Question for Tosh

[Myra Bronstein]

Tosh,

I appreciate the fact that you are on this forum to share what you can, and that there are limits to that.

I have two questions that should allow for your necessary discretion, and is something I would really like your input on.

-What did you think of President Kennedy prior to Nov 22, 1963?

-What do you think of him now, in retrospect?

Thank you.

Myra

[William Plumlee]

Deleted

Edited November 2, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Myra Bronstein]

Tosh,

I appreciate the fact that you are on this forum to share what you can, and that there are limits to that.

I have two questions that should allow for your necessary discretion, and is something I would really like your input on.

-What did you think of President Kennedy prior to Nov 22, 1963?

-What do you think of him now, in retrospect?

Thank you.

Myra

Myra: Thanks for that question and I will be glad to give my answer.

(1) I thought at the time he was a very good "Commander in Chief". Politics was not my strong suite at the time and it did not play into anything I was associate with at that time. We thought the United States could do no wrong in fighting the Cold War and it was an honor to serve the President during those difficult times.

(2) My feelings have not changed in reference to JFK. However, I have watch the American dream degraded by greed and crooks since Kennedy. We have lost our freedom and destoryed our chacacter as a nation that leads. We have been overrun by Crooks, Lobbiest, and special interest in the name of freedom and the "American way".

If Kennedy could have saved us or killed us I do not know. But because of the average American citizen and his apathy toward important issues of the past and today, HE (the average John Doe and Jane Doe has let this nation die a slow death. We Americans have let this greate nation fall into the hands of evil and forked tongued liars and for this I believe JFK is turning in agoney in his grave, because I feel the man loved his country more than Pork, lobbiest, and special interest side deals.

We lost the good fight when we lost John Kennedy.

Tosh,

Thank you so much for answering my questions. I find your answerings comforting. Researching President Kennedy's murder is very emotional for me. Not only because a fine man was slaughtered, but because it was--as you indicate--the start of the end. It is now clear that a good and genuine leader like JFK, Malcolm X, MLK, and RFK will be exterminated by the shadow government.

If you're willing to answer another question, I wonder: was your attitute towards JFK (non-political and non-hostile) atypical amongst your colleagues?

Thanks again.

Myra

(On edit: Corrected a typo.)

Edited October 24, 2006 by Myra Bronstein

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 2, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Randy Downs]

Tosh,

I appreciate the fact that you are on this forum to share what you can, and that there are limits to that.

I have two questions that should allow for your necessary discretion, and is something I would really like your input on.

-What did you think of President Kennedy prior to Nov 22, 1963?

-What do you think of him now, in retrospect?

Thank you.

Myra

Myra: Thanks for that question and I will be glad to give my answer.

(1) I thought at the time he was a very good "Commander in Chief". Politics was not my strong suite at the time and it did not play into anything I was associate with at that time. We thought the United States could do no wrong in fighting the Cold War and it was an honor to serve the President during those difficult times.

(2) My feelings have not changed in reference to JFK. However, I have watch the American dream degraded by greed and crooks since Kennedy. We have lost our freedom and destoryed our chacacter as a nation that leads. We have been overrun by Crooks, Lobbiest, and special interest in the name of freedom and the "American way".

If Kennedy could have saved us or killed us I do not know. But because of the average American citizen and his apathy toward important issues of the past and today, HE (the average John Doe and Jane Doe has let this nation die a slow death. We Americans have let this greate nation fall into the hands of evil and forked tongued liars and for this I believe JFK is turning in agoney in his grave, because I feel the man loved his country more than Pork, lobbiest, and special interest side deals.

We lost the good fight when we lost John Kennedy.

Tosh,

Thank you so much for answering my questions. I find your answerings comforting. Researching President Kennedy's murder is very emotional for me. Not only because a fine man was slaughtered, but because it was--as you indicate--the start of the end. It is now clear that a good and genuine leader like JFK, Malcolm X, MLK, and RFK will be exterminated by the shadow government.

If you're willing to answer another question, I wonder: was your attitute towards JFK (non-political and non-hostile) atypical amongst your colleagues?

Thanks again.

Myra

(On edit: Corrected a typo.)

Myra: At the time most of the crew I knew were in favor of Kennedy. Although we tried to stay out of the politics. I can't speak for others in the Pentagon. That was a mixed breed and you could never figure the brass out. However, you could feel that the military was going political. It was divided. I think those years were the beginning of America's decay. It became, in some circles, " if your not for us-- you are against us". Kind of like it is now here in America. Some were a mixed bag of tricks and dirty tricks. It was tough to know where to walk sometimes, as I said it was the beginning of decay and deciet.

So in answer to your question. We were a "specialized secret crew" attatched to the Penetagon and we stood with the Comander in Chief, President Kennedy. Some of us were eliminated in Nam.

This is a sidebar, brought on by what you said about the change in America as a nation. I remember reading (in of the many books and articles) about JFK in the White House right before the Berlin Wall. The gist being, there was a lot of tension in the room as JFK waited to find out what was going to happen. Then word came that the Soviets had decided to build a wall (i don't remember which author, but this was a first person narrative). The author wrote that JFK said: "A wall? What are we supposed to do about a wall?" (words to that effect). The point being, it was a contingency that nobody had imagined; that responses had been planned for A, B, or C; but, what can you do if someone builds a wall?

And i vividly remember the day the Berlin Wall came down, and as i watched the crowd of people some part of my mind did the math; and i realized if he hadn't been killed JFK would have been alive to see the tearing down of the Berlin Wall. And i felt a great sadness over that. He had sounded so dispirited at it's beginning.

I think America, as a nation, is hard to define; there's the ideas and attitudes of the generation of WW1 and WW2. I was born in '63, i've seen footage of the 60's read and heard about how the soldiers were treated by the civilians. Even as a youth, i'd think: why are they mad at the soldiers, they don't want to be there, go take it out on the people who sent them there; how can people not understand that?

At some point you have to let reality in, if you don't you're living a fantasy. So, if we go back to the beginning; how does a nation rise up and say it stands for freedom when it kidnaps and enslaves another group of people? That's just not logical. And i suppose that's my point: in reality, there's much that is illogical and contradictory. I respect the viewpoint of the earlier generations.

But i wonder to myself, is the country really changing or is it's true face beginning to show? In reality, America was founded on kidnapping, enslavement, murder, theft and genocide. But it could have, it could have been a truly great thing. We had that potential. It's the ones at the top that don't let that happen. In the past or the present. Those are the ones i get angry about. The ones that took away what my country could have been.

Randy

[Myra Bronstein]

...

Tosh,

Thank you so much for answering my questions. I find your answerings comforting. Researching President Kennedy's murder is very emotional for me. Not only because a fine man was slaughtered, but because it was--as you indicate--the start of the end. It is now clear that a good and genuine leader like JFK, Malcolm X, MLK, and RFK will be exterminated by the shadow government.

If you're willing to answer another question, I wonder: was your attitute towards JFK (non-political and non-hostile) atypical amongst your colleagues?

Thanks again.

Myra

(On edit: Corrected a typo.)

Myra: At the time most of the crew I knew were in favor of Kennedy. Although we tried to stay out of the politics. I can't speak for others in the Pentagon. That was a mixed breed and you could never figure the brass out. However, you could feel that the military was going political. It was divided. I think those years were the beginning of America's decay. It became, in some circles, " if your not for us-- you are against us". Kind of like it is now here in America. Some were a mixed bag of tricks and dirty tricks. It was tough to know where to walk sometimes, as I said it was the beginning of decay and deciet.

So in answer to your question. We were a "specialized secret crew" attatched to the Penetagon and we stood with the Comander in Chief, President Kennedy. Some of us were eliminated in Nam.

Tosh, Thank you again for your reply.

"A mixed bag of tricks and dirtry tricks" eh? Nicely said.

I am surprised though at the sanguine reaction of those professonals who must have felt their livelyhoods threatened by President Kennedy's peace-mongering.

And I read in an earlier statement of yours that on the airplane ride out of Dallas your passengers were downcast; you speculated it was because they would have liked to kill JFK themselves.

How would that jibe with a crew you describe as mostly being in favor of Kennedy?

Myra

[Myra Bronstein]

This is a sidebar, brought on by what you said about the change in America as a nation. I remember reading (in of the many books and articles) about JFK in the White House right before the Berlin Wall. The gist being, there was a lot of tension in the room as JFK waited to find out what was going to happen. Then word came that the Soviets had decided to build a wall (i don't remember which author, but this was a first person narrative). The author wrote that JFK said: "A wall? What are we supposed to do about a wall?" (words to that effect). The point being, it was a contingency that nobody had imagined; that responses had been planned for A, B, or C; but, what can you do if someone builds a wall?

And i vividly remember the day the Berlin Wall came down, and as i watched the crowd of people some part of my mind did the math; and i realized if he hadn't been killed JFK would have been alive to see the tearing down of the Berlin Wall. And i felt a great sadness over that. He had sounded so dispirited at it's beginning.

I think America, as a nation, is hard to define; there's the ideas and attitudes of the generation of WW1 and WW2. I was born in '63, i've seen footage of the 60's read and heard about how the soldiers were treated by the civilians. Even as a youth, i'd think: why are they mad at the soldiers, they don't want to be there, go take it out on the people who sent them there; how can people not understand that?

At some point you have to let reality in, if you don't you're living a fantasy. So, if we go back to the beginning; how does a nation rise up and say it stands for freedom when it kidnaps and enslaves another group of people? That's just not logical. And i suppose that's my point: in reality, there's much that is illogical and contradictory. I respect the viewpoint of the earlier generations.

But i wonder to myself, is the country really changing or is it's true face beginning to show? In reality, America was founded on kidnapping, enslavement, murder, theft and genocide. But it could have, it could have been a truly great thing. We had that potential. It's the ones at the top that don't let that happen. In the past or the present. Those are the ones i get angry about. The ones that took away what my country could have been.

Randy

Hi Randy. I sure know what you're talking about when you ask "how does a nation rise up and say it stands for freedom when it kidnaps and enslaves another group of people? That's just not logical."

Kevin Tillman asked the same think in his wonderful Oct 19 essay on the occasion of his deceased brother Pat's birthday: "Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is."

I think we are aware here of the significance of President Kennedy's assassination in that "somehow." Who was it that said that it was effective to accuse opponents of doing what we're doing? Accuse them of being what we are. Machiavelli? Orwell? Rove?

I also share your ambivalence/disgust/discomfort (don't want to put words in your mouth) over the US's genesis. "All men are created equal"...except for some, like the black ones. Uh, seems to me we were poisened from the outset. And there's the good ol' electoral college to keep the commoners (poor dumb rubes) from voting in the *wrong* president. We saw how well that musty old system worked for the power elite in 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but Bush was saved by the foresight of our aristocratic forefathers. It keeps insiders in and outsiders out.

Yeah, this country didn't start out very idealistic or pure, and I think that must be a factor in our current rancidity. Our forefathers wanted slave labor and now as globalist rulers they want the same thing. If the president of Haiti or Venezuela raises the minimum wage the CIA overthows them. (Or in the case of President Chavez tries to overthrow him. Ah but he's a clever one.)

You say that at some point you have to let reality in, but I don't know if this country can or will. The truth is worse than the worst nightmare. I don't know if people are generally open to that. And even if they are, what to do with the truth? The power elite were out of control in 1963, and they've spent 40 years tightening their fists around our leashes.

I sure don't know the answers. For now all I can do is learn the truth in spite of their constant propaganda. My own flavor of civil disobedience.

Myra

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 2, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Randy Downs]

That was very well said, Myra.

Randy

[Myra Bronstein]

>

That was very well said, Myra.

Randy

Thank you Randy.

And I read in an earlier statement of yours that on the airplane ride out of Dallas your passengers were downcast; you speculated it was because they would have liked to kill JFK themselves.

How would that jibe with a crew you describe as mostly being in favor of Kennedy?

Myra

"... And I read in an earlier statement of yours that on the airplane ride out of Dallas your passengers were downcast; you speculated it was because they would have liked to kill JFK themselves...".

Myra: I think you should re read that post or interview. I never said "they would of liked to have killed Kennedy themselves", as the reason for being downcast. They were --and we were-- downcast and dejected because we (they) had failed the mission. If you read that "... killed JFK themselves....". then it was changed by someone for whatever reasons. I have never said that.

"... How would that jibe with a crew you describe as mostly being in favor of Kennedy? ..".

It would not jibe if I had said that.

Hi Tosh, I was paraphrasing. I don't do so good when I try to post from memory. So I found the blurb I was trying to reference:

"The people on the flight out of Dallas were very quiet. I interpreted their silence as dejection at the mission's failure to abort the assassination of the President. I believed that if these men had been the shooters or assassins themselves, they would have been very excited because they had carried it off.

...

I certify this declaration to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Dated this 21st day of November, 2004

William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee, aka William H."Buck" Pearson."

http://www.jfkchat.com/plumlee1.html

Do you see where I'd get the impression that your passengers were dejected that they didn't get to murder President Kennedy themselves?

And that led to my question: How would [a crew that wanted to kill President Kennedy] jibe with a crew mostly in favor of Kennedy?

Thanks.

Myra

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 2, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Myra Bronstein]

Tosh,

Somehow you overlooked the relevant sentence in the quote I posted. But I'll try again.

Which of the below two quotes is accurate?

Quote 1

---------

(You were describing the men you flew out of Dallas 11/22/63 after the failed JFK assassination abort:)

"I believed that if these men had been the shooters or assassins themselves, they would have been very excited because they had carried it off."

I certify this declaration to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Dated this 21st day of November, 2004

William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee, aka William H."Buck" Pearson."

http://www.jfkchat.com/plumlee1.html

Quote 2

---------

(I asked how your colleagues had felt about JFK up until 11/22/63. You answered:)

"At the time most of the crew I knew were in favor of Kennedy."

William Plumlee

post Oct 25 2006, 03:05 AM

Post #4

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry78586

[Frank Agbat]

Tosh,

Somehow you overlooked the relevant sentence in the quote I posted. But I'll try again.

Which of the below two quotes is accurate?

Quote 1

---------

(You were describing the men you flew out of Dallas 11/22/63 after the failed JFK assassination abort:)

"I believed that if these men had been the shooters or assassins themselves, they would have been very excited because they had carried it off."

I certify this declaration to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Dated this 21st day of November, 2004

William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee, aka William H."Buck" Pearson."

http://www.jfkchat.com/plumlee1.html

Quote 2

---------

(I asked how your colleagues had felt about JFK up until 11/22/63. You answered:)

"At the time most of the crew I knew were in favor of Kennedy."

William Plumlee

post Oct 25 2006, 03:05 AM

Post #4

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry78586

Not to put words in someone else's mouth... But I interpret this in the following way:

Mr. Plumlee's team was dejected because they had failed their mission to protect the president, a leader whom they favored.

Had some members of Mr. Plumlee's team been actively involved *in* the assassination, those members might have shown excitement rather than dejection. Because they left dejected, Mr. Plumlee concluded that none of his team had participated as successful shooter(s).

Does this phrasing ring true?

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 2, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Myra Bronstein]

Tosh,

Somehow you overlooked the relevant sentence in the quote I posted. But I'll try again.

Which of the below two quotes is accurate?

Quote 1

---------

(You were describing the men you flew out of Dallas 11/22/63 after the failed JFK assassination abort:)

"I believed that if these men had been the shooters or assassins themselves, they would have been very excited because they had carried it off."

I certify this declaration to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Dated this 21st day of November, 2004

William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee, aka William H."Buck" Pearson."

http://www.jfkchat.com/plumlee1.html

Quote 2

---------

(I asked how your colleagues had felt about JFK up until 11/22/63. You answered:)

"At the time most of the crew I knew were in favor of Kennedy."

William Plumlee

post Oct 25 2006, 03:05 AM

Post #4

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry78586

Not to put words in someone else's mouth... But I interpret this in the following way:

Mr. Plumlee's team was dejected because they had failed their mission to protect the president, a leader whom they favored.

Had some members of Mr. Plumlee's team been actively involved *in* the assassination, those members might have shown excitement rather than dejection. Because they left dejected, Mr. Plumlee concluded that none of his team had participated as successful shooter(s).

Does this phrasing ring true?

Thanks Frank. That says what I meant and rings true. Why could'nt I have said it that way... Myra. Does that help? Sorry if I confused anyone, but Frank did sum it up for me in a way I can live with..

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, yes yes yes. I see. I read it a totally different way. Thank you Frank and Tosh for helping me see the light. I hope you can understand now what I was perplexed about Tosh. Hm, I wonder if other people have read quote #1 and now think your passengers were bloodthirty.

Your statement was really precise, so I believe I'm clear that the flights to Dallas and from Dallas (I know there were multiple stops en route) had some different passengers, right? And John Roselli was not on the return flight.

So...speaking of Roselli, the traditional wisdom is that he was one of the assassins. Does it puzzle you at all that he was on the abort flight into Dallas then?

I know you were on the South size of Dealey Plaza and more people were on the North side. But did you happen to see any of the below?

-Joseph Milteer

-Ted Shackley

-David Morales

-Gerald Patrick Hemming

-Ed Lansdale

-Lucien Conein

-Alfredo Duran

-Rip Robertson

-John Adrian O'Hare

-Orlando Bosch (seems like he would have been directly opposite you)

-Ray Hargraves (ditto)

Or maybe we can come at this a different way: was there anyone in the crowd who did *not* work for the company?

I hope you don't mind all the questions. I'm just trying to piece things together as so many here are. If you can't answer some then I understand.

Thanks.

Myra

Ref:

http://www.google.com/search?q=familiar+fa...:en-US:official

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/FFiDP-2/