John Dolva

http://members.aol.com/forumlead/Articles/...y/fillbust2.htm "From 1848 to 1851, Cuban separatists residing in the United States established organizations, released publications, and mustered four filibuster invasions to overthrow the Spanish colonial government and establish a Cuban republic. They were following the Texas model by using American funds, volunteers and weapons to achieve independence. The islanders would later decide the question of statehood through a referendum. Filibuster expeditions led by disgruntled former Spanish Army General Narciso López and his aide-de-camp Ambrosio José Gonzales,violated the Neutrality Law of 1818, prohibiting armed enterprises against nations at peace withthe United States. López's attempts to liberate Cuba had profound consequences for United States-Spanish relations and the course of Cuban history. López, Gonzales and most of the filibuster leadership were Freemasons who relied extensively on the international fraternity to accomplish their plans. There had been a similar precedent in the creation of the Republic of West Florida in 1810 and the Republic of Texas in 1836. Louisiana Freemasons led the revolt against Spain that proclaimed the seventy-two-day Republic of West Florida, an area that was later annexed to their state. In Texas, revolutionary leaders Stephen F. Austin, Samuel Houston, David G. Burnet, Mirabeau Bounaparte Lamar, William B. Travis, David Crockett, James Fannin and Thomas J. Rusk were Freemasons. Twenty-two of the fifty-nine delegates to the Texas Independence Convention were Freemasons, as were all four Presidents and four Vice Presidents of the Texas Republic. Austin had met in the fall of 1835 with thirty-five prominent New Orleans Freemasons who planned the liberation of Texas and established a local committee to raise funds and volunteers. The Cuban revolutionaries tried to emulate this pattern fifteen years later." As there is no input to the contrary I'll continue to stroll down this hypothesis a bit longer. It is nothing more than a hypothesis using known events but 'naming' or interpreting them differently. Hopefully in a logical way. The thought taking shape is that at the heart of the whole issue is a secret so veiled and disturbing that any sane person automatically dumps it if ever even considering it. However as I'm not any sane person... There seems to have been largescale private accumulations of arms and personnell concentrating in the south east ostensibly for the purpose of dealing with Castro. "There was a thought stream that sought to co-opt current events as a cover for a domestic operation that basically was an armed insurrection." _________________________________________________________________ Occuring just three weeks before the Cuban missle crisis, the Battle of Oxford quickly vanished from the public consciousness. Portions of Willian Doyle's essay "The making of an American insurrection" -1996 - "...My partner Carol Fleisher was preparing to videotape Kennedy aide Burke Marshall about JFK's tapes of the so-called James Meredith crisis in 1962, when Meredith attempted to become the first black student to attend the University of Mississippi. As the cameras were about to roll, Marshall said almost off-handedly, "that was the night we had a little war." " http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/1101/doyle/essay.html "In Jackson I sat down with William Simmons, the 85-year-old former chief of the Citizens Councils of America, a charming, sophisticated intellectual who in 1962 was the most powerful segregationist in America and the shadow ruler of Mississippi on racial matters, the man who Governor Ross Barnett actually reported to. Simmons explained that from the segregationists point of view, the Battle of Oxford was the decisive turning point in the entire struggle against integration. I tracked down Robert Shelton, former Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America and the most powerful Klan leader of the late 20th Century. As the Battle of Oxford drew near, Shelton placed his 20,000 Klansmen on alert and prepared them to move on Oxford with rifles and shotguns. Shelton disclosed what went through his mind on the eve of the battle. "This," he thought, "could be another War Between the States." " "William Fauklner's nephew, who in 1962 was Captain of Mississippi Army National Guard Troop E. Falkner explained, "No one knows what went on here then." Then he took his thirty-five year old typewritten after-action report out of his files, and handed it to me, saying "read this." The document described in extraordinary detail how Falkner and his band of local white men, most of whom were personally opposed to the immediate integration of the University of Mississippi, were ordered into the battle to try to rescue the marshals and Meredith from being massacred by the mob. As I read the report I was dumbfounded by the ferocity of the violence inflicted upon the Guardsmen by their fellow white Southerners. I could only mumble, "this is like combat." Falkner quickly corrected me: "It WAS combat." " "The Army memo dated April 19, 1963 reads: "It is considered that the focus of additional attention on this incident would not be in the best interest of the nation . . . Decorations should not be awarded for actions involving conflict between U.S. Army units and other Americans." Together with James Meredith and many unsung heroes of the Battle of Oxford, this country fought and won the last battle of the American Civil War on October 1, 1962." ______________________________________________ An excerpt from his book "... ack on the front lines, the marshals had just about run out of tear gas, the only means they had to keep the rioters at bay. "We've got to have more gas," one marshal demanded of Nicholas Katzenbach. "We don't have any more right now, but we're working on it" was the reply. "We've got to have it now," the marshal shouted. "My men are getting slaughtered out there!" The marshals were pumping out tear gas faster than they could get reserves ready. McShane and the Justice Department officials were pleading for more tear gas to be flown down from Memphis, but the supplies were running so low there that marshals were commandeering crates of gas bombs from the 503d Military Police Battalion's supply. Two hours into the chaos, the riot was abruptly shifting into full-scale combat. The marshals could hear a shotgun blasting away in the distance, and it was soon joined by the rhythmic "pow-pow-pow" of a .22 automatic. Before long, gunfire seemed to be coming from everywhere. "We were now alone," recalled newsman Ed Turner, "the crowd roaring louder with each barrage, the campus filling up with reinforcements from three states and no guard at the gates to stop them." Across the region, cars and trucks full of armed and unarmed fighters were surging toward Oxford from all directions, especially from segregationist strongholds in adjacent Alabama and Louisiana. A few scattered Mississippi Highway Patrolmen were blocking potential rioters from the campus, but one patrolman was observed telling a carload of outsiders, "We can't let you in here but if you break into small groups you can sneak in across the railroad tracks." ______________ "Deputy U.S. Marshal James K. Kemp was a thirty-six-year-old father of three from Nashville, Tennessee. "I was a gunners mate in the Navy" Kemp recalled soon after the riot, "and after my ship went down, I was in the Atlantic Ocean for about an hour." But the riot at Ole Miss, Kemp shuddered, "was the worst thing I've ever been in." Nicholas Katzenbach grabbed the line to the White House, and finally pleaded for a military rescue. "For God's sake," he said, "we need those troops!" XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Another good exercise for Image Analyzer can be demonstrated when viewing paper documents. In this instance a document produced by the FBI in its COINTELPRO operations. Faint smudges on the copy can be enhanced and they reveal something on the reverses side. Placing this as a grayscale depth map with scaling set at about 0.01 allows one to rotate the document and view it from different angles. In this case the reverse is a copy of the bogus disruptive flyer referred to in the text. In this way one can also discern text in blacked out areas of redacted documents. I have yet to be able to discern more than a few unconnected letters, however sooner or later one will come across one where the black out is insufficient. It helps to play around with the various enhancement features and to use the various ambient light and surface reflection features.

"Why not!" - With index finger gesturing straight up, the mustachioed comedian Dayton Allen popularized the phrase "Why Not!" first seen during a skit called "Why Not" on THE STEVE ALLEN SHOW in the 1950s. The phrase was so popular that two towns (in Mississippi and North Carolina) renamed themselves Why Not! A cartoon by Hi Rosen in the Washington Post in 1959 depicted undeclared candidates John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Hubert H. Humphrey answering reporters questions on whether they'd be candidates in the 1960 election. They all answered with a resounding "Why not!" To get in the mood and perhaps see the purpose of this thread : to see what may have shaped the minds of early 60's for those relying on mainstream news. Remember, Oswald doesn't exist. Kennedy is alive and well. Next year is election time... First week of January 1963 The winter of 1962/63 was the coldest over England and Wales since 1740. As in 1947, anticyclones to the north and east of the British Isles brought bitterly cold winds from the east day after day. As in 1947, depressions followed tracks to southward of the British Isles and their fronts brought snow to England, Wales and the southernmost parts of Scotland In early 1963, Murray Wilson put the Beach Boys on the road for a relentless string of concerts across America. By 1962 Dusty was becoming restless. After a trip to America she had heard The Exciters singing "Tell Him" and was gripped by what she describes as "the most exciting thing I had ever heard, the attack in it!" The Springfields were becoming increasingly caught between the tensions of pop and folk and Dusty finally left the trio in 1963. Communist preference - Observers believe North Vietnam, which has been walking a tightrope across the ideological chasm between Moscow and Peking, appears to be swaying toward the Soviet Union. Popular books - 7 Days In May - Fletcher Knebel/Charles Bailey The Sand Pebbles - Richard McKenna Genius - Patrick Dennis Harm’s Way - James Bassett The Moon Spiners - Mary Stewart The $100 Misunderstanding - Robert Gover Fail-Safe - Eugene Burdick, Harvey Wheeler Final Verdict - Adela Rogers St. John Travels With Charlie - John Steinbeck Silent Spring - Rachel Carson The Pyramid Climbers - Vance Packard Sex and the Single Girl - Helen Gurley Brown The Points of My Compass - E.B. White Playing in Las Vegas - Milton Berle - Desert Inn Guys and Dolls - Dunes Bobby Darin - Flamingo Connie Francis - Sahara Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr., Dean Martin - Sands Lido de Paris - Stardust South Pacific - Thunderbird Folies Bergere - Tropicana ...political satirist Vaughn Meader's "The First Family" parody album, in which he imitates the President, is a colossal best-seller in late 1962 and early 1963. Gov. Nelson Rockefeller begins his second term as New York’s governor... Former automaker George Romney takes the oath of office as governor of Michigan with a plea for an end to the “cold war” of partisanship “that has been hindering Michigan’s progress.” Former U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers is granted a divorce after testifying that his wife was an habitual drunk and was “the only person who ever mistreated me.” About 800 attend memorial rights for Dick Powell including his widow, June Allyson, and their two children - Pam (14) and Richard (12). Also seen - James Stewart, Barbara Stanwyck, Ronald Reagan, Edgar Bergen, Jack Benny, George Murphy, Lloyd Nolan, Victor Jory, Lloyd Bridges, James Cagney, George Burns, Walter Pidgeon, Jackie Cooper, Hugh O’Brian, Ann Blyth, Danny Thomas, Jane Wyman, Robert Taylor, Edward G. Robinson, Bill Dozier and others. Sunday evening television (begins late afternoon) CBS - Ted Mack and the Original Amateur Hour, Twentieth Century, Password, Lassie, Dennis The Menace, The Ed Sullivan Show, The Real McCoys, GE True, Candid Camera, What’s My Line? NBC - Wild Kingdom, Bullwinkle, Meet The Press, McKeever and the Colonel, Ensign O’Toole, Walt Disney’s Wonderful World of Color, Car 54, Where Are You?, Bonanza, Special-Projection ‘63 ABC - Major Adams/Trailmaster, The Jetsons, Movie, Voice of Firestone Lawrence of Arabia - Peter O’Toole, Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Jack Hawkins, Jose Ferrer The Day Mars Invaded Earth - Kent Taylor, Marie Windsor, William Mims Young Guns of Texas - James Mitchum, Alana Ladd, Jody McCrea The Chapman Report - Shelley Winters During the first week of January 1963 Brother Branham, following the instructions given by God, through Another Vision arrived in Tucson, Arizona with his family. In that same month, at a Convention held in Phoenix, he related the details of "The Vision Of The Coming Of The Seven Angels" and told the people present that they were to watch because something was going to happen. This was the culmination of the direction from then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara to consolidate Army, Navy and Air Force single-manager agencies into a separate common supply and service agency. DSA formally began operations Jan. 1, 1962. The small DSA staff under General McNamara originally set up operations in the Munitions Building in Washington, D.C., and a short time later, moved into more suitable facilities at Cameron Station in Alexandria, Va. The agency’s primary role was to provide supplies and services to America’s military forces worldwide. By July 1962, DSA included 11 field organizations, employed 16,500 people and managed 45 facilities. By late June 1963, the agency was managing more than 1 million different items in nine supply centers with an estimated inventory of $2.5 billion. In January 1963, the agency began acquiring management of depots throughout the United States. As the buildup continued in Southeast Asia, on Jan. 1, 1963, the agency acquired Army general depots at Columbus, Ohio, and Tracy, Calif., and the Navy depot at Mechanicsburg, Pa. In January 1963 some trade unionists were detained along with prominent Muslim Sheikhs. Rumours making the rounds in Dar es Salaam was that the Sheikhs were planning a coup against the government. TIME The Road to Jail Is Paved with Nonobjective Art Jan. 04, 1963 Since the Kremlin's sharpest barbs these days are aimed at modern art and "Western espionage," it was just a matter of time before the KGB's cops would turn up a victim whose wrongdoings combined both evils. He turned out to be a Leningrad physics teacher whose taste for abstract painting allegedly led him to join ... Hans Weidner had been hoping for months to escape drab East Germany and make his way to the West. The odds were against him, for Weidner, 40, was a cripple on crutches who lived in the village of Neugersdorf, 115 miles southeast of the frontier of freedom. But Hans Weidner did have one major asset, ... The chiffon-bedecked ballroom of Manhattan's Astor Hotel glowed pink for femininity and glittered silver for elegance, and 49 debutantes from 15 countries at the Eighth International Debutante Ball did right by the décor. Leading the pedigreed parade was serenely lovely Serena Russell, 18, daughter of Vogue Magazine Editor Edwin F. Russell and Lady Sarah Spencer ... George Frazier is a man of muscular opinions. To him, Harry Belafonte is "America's number one slave"; Mississippi's Governor Ross Barnett is a "son of a bitch"; Roger Maris is a "fink" and Mickey Mantle is an "unfrocked fink." In Frazier's considered judgment, "all hockey players are crazy," all Texans are "a little ridiculous," and ... The face put on the air by New York's Channel 4 last week was unfamiliar to the audience. It belonged to New York Times Washington Bureau Chief James Reston. forced onto a rival medium by New York's newspaper strike.* As a TV newsman. Scotty Reston proved that he will never replace Dave Brinkley; the big ... Massachusetts' Democratic Senator Teddy Kennedy moved from a swimming holiday in the Virgin Islands to a skiing junket with Bobby (and families) at Aspen, Colo. But his office in Washington was already grinding out news releases as fast as anyone could say, "He Can Do MORE for Massachusetts." So far, Teddy's office had announced $135 ... was Victory Day in Port Said, six years exactly since the last British soldier left Suez. There to celebrate the occasion was Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser. As 20,000 Egyptians cheered, Nasser called the British—from Queen to commoner—"sons of bitches," sneered at his critics, and ridiculed as a pair of "nuts" Jordan's King Hussein ... The Secretary of State The Postmaster General The Administrator of Veterans Affairs The Chairman, United States Civil Service Commission: I have today signed an Executive Order providing for administration of the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. As contemplated by the Act, this Order provides for an annual review of the comparability of Federal salary rates with those paid for the same level of work in private enterprise. This Administration has vigorously espoused the principle of comparability of Federal salary rates with those of private enterprise. In the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, the Congress has adopted this principle. Substantial progress has already been made, but continuing efforts will be necessary to fully achieve and maintain this objective. The payment by the Federal Government of salary rates comparable to those paid for the same levels of work in private enterprise imposes upon the Executive Branch a duty to assure that positions in the Federal service are properly classified in accordance with applicable standards and procedures, and that the incumbents of those positions possess the necessary qualifications. I shall expect each of you, as the officers primarily responsible for the administration of the four major statutory salary systems dealt with in the 1962 Act, to devote personal attention to these points. Your first reports on the operation of the salary systems in your agencies will form the basis for a report which the Director of the Bureau of the Budget and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission will submit to me not later than December 31, 1963. Your reports should outline the actions which you have taken to assure that the systems are so administered that the grading of positions and the qualifications of incumbents are in strict accordance with the law and the applicable regulations. JOHN F. KENNEDY

Excuse me, Tim. I believe the paranoid rantings refered to by Adam here are mine, not Marks.

Hi Lee,I used Image Analyzer to try to enhance what I thought you were getting at with that image. As far as the broad topic is concerned. Interesting. (I'm also interested as it parallells an other hidden issue of the lost black people who are incredibly underrepresented in the overall picture while they were so much there at the time. (I'm reading a book on the serial killer Gacy at the moment, who was a homosexual heavily distorted by guilt and pharmaceuticals, and the police's avoiding anything homosexual seems to have allowed him to keep on killing for some time. The inability to deal equanimously with certain facts of life causes many problems I think.) Anyway, I don't mean to wander off topic. I am always concerned that such things or topics could turn into some sort of bashing, but I think you're making your points in a balanced and thoughtful way. No doubt homosexuality, like communism, was (is) used to smear people. Unfortunately the flipside happens as well, it almost becomes a no-go area. As John points out it's a fact of life, how relevant in this instance is what I'm following your topic to see.

1963(MCMLXIII) - 1963 was a common year starting on Tuesday January 1 Australia : CSIRO scientist Dr Gilbert Bogle and Mrs Margaret Chandler are found dead, believed to have been poisoned, in bushland near the Lane Cove River, Sydney. Known as the Bogle-Chandler case. In Britain for fans of music : Purchase Tax on discs is cut from 45% to 25% In 1963 hemlines were just above the knee. a hungarian reminisces : "The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and all the others meant Freedom for us; we could touch Them (even if only through the music) - and we could touch freedom… Once, in high school some stupid "Youth Magazine" posed the grand question: what's all that screaming about at rock concerts? I sent in my answer, I really answered it - and they put it in the paper. They still had some guts…" Laura Ingraham, talk show host and author (birth) England under the captaincy of Ted Dexter on its way to winning the second match in Melbourne by 7 wickets F-104G Starfighter is introduced into NATO air forces KERR, Robert Samuel, a Senator from Oklahoma elected as a Democrat to the United States Senate in 1948; reelected in 1954, and again in 1960, and served from January 3, 1949, until his death in Washington, D.C., January 1 The state of Ohio has withdrawn a suit against the Reds when owner Bill DeWitt agrees in writing that the club will stay in Cincinnati for 10 years Dylan talked like Brando imitating that southern farmhand. "I'm not in show-business," he said. "Money? I don't know how much I make. Sometimes I ask, sometimes I don't. I don't know what I spend it on, it just falls through holes in my pocket...I don't like singing to anybody but Americans. My songs say things. I sing them for people who know what I'm saying." President John F. Kennedy was one of 73,380 fans to witness Alabama linebacker Lee Roy Jordan singlehandedly turn back Oklahoma, 17-0. Jordan, who met Kennedy during the coin toss, recorded 31 tackles and was all over the field as a defensive battle took shape right from the start. The tough Alabama defense had allowed only 39 points all season and had not been scored upon twice in any game. President Kennedy is seriously considering making an appeal to the 88th Congress to outlaw literacy tests as a qualification for voting. The President and his brother, Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, regard voting rights as the single most powerful weapon that the Negro can obtain in his fight for civil liberties and equality. Congo update - The important Katanga mining center of Jadotville falls to U.N. troops without a fight. President Tshombe is reported fleeing with his troops toward Kolwezi. The ailing Telstar satellite is back in operation after six weeks. Since Nov. 23, Telstar had refused to accept command signals to turn on power to relay radio, television and other transmissions. Telstar had run into radiation in the Van Allen belts 100 times more than expected and this was the cause of the problem. Communist China accuses Soviet Premier Khrushchev of trying to restore capitalism in Russia. An editorial, published in all Peking newspapers, called for friendship and unity between China and Russia, but indicated this was unlikely until Khrushchev is overthrown or starts supporting China’s brand of Communism. To Kill A Mockingbird - Gregory Peck RETURN TO SENDER - Elvis Presley Bonanza - “The Colonel” - Ben’s old soldier friend is a guest of the Ponderosa. Disney’s Wonderful World of Color - Professor Ludwig Von Drake discusses a subject close to his heart - liars and legends. The Jetsons - The family dog is the object of a custody fight when wealthy Gottrockets claims him. Television ratings – Beverly Hillbillies – 37.9 Wizard of Oz – 33.0 Candid Camera – 32.5 Bonanza – 29.6 Red Skelton – 29.3 Gunsmoke – 28.8 Danny Thomas – 28.6 Lucy Show – 28.2 Dick Van Dyke – 28.1 Ben Casey – 27.9 Dr. Kildare – 27.6 Andy Griffith – 26.9 Jack Benny – 26.4 Ed Sullivan – 26.3 I’ve Got A Secret – 26.1 What’s My Line - 25.1 To Tell the Truth - 25.1 Bob Hope – 24.3 Mrs. John F. Kennedy tops the list of best-dressed women of the world*: Mrs. John F. Kennedy Mrs. Loel Guinness (wife of international banker) Princess Lee Radziwill - sister of Jackie Kennedy Mrs. Gianni Agnelli - wife of the head of the Fiat Co. Mme Herve Alphand - wife of the French ambassador to the United States Mrs. David Bruce - wife of the U.S ambassador to Great Britain Mrs. Gloria Vanderbilt - actress and socialite Mrs. Walther Moreira Mrs. John Barry Rayn III Mrs. Charlies Writeaman wife of the oil magnate Mrs. Frederick Eberstadt - New York socialite Baroness Ernest Thyssen-Bornemisza G Woods succeeds Eugene Black as president of the World Bank *at some point these Wives obviously would have had names. I initially thought with this thread of taking it day by day through till 11/22 and beyond, but it's so hard to select things. Basically I hope to get a 'snapshot' of what it was like. i should probably compress it to say at least weekly or perhaps even monthly.

In another concocted missive they sought to disillusion the Trotskyists, making veiled references to the assassination. This was at a time when the FPCC was already in the public consciousness as being to do with 'the lone nut'. They kind of nicely slip up when they drop the derogatory 'Trotskyite' for the proper term , Trotskyist, right at the end of the letter. Probably was keen to finish. (It seems to me that a number of pieces of evidence loose the plot somewhere halfway towards the end when the main purpose has been covered. The attention to detail is lessened in the wish to finish. (Probably should refer to the manuals more often.)) useful links http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/articles/co...luther_king.htm http://www.aimovement.org/csi/ http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/Feds/cointelpro.html

Under the rather amusingly titled cover of the 'National Committee for Domestic Tranquility' (NCDT), the FBI presents itself as seeking to calm things down. They do this by mailing copies of cartoons from Civil Rights groups publications to known clan leaders/members while simultaneously alerting the Civil Rights groups to the presense of Klan members in their midst. Provocation or what??? "Domestic Tranquility" . . . yeah, right... http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/whitehate.htm "Intelligence Cover Organization You are in receipt of a prior communication regarding the establishment of the National Committee for Domestic Tranquility (NCDT), a Bureau-approved vehicle for attacking Klan policies, and disputes from a low-key, common sense, and patriotic position. You should regard this development as a highly confidential counterintelligence technique. Information concerning the NCDT should not be set forth in the details of any communication prepared for dissemination. In the event inquiries are made concerning the NCDT by interested intelligence agencies, you are not to divulge any information conerning the NCDT. Such inquiries should be promptly furnished the Bureau. Director to 20 Field Offices, May 12, 1966"

Were the FBI interested in destroying individuals who supported Civil Rights? Was the mentality on the right there such as to consider murdering Kennedy? Yes. Were there sufficient reason to consider the operations against Cuba and other foreign events as covers for a more sinister aim of controlling the american public? I think so. It's important to look at the big picture taking into account the full scope of the actions of the thought police, but here is one example out of many. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/sco.../03/306991.html "Jean, like her contemporaries Jane Fonda and Vanessa Redgrave, was politically active in the late 60’s and was particularly supportive of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People). She spoke out after the assassination of Dr Martin Luther King in 1968 and was friendly with the Black Panthers to whom she is reputed to have donated $100,000 [around $1 million in today’s money]. While Jane Fonda was dubbed `Hanoi Jane` and Redgrave’s career suffered because of her support for the Palestinians it was Seberg who was to pay the heaviest price when she fell foul of FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover, `the boss` from 1924 till his death in 1972, saw Jean as a particular threat because of her popularity on both sides of the Atlantic. These were the days of an FBI campaign, sometimes forgotten today, called COINTELPRO meaning Counter Intelligence Programme. Briefly COINTELPRO was a series of programmes of political harassment directed against black and socialist organisations such as the Black Panthers, the Civil Rights movement, the Socialist Workers Party and the burgeoning 1960’s peace movement. Not lawful investigation, but actual criminal acts committed by the FBI designed to deny the black population (along with Native Americans, the anti-war movement, and the early feminist movement) their civil rights. It involved widespread and illegal wiretapping, the use of smear campaigns, infiltration and outright violence against those groups deemed to be a `threat` to the American Apple Pie way of life. The White Anglo Saxon Protestant US ruling class including Hoover had a particular dislike for the Black struggle especially militant or uncompromising organisations like the Panthers. According to a former Los Angeles based FBI agent (M. Wesley Swearingen) a culture of racism had permeated the bureau and their venom was particularly directed towards the Panthers and the white women who associated with them. Hoover was reputed to have said he was going to 'take care of those two bitches' - meaning Jean and Jane Fonda. But Hoover said it was Seberg who kept him awake at nights. When a high profile blonde actress like Jean devoted much of her money and time to them Hoover singled her out for exceptionally harsh treatment. On April 27th 1970, just seven weeks after the New York release of Airport, SAC [special Agent in Charge] in Los Angeles Richard Held sent a memorandum to headquarters requesting permission to smear Jean: It reads: “Bureau permission is requested to publicize the pregnancy of JEAN SEBERG, well known movie actress, by [DELETED] Black Panther Party (BPP) [DELETED] by advising Hollywood `Gossip-Columnists` in the Los Angeles area of the situation. It is felt that the possible publication of Seberg’s plight could cause her embarrassment and serve to cheapen her image with the general public” Richard Held is purported to have said: “ I wonder how she’d like to gobble my dick while I shove my .38 up that black bastard’s ass.” This was a reference to Panther theorist Raymond `Masia` Hewit with whom Jean was supposedly having an affair. Hoover said that Seberg deserved to be `neutralised` because of her financial support for the Panthers. He gave his authorization with the proviso that the implementation be postponed for approximately two months until the pregnancy became more visible and also to protect the secrecy of wiretaps the Bureau had installed in the Los Angeles and San Francisco BPP headquarters. The schedule was accelerated however and on June 6th Held sent Hoover a letter with a newspaper cutting demonstrating the success of the operation. The cutting showed an article by Los Angeles Times gossip columnist Joyce Haber laying out the Bureau fiction of Jean [here referred to as `Miss A`] being pregnant by a prominent Black Panther. The article was syndicated to over a hundred newspapers including the International Press and `Newsweek`. Held and Hoover knew Jean to be emotionally unstable before the smear and the effect on her was to attempt suicide with an overdose of sleeping pills. Though she survived, the trauma of the event caused her to go into premature labour and the resulting baby girl Nina died just two days later on August 25th 1970. Jean was devastated and never fully recovered, for every one of her remaining 9 years she tried to kill herself on the anniversary of the miscarriage. She called a press conference at which she presented shocked journalists with the foetus of her dead white child and at the funeral she insisted on a glass coffin. In her 1993 book `Make Believe` Diana Athill recounts how “after the baby died Jean became obsessed with it. She had photographs taken of it in its coffin and tapes made of the funeral, and these she brooded over, and made other people brood over, for hours on end.” Though plagued by personal problems Jean was to make 12 more films in what remained of her career though none of them was of any great note. She made Ondata di calore (dead of Summer), a psychodrama made in Morocco. She played Joyce Grasse, an American woman who cannot cope with the pressure of her isolated existence. She seldom sees her husband, cannot speak the language, and finds that racial tensions interfere with her ability to get along with the locals. In 1971 Jean made Kill! with James Mason and Stephen Boyd, then in 1972 Questa specie d’amore (This kind of love) and Camorra! followed by the French Conspiracy with Roy Scheider in 1973. On May 1, 1973, tragedy struck again when her close friend Hakim Jamal, a black activist, was brutally murdered. In 1974 she made an American TV movie Mousey with Kirk Douglas and in the same year had her one and only try at directing in Ballad for the Kid. She spent the last five years of her life in Europe making films not released to the foreign market. Her last film was Die Wildente (The Wild Duck) a German-language version of the Henrik Ibsen play in 1976. Jean attempted suicide by throwing herself under a Paris metro train but miraculously survived and even had thoughts of a comeback. She was apparently enthusiastic about a possible but then unconfirmed role that would have reunited her with her "Bonjour Tristesse" co-star David Niven. The film, "A Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square", was eventually remade in 1980 with German actress Elke Sommer taking the role Jean was meant to play. JEAN'S DEATH Jean went missing in August 1979 and to the consternation of her fans could not be found. Their worst fears were confirmed when on the evening of Saturday 8th September 1979 her Renault car was discovered by an off-duty policeman in the Rue du General Appertin, in a smart residential district near the Champs-Élysées. The policeman noticed the car by the kerb, covered with leaves and dust. On opening the door he saw a big bundle on the floor at the back, wrapped in a blanket. It was the body of a blonde woman. Near the body were several empty pill bottles and a half empty bottle of mineral water. From the badly decomposed state of the corpse it was believed that her death probably occurred shortly after her disappearance. Jean had left a note addressed to her son, and only child, Alexandre Diego. She complained about depression and wrote: “ I can’t live any longer with my nerves.” The day after her funeral the London Daily Telegraph reported that the FBI admitted it spread the rumour that destroyed Jean. This revelation consisted of two and three quarter inches on page 19. The London Times of November 20th that year printed a somewhat longer piece, all of nine and three quarter inches on page 9, which was headlined `FBI agents blamed for Jean Seberg suicide` and which mentioned the word COINTELPRO. After her death came the documentary Jean Seberg: American Actress (1995), and the docudrama From the Journals of Jean Seberg (1995), with Mary Beth Hurt, ironically also from Marshalltown, as Jean. Jean had outlived both J Edgar Hoover by seven years and COINTELPRO by eight. Speaking in 1975 Congressman Don Edwards had said: “Regardless of the unattractiveness or noisy militancy of some private citizens or organisations, the Constitution does not permit federal interference with their activities except through the criminal justice system, armed with its ancient safeguards. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS. [Emphasis added] No federal agency, the CIA, the IRS, or the FBI, can be at the same time policeman, prosecutor, judge and jury. That is what constitutionally guaranteed due process is all about.”"

In this thread I'm exploring an idea I've formulated regarding the nature of the seemingly different major fields of activity foreign and domestic that seem to have an aim of controlling the direction american society was going in in the last century. I am identifying three broad areas. Communism, Civil Rights, and an area I am having difficulty finding a word for which is largely about the atmosphere that the average american citizen finds him/her self in. This is shaped by such things as Media and in more sinister aspects of action arising out of operations such as MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, MOCKINBIRD. The McCarthy years taught the citizen what a communist was and what troubles someone who may consider looking seriously at becoming one would experience along the way. The average person would probably have steered clear of anything that may have tainted them in this way. So once this particular mindset is in place then the 'externalising' of a communist threat for example the picture provided by Castro becomes more acceptable. The 'mind control experiments' of the CIA and others is a rather gross description of something far more subtle. These activities were a continuation of a philosophy of psychology and race that sought to understand and consequently control humanity. The activities of the various agencies (including media elements) draw on this research material. The 'communist' or 'marxist' werte often portrayed as being behind the various US mainland problems such as Civil Rights. I suggest that civil un-rights were behind it. Civil Un-Rights is a product of an Unequal or Unfree society that depends on control of aspects of its society to function. Civil Rights is a response to this. And the reason that the communist would be found in the 'vanguard' of this struggle is because this is essentially communisms reason for being. No mysterious sinister plots there. The sinister thing is the creation of a 'communist' threat mind set that thewn allowed the often legal hounding of such a vanguard. Now, remember this was happening in America. Emmett Till was slaughtered in America, not Cuba. etc. What happened in little Cuba was a taking back of government by a military action against a corrupt US sponsored regime. What if there had been no response to this by the US government? Could the idea of people having the right to do such things be applied to the mainland? The people behind the preparations for an armed insurrection obviously thought so. The murderers of Kennedy obviously thought so. The point was to impress on the average decent american citizen what wopuld happen should they get into their mind that such a thing was OK. All the worlds a stage where we see cause and effect played out. TV is a good example of this. Here we are willing Pavlovian dogs being herded in directions acceptable to those in control. I'm suggesting that the proper way to view all these events surrounding the assassination of Kennedy had nothing whatsoever to do with Cuba or the USSR, nothing to do with the Mob, nothing to do with Communists or any other identifiable grouping but was an aspect of the logical thread of mindcontrol aimed at the average American spectator to these events. I hope my meaning here is clear? here is the introduction to the ( http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/c...lreportIIca.htm ) "INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES AND THE RIGHTS OF AMERICANS - BOOK II FINAL REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES UNITED STATES SENATE TOGETHER WITH ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND SEPARATE VIEWS APRIL 26 (legislative day, April 14), 1976 A. VIOLATING AND IGNORING THE LAW - MAJOR FINDING The Committee finds that the domestic activities of the intelligence community at times violated specific statutory prohibitions and infringed the constitutional rights of American citizens. 1 The legal questions involved in intelligence programs were often not considered. On other occasions, they were intentionally disregarded in the belief that because the programs served the "national security" the law did not apply. While intelligence officers on occasion failed to disclose to their superiors programs which were illegal or of questionable legality, the Committee finds that the most serious breaches of duty were those of senior officials, who were responsible for controlling intelligence activities and generally failed to assure compliance with the law. Subfindings (a) In its attempt to implement instructions to protect the security of the United States, the intelligence community engaged in some activities which violated statutory law and the constitutional rights of American citizens. ( Legal issues were often overlooked by many of the intelligence officers who directed these operations. Some held a pragmatic view of intelligence activities that did not regularly attach sufficient significance to questions of legality. The question raised was usually not whether a particular program was legal or ethical, but whether it worked. © On some occasions when agency officials did assume, or were told, that a program was illegal, they still permitted it to continue. They justified their conduct in some cases on the ground that the failure of "the enemy" to play by the rules granted them the right to do likewise, and in other cases on the ground that the "national security" permitted programs that would otherwise be illegal. (d) Internal recognition of the illegality or the questionable legality of many of these activities frequently led to a tightening of security rather than to their termination. Partly to avoid exposure and a public "flap," knowledge of these programs was tightly held within the agencies, special filing procedures were used, and "cover stories" were devised. (e) On occasion, intelligence agencies failed to disclose candidly their programs and practices to their own General Counsels, and to Attorneys General, Presidents, and Congress. (f) The internal inspection mechanisms of the CIA and the FBI did not keep -- and, in the case of the FBI, were not designed to keep -- the activities of those agencies within legal bounds. Their primary concern was efficiency, not legality or propriety. (g) When senior administration officials with a duty to control domestic intelligence activities knew, or had a basis for suspecting, that questionable activities had occurred, they often responded with silence or approval. In certain cases, they were presented with a partial description of a program but did not ask for details, thereby abdicating their responsibility. In other cases, they were fully aware of the nature of the practice and implicitly or explicitly approved it. Elaboration of findings The elaboration which follows details the general finding of the Committee that inattention to -- and disregard of -- legal issues was an all too common occurrence in the intelligence community. While this section focuses on the actions and attitudes of intelligence officials and certain high policy officials, the Committee recognizes that a pattern of lawless activity does not result from the deeds of a single stratum of the government or of a few individuals alone. The implementation and continuation of illegal and questionable programs would not have been possible without the cooperation or tacit approval of people at all levels within and above the intelligence community, through many successive administrations. The agents in the field, for their part, rarely questioned the orders they received. Their often uncertain knowledge of the law, coupled with the natural desire to please one's superiors and with simple bureaucratic momentum, clearly contributed to their willingness to participate in illegal and questionable programs. The absence of any prosecutions for law violations by intelligence agents inevitably affected their attitudes as well. Under pressure from above to accomplish their assigned tasks, and without the realistic threat of prosecution to remind them of their legal obligations, it is understandable that these agents frequently acted without concern for issues of law and at times assumed that normal legal restraints and prohibitions did not apply to their activities. Significantly, those officials at the highest levels of government, who had a duty to control the activities of the intelligence community, sometimes set in motion the very forces that permitted lawlessness to occur -- even if every act committed by intelligence agencies was not known to them. By demanding results without carefully limiting the means by which the results were achieved; by over-emphasizing the threats to national security without ensuring sensitivity to the rights of American citizens; and by propounding concepts such as the right of the "sovereign" to break the law, ultimate responsibility for the consequent climate of permissiveness should be placed at their door. 2 Subfinding (a) In its attempt to implement instructions to protect the security of the United States, the intelligence community engaged in some activities which violated statutory law and the constitutional rights of American citizens. From 1940 to 1973, the CIA and the FBI engaged in twelve covert mail opening programs in violation of Sections 1701-1703 of Title 18 of the United States Code which prohibit the obstruction, interception, or opening of mail. Both of these agencies also engaged in warrantless "surreptitious entries" -- break-ins -- against American citizens within the United States in apparent violation of state laws prohibiting trespass and burglary. Section 605 of the Federal Communications Act of 1934 was violated by NSA's program for obtaining millions of telegrams of Americans unrelated to foreign targets and by the Army Security Agency's interception of domestic radio communications. All of these activities, as well as the FBI's use of electronic surveillance without a substantial national security predicate, also infringed the rights of countless Americans under the Fourth Amendment protection "against unreasonable searches and seizures." The abusive techniques used by the FBI in COINTELPRO from 1956 to 1971 included violations of both federal and state statutes prohibiting mail fraud, wire fraud, incitement to violence, sending obscene material through the mail, and extortion. More fundamentally, the harassment of innocent citizens engaged in lawful forms of political expression did serious injury to the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and the right of the people to assemble peaceably and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The Bureau's maintenance of the Security Index, which targeted thousands of American citizens for detention in the event of national emergency, clearly overstepped the permissible bounds established by Congress in the Emergency Detention Act of 1950 and represented, in contravention of the Act, a potential general suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus secured by Article 1, Section 9, of the Constitution. A distressing number of the programs and techniques developed by the intelligence community involved transgressions against human decency that were no less serious than any technical violations of law. Some of the most fundamental values of this society were threatened by activities such as the smear campaign against Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the testing of dangerous drugs on unsuspecting American citizens, the dissemination of information about the sex lives, drinking habits, and marital problems of electronic surveillance targets, and the COINTELPRO attempts to turn dissident organizations against one another and to destroy marriages."

.

error

one thing that is becoming apparent with these seeming coincidences is a thought that there is no necessary reason to look for 'global' or 'foreign' reasons for conflict sufficient to generate a will to kill the President. ( one amusing coincidence is at the end with regards to 'signals' "Source: News-clipping (FBI file 961-7398-52) - http://www.nathanielturner.com/blacklegion2.htm FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Cleveland, Ohio 5/24/35 Synopsis of Facts: Secret organization national in scope and military in nature, apparently organized by dr. Shepard, of Bellaire, O. membership restricted to native-born, white, gentile, protestant citizens. Former members. state organization is revolutionary and is terrorizing former members for withdrawing. general of organization, at Lima, O., has ordered subordinate to wreck picture shows, burn roadhouses and assault individuals. organization purports to have completely equipped machine guns company in detroit, Mich. Former members advise 80% of FERA employes at Lima, O., are members and relief in district is controlled by head or order. Chief of Police, Lima, is reputed to be a member; General of legion, lima, stated to former member that 60 to 70 members of department of justice were members; also stated that Cincinnati, o., agent was admitted to order fall '34, Event of unknown nature scheduled for Nov. 20-26. Ritual, organization, and partial list of members set forth Reference: Bureau letters dated 4-22-35 and 5-11-35 Details: Agent interviewed Mr. J. F. Cordrey, Post Office Inspector, stationed at Lima, Ohio, [was the FBI source of information] . . . . The following information relative to the history, ritual, organization, officers, members and meeting places of the Order were furnished by . . . The Black Legion, historical in itself, was first formed prior to the Revolutionary War, and it was this organization that organized the Boston Tea Party, after the Colonies won their independence; there being no more need for the existence of the order it disbanded; however, those who were Generals at that time, there being one General for each of the 13 colonies, handed down their rank to their sons, and thus the order was kept alive. the next time that the order felt it must become active was immediately after the Civil war, and a band of gorillas [sic] under Quantrell was organized and operated until they had satisfactorily straightened out the country. it was again disbanded and has now been reorganized as the country is once again being threatened by various sorts ISMS. *(Note: the above is part of the speech made by General Effinger at meetings.) Ritual and Initiation members are armed and masked, recruits are lined up for preliminary questions and oath. grounds are patrolled by masked armed guards. Captain of the Guard 1. Are you a native-born, white, gentile, protestant citizen? 2. Do you understand that this organization you are about to join is strictly secret and military in character? 3. This organization is classed by our enemies as an outlaw organization; are you willing to join such an organization? (The above questions are asked each recruit.) Preliminary Oath Kneel on your right knee; place your left hand over your heart and raise your right hand; repeat after me: (Say I and repeat your name.) "Do solemnly promise and swear that i will never reveal any part or portion of the work I have already received or that which is about to be commutated to me. I further promise and swear I will never reveal a single word of anything that has transpired here tonight or the identity of anyone I may recognize in case I am refused membership in this organization. The penalty for violation of this is -- DEATH." (The recruits having passed this test and placed under oath are now taken before the larger body of Night Riders and surrounded by armed masked men.) _____(missing page)_____ Do you believe in the separation of church and state? Will you lie to protect a comrade in this organization, if ordered to do so by your superior officer? To what political organization do you now belong? will you forget your party and vote for the best man if ordered to do so by your superior officer? Can you keep a secret? (On the last question a phoney password is passed around and one of the Blacks purposely repeats it, and then he is taken out and hung before all the recruits; a special harness is used and the rope is hooked on; a strap in the back; in the dark it looks like a true hanging. Carter stated that he has frequently been the victim in this act.) Colonel to Lieut. Colonel: "Do you think these men have shown their fitness to join this organization by their answers to questions?" Answer: "Sir, i wish to subject these men to further questioning, have I your permission?" Answer: "You have." Questions By Lieut. Colonel "Can you ride a horse and shoot a rifle?" "Are you properly armed?" "Will you properly arm yourself as soon as possible" "Do you believe in Lynch Law?" "Will you sign your name in Blood?" Lieut. Colonel to Colonel "Sir, these men have answered all questions properly, and if they are bound by the oath that we are bound by -- they are acceptable to me." Black Oath Kneel on your right knee; place your left hand over your heart; raise your right hand; repeat after me: (orders are then given to cover these men with loaded guns, and if they fail or falter, you know your duty.) "In the name of God and Devil and by the power of light and darkness, good and evil, here under the black arch of heavens avenging symbol, i pledge and consecrate my body, my limbs, my heart and my mind and swear by all powers of heaven and Hell that i will devote my life to the obedience of any superior officers in this organization and that i will never betray a comrade in this organization. I further promise and swear that I will destroy, without mercy, all FEDERALS, Jay hawkers and their abetors, whose serpent trail has winnowed the fair fields of our allies and sympathizers; these I will fight without mercy as long as breath remains. before divulging a single work or implied pledge of this, my solemn oath, and obligation, i will pray to an avenging God and unmerciful devil that my limbs be broken with stones and cut off by inches; that they may be for carion birds; that my body be ripped open and my bowels torn out and fed to the foulest bird of the air, and that my head be split open and my brains scattered over the earth, my heart be torn out and roasted over flames of sulphur. And, lastly, may my soul be given unto torment, may it be submerged in a molten metal and stifled in the flames of Hell, and may this punishment be meeted out to me through all eternity." Signs and Pass Words Pass word: PUT (name of place) Americans only on guard. Call word: LIXTO (When this word is received by a Black Knight, either by word of mouth, telephone, telegraph or mail, he is supposed to drop anything he is doing and take up arms and go to the place named: for instance, if a call was made for Cleveland, the word would be LIXTO, CLEVELAND) Test word: (Under the star of the guard, which is answered by the party approached saying Until Death) Signs: At night-time either a flashlight, match or auto head lights are flashed three times, and if the party flashed is a Black, he will answer with three flashes. in day-time the hat is pushed back on the head three times and is answered the same way. Any sign may be used in multiple of three and must be answered the same way.* Degrees 1.. Lowest rank -- Foot legion 2. Night Riders 3. Black Knight 4. Armed Guard 5. Bullet Guard (consists of only selected Black Knights) Organization 1. Squad -- consists of 6 men and a corporal 2. Company -- consists of 78 privates, 18 corporals, 6 sergeants 3. Battalion -- consists of 3 companies and is commanded by a major 4. Regiment -- consists of 3 battalions and is commanded by a colonel" so 10000 is approximately equal to 10 regiments. assuming the prior selection of officers, leaves approximately 2000 reserves. I wonder if someone with militery experiencecould comment on whether this is a reasonable formation: ie out of 10000 called up, to expect to form 10 regiments as per above frormula with 3000 reserves, possibly also with the lower ranks, corporal and seargent drawn from this reserve figure? presumably also all the associated support groups such as medical and cantine is drawn from this reserve? *three yellow stripes painted on a curb?

can't place the show. Is that Richard Widmark? Looks like a heat distorted beer bottle to me. _______________________________________ 'jimi'

error

I have had this problem Evan, it seems to have gone for now though, only to be replaced by a repeat of some of the problems from before. I wonder if the site is under attack again. Hopefully logging of IP's can reveal timing and cause. I suspect it's a response to some issue dealt with recently on the forum. (JFK?) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Another problem emerging for now is a repeat of what seems to be targeted interference. If one accepts it as an annoyance and repeatedly persist in attempting to post then this is in time overridden. However a side result is often a nonregistration of post and a failure to advance said topic. This can be overridden as well with a persistent 'bump' post.

"From the beginning of planning to the end of questioning it has been necessary to understand and guard against the various troubles that a vengeful ex-source can cause. As was pointed out earlier, KUBARK's lack of executive authority abroad and its operational need for facelessness make it peculiarly vulnerable to attack in the courts or the press. The best defense against such attacks is prevention, through enlistment or enforcement of compliance. However real cooperation is achieved, its existence seems to act as a deterrent to later hostility. The initially resistant subject may become cooperative because of a partial identification with the interrogator and his interests, or the source may make such an identification because of his cooperation. In either event, he is unlikely to cause serious trouble in the future." this part in particular is to me a good reason to avoid alliance, one must remain free to criticise or accpept all input. To me it's a good reason to maintain independence of thought. Of course all should be treated on it's own merit, and polite discourse between independents is the proper way to override such influences.

I have had this problem Evan, it seems to have gone for now though, only to be replaced by a repeat of some of the problems from before. I wonder if the site is under attack again. Hopefully logging of IP's can reveal timing and cause. I suspect it's a response to some issue dealt with recently on the forum. (JFK?)

Some clues as to strategies intelligence organisations use to obfuscate may be found in of this document, I particularly find the 'isolation, confusion, guilt induction, good cop, bad cop routine' interesting KUBARK COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION July 1963 This manual found at http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kubark06.htm makes for some interesting reading. for example : "VIII. The Non-Coercive Counterintelligence Interrogation A. General Remarks The term non-coercive is used above to denote methods of interrogation that are not based upon the coercion of an unwilling subject through the employment of superior force originating outside himself. However, the non-coercive interrogation is not conducted without pressure. On the contrary, the goal is to generate maximum pressure, or at least as much as is needed to induce compliance. The difference is that the pressure is generated inside the interrogatee. His resistance is sapped, his urge to yield is fortified, until in the end he defeats himself. Manipulating the subject psychologically until he becomes compliant, without applying external methods of forcing him to submit, sounds harder than it is. The initial advantage lies with the interrogator. From the outset, he knows a great deal more about the source than the source knows about him. And he can create and amplify an effect of omniscience in a number of ways. For example, he can show the interrogatee a thick file bearing his own name. Even if the file contains little or nothing but blank paper, the air of familiarity with which the interrogator refers to the subject's background can convince some sources that all is known and that resistance is futile. If the interrogatee is under detention, the interrogator can also manipulate his environment. Merely by cutting off all other human contacts, "the interrogator monopolizes the social environment of the source."(3) He exercises the powers of an all-powerful parent, determining when the source will be sent to bed, when and what he will eat, whether he will be rewarded for good behavior or punished for being bad. The interrogator can and does make the subject's world not only unlike the world to which he had been accustomed but also strange in itself - a world in which familiar patterns of time, space, and sensory perception are overthrown. He can shift the environment abruptly. For example, a source who refuses to talk at all can be placed in unpleasant solitary confinement for a time. Then a friendly soul treats him to an unexpected walk in the woods. Experiencing relief and exhilaration, the subject will usually find it impossible not to respond to innocuous comments on the weather and the flowers. These are expanded to include reminiscences, and soon a precedent of verbal exchange has been established. Both the Germans and the Chinese have used this trick effectively. The interrogator also chooses the emotional key or keys in which the interrogation or any part of it will be played. Because of these and other advantages, " [approx. 6 lines deleted] ." B. The Structure of the Interrogation A counterintelligence interrogation consists of four parts: the opening, the reconnaissance, the detailed questioning and the conclusion. 1. The Opening Most resistant interrogatees block off access to significant counterintelligence in their possession for one or more of four reasons. The first is a specific negative reaction to the interrogator. Poor initial handling or a fundamental antipathy can make a source uncooperative even if he has nothing significant or damaging to conceal. The second cause is that some sources are resistant "by nature" - i.e. by early conditioning - to any compliance with authority. The third is that the subject believes that the information sought will bedamaging or incriminating for him personally that cooperation with the interrogator will have consequences more painful for him than the results of non-cooperation. The fourth is ideological resistance. The source has identified himself with a cause, a political movement or organization, or an opposition intelligence service. Regardless of his attitude toward the interrogator, his own personality, and his fears for the future, the person who is deeply devoted to a hostile cause will ordinarily prove strongly resistant under interrogation. A principal goal during the opening phase is to confirm the personality assessment obtained through screening and to allow the interrogator to gain a deeper understanding of the source as an individual. Unless time is crucial, the interrogator should not become impatient if the interrogatee wanders from the purposes of the interrogation and reverts to personal concerns. Significant facts not produced during screening may be revealed. The screening report itself is brought to life, the type becomes an individual, as the subject talks. And sometimes seemingly rambling monologues about personal matters are preludes to significant admissions. Some people cannot bring themselves to provide information that puts them in an unfavorable light until, through a lengthy prefatory rationalization, they feel that they have set the stage that the interrogator will now understand why they acted as they did. If face-saving is necessary to the interrogatee it will be a waste of time to try to force him to cut the preliminaries short and get down to cases. In his view, he is dealing with the important topic, the why . He will be offended and may become wholly uncooperative if faced with insistent demands for the naked what . There is another advantage in letting the subject talk freely and even ramblingly in the first stage of interrogation. The interrogator is free to observe. Human beings communicate a great deal by non-verbal means. Skilled interrogators, for example, listen closely to voices and learn a great deal from them. An interrogation is not merely a verbal performance; it is a vocal performance, and the voice projects tension, fear, a dislike of certain topics, and other useful pieces of information. It is also helpful to watch the subject's mouth, which is as a rule much more revealing than his eyes. Gestures and postures also tell a story. If a subject normally gesticulates broadly at times and is at other times physically relaxed but at some point sits stiffly motionless, his posture is likely to be the physical image of his mental tension. The interrogator should make a mental note of the topic that caused such a reaction.One textbook on interrogation lists the following physical indicators of emotions and recommends that interrogators note them, not as conclusive proofs but as assessment aids: (1) A ruddy or flushed face is an indication of anger or embarrassment but not necessarily of guilt. (2) A "cold sweat" is a strong sign of fear and shock. (3) A pale face indicates fear and usually shows that the interrogator is hitting close to the mark. (4) A dry mouth denotes nervousness. (5) Nervous tension is also shown by wringing a handkerchief or clenching the hands tightly. (6) Emotional strain or tension may cause a pumping of the heart which becomes visible in the pulse and throat. (7) A slight gasp, holding the breath, or an unsteady voice may betray the subject. (8) Fidgeting may take many forms, all of which are good indications of nervousness. (9) A man under emotional strain or nervous tension will involuntarily draw his elbows to his sides. It is a protective defense mechanism. (10) The movement of the foot when one leg is crossed over the knee of the other can serve as an indicator. The circulation of the blood to the lower leg is partially cut off, thereby causing a slight lift or movement of the free foot with each heart beat. This becomes more pronounced and observable as the pulse rate increases. Pauses are also significant. Whenever a person is talking about a subject of consequence to himself, he goes through a process of advance self-monitoring, performed at lightning speed. This self-monitoring is more intense if the person is talking to a stranger and especially intense if he is answering the stranger's questions. Its purpose is to keep from the questioner any guilty information or information that would be damaging to the speaker's self-esteem. Where questions or answers get close to sensitive areas, the pre-scanning is likely to create mental blocks. These in turn produce unnatural pauses, meaningless sounds designed to give the speaker more time, or other interruptions. It is not easy to distinguish between innocent blocks -- things held back for reasons of personal prestige -- and guilty blocks -- things the interrogator needs to know. But the successful establishment of rapport will tend to eliminate innocent blocks, or at least to keep them to a minimum. The establishment of rapport is the second principal purpose of the opening phase of the interrogation. Sometimes the interrogator knows in advance, as a result of screening, that the subject will be uncooperative. At other times the probability of resistance is established without screening: detected hostile agents, for example, usually have not only the will to resist but also the means, through a cover story or other explanation. But the anticipation of withholding increases rather than diminishes, the value of rapport. In other words,a lack of rapport may cause an interrogatee to withhold information that he would otherwise provide freely, whereas the existence of rapport may induce an interrogatee who is initially determined to withhold to change his attitude. Therefore the interrogator must not become hostile if confronted with initial hostility, or in any other way confirm such negative attitudes as he may encounter at the outset. During this first phase his attitude should remain business-like but also quietly (not ostentatiously) friendly and welcoming. Such opening remarks by subjects as, "I know what you so-and-so's are after, and I can tell you right now that you're not going to get it from me" are best handled by an unperturbed "Why don't you tell me what has made you angry?" At this stage the interrogator should avoid being drawn into conflict, no matter how provocatory may be the attitude or language of the interrogatee. If he meets truculence with neither insincere protestations that he is the subject's "pal" nor an equal angr but rather a calm interest in what has aroused the subject, the interrogator has gained two advantages right at the start. He has established the superiority that he will need later, as the questioning develops, and he has increased the chances of establishing rapport. How long the opening phase continues depends upon how long it takes to establish rapport or to determine that voluntary cooperation is unobtainable. It may be literally a matter of seconds, or it may be a drawn-out, up-hill battle. Even though the cost in time and patience is sometimes high, the effort to make the subject feel that his questioner is a sympathetic figure should not be abandoned until all reasonable resources have been exhausted (unless, of course, the interrogation does not merit much time). Otherwise, the chances are that the interrogation will not produce optimum results. In fact, it is likely to be a failure, and the interrogator should not be dissuaded from the effort to establish rapport by an inward conviction that no man in his right mind would incriminate himself by providing the kind of information that is sought. The history of interrogation is full of confessions and other self-incriminations that were in essence the result of a substitution of the interrogation world for the world outside. In other words, as the sights and sounds of an outside world fade away, its significance for the interrogatee tends to do likewise. That world is replaced by the interrogation room, its two occupants, and the dynamic relationship between them. As interrogation goes on, the subject tends increasingly to divulge or withhold in accordance with the values of the interrogation world rather than those of the outside world (unless the periods of questioning are only brief interruptions in his normal life). In this small world of two inhabitants a clash of personalities -- as distinct from a conflict of purposes -- assumes exaggerated force, like a tornado in a wind-tunnel. The self-esteem of the interrogatee and of the interrogator becomes involved, and the interrogatee fights to keep his secrets from his opponent for subjective reasons, because he is grimly determined not to be the loser, the inferior. If on the other hand the interrogator establishes rapport, the subject may withhold because of other reasons, but his resistance often lacks the bitter, last-ditch intensity that results if the contest becomes personalized. The interrogator who senses or determines in the opening phase that what he is hearing is a legend should resist the first, natural impulse to demonstrate its falsity. In some interrogatees the ego-demands, the need to save face, are so intertwined with preservation of the cover story that calling the man a xxxx will merely intensify resistance. It is better to leave an avenue of escape, a loophole which permits the source to correct his story without looking foolish. If it is decided, much later in the interrogation, to confront the interrogatee with proof of lying, the following related advice about legal cross-examination may prove helpful. "Much depends upon the sequence in which one conducts the cross-examination of a dishonest witness. You should never hazard the important question until you have laid the foundation for it in such a way that, when confronted with the fact, the witness can neither deny nor explain it. One often sees the most damaging documentary evidence, in the forms of letters or affidavits, fall absolutely flat as betrayers of falsehood, merely because of the unskillful way in which they are handled. If you have in your possession a letter written by the witness, in which he takes an opposite position on some part of the case to the one he has just sworn to, avoid the common error of showing the witness the letter for identification, and then reading it to him with the inquiry, 'What have you to say to that?' During the reading of his letter the witness will be collecting his thoughts and getting ready his explanations in anticipation of the question that is to follow, and the effect of the damaging letter will be lost.... The correct method of using such a letter is to lead the witness quietly into repeating the statements he has made in his direct testimony, and which his letter contradicts. Then read it off to him. The witness has no explanation. He has stated the fact, there is nothing to qualify." 2. The Reconnaissance If the interrogatee is cooperative at the outset or if rapport is established during the opening phase and the source becomes cooperative, the reconnaissance stage is needless; the interrogator proceeds directly to detailed questioning. But if the interrogatee is withholding, a period of exploration is necessary. Assumptions have normally been made already as to what he is withholding: that he is a fabricator, or an RIS agent, or something else he deems it important to conceal. Or the assumption may be that he had knowledge of such activities carried out by someone else. At any rate, the purpose of the reconnaissance is to provide a quick testing of the assumption and, more importantly, to probe the causes, extent, and intensity of resistance. During the opening phase the interrogator will have charted the probable areas of resistance by noting those topics which caused emotional or physical reactions, speech blocks, or other indicators. He now begins to probe these areas. Every experienced interrogator has noted that if an interrogateeis withholding, his anxiety increases as the questioning nears the mark. The safer the topic, the more voluble the source. But as the questions make him increasingly uncomfortable, the interrogatee becomes less communicative or perhaps even hostile. During the opening phase the interrogator has gone along with this protective mechanism. Now, however, he keeps coming back to each area of sensitivity until he has determined the location of each and the intensity of the defenses. If resistance is slight, mere persistence may overcome it; and detailed questioning may follow immediately. But if resistance is strong, a new topic should be introduced, and detailed questioning reserved for the third stage. Two dangers are especially likely to appear during the reconnaissance. Up to this point the interrogator has not continued a line of questioning when resistance was encountered. Now, however, he does so, and rapport may be strained. Some interrogatees will take this change personally and tend to personalize the conflict. The interrogator should resist this tendency. If he succumbs to it, and becomes engaged in a battle of wits, he may not be able to accomplish the task at hand. The second temptation to avoid is the natural inclination to resort prematurely to ruses or coercive techniques in order to settle the matter then and there. The basic purpose of the reconnaissance is to determine the kind and degree of pressure that will be needed in the third stage. The interrogator should reserve his fire-power until he knows what he is up against. 3. The Detailed Questioning If rapport is established and if the interrogatee has nothing significant to hide, detailed questioning presents only routine problems. The major routine considerations are the following: The interrogator must know exactly what he wants to know. He should have on paper or firmly in mind all the questions to which he seeks answers. It usually happens that the source has a relatively large body of information that has little or no intelligence value and only a small collection of nuggets. He will naturally tend to talk about what he knows best. The interrogator should not show quick impatience, but neither should he allow the results to get out of focus. The determinant remains what we need, not what the interrogatee can most readily provide. At the same time it is necessary to make every effort to keep the subject from learning through the interrogation process precisely where our informational gaps lie. This principle is especially important if the interrogatee is following his normal life, going home each evening and appearing only once or twice a week for questioning, or if his bona fides remains in doubt. Under almost all circumstances, however, a clear revelation of our interests and knowledge should be avoided. It is usually a poor practice to hand to even the most cooperative interrogatee an orderly list of questions and ask him to write the answers. (This stricture does not apply to the writing of autobiographies or on informational matters not a subject of controversy with the source.) Some time is normally spent on matters of little or no intelligence interest for purposes of concealment. The interrogator can abet the process by making occasional notes -- or pretending to do so -- on items that seem important to the interrogatee but are not of intelligence value. From this point of view an interrogation can be deemed successful if a source who is actually a hostile agent can report to the opposition only the general fields of our interest but cannot pinpoint specifics without including misleading information. It is sound practice to write up each interrogation report on the day of questioning or, at least, before the next session, so that defects can be promptly remedied and gaps or contradictions noted in time. It is also a good expedient to have the interrogatee make notes of topics that should be covered, which occur to him while discussing the immediate matters at issue. The act of recording the stray item or thought on paper fixes it in the interrogatee's mind. Usually topics popping up in the course of an interrogation are forgotten if not noted; they tend to disrupt the interrogation plan if covered by way of digression on the spot. Debriefing questions should usually be couched to provoke a positive answer and should be specific. The questioner should not accept a blanket negative without probing. For example, the question "Do you know anything about Plant X?" is likelier to draw a negative answer then "Do you have any friends who work at Plant X?" or "Can you describe its exterior?" It is important to determine whether the subject's knowledge of any topic was acquired at first hand, learned indirectly, or represents merely an assumption. If the information was obtained indirectly, the identities of sub-sources and related information about the channel are needed. If statements rest on assumptions, the facts upon which the conclusions are based are necessary to evaluation. As detailed questioning proceeds, addition biographic data will be revealed. Such items should be entered into the record, but it is normally preferable not to diverge from an impersonal topic in order to follow a biographic lead. Such leads can be taken up later unless they raise new doubts about bona fides . As detailed interrogation continues, and especially at the half-way mark, the interrogator's desire to complete the task may cause him to be increasingly business-like or even brusque. He may tend to curtail or drop the usual inquiries about the subject's well-being with which he opened earlier sessions. He may feel like dealing moreand more abruptly with reminiscences or digressions. His interest has shifted from the interrogatee himself, who jut a while ago was an interesting person, to the atsk of getting at what he knows. But if rapport has been established, the interrogatee will be quick to sense and resent this change of attitude. This point is particularly important if the interrogatee is a defector faced with bewildering changes and in a highly emotional state. Any interrogatee has his ups and downs, times when he is tired or half-ill, times when his personal problems have left his nerves frayed. The peculiar intimacy of the interrogation situation and the very fact that the interrogator has deliberately fostered rapport will often lead the subject to talk about his doubts, fears, and other personal reactions. The interrogator should neither cut off this flow abruptly nor show impatience unless it takes up an inordinate amount of time or unless it seems likely that all the talking about personal matters is being used deliberately as a smoke screen to keep the interrogator from doing his job. If the interrogatee is believed cooperative, then from the beginning to the end of the process he should feel that the interrogator's interest in him has remained constant. Unless the interrogation is soon over, the interrogatee's attitude toward his questioner is not likely to remain constant. He will feel more and more drawn to the questioner or increasingly antagonistic. As a rule, the best way for the interrogator to keep the relationship on an even keel is to maintain the same quiet, relaxed, and open-minded attitude from start to finish. Detailed interrogation ends only when (1) all useful counterintelligence information has been obtained; (2) diminishing returns and more pressing commitments compel a cessation; or (3) the base, station, [one or two words deleted] admits full or partial defeat. Termination for any reason other than the first is only temporary. It is a profound mistake to write off a successfully resistant interrogatee or one whose questioning was ended before his potential was exhausted. KUBARK must keep track of such persons, because people and circumstances change. Until the source dies or tells us everything that he knows that is pertinent to our purposes, his interrogation may be interrupted, perhaps for years -- but it has not been completed. 4. The Conclusion The end of an interrogation is not the end of the interrogator's responsibilities. From the beginning of planning to the end of questioning it has been necessary to understand and guard against the various troubles that a vengeful ex-source can cause. As was pointed out earlier, KUBARK's lack of executive authority abroad and its operational need for facelessness make it peculiarly vulnerable to attack in the courts or the press. The best defense against such attacks is prevention, through enlistment or enforcement of compliance. However real cooperation is achieved, its existence seems to act as a deterrent to later hostility. The initially resistant subject may become cooperative because of a partial identification with the interrogator and his interests, or the source may make such an identification because of his cooperation. In either event, he is unlikely to cause serious trouble in the future. Real difficulties are more frequently created by interrogatees who have succeeded in withholding. The following steps are normally a routine part of the conclusion: a. [approx. 10 lines deleted] d. [approx. 7 lines deleted] e. [approx. 7 lines deleted] f. [approx. 4 lines deleted]

Hmmm...to echo another poster : Gosh. I'm not sure I am clear on what a Libertarian Socialite is, so I can't claim to be one. I do know that there was a time when there was no Capitalites, I think it was Cromwell who led a revolution to establish Capitalism. This was also a time when early experiments with Communal life were happening in England. Peasants flocked to the Capitalites banner as it promised some freedoms. as usual when such tyrannical means are used the progressive elements are later eliminated. I think in this case a diversion into Ireland accomplished this. A 20th century example is the Iranian revolution. Here Trotskyist elements were in the vanguard. Following the successful overthrow of the old US backed Shah came a military adventure involving Iraq, then supported by the US. Again the progressive elements flocked to the defense of the revolution, which meant that the students and others who had a progressive political understanding went to the front line. Here they were effectively wiped out. The end result was, as in the USSR, a successful counter revolution, in this case the rule of the Mullahs was assured and any Marxist opposition wiped out, in the case of the Soviets the rise of Stalinism. This Stalinist regime has now after a few generations returned to the fold. In the case of the efforts of Capitalites in Britain, Monarchy as a ruling force was reestablished. If I need to put my attitudes into a box, I suppose an anarcho syndicalist neutral christian with pentacostal tendencies having trotskyist sympathies with a world view encompassing the buddhist concepts of illusory perception with regards to ultimate truth. I don't know if that has been defined elsewhere as a typical box within which to reside. Perhaps dadaists would have something to say on that, however I tend to regard such things as a form of priviledged cerebral onanism to be avoided. I think government often runs the risk of dispossessing individuals of their responsibilities to other humans. We too readily hand over thinking to government agencies (or any readily available 'authority') and become passive spectators, albeit with opinions, but as long as it's 'them' that are copping it, somehow maybe things are still OK. To learn that a collective NO! the buck doesn't stop with the Prez. it stops with me, carried to its logical conclusion is probably one of the most powerful weapons against 'nastiness'. I tend to have a pretty simplistic out look avoiding some of the finer details. For example I don't think we should have nuclear bombs simply because what they do is not nice. Similarly, police hitting people is not a good thing. People don't like being hit. Also, it's not good for the people who are doing the hitting. When you hit someone you have to develop some degree of unpleasant hateful feelings within your self. That's not a good thing to do to oneself. If I want to eat sweet mango fruit it probably helps to plant sweet mango seeds. If I plant thistles all the time it seems to me logical that a scarcity of sweet mangoes may have something to do with not planting sweet mango seeds. People who cooperatively choose not to participate in thistle farming and who argue for and actively go about planting sweet mango (ie. walk the talk) may in the long run prevail. I don't know. (Oh... did I forget to mention..I'm a skeptic.)

Jason, it will be very interesting to see what evidence comes forth, and of course where it comes from, to support this. No doubt there were turned agents working on both sides. The whole espionage game is as Angleton pointed out 'a room full of mirrors'. Naturally though, one factor that must be kept in mind (I'm not sayin it IS the reason for this information, but that it MAY be) is the fact that as the conspiracy trail unfolds there seems (as one might expect) to always be a concurrent relevant thread of counter claims developing. In this case a response by the intelligence community that they may have something to do with it is to seed doubt in the sense that 'yes maybe, but it was those elements that had been turned'. Rather disingenious of course as the consequences of accepting that are quite devastating in general, but in the conspiracy field serves to further fragment. An example that I, through my research, am familiar with, is : if one studies the senate report on the CIA mail opening operations one finds documents dealing with potential disclosures where directives clearly point to the procedures to adopt in order to permit the continuation of such illegal activities. They include seeding of false information, reports etc to say 'there is no such operation', they then recommend 'laying low' and resuming when attention is elsewhere. To some extent as this after all is a industry of professionals they will always be a step ahead. However, truth has the characteristic of eventually percolating to the top, thus in time reason can often sort lies from truth. Because of the nature of lies, there are usually gaps that careful attention to detail will reveal

Mark, I also have some comments on this paragraph: "I've previously mentioned my own theory, that on November 22, 1963 all the factors--the left, the right, the oil interests, the banking interests, the Bobby Baker mess, the pro- and anti-Castro overtures, the racial and the social upheaval--all reached "critical mass." Had there been no assassination that day, Don Reynolds' testimony before Congress surely would've ended LBJ's career. JFK's own sexual dalliances might've caused his OWN political career to implode. Had evidence of a Castro-led conspiracy been found immediately after the assassination, I believe that Cuba would have been obliterated. Had the assassination not occurred, a lot of the positive legislation that came about in 1964 and 1965 wouldn't have happened, as there would've been no reason for a show of bipartisanship...similar to the polarization of left and right that we see today." The reason why there was no evidence of a Castro-led conspiracy, I'm suggesting, is because there was no Castro-led conspiracy. The purpose of these events were very much targeted at the American public. While presented as a concern for global events, the 'play' being enacted was of the nature of the 'lynching postcards' distributed freely through the society, in order to show : 'this is what will happen to you if you don't behave as we want you to behave'. Thought control. I agree that a critical mass was being reached. It's interesting at this point to note in reference to the thread of media influence that the Nov 22 issue of Time was heavily devoted to presenting future candidates to the presidential elections : all Republicans, including that a VERY eager Rockefeller, and a sober and measured Nixon, while painting the Kennedy administration as 'grumpy' and 'dissolute'. The positive legislation was a product of Kennedy's government. The bipartisanship was a product of intense lobbying and not a certainty. Had Kennedy been survived and been reelected in the face of these forces I think he would have remained true to form and seen this legislation through. The difference would have been that the public would have learned an entirely different lesson of how things are done in the Good ole' USA, and the world could have been a different place today.(though I wouldn't have recommended to any one to hold their breath on that one either) I agree it's important to keep a balance, violence was not just something the right did/do. There TENDS to be a difference though. A gross example would be the killings in Somozas Nicaragua prior to the victory of the Sandinistas. While Somoza and his US sponsored gentlemen would roll drums of petrol out of helicopters onto the suburbs of its opponents and kidnap and torture children, the Sandinista guerillas tended to selectively eliminate with a single clean shot to the head. _________________________ An interesting document from the sixties is a picture book written by Julian Bond and published in 1967, after he was expelled from the Georgia House of Representatives for opposing the war in Viet Nam. http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/.../Bond/Bond.html In this document he talks of the violence against black people, including the institutionalised one of killing black people by sending them to war.

Here's the reference I read to the car bomb. I found this in Gerry Hemming's bio on spartacus. This week Hemming revealed to Solares Hill that the assassins had a back-up plan to ensure Kennedy never left Dallas alive. According to Hemming, there was a huge remote-controlled bomb planted in one of the cars parked beyond the triple overpass at the south end of Dealey Plaza. If the assassins were not sure Kennedy had been killed by the ambush in Dealey Plaza, they would detonate the car bomb as the motorcade sped toward the hospital, ensuring the death of all the occupants of the Presidential limousine. Here's the complete link: Link <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thank you for posting that Tom, I wonder how many members are aware of that article written by Tim? Gerry, when did you hear of this bomb, and how credible is it? I find it fascinating. As stated this topic is to look at some coincidences and to look a post assassination attempt plans to see what that might reveal. OK. So Tim reports that Gerry tells Sol that there was a car bomb of such size that obliteration of occupants of speeding Limousine was ensured. Remote controlled bomb. Radio one would surmise? Is there an iota of suggestion that Oswald had such a device? No? Well then, it MUST have been a conspiracy. Or...? ______________ The only people reported as having radios are of course the various Law enforcement agencies, and Harry up in his office speaks of having one, though like his ocular being bi, his radio was tuned to local station. No matter. ______________ OK, fair enuff..I'd like to hear what Gerry has to say about this article by Tim. There are obvious logical inconsistencies. If it was to be a conspiracy to have a lone nut, then that would have blown as soon as the bomb went off. Plus the weight brought to bear on the case would have been of a different magnitude entirely. How could this split second deciscion NOT to blow the bomb have been made with any degree of certainty? Let's say it was decided to blow, what then? What if it hadn't worked? Back to the whole question of post assassination attempt survival of Kennedy and his subsequent steps to take charge. Strikes me that the conspiracists played a VERY chancy game. If they had a serious agenda, would they do it like this? It sounds a bit too pat to me.

I couldn't help being struck by the similarity of the way Captain Robert Crowder, Texas Ranger, company B, Dallas 1963 set his mouth. Robert Crowder died of a heart attack on November 26, 1972 in Dallas, Texas

Yup, very perceptive Steve, except it's been going on for about 10 years now. I think I got out of the habit and take it for granted now. I do have a memory that a good night sleep is a good thing. I can't clearly remember why. I think it just felt good to wake up after a full 8 odd hours. 'pontiac' _____________________________ (If anyone else feels like posting their own images here in this free gallery, please feel free. I, as well as others I'm sure, would love to see them.)