitoring OAS cable traffic, when he came upon the plot. Boxley believes that Dinkin was credible, and had been an NSA cipher clerk with significant clearance. Gene Steve Thomas
  15. Were Dennis De Witt or Larry Pulles ever subsequently interviewed? Both of them were apparently aware of the first letter to the Attorney General. If I have the story straight, it was De Witt whose name was on the envelope as a return address (as Dinkin was concerned it would be intercepted) and Pulles who actually mailed the letter. They could corroborate its existence. Regarding the cryptographic work, interviews of Garrison investigator William C. Wood (aka Bill Boxley) were conducted by one George E. Rennar (accompanied by Mary Ferrell) in 1971. Boxley (designated as "B" below) was interviewed in Dallas on August 30, 31 and September 3, 1971. Most of the interviews focused on allegations made by others against Boxley, who was former CIA (allegedly left due to a drinking problem) and was one of several individuals who had infiltrated the Garrison investigation. Garrison eventually had a falling out with Boxley, who jumped ship and ended up working on Clay Shaw’s defense team. I recall some separate correspondence that Steve Thomas provided, indicating that Boxley had previously interviewed Dinkin in Brooklyn for Garrison, and described him as a bit nutty (he had 10 dogs). Boxley had some interesting comments to make about Eugene Dinkin : B says it is a very interesting story, including how DINKIN turned up in New York. B's basic reaction in that DINKIN's "paranoia" deserves a second look. For one thing, they do not take people like DINKIN into crypto work, the importance of which is second only to nuclear topics. He was in Europe handling coded Algerian traffic, when he came rushing into the next room saying that the President was going to be killed in Dallas. B also thinks he named the date. He was taken to a military hospital under heavy guard after he told his Captain about his intercept. Then, unprecedentedly, he was taken to Walter Reed Hospital two days later. B says the lead 'came from a DINKIN acquaintance at Ft. Hood. B talked to a Killien boy who provided him with the present whereabouts of the members of DINKIN's unit. Basically, they were military police. DINKIN took a polygraph in Chicago and has the results with him. B feels that he has been gotten to and is now just parroting a false story.
×