Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
William Kelly

Walt Brown's Master Analytic Chronology

Recommended Posts

The JFK assassination chronology that Walt Brown talked about on the November 22nd Coast to Coast radio program is now available.

Has anyone got this yet?

Does Walt cite a source for each entry?

Does he use Mary Ferrell's chronology?

BK

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/

blufloat.gif IT'S HERE: A WORK OF MONUMENTAL PROPORTIONS FROM WALT BROWN

Master Analytic Chronology:

The Death of President John F. Kennedy

November 22, 1963

(AKA "The Project")

2½ years in the making -- 5,800 pages -- 50,000 paragraphs -- 2.2 million words

now available on CD-ROM to JFK/DPQ subscribersOrder here or via a PDF file here or a Word file here.

MasChronCD.jpgThis Chronology reports data from a handful of historical events prior, even, to the birth of John Kennedy. And Dealey Plaza makes little sense absent an understanding of the issues of Kennedy's rise through the legislative branch, and those events must certainly be complemented with a healthy dose of information on his presidency. From there, the reader will have something more than an à la carte menu, which will include complete reporting on, and analyses of, the major necessities:

The presidency of John F. Kennedy. <LI>The assassination. <LI>The Warren Commission and its "verdict." <LI>The FBI as a concomitant of the Warren Commission. <LI>Growth of doubts as "we the people" discovered more wisdom than the experts who had investigated in the first place. <LI>Arrest and trial of Clay Shaw in New Orleans. <LI>The House Select Committee on Assassinations, and its "verdict." <LI>Continued growth of doubt in America. <LI>Oliver Stone's JFK and its impact. <LI>The publishing explosion that followed hard upon the public’s doubt and the media's defense of Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin. <LI>The "two Oswald" scenario, as reported in various sources, but most heavily and best stated by John Armstrong. <LI>The work of the Assassination Records Review Board, chiefly in terms of the critical medical testimony. <LI>And finally, "passages." Just as the thousands of characters had to be born at some point, it was decreed that they would leave the scene at some point, and no understanding of our narrative is complete without a clear perspective of just who was available -- and who was not -- to provide data at a given time. ---Walt Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard Walt speaking about this project on Black Op Radio several times. It sounds like a huge contribution to research. To give you a taste of how detailed it is, the chronology starts in the 19th century with the establishment of the funeral home that dealt with JFK's body.

It sounds quite amazing, I do wish I had a few quid t spare at the moment. It's going on my 'to buy' list.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard Walt speaking about this project on Black Op Radio several times. It sounds like a huge contribution to research. To give you a taste of how detailed it is, the chronology starts in the 19th century with the establishment of the funeral home that dealt with JFK's body.

It sounds quite amazing, I do wish I had a few quid t spare at the moment. It's going on my 'to buy' list.

John

Did anybody get Walt Brown's chronology?

I'd like to hear from somebody who has it.

Thanks,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read on the DPF - before I was so rudely IP banned - that there was an appeal from the DPF to Walt Brown who had a wealth of JFK materials that they wanted him to share.

I wonder if they ever have any luck with that? I would imagine that they might get a very angry response, even if a polite message were sent to him, as he might have interpreted some of the things said on the DPF as accusing him of being an accessory to a cover up. Also it would take quite an effort to try and make public a few million sheets of paper. Hmm - I probably would not hold my breath on the Harrison papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a copy of the chronology. Sad to say I still haven't had time to read it except for some of the intro (it's about 50 pages), and some of the early Oswald info (particularly the two young Oswalds from Armstrong's work). The intro discusses the Harrison material, and you're right that it would involve millions of pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a copy of the chronology. Sad to say I still haven't had time to read it except for some of the intro (it's about 50 pages), and some of the early Oswald info (particularly the two young Oswalds from Armstrong's work). The intro discusses the Harrison material, and you're right that it would involve millions of pages.

Ron,

Could you post a sample of what the Chronology looks like, by posting just one day,

for instance, Sept. 24, 1963?

Thanks,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you post a sample of what the Chronology looks like, by posting just one day,

for instance, Sept. 24, 1963?

Here's an excerpt from the Sept. 24 section:

September 24, 1963—time unstated; while “Lee Oswald” was turning down an employment opportunity as a warehouseman in Dallas through a referral from the Texas Employment Commission on the cited date, “Lee Oswald” was interviewed for the last time by F.L. Christen of the New Orleans, Louisiana unemployment office. (John F. “Jay” Harrison Genealogical Archives)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you post a sample of what the Chronology looks like, by posting just one day,

for instance, Sept. 24, 1963?

Here's an excerpt from the Sept. 24 section:

September 24, 1963—time unstated; while “Lee Oswald” was turning down an employment opportunity as a warehouseman in Dallas through a referral from the Texas Employment Commission on the cited date, “Lee Oswald” was interviewed for the last time by F.L. Christen of the New Orleans, Louisiana unemployment office. (John F. “Jay” Harrison Genealogical Archives)

Thanks Ron,

How many items are mentioned on the date of Sept. 24, 1963?

Thanks,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many items are mentioned on the date of Sept. 24, 1963?

Five. The other four are about the Paines and Marina, LHO leaving New Orleans, the Senate ratifying the Test-Ban Treaty, and Ferrie making his call to Chicago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many items are mentioned on the date of Sept. 24, 1963?

Five. The other four are about the Paines and Marina, LHO leaving New Orleans, the Senate ratifying the Test-Ban Treaty, and Ferrie making his call to Chicago.

Thanks Ron,

and I hear you Peter,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An update on Walt's chonology if people haven't investigated it yet.

All the various volumes of it (and there are nearly 20 volumes - four main volumes of the Chronology proper, then a dozen or more appendix volumes on various subjects) are available on Amazon. if anyone wants to read the most assassination-heavy volume, grab 'DEATH', the second part of the Chronology. It's around 1600 A4 pages in print form, and has (as an example) about 100 pages or so just devoted to the minute of JFK's assassination. The first volume, 'DYNASTY', covers events prior to the shooting, DISAPPOINTMENT covers the Warren Commission, and DISCOVERY covers the years after that, and each of those is again around 1500 pages long.

The appendix volumes are also fascinating - in the medical volume, Walt goes through all the medical testimony from Warren Commission, to the HSCA, to the AARB period, and annotates it with footnotes that highlight contradictions in testimony and other observations. A volume on the U-2 Powers flight and shootdown over Russia follows the entire Powers trial and the machinations of the CIA through that period. There are volumes on the witnesses in Dealy Plaza, and a volume on the testimony of folks who were in the motorcade. I'm just scratching the surface here.

As a final note, Walt chronologically deconstructs Judith Baker's assertions from her ME AND LEE volume to match them against documented events, and methodically rips her narrative apart throughout much of his first 'DYNASTY' volume. It's grimly funny - he's not a fan of her book at all.

Walt's chronology is well worth a read in part or whole if anyone is interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently picked up Walt's chronology, but haven't started going through it yet. Looks good, though. Definitely a lot to chew on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

More than three years since last post here. Tried searching; - anyone know of a more recent thread discussing this 31.000+ pages -  compilation by Walt Brown. ? Or discussion(s) of different areas/fragments/details from it. ?

Would appreciate any tip/insight , - whether on topics, details, or about the author himself. Not having caught up on much , - I don't know what the stance(s) is on this compilation/author/information within the chronology.

By now, many things (he claim) may have been debunked etc,  by now. Any insights? For instance on what he is saying in this interviev:

4 years old this clip, - should for sure be old news by now.

Edited by Trygve V. Jensen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trygve,

Have you read Walt Brown's superb book, Treachery in Dallas (1995), about the role played by the Dallas Police and Deputies at Dealey Plaza?

In my view, it offers a solid alternative to Peter Dale Scott's literary term, "Deep Politics."

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walt Brown on Barr McClellan and McClellan's book "Blood, Money and Power."

 

(2) John Kelin, JFK Breakthrough (1998)

A Texas-based assassination research group has publicly named a man believed to have left a previously unidentified fingerprint on a box making up the so-called "sniper's nest" on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.

At a May 29 press conference in Dallas, researcher and author Walt Brown said that the fingerprints belong to Malcolm E. "Mac" Wallace, a convicted killer with ties to Lyndon Baines Johnson. The fingerprints have been officially unidentified since President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Brown presented data showing a 14-point match between Wallace's fingerprint card, obtained from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and the previously unidentified print, a copy of which was kept in the National Archives. The match was made by A. Nathan Darby, an expert with certification by the International Association of Identifiers.

The Texas researchers forwarded their findings to the Dallas Police Department, who passed it on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Copies have also gone to Assassination Records Review Board, the federal panel created to oversee the identification and release of records relating to the JFK assassination.

Malcolm Wallace, convicted in a 1951 murder and suspected in others, has been linked to the 1961 death of U.S. Department of Agriculture investigator Henry Marshall. Marshall was reportedly close to connecting Lyndon Johnson to fraudulent activities involving businessman and convicted swindler Billy Sol Estes.

Estes alleged in 1984 that LBJ ordered the killings of Marshall, President Kennedy, and half a dozen others, and that Wallace carried them out. A grand jury decided that same year that Henry Marshall was murdered as a result of a conspiracy involving then-Vice President Johnson, his aide Clifton Carter, and Wallace. No charges were possible since all three men were by then deceased.

Wallace was killed in a single car automobile accident in January 1971.

Barr McClellan, a Houston attorney and part of the Texas research team, told Fair Play that he began to focus on Wallace during his work as attorney-partner with Ed Clark, whom he described as an Austin power broker and one of those behind the assassination. "John Cofer, Wallace's attorney from the start, was our partner specializing in criminal cases," McClellan said. "From that position of insight, I knew Wallace played a key role in the assassination."

In the petition filed with the ARRB, McClellan wrote: "My direct involvement with Clark as his law partner and sole attorney occurred when he sought an additional payoff for the assassination." Negotiations for the payoff, McClellan told Fair Play, were "in May 1974 in a secret meeting with two members of the Railroad Commission."

The Wallace fingerprint match by Darby has been disputed by Glen Sample, who represents California-based researchers whose investigation parallels the Texas research. While Sample says the California group still believes Wallace "was one of the shooters" of President Kennedy, they do not believe his fingerprints are those from the TSBD box.

(3) Walt Brown, Barr McClellan’s Blood, Money, and Power (November 1, 2003)

On September 30, I mailed out the October, 2003 issue of the JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly, which contained positive, “endorsement” references to Barr McClellan’s “upcoming” work, Blood, Money, and Power: How L.B.J. Killed JFK. (That work also contains a jacket “blurb,” by me, which is valid in the sense that it reflected my opinions on the“to be corrected” “galley proofs” of the book that I read in July.) Several days later, I received the publisher’s edition of the book, and I have been deeply troubled by inconsistencies between what I read (and editorially corrected) in the page proofs and that which appears in the publisher’s edition, available for sale.

To readers of the journal, as well as to readers of my own works, I must issue an apology in that I would not have so eagerly endorsed this work had I known what the publisher’s edition would look like. I have known Barr McClellan for almost six years, and although we’ve never actually met, we have spent many hours together in the search for truth in the events of November 22, 1963. I have no reason to think that his work is in any way an attempt at deceit, but at the same time, I have no answers to the “why?” of how it went from a solid, stand-on-its-own-legs work in July to an almost fictionalized account in October. If anyone reading this found as much disappointment in the book as I did, I apologize if you made this reading selection based on my endorsement. For those who have read the JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly at any time in the past nine years, you know that when I review a published work, I tend to be critical, not laudatory. Had I not known Barr (from the proverbial “Adam”), and this book crossed my desk, I would have had no choice BUT TO BE CRITICAL of it, as it contains egregious errors of a factual nature and it takes literary license beyond bounds in its attempts to “factionalize” events not actually known, but highly suspected, by the author. I should also add that if the premise of this book was “Oswald only,” and it had such errors and “faction,” any reviewer who has had material published in the journal would have had a field day.

Chronology: Barr McClellan initially sent me his manuscript in 1998. It was an interesting read with respect to what he called “Bubba Justice,” a parochial nickname for the ol’ boy legal network in Texas. The vast majority of that manuscript dealt with that topic and devoted very little space to McClellan’s close working ties with Ed Clark, portrayed as LBJ’s “cover-up” lawyer in matters dealing with the JFK assassination.

There the matter rested until I became aware that the book was to be published, with the original publication date set for late 2002, and then moved to early 2003. Since I had not been privy to that process, I assumed the author was moving ahead, on his own, and I wished him well.

He sent me the “new” manuscript early in 2003, and I edited it thoroughly, both for mechanics (grammar, usage, spelling), and, more importantly to me, for factual accuracy. I rewrote parts of it for greater clarity in matters pertaining to events in Dealey Plaza. The edited manuscript was then Fed-Ex’d back to Mississippi in the depths of winter.

In June, I was asked to “take a peek at the galleys,” and another researcher, who had also worked extensively with Barr, was asked to do likewise. When the galleys arrived, in page-proof form, it was immediately obvious that the manuscript I had returned in February had been massively altered, and, in particular, there were glaring errors of fact in the galleys that had been added following the February edit. One case in point was a notation regarding Will Fritz, cited as the Dallas Police Chief. I was wholly at a loss to explain how that, and other, similarly obvious errors had made their way into the manuscript, but I had to remind myself that I had only been the editor, not the author.

I faxed the first 154 galley pages back to Barr in early July, but then literally hit a wall as I found error after error in the part(s) covering events from Love Field to Bethesda. These concerns were ALL directly addressed in a lengthy conference call held on July 11, 2003, involving Barr, the Texas-based researcher who also had great input into the work, and me. At the end of that phone call, both “editors” were assured that the provable corrections of fact that had to be made would ALL be made.

With that in mind, and with the long-held belief that John Kennedy’s murder could not have been accomplished without LBJ, and mindful that it had been LBJ who had created the Warren Commission, I wrote the blurb (along with the “rectangle” below it) for attribution on the back dust flap of a book that, as of July 11, I believed to be factually accurate, although it was always understood that I was taking Barr’s knowledge of the inner workings of the legal system as truth.

I still believe that Barr’s knowledge of the Clark-LBJ tie is accurate. Beyond that, however, both editors BEGGED Barr not to use “faction,” the name he gave to the blending of fact and fiction as a way of connecting the dots. I wrote “source?” so many times in the margin I grew weary of the task. If Barr could not be dissuaded from leaving out his educated guesses, both editors again implored him to italicize them, so the reader would know where documented material parted company with “faction.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×