Paul Kuntzler's Washington Conference

[Bernice Moore]

In Ms.Mellen's short negative post, it is noted the "I" word appears ..12 times, and had absolutely nothing good to say..

"This disgraceful conduct only makes me long for the camaraderie of a cohort of professional historians, and sorry that people the likes of Robert Caro, Michael Beschloss and Taylor Branch have, so far, lacked the courage to address the issues of the assassinations of President Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr."...Ms. Mellen

...

Historians write history according to their view..

The Historians have "lacked the courage to address the issues of the assassinations of President Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.....Ms. Mellen.."........

They will also continue to lack that courage, also within the murders of Malcolm X, and Robert F Kennedy.

These few, this small group, yesterday did have that Courage to address the issues ,and have not.. for their great effort....received any support or thanks from the majority who posted on this thread...

Starting with the first reply post, and in the majority that followed, it appears to have been diverted away from the subject line, and or anything possibley positive that may be a result of said meeting, before such had even taken place......some appeared to spew such negativity, with their, I hopes, and thinkies, that the atmosphere was "pea green"..

It became another seemingly "all about me" attitude thread, that green eyed AAM desease, and what they felt was important......to them..

Not, the why these few were in Washington, to try to get the media's attention, on the assassination, for all who care....or on what is so important to so many ,who have worked so dilligently, spent so much a part of their lives on, and received so little if any, encouragement or thanks down through the years....and have taken so much abuse...

Why do some, who post so often, choose to continually dwell on what they think is wrong, only what they think is right, and so seldom have anything good to say about what has been done, presented etc, be it in books, articles whatever or will be, could be, or often is..within this subject..they choose to only attack what they think is wrong, they so seldom choose what is good...this was not the overall attitude of this Forum...at one time......the negative atmosphere is overwhelming.....imo.

It could be that some do not and did not deserve the efforts of this few....that was made in Washington.

Those people who did not even show any courage to even stand up, on any forum and or to wish them well, so much for "camaraderie"...that was a clear "wasted opportunity".

So much for the great need, the want to solve the JFK Assassination..that show of pessimism ,says it all..that is and was the major " disgraceful conduct" within this thread..

For God's sake people,try to encourage each other in some ways, try to be civil, dare the mention the word kind be mentioned ?.....the result would and will be a much more productive and prolific Forum..

Get over yourselves..try to work together, help one another, share what you have, drop the know-it-alls-and the I am right and you are wrong attitudes and the condescention...instead of dwellling on the negative, try some optimism..for a change..

This is a very explosive subject, has been, and always will be, whether there was anything in any way that was not "according" to hoyle, in the arranging of and or a behind the scenes scenario or promises of any kind,that

has not come to light, that thought has occurred to me, and if so it will eventually, it always does...it was not to be as I understood it, a media opportunity for any one individual, seemingly backed by others, nor about any book promotion, by any means....but for now...that sick mentality that seems to always come to light first, that attack mode has again made itself known....someone always has to appear to be made the scape goat, always, and no matter whom that person appears to be or is made out to be, in the end I would say the same...... it is too bad, if any one individual didn't get the time, and or attention that they felt they needed and or wanted, or perhaps were promised.

It is also to bad that those who felt their findings and or thesis is so important and were not invited to the meeting perhaps had to show their "sour grapes" within this thread...it was not to be about any one individual, was it?? wasn't the subject the assassination of John F.Kennedy...? Some of you need get over yourselves..imo.

I would personally like thank those that went to Washington, and applaud them, that took courage and great effort.....and is appreciated...

B..

[Pat Speer]

A thoughtful post, Bernice. I, too, would like to thank everyone involved in the press conference for trying to bring important issues to the attention of the media. I would also like to thank Bruce Cormier, Doug Horne, Joan Mellen, and Jim Fetzer for their reporting on this event on this forum. It's a pity that the widespread frustration associated with this event has come to overshadow its noble intentions. But, as Dr. Fetzer pointed out, there were reporters there, and something good may still come of it.

[Robert Howard]

The importance of this thread notwithstanding, when I read it, (in the portions where there is so much anomosity), it remind's me of the House Select Committee Era, when Sprague and Gonzalez were going after each other. I am sure that most everyone realizes there was more to that story than what appeared at the time.

As far as the topic thread goes, what I believe it reveals, is that even without any 'external influences' failing to work together wreaks havok on 'JFK Research' and ultimately on it's credibility as well. Please, don't misconstrue what I am saying. We all, hopefully have good intentions; but for the life of me, I don't understand what arguing endlessly about the Zapgruder Film has to do with anything geared towards resolvingt the last pieces of the puzzle. Once you see that you can't change someone else's mind, isn't it better to just move on, instead of the bitter personal stuff?

[Bruce Cormier]

As far as the topic thread goes, what I believe it reveals, is that even without any 'external influences' failing to work together wreaks havok on 'JFK Research' and ultimately on it's credibility as well. Please, don't misconstrue what I am saying. We all, hopefully have good intentions; but for the life of me, I don't understand what arguing endlessly about the Zapgruder Film has to do with anything geared towards resolvingt the last pieces of the puzzle. Once you see that you can't change someone else's mind, isn't it better to just move on, instead of the bitter personal stuff?

Point taken, Robert, Bernice, Stephen, and all others. I apologize for sticking my own late-night immediate impressions into the thread to further discourage helpfulness and encourage animosity among researchers. We always seem to be jumping to take sides and failing to realize that 42 years later we're still trying to get some consensus on what was originally stated to be the real objective, "Our only client here is truth."

I am sorry, and should have known better from personal experience, since there is one firm believer in Zapruder film alteration for whom I have tremendous respect. This is because of the numerous intelligent and insightful things he has had to say on other subjects (and what he has to say on the subject of Z-film alteration is also intelligent and insightful).

Dan, apologize? I thought your observations in this thread were right on, especially for late-night observations. Yes, some vitriol has spilled over from the conference and commentary on the same in here, but please bear the following in mind.

1. Two of the PARTICIPANTS expressed disappointment and frustration here over the proceedings, and a third, though a bit cheerier, nonetheless recognized it as a missed opportunity. It's not the fans booing, it's the players.

2. Likewise, two of the PARTICIPANTS are at pointed swords here with each other, and the sponsor. There has been little in the way of piling on by the rest of us. (I, for example, attempted to report on the first hour of the proceedings keeping my opinions to myself as best I could, save for one aspect that was simply over the top.

3. You are quite right about the "endless arguing," which eventually grows tiresome and often ventures into personal attack, which is unfortunate. But hey, it happens. Just today in JFK Lancer, a truce was declared in the Hundred Year "Files" War, and that thread was removed from the general discussion to its own padded cell.

Best regards,

Bruce

[William Kelly]

CAN WE GET A WORLD WRESTLING ASSOCATION BELT FOR THIS?

bk

[Josiah Thompson]

Note Fetzer's self-description as given above: "James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota. Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax."

Seemingly forever, Fetzer has been championing credentials as the key to credibility. No surprise then that he should be involved in upgrading his own. Note that Fetzer (now retired after a two-month suspension without pay for "sexual harrassment" a couple of years ago) has given up any association with the University of Minnesota (Duluth). He now advertizes himself as distinguished professor "at the University of Minnesota." This is sort of like telling people you teach "at Harvard" when "Harvard" is really an obscure technical college on the outskirts of Enid, Oklahoma. Sic semper bloviatus!

Is anyone surprised?

Josiah Thompson

From my sources -- this should generate some interest among researchers of the CT bent

and 'A' lot of gas for the Lone Neuter's amongst us!

MAJOR EVENT (S) MONDAY RE: JFK ASSASSINATION CASE

Two items I will add to the press release below. Jeff Morley of the

Washington Post is joining the panel to discuss his fascinating FOIA

battle with the CIA over 32 pages of documents that may clarify the

much speculated about connection between Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA.

And US News World Report is running a major feature about the press

conference that will be on their website Sunday and on sale Monday. It

looks like we will have several TV crews at this point.

Did the U.S. Government Cover-up JFK Assassination Details?

Five renowned experts present new findings in DC

WASHINGTON, DC, May 15, 2006 - Five prominent John F. Kennedy

assassination experts will convene today at the Willard Hotel in the

nation's capitol to present new findings and make the case that the

U.S. government's investigation of the JFK assassination was replete

with errors and, most likely, a deliberate cover-up.

These experts will also raise an important question: Does the JFK

assassination 43 years ago (and the U.S. government's likely cover-up

of the details of that assassination) hold the key to regaining public

trust in government?

These five experts - appearing for the first time in a national forum

together - each have meticulously assembled key parts of a complex

puzzle that lead any objective observer to just one conclusion: that

the government deliberately covered up the details of the JFK

assassination and misled the American public.

For instance, one expert has assembled new photographic evidence that

raises substantial questions about whether the Zapruder film was

altered while in the government's possession. Others will present new

suggestions that a second brain was, in fact, used in an autopsy

cover-up.

A CBS poll on the 40th observance of the JFK assassination in 2003

indicated that only 10% of the American people believe The Warren

Report, while 74% think believe there was a cover-up. Many experts

believe that the U.S. government's mishandling of its investigation

of the Kennedy assassination began what is by now a deep inclination

for the American public to distrust it.

A Washington publishing company executive, Paul Kuntzler, hopes that,

by bringing nationally renowned JFK assassination experts together for

the first time to reveal important findings on the errors in how the

government handled the JFK assassination, Congress and the

administration will re-open the case in an effort to finally get to the

truth.

Kuntzler's company, Miller Reporting, has a proven record for

integrity in handling records and transcripts for government agencies

for more than 30 years. Ironically the records it transcribed for The

Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) in 199

8 were the ones that

troubled him the most. They were the most exhaustive attempt at

reconstructing the evidence to date. And he is bringing together a

group of some of the nation's leading experts on the death of JFK to

help sort things out at a meeting at the Willard Hotel at 11AM on

Monday, May 15th.

"My belief is that our country has lost its way," Kuntzler said. "If

we could find out what happened in Dallas, it might help us to figure

out a way to regain a sense of trust in government." His concern is

that this may be a seminal instance in which the American government

lied to the American people.

"If it is possible for someone to assassinate a President in broad

daylight in a major American city, and then have the federal government

fake the autopsy evidence and conceal the nature of the crime itself,

then those who exercised that kind of power are emboldened to repeat

performances of that kind over and over again. The American people are

not unreasonable to suspect that that has happened to them many times

by now."

The ARRB was created by the JFK Records Act passed by Congress in 1992.

It had the unprecedented power to declassify documents and records held

by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and other agencies of the

government. Only the President could override its decisions.

President George H.W. Bush opposed the legislation and, when it passed

over his opposition, refused to appoint its members, which had to await

the incoming Clinton administration.

The five experts Kuntzler will present include:

* James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota.

Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK

and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,

Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax. Fetzer is

not surprised at the unprecedented level of public disbelief in the

Warren Report. "Considering that the crux of the government's

position, the 'magic bullet' theory, is not even anatomically possible,

it should be even higher."

* David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has worked with the tangled web of

inconsistent and contradictory medical evidence, including the autopsy

X-rays and photographs, for many years. "It's hardly surprising that

most Americans don't know what to make of this case," he observed.

"Even a Ph.D. in physics and an M.D. did not adequately prepare me for

this chaotic record. It was probably fortuitous that John Ebersole,

M.D., who was the officer in charge of radiology at Bethesda during the

autopsy, and I happen to have the same medical specialty, radiation

oncology. Otherwise, I might not have been able to figure out what

happened to the official records during the autopsy."

* Douglas Horne, the Senior Analyst for Military Affairs for the ARRB

who discovered the existence of records demonstrating the conduct of

two postmortem brain exams, described the experience of searching

through seemingly endless documents for a few nuggets of truth as

frustrating and exasperating. "This just may be the single most

bizarre case in the history of forensic science," he observed. "I can

certainly understand why Mr. Kuntzler has found this case the most

disturbing. I was there during the ARRB's search for records, but I

still find it challenging to take the case apart and put it together

and make all the pieces fit."

* Thomas Lipscomb, the noted journalist and publisher, was President of

Times Books, the New York Times book division when it published The

Final Report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979.

"As a young officer in charge of a US Army Rifle and Pistol Team at the

time of the Kennedy assassination," he said, "I was asked to try to

replicate the feats attributed to Oswald with a mail order carbine

exactly like his. I couldn't. But I feel a lot better now that no one

else has either, including teams at CBS and the Discovery channel." A

senior fellow at the Annenberg Center for the Digital Future, Lipscomb

has been investigating the authenticity of the photographic record,

including the Zapruder film, and has unearthed disturbing

discrepancies.

* Joan Mellen, a professor at Temple University, is the author of

Farewell to Justice, a new study of the trial of Clay Shaw brought by

New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, which led her to important

discoveries showing CIA and FBI involvement in the Kennedy

assassination "After going through thousands of documents released

since the Assassination Records and Review Act, and doing 1,200

interviews, I've learned that Jim Garrison had a host of suspects who

played a role in the implementation of the assassination of President

Kennedy. Like any criminal investigator, he sometimes found himself in

a blind alley. He would have been no investigator if that hadn't

happened. Yet he came up with the truth closer than anyone has before

or since."

[Bernice Moore]

David Wayne Dunn: wrote above in post #68...and thank you Sir..for your sane thoughts..appreciated..

Clip""I appreciate the support. My apologies were intended for and extended to the general studio audience, a small concession in the interests of peace among those who should be working together instead of at each other’s throats all the time. A lot of things are discouraging a nearly half century after the event, but not many more so than the constant bickering and bitching and accusations of being disinformation agents and “working for the dark side.” Although it’s naive to believe that doesn’t occur or can’t occur when it surely has occurred, it also seems that we don’t often allow nearly enough room for simple stupidity, personal vanity, or psychological variety when we try to figure out “where someone’s coming from” in their support of views we don’t share. Instead, we jump to conclusions about their motives or affiliations, etc, etc. So I wanted to apologize for adding my turds to that pile.

As far as the psychological aspect, it seems clear that some people are just really compulsive and cannot for a moment stop posting long enough to take a breath, much less consider what the other side has to say. Much of that also has to do with personal vanity and their certainty that they’re so absolutely right. Whatever. We’ve all got egos to protect and promote. ""

*********************

And now we hear from Mr. Doom & Gloom...Josiah Thompson Post #69..stirring the pot eh Tink???

The thread had about settled down to some sense and sanity??? Just gotta xxxxe disturb, and distrupt,

don't ever help, just hinder..same old..and don't ever forget to throw in some personal insults in there...

yours and others tactics are very old...they are very worn..

""Note Fetzer's self-description as given above: "James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota. Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax."

Seemingly forever, Fetzer has been championing credentials as the key to credibility. No surprise then that he should be involved in upgrading his own. Note that Fetzer (now retired after a two-month suspension without pay for "sexual harrassment" a couple of years ago) has given up any association with the University of Minnesota (Duluth). He now advertizes himself as distinguished professor "at the University of Minnesota." This is sort of like telling people you teach "at Harvard" when "Harvard" is really an obscure technical college on the outskirts of Enid, Oklahoma. Sic semper bloviatus!

Is anyone surprised?

Josiah Thompson""

That you resort to this type of Post not in the least...

**************

Here why don't you chew on this for awhile....at least

the Russians at Pravda are reporting

on the press meeting, but not the US press so far.....

John F. Kennedy killed by CIA agents?

Did the U.S. government cover up the details pertaining to the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy? An answer to this question will be much sought after by participants of a conference that kicked off on Monday, May 15th, in Washington, D.C. According to the report of the Warren Commission, President Kennedy fell victim to “Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone.” However, the “alternative” versions of the tragedy argue that two or more people shot at JFK in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas, on November 22nd, 1963. The above versions allege that U.S. government covered up the truth behind Kennedy’s death.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/19...80596-Kennedy-0

B

Edited May 20, 2006 by Bernice Moore

[David G. Healy]

Josiah Thompson' wrote:

Note Fetzer's self-description as given above: "James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota. Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax."

Seemingly forever, Fetzer has been championing credentials as the key to credibility. No surprise then that he should be involved in upgrading his own. Note that Fetzer (now retired after a two-month suspension without pay for "sexual harrassment" a couple of years ago) has given up any association with the University of Minnesota (Duluth). He now advertizes himself as distinguished professor "at the University of Minnesota." This is sort of like telling people you teach "at Harvard" when "Harvard" is really an obscure technical college on the outskirts of Enid, Oklahoma. Sic semper bloviatus!

Is anyone surprised?

Josiah Thompson

_____________

Gosh, I'm glad you chimmed in here Dr. Thompson, Ive always wanted to know [as have others] HOW a Philosophy Professor at an obscure College, Haverford I think it is, nearly overnight wound up at LIFE Magazine dealing with the Zapruder film frames and The JFK assassination? How did that happen?

Now, I know you have your worshippers on this forum, so I'm probably insulting them, and others by asking such a base, legitimate question. It would nice to have that understanding. Can you help us out here?

Then feel free, get on to your bashing of JFetzer, seems you just can't stay away. Not in anybody's defense, I will say, whenever the the non-Z-film alteration crowd are putting on a less than stellar performance, the call goes out. Guess who shows up?

How is Rollie and Ray doing these day's? tap-tap-tap! We're await'in...!

David Healy

Edited May 20, 2006 by David G. Healy

[Joan Mellen]

To the gentleman who wrote about selling ("hawking" books): Mr. Fetzer ordered at the expense of the organizer 100 copies of his book, and none of mine. I sold no books, brought no books, ordered no books, and was not there to sell books, for the record. I appreciate your introducing this point. I did not sell my book at this event. I referred to it, yes.

To Pat Speer: Jeff Morley did finally speak. He was a late addition to the panel, and so is not mentioned in the press release. He spoke about his Joannides case, but then added that he did not believe that there is any credible evidence that there was a conspiracy! Maybe in fifty years we'll have that evidence, he said. So, as everyone who reads this discussion knows, despite all his research, he stands with the 25% minority of this country that still believes that Oswald was the lone assassin. He also defended Gerald Posner as "a friend of mine." Why of all the hard-working researchers in this case he was chosen to be on this small panel is beyond me. It was Tom Lipscomb who put him on the panel, by the way. I might add that although the organizer invited me to be on this panel, driving from Washington to New Jersey for dinner just to persuade me, the moderator Mr. Fetzer had not read my book, nor had Mr. Lipscomb, who was somehow, for reasons not clear to me, in charge of writing the press release.

To Mr. Horne and his complaints, allow me to add that we were told this press conference was to be one hour long. His complaint should be to Mr. Fetzer for seizing the lion's charge of the time, making a new speech each time he introduced a speaker. I was surprised to learn that Mr. Horne had hoped that I would "walk out." He had seemed to me to be a sympathetic individual.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Having turned 65 in December, I am retiring at the end of the month after 35 years of teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning. I have noticed that most faculty retire at some point in time, so I don't understand why this should come as news to Josiah Thompson. The purpose of this press release was not only to explain the purpose of the press conference but the qualifications of the individuals who were to be participating. You can't do that without enumerating credentials. That's the point.

The shorter announcement was accompanied by a longer biographical summary that mentioned that I teach on the Duluth campus. My rank as Distinguished McKnight University Professor was bestowed upon me in 1996 as a consequence of a system-wide search. It is an honor awarded by the University of Minnesota based upon an extensive comparative evaluation of faculty throughout the system. It is not a rank that can be bestowed by the University of Minnesota, Duluth. He should know that.

It is the case that I had a falling out with a 60-year old member of the staff, who was not under my supervision but had been a graduate student of mine. We had had an inappropriate relationship that spanned some 18 months. For reasons that I do not profess to understand, she turned on me and accused me of sexually harassing her. I have not sexually harassed anyone and probably nothing would have come of it except that she was the Chancellor's "best buddy" and I was hung out to dry.

Just for the record, I have published 23 books and over 125 articles and reviews in the philosophy of science and on the theoretical foundations of computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science. I have also published four books that are directly related to assassination research, three edited on the death of JFK (Assassination Science, Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax) and one co-authored (with Four Arrows) on the death of Senator Paul Wellstone (American Assassination).

Although it may sound very odd, if not bizarre, Thompson often implies that persons who are accomplished scholars are somehow less qualified to study the death of JFK than others who are not. He has observed that there are no degrees in "assassination science", as though applying scientific reasoning to political assassinations were not a responsible area of inquiry for academicians. My Ph.D., for example, is in the history and philosophy of science, which has qualified me for precisely this kind of study.

Thompson once authored a book on the assassination, Six Seconds in Dallas, which is based upon the assumption that the Zapruder film is authentic. Since 1996, when I organized and moderated the first "Zapruder Film Symposium" devoted to assessing whether or not that assumption is correct, he has been conducting an unrelenting assault on my character and research. Although he holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from Yale, he has committed fallacy after fallacy in hundreds if not thousands of attacks.

Anyone who doubts my words can easily verify them for themselves if they happen to be familiar with any of my books related to assassination research. Simply go to amazon.com and read the "reader's reviews" he has posted there about them. In the 40 years since his book was published, he has posted exactly 4 reviews of books on amazon.com. Each of them is a hatchet-job on one of my books, which are about as grossly unfair and deliberately distorted as any book reviews I have ever read.

Josiah Thompson has made such allegations before and I dealt with them years ago on another forum. So he knows better on every count. I have long since concluded that he is intellectually dishonest and morally bankrupt. If he was once a force for good in promoting the search for truth about the death of JFK, he has now become an obstacle. I believe he has so few and dated contributions to assassination research that he compensates by attacking those with newer and more, a kind of envy Freud explained.

Note Fetzer's self-description as given above: "James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota. Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax."

Seemingly forever, Fetzer has been championing credentials as the key to credibility. No surprise then that he should be involved in upgrading his own. Note that Fetzer (now retired after a two-month suspension without pay for "sexual harrassment" a couple of years ago) has given up any association with the University of Minnesota (Duluth). He now advertizes himself as distinguished professor "at the University of Minnesota." This is sort of like telling people you teach "at Harvard" when "Harvard" is really an obscure technical college on the outskirts of Enid, Oklahoma. Sic semper bloviatus!

Is anyone surprised?

Josiah Thompson

From my sources -- this should generate some interest among researchers of the CT bent

and 'A' lot of gas for the Lone Neuter's amongst us!

MAJOR EVENT (S) MONDAY RE: JFK ASSASSINATION CASE

Two items I will add to the press release below. Jeff Morley of the

Washington Post is joining the panel to discuss his fascinating FOIA

battle with the CIA over 32 pages of documents that may clarify the

much speculated about connection between Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA.

And US News World Report is running a major feature about the press

conference that will be on their website Sunday and on sale Monday. It

looks like we will have several TV crews at this point.

Did the U.S. Government Cover-up JFK Assassination Details?

Five renowned experts present new findings in DC

WASHINGTON, DC, May 15, 2006 - Five prominent John F. Kennedy

assassination experts will convene today at the Willard Hotel in the

nation's capitol to present new findings and make the case that the

U.S. government's investigation of the JFK assassination was replete

with errors and, most likely, a deliberate cover-up.

These experts will also raise an important question: Does the JFK

assassination 43 years ago (and the U.S. government's likely cover-up

of the details of that assassination) hold the key to regaining public

trust in government?

These five experts - appearing for the first time in a national forum

together - each have meticulously assembled key parts of a complex

puzzle that lead any objective observer to just one conclusion: that

the government deliberately covered up the details of the JFK

assassination and misled the American public.

For instance, one expert has assembled new photographic evidence that

raises substantial questions about whether the Zapruder film was

altered while in the government's possession. Others will present new

suggestions that a second brain was, in fact, used in an autopsy

cover-up.

A CBS poll on the 40th observance of the JFK assassination in 2003

indicated that only 10% of the American people believe The Warren

Report, while 74% think believe there was a cover-up. Many experts

believe that the U.S. government's mishandling of its investigation

of the Kennedy assassination began what is by now a deep inclination

for the American public to distrust it.

A Washington publishing company executive, Paul Kuntzler, hopes that,

by bringing nationally renowned JFK assassination experts together for

the first time to reveal important findings on the errors in how the

government handled the JFK assassination, Congress and the

administration will re-open the case in an effort to finally get to the

truth.

Kuntzler's company, Miller Reporting, has a proven record for

integrity in handling records and transcripts for government agencies

for more than 30 years. Ironically the records it transcribed for The

Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) in 199

8 were the ones that

troubled him the most. They were the most exhaustive attempt at

reconstructing the evidence to date. And he is bringing together a

group of some of the nation's leading experts on the death of JFK to

help sort things out at a meeting at the Willard Hotel at 11AM on

Monday, May 15th.

"My belief is that our country has lost its way," Kuntzler said. "If

we could find out what happened in Dallas, it might help us to figure

out a way to regain a sense of trust in government." His concern is

that this may be a seminal instance in which the American government

lied to the American people.

"If it is possible for someone to assassinate a President in broad

daylight in a major American city, and then have the federal government

fake the autopsy evidence and conceal the nature of the crime itself,

then those who exercised that kind of power are emboldened to repeat

performances of that kind over and over again. The American people are

not unreasonable to suspect that that has happened to them many times

by now."

The ARRB was created by the JFK Records Act passed by Congress in 1992.

It had the unprecedented power to declassify documents and records held

by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and other agencies of the

government. Only the President could override its decisions.

President George H.W. Bush opposed the legislation and, when it passed

over his opposition, refused to appoint its members, which had to await

the incoming Clinton administration.

The five experts Kuntzler will present include:

* James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota.

Fetzer has chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK

and has published three books on this event: Assassination Science,

Murder in Dealey Plaza, and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax. Fetzer is

not surprised at the unprecedented level of public disbelief in the

Warren Report. "Considering that the crux of the government's

position, the 'magic bullet' theory, is not even anatomically possible,

it should be even higher."

* David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has worked with the tangled web of

inconsistent and contradictory medical evidence, including the autopsy

X-rays and photographs, for many years. "It's hardly surprising that

most Americans don't know what to make of this case," he observed.

"Even a Ph.D. in physics and an M.D. did not adequately prepare me for

this chaotic record. It was probably fortuitous that John Ebersole,

M.D., who was the officer in charge of radiology at Bethesda during the

autopsy, and I happen to have the same medical specialty, radiation

oncology. Otherwise, I might not have been able to figure out what

happened to the official records during the autopsy."

* Douglas Horne, the Senior Analyst for Military Affairs for the ARRB

who discovered the existence of records demonstrating the conduct of

two postmortem brain exams, described the experience of searching

through seemingly endless documents for a few nuggets of truth as

frustrating and exasperating. "This just may be the single most

bizarre case in the history of forensic science," he observed. "I can

certainly understand why Mr. Kuntzler has found this case the most

disturbing. I was there during the ARRB's search for records, but I

still find it challenging to take the case apart and put it together

and make all the pieces fit."

* Thomas Lipscomb, the noted journalist and publisher, was President of

Times Books, the New York Times book division when it published The

Final Report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979.

"As a young officer in charge of a US Army Rifle and Pistol Team at the

time of the Kennedy assassination," he said, "I was asked to try to

replicate the feats attributed to Oswald with a mail order carbine

exactly like his. I couldn't. But I feel a lot better now that no one

else has either, including teams at CBS and the Discovery channel." A

senior fellow at the Annenberg Center for the Digital Future, Lipscomb

has been investigating the authenticity of the photographic record,

including the Zapruder film, and has unearthed disturbing

discrepancies.

* Joan Mellen, a professor at Temple University, is the author of

Farewell to Justice, a new study of the trial of Clay Shaw brought by

New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, which led her to important

discoveries showing CIA and FBI involvement in the Kennedy

assassination "After going through thousands of documents released

since the Assassination Records and Review Act, and doing 1,200

interviews, I've learned that Jim Garrison had a host of suspects who

played a role in the implementation of the assassination of President

Kennedy. Like any criminal investigator, he sometimes found himself in

a blind alley. He would have been no investigator if that hadn't

happened. Yet he came up with the truth closer than anyone has before

or since."

Edited May 20, 2006 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

There is no pleasing some people. After discussion with Paul Kuntzler, he agreed that it was a good idea to order copies of books for the press conference. I ordered copies of mine at my editor's 50% discount. I took it for granted that he would discuss the same plan with Joan Mellen. I could not have ordered her books at discount, because I am not their author. I was not plotting against her. None of us were selling books, but it would have been great to have had them available to give to reporters. As it happened, even the copies of my books, which included chapters by David Mantik and Douglas Horne, did not arrive in time.

Conversations with Joan Mellen are different. She makes pronouncements and expects everyone to fall all over them! She made this claim that I had not read her book, which in the ordinary sense is true, but gave me no opportunity to explain that I had analyzed her book. I did not want to raise the serious questions I had about it at that time, but in my opinion she has a grossly exaggerated sense of its importance. She has next to nothing--in most cases, literally nothing--about LBJ, Hoover, or the Texas oil men, for example. In her zeal for planting the seeds of the assassination in New Orleans, she completely ignores its Dallas roots.

Although she includes Barr McClellan's Blood, Money, and Power, which fingers LBJ, in her bibilography, she appears to be unaware of Madelene Duncan Brown's Texas in the Morning or of Billie Sol Estes A Texas Legend, both of which also place much of the responsibility for the assassination on the shoulders of Lyndon Baines Johnson. I am sure that she would respond that, since Billie's book has only just appeared, she should not be held responsible for what he has to say, except that he said a lot of it before in an important interview he gave to a French investigative reporter, William Raymond, which was published years ago.

The very idea that Jim Garrison, whom I admire, "came up with the truth closer than anyone has before or since" is a gross misrepresentation. No doubt, the CIA was deeply involved. But a far more extensive study of the individuals and groups who appear to have had roles in the assassination, including LBJ and Edgar, was authored by Noel Twyman, whose Bloody Treason she includes in her bibliography but does not seem to appreciate, citing it only once in relation to an interview, according to her own index. Similarly, she includes Murder in Dealey Plaza, but does not seem to understand what it has to tell us about the death of JFK.

There appears to be next to nothing about the autopsy, the X-rays, the substitution of another person's brain for that of JFK, or the alteration of the Zapruder film, all of which are discussed extensively in Murder, in her book. So far as I have been able to discern, the important objective and scientific evidence that the most basic evidence in this case as been subject to alteration, distortion, or fabrication has not penetrated her consciousness. That may work for a professor of creative writing--and others, including Tom Lipscomb, have praised her book as "very well written"--but for a book that pretends to be definitive, that simply won't do.

It is the case that, in introducing each speaker, I offered observations that were intended to place their presentations in context. They averaged about 30 seconds apiece. In the case of Mellen, I was sensitive to her exaggerated sense of the importance of New Orleans and her apparent ignorance of the objective and scientific evidence in the case, so I used my introductory remarks to create a framework that would better define how her work fit into the broader context of JFK research. It took 45 seconds and read as follows (I had described each of our contributions as "anchors to reality" that responsible theories must accommodate):

"Our multiple anchors to reality substantially impact alternative theories about the case. The Mafia, for example, which no doubt put up some of the shooters, could not have extended its reach into Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter X-rays under the control of agents of the Secret Service, medical officers of the US Navy, or the President's personal physician. Neither pro- nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted someone else's brain for that of JFK. The KGB, which had the same ability to edit films as Hollywood or the CIA, could not have gained possession of the Zapruder film. Nor could any of these things have been done by Lee Oswald, who was either incarcerated or already dead. Our next speaker, a professor of English at Temple University, has explored Oswald's experiences in New Orleans and thereby shed light upon this enigmatic man and his involvement with our own intelligence agencies. I am delighted to welcome Joan Mellen."

I knew that Joan was probably not going to like the fact that I emphasized evidence that undermines her claims to centrality in relation to New Orleans, but I thought it was indispensable that she not convey the impression that New Orleans was the end-all and be-all of the assassination of JFK. Although Kuntzler had been rigorous in enforcing strict time limits on the rest of us, he did not once give Joan little notes with the time she had remaining on them. We clocked her presentation and it ran about 18 minutes. So I would have to say that, if anyone took "the lion's charge" of the time, it was Joan Mellen, as the tapes will show.

Indeed, that is easy to establish. I spoke for 12 minutes exactly in my opening, which offered a brief history of the case, including the Warren Commission's conclusions and the necessity to introduce the "magic bullet" theory. I laid out the evidence refuting the "magic bullet" theory and, on the basis of independent evidence, the proof that there had been at least six shots from at least three directions. I then explained what David Mantik had discovered about the X-rays, by way of introducing him. I was showing 35 slides as I proceeded. With 30 second introductions for Horne, Lipscomb, and Morely, and 45 for Mellen, I used 14:15 altogether.

Of course, I was moderating the program and it should come as no suprise if the moderator--who, in this case, was also a presenter--should consume more time than other participants, even if their name happens to be Joan Mellen! But that was not the case and she spoke nearly twice as long as any other other member of the panel apart from me. As for Lipscomb preparing the press release, maybe she does not know it, but he is an accomplished journalist who was doing his best to present what we were doing in the best possible light. I find it the least bit bewildering to read her complaint that "Mr. Lipscomb, for reasons that were not clear to me, was somehow in charge of writing the press release". But then she was probably not paying a lot of attention to the rest of us. She is a person who is first and foremost concerned with herself and no others.

To the gentleman who wrote about selling ("hawking" books): Mr. Fetzer ordered at the expense of the organizer 100 copies of his book, and none of mine. I sold no books, brought no books, ordered no books, and was not there to sell books, for the record. I appreciate your introducing this point. I did not sell my book at this event. I referred to it, yes.

To Pat Speer: Jeff Morley did finally speak. He was a late addition to the panel, and so is not mentioned in the press release. He spoke about his Joannides case, but then added that he did not believe that there is any credible evidence that there was a conspiracy! Maybe in fifty years we'll have that evidence, he said. So, as everyone who reads this discussion knows, despite all his research, he stands with the 25% minority of this country that still believes that Oswald was the lone assassin. He also defended Gerald Posner as "a friend of mine." Why of all the hard-working researchers in this case he was chosen to be on this small panel is beyond me. It was Tom Lipscomb who put him on the panel, by the way. I might add that although the organizer invited me to be on this panel, driving from Washington to New Jersey for dinner just to persuade me, the moderator Mr. Fetzer had not read my book, nor had Mr. Lipscomb, who was somehow, for reasons not clear to me, in charge of writing the press release.

To Mr. Horne and his complaints, allow me to add that we were told this press conference was to be one hour long. His complaint should be to Mr. Fetzer for seizing the lion's charge of the time, making a new speech each time he introduced a speaker. I was surprised to learn that Mr. Horne had hoped that I would "walk out." He had seemed to me to be a sympathetic individual.

Edited May 20, 2006 by James H. Fetzer

[Bill Miller]

Thompson once authored a book on the assassination, Six Seconds in Dallas, which is based upon the assumption that the Zapruder film is authentic. Since 1996, when I organized and moderated the first "Zapruder Film Symposium" devoted to assessing whether or not that assumption is correct, he has been conducting an unrelenting assault on my character and research. Although he holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from Yale, he has committed fallacy after fallacy in hundreds if not thousands of attacks.

Boy, Jim ... for the life of me I cannot figure out why anyone would assualt your research, unless it is for the types of boners you pulled below ...

... now don't you think that you brought some of those assualts onto yourself.

Bill

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Your capacity to allege mistakes wildly outruns our tendency to commit them. We were well aware of the asphalt build-up on the street. Our reference point was always measurements above the curb. But we had to take measurements on the street (since we were not at liberty to resurface it) and then compensate for the asphalt build-up. How else could we make any measurements in the street? This is the first time that I have heard this objection raised, no doubt for the obvious reason that we did not commit it. But it's not the first time that you and the rest of this crew have claimed that we did something wrong about the Moorman. The blunders, so far as I have been able to determine, have all been on the other side, including a whopper by your leader on another forum. This photo does not establish any "boner" on our part, because you have assumed we ignored the asphalt build-up in making our calculations. That requires a different line of argument, one which you have yet to provide. When you sort it out, let me know. But this stuff is getting just a bit stale.

Thompson once authored a book on the assassination, Six Seconds in Dallas, which is based upon the assumption that the Zapruder film is authentic. Since 1996, when I organized and moderated the first "Zapruder Film Symposium" devoted to assessing whether or not that assumption is correct, he has been conducting an unrelenting assault on my character and research. Although he holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from Yale, he has committed fallacy after fallacy in hundreds if not thousands of attacks.

Boy, Jim ... for the life of me I cannot figure out why anyone would assualt your research, unless it is for the types of boners you pulled below ...

... now don't you think that you brought some of those assualts onto yourself.

Bill

Edited May 20, 2006 by James H. Fetzer

[Ron Ecker]

the Russians at Pravda are reporting on the press meeting, but not the US press so far.....

To me this is truly ironic. I remember back in my youth pitying the poor Russians with their controlled media and wondering why they were content to be such sheeple. I have lived to see the situation almost reversed, with the sheeple being in America with a controlled media, and Russia's Pravda reporting like a free press. I don't know how free Pravda actually is nowadays, but it can't be any worse than what we've got today in the U.S. "republic."

[John Simkin]

To me this is truly ironic. I remember back in my youth pitying the poor Russians with their controlled media and wondering why they were content to be such sheeple. I have lived to see the situation almost reversed, with the sheeple being in America with a controlled media, and Russia's Pravda reporting like a free press. I don't know how free Pravda actually is nowadays, but it can't be any worse than what we've got today in the U.S. "republic."

Here is the report that appeared in Pravda:

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/19...80596-Kennedy-0

Did the U.S. government cover up the details pertaining to the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy? An answer to this question will be much sought after by participants of a conference that kicked off on Monday, May 15th, in Washington, D.C. According to the report of the Warren Commission, President Kennedy fell victim to “Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone.” However, the “alternative” versions of the tragedy argue that two or more people shot at JFK in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas, on November 22nd, 1963. The above versions allege that U.S. government covered up the truth behind Kennedy’s death.

Douglas Horn, the former chief analyst of U.S. Congress on the Kennedy case, took part in the conference. He was among other experts calling the official version of the tragedy into question. The participants will include the historian from Minnesota James Fetzer, and the specialist in radioactive oncology David Mantic. Thomas Lipscomb, a well-known U.S. author, is expected to unveil more data indicating discrepancies in evidence used by the Warren Commission, which was set up by President Johnson to investigate Kennedy’s murder. In particular, Lipscomb is reported to have found evidence showing that the famous amateur footage (by Abraham Zapruder who happened to witness the assassination) was obviously cropped away by some unknown party.

Some of the participants of the conference have information showing that the 26-second footage filmed by Zapruder on 8 mm camera is just one of eight existing amateur documentaries on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. However, with the help of some interested party, Zapruder’s short film became the main piece of material evidence for the Warren Commission.

Experts are trying to locate other documentaries.

The participants will reportedly present new data to support the version about the “CIA conspiracy.” According to the theory, CIA agents might have replaced Kennedy’s brain with that of another person during the president’s autopsy.

By a strange twist of fate, the plane carrying Senator Ted Kennady, the brother of the late President John F. Kennedy, was struck by lightning right on the day when the conference kicked off in the U.S. capital. No one was harmed during the incident yet the news seemed to serve as yet another reminder of grim fate controlling the Kennedys.

You can discuss this story on the Pravda Forum:

http://engforum.pravda.ru/