Lynne Foster

Lynne, please stop embarrassing yourself by calling us all Nixon fans. A few months back there were a number of threads about the ties between Watergate and the Kennedy Assassination. Please use the search feature and find these threads and read them. You may learn a thing or two.

I did that search and I found this article, the very same one I posted today. and it is listed under my thread, Watergate and the kennedy assassination.

But when I initially posted that, the material on the website was very, very different, it has evidently been updated.

Websites are evidently updated all the time, and the material that you will find there today, may not be the same tomorrow.

At any rate, I did not find anything that anybody else has posted, can you post a link I can look into?

Why don't you people mention his evident involvement in the Kennedy assassination

Because Nixon as a suspect has been discussed here many times. Do you think you have something new?

Why don't you mention the apparent plagiarism in that "great read" you found, since I went to the trouble of pointing it out?

I didn't notice any plagiarism, Nixon is just a suspect?

He sounds more like a serial assassin to me.

If you know everything, why don't you just tell us who murdered President Kennedy and I'll just read and learn?

Lynee,

What's your hard on for this Mat Wilson guy? You seem to think every thing he writes is the "Holy Grail". To me it all looks like idle unsubstantiated speculation. The supposedly damming photo of Tricky Dick was nowhere to be seen nor were there any footnotes. You may take everything he says as the "Wilson given truth" but if you want to be taken seriously on this forum you should cite researchers who actually have research to back their claims.

The way you constantly plug his work makes me wonder if you have an ulterior motive. Are you his publisher, press agent, wife, daughter or girl friend? Or are you just an obsessed fan. Or are you him using an assumed identity?

Like I said in another thread...

A fiver says these linked web sites will be selling something soon... Book, Video, Etc. Something for sale... It is the most plausible explanation for seemingly irrational spamming.

And like I said, Nixon was propelled to power by destroying an innocent man -Alger Hiss.

Why don't you people mention his evident involvement in the Kennedy assassination, if you are here to discuss the assassination of John F. Kennedy?

What are you talking about, Ron posted the website with the picture.

Are you just a Nixon fan who is trying to protect the image of a known criminal?

A fiver says that these linked sites will be selling a book or a video of some sort soon...

What's the point?

Richard Nixon was propelled to power by destroying Alger Hiss. do you have any doubt that he was in fact involved in the Kennedy assassination?

Is there anything that Richard Nixon did that did not involve targeting the "enemy"?

Why is Nixon's involvement being ignored here?

That's the bet that is puzzling, unless it's all political.

This is very interesting, Watergate and the Kennedy assassination are turning out to be a part of the same scandal.

I have read Nixon's memoirs, and I think that if you read them, you will be able to find all kinds of references which tie the 2 scandals together.

For anybody who would like to add to the research here, you should also check out the book

FROM: The President: Richard Nixon's Secret Files, Edited by Bruce Oudes, I think you will be able to find all kinds of relevant information.

Propelled to power by destroying Alger Hiss, is there anything that Richard Nixon did that did not involve destroying a political adversary?

The above link is also useful in emphasizing the point that when Nixon spoke about Watergate, he had Cuba and the Kennedy assassination in mind.

To be brief, reliable Kennedy assassination researchers are people like Harold Weisberg, Jay Epstein, Mat Wilson and the like, while the cover up artists, Jim Garrison, Gerald Posner, McAdams and the like, aggressively counter reasonable critics.

You are too weird.

I rest my case.

By the way, are you also proud of the fact that your hero, Jim Garrison, was the "official" version of Jack Ruby?

Jim Garrison was not "the 'official' version of Jack Ruby." You can imply Garrison had David Ferrie killed all you want, but that doesn't make it so. Where does David Ferrie fit in your Hoover-Johnson assassination theory anyway?

I really hope I haven't been "too weird." My question, which you have not yet answered, is do you agree with the Wilson-network viewpoint that Scott did not murder Laci Peterson?

The only thing I agree with 100% is the following article I recently read. A picture of one of the grassy knoll gunmen is more than I ever thought I would find on the Internet, this is absolutely incredible, as far as I am concerned.

As for Laci Peterson, I don't know anything about her, I don't have time to review all the links that you wish to point out, to divert the truth.

That picture is very clear to me. Honesty is such a lonely word on this forum.

I guess you are all, Jim Garrison, Gerald posner, McAdams and other disinformation supporters.

I don't think you have put a dent in the fact that Richard Nixon was directly involved in the Kennedy assassination.

Incredible, how hard you try however, I am absolutely astounded by the effort.

I guess you are all politically motivated here, because you never discuss the Kennedy assassination, unless you wish to protect scoundrels like Richard Nixon.

This is directly from the article, and I get the feeling that it has upset your political views, is that what this is all about?

"It is not really certain whether Harrelson was successful in his mission to kill the President. He could have fired the shot that missed. What is absolutely certain is that he was with Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis at the scene of the crime, that Nixon was evidently an off-site operative and 'Watergate' is merely an act that includes many crimes, including the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

The battle between Nixon loyalists and Nixon targets is still a huge factor in American politics. When Bill Clinton was elected President, Nixon loyalists adopted the mantra "if the press can impeach Nixon, the press can impeach Clinton" and they stuck to it, to provoke the greatest constitutional crisis since Watergate. Nobody blamed the media because former Nixon spies like Lucianne Goldberg are no longer called spies, they are called "the media", and the phony distinction between the "Liberal" media and the "Conservative" media has become a license to distort the truth without the need to act like a treacherous spy. Why pretend to be a journalist to spy on your opponent, when you can call yourself a "Conservative journalist" and lie about your opponent with impunity?

In actual fact the media should not be "Liberal" or "Conservative", it should be reliable, but when Richard Nixon was forced to resign, he blamed the liberal media for his predicament and he spent the rest of his life cultivating the power to do the same to his enemies.

The climax of the plot to impeach President Clinton was April 1, 1998, when Dick Morris foamed around the mouth on national television and vehemently condemned what he called, the "Nixonian creep that we have seen in the Clinton White House." Dick Morris called himself a journalist, but in fact, he was acting like Lucianne Goldberg who had pretended to be a journalist in the 1970's, because she was trying to gain political advantage for Richard Nixon.

Moreover, the very same money that was responsible for backing Richard Nixon in the 1970's was responsible for attacking Bill Clinton, and a memo dated May 12, 1971, from Charles Colson to H. R. Haldeman, identified the long-standing, finanial, Scaife/Nixon relationship. According to the memo: "...Dick Scaife is feeling very down on the administration at the moment. Inasmuch as Scaife has been one of our biggest financial backers, I think we need to consider perhaps some unusual steps to rebuild relationships."

Thankfully, Richard Nixon's financial backers did not make him President of the United States, in 1960, because he would have probably invaded Cuba and triggered a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, in the process. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what Richard Nixon advised Kennedy to do. In his own words, speaking to Kennedy about Cuba, Richard Nixon said, "I would find a proper legal cover and I would go in. There are several justifications that could be used, like protecting American citizens living in Cuba and defending our base at Guatanamo. I believe that the most important thing at this point is that we do whatever is necessary to get Castro and communism out of Cuba." Fortunately, John F. Kennedy was the President of the United States, in 1960.

Unfortunately for the President however, Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson were reading from the same page, regarding the obsession to prosecute the Vietnam war, and that became absolutely clear when Richard Nixon did not challenge Johnson's political candidacy in 1964. In other words, while Lyndon Johnson publicly promised to maintain the Kennedy agenda, he had privately reached a secret deal which Nixon, and that was the real, credibility gap of the Johnson White House. Needless to say, Nixon did not oppose Lyndon Johnson in 1964 because his choices were determined by the "politics" of the Kennedy assassination. Everybody who had a hand in the plot to assassinate Kennedy had his role defined for him, Richard Nixon did not have unilateral authority over a diverse, group efort. If that were the case, he would have opposed Lyndon Johnson's political candidacy in 1964, but he did not."

By the way Ron, everybody that i have shown those posted pictures, thinks that the picture of the "HOBO" LOL is in fact Harrelson.

The features of a person do not change despite the aging process, but I have had a good laugh with all the propaganda you are posting, to misinform.

Anyways, who should be happy about the fact that one of the plotters is in a federal prison.

Anyways, I missed the point of all that whining Ron, are you trying to say that both MC Tracy and Mat Wilson are wrong about the fact that Richard Nixon is lying about the assassination of John F. Kennedy?

I thought I'd get serious input here because it's all relevant to the kennedy assassination, but people like Owens just want to talk about Howard Dean.

I really don't get this.

Anyways, goodnight, I thought I was here to discuss the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

I think people's political views are denying impartial discussion here.

I think this website cover Watergate and the Kennedy assassination very nicely.

It's all new to me, too much information to discuss there !

I did not realize that richard Nixon was so heavily involved.

I didn't see anything on the agenda regarding richard Nixon's possible involvement --why not?

I reviewed this site today and i was absolutely astounded by the picture of one of the gunmen.

That picture of Harrelson is astounding, did you all know about that?

Nixon is a key, Kennedy assassination association.

Did you read this?

I had no idea Harelson was a gunman, until I found this site today.

Did garrison say anything about Richard Nixon's involvement in the Kennedy assassination?

Ron, are you talking to me? Who is Frenchy?

By the way, I think you need to factor in the aging process when you consider "hairline evidence" I think you re overreacting here.

Read this again, I think his wife is in a better position to judge than you are:

"Chuck Cook, a reporter for the Dallas morning news interviewed Harrelson on the judge Wood case and subsequently asked him about his claims of murdering the President. Cook said that Harrelson ‘got this sly little grin on his face, Harrelson is very intelligent and has a way of not answering when it suits him.’ At a later interview Cook brought the subject up again and at that point Harrelson became very serious, Cook quoted Harrelson as saying "Listen, if and when I get out of here (prison) and feel free to talk, I will have something that will be the biggest story you ever had" and added "November 22, 1963. You remember that!". Most of the time, when Harrelson has been questioned with regard to the assassination he has emphatically denied it, but Cook showed the photos of the three tramps to Harrison’s wife Jo Ann Harrelson who was 'amazed at the similarities.' Indeed, even aging has not affected the resemblance. "

That's right and that's the most incredible part !

!

Charles Harrelson was a contract killer and according to Jack Anderson, whom Nixon tried to have killed, he was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Harrelson is believed to be one of the gunmen behind the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll. Harrelson was one of the three tramps arrested in Dealey Plaza on 22nd November, 1963, along with Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt. In 1992, the Dallas Police Department claimed that the three tramps were Gus Abrams, John F. Gedney and Harold Doyle, but their photographs do not match.

In 1968 Harrelson was convicted of the murder of businessman, Sam Degelia, in a contract killing in South Texas. After serving time he was released, and in 1979 Harrelson was paid $250,000 by drug dealers to assassinate Federal Judge John H. Wood. On 29th May, 1979, Wood was shot dead, the first federal judge to be murdered in the 20th century.

When he was arrested for murdering a federal judge he confessed to being one of the gunmen who shot at President John F. Kennedy. He later withdrew this confession, but the admission is more credible than the denial. He received two life sentences for the murder of Wood in a criminal investigation which proved to be more expensive than the investigation in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

In 1995 Harrelson attempted to break out of Atlanta Federal Prison. He was recaptured and moved to Florence Administrative Maximum Penitentiary in Colorado.

Charles Harrelson is also a former Jack Ruby Strip Bar Bouncer, and if that doesn't push all the skeptics over the fence, nothing ever will. In retrospect, if Jack Ruby could not rely on the man who committed paid murders for the mob, it is because Charles Harrelson had met his quota for November, 1963.

Chuck Cook, a reporter for the Dallas morning news interviewed Harrelson on the judge Wood case and subsequently asked him about his claims of murdering the President. Cook said that Harrelson ‘got this sly little grin on his face, Harrelson is very intelligent and has a way of not answering when it suits him.’ At a later interview Cook brought the subject up again and at that point Harrelson became very serious, Cook quoted Harrelson as saying "Listen, if and when I get out of here (prison) and feel free to talk, I will have something that will be the biggest story you ever had" and added "November 22,

1963. You remember that!". Most of the time, when Harrelson has been questioned with regard to the assassination he has emphatically denied it, but Cook showed the photos of the three tramps to Harrison’s wife Jo Ann Harrelson who was "amazed at the similarities." Indeed, even aging has not affected the resemblance.

If you are a real Kennedy Assassination buff, you will soak up every single word here:!

Did you check out that picture on the website?

Well Owen, I was expecting you to comment and you did not. Are you a Nixon fan?

Did you read this part?

Indeed, it is a documented, proven fact that Nixon's cronies plotted outright political murder (Jack Anderson was lucky to survive.) He was scheming to have people beaten up. He associated with mobsters. Nazi propaganda films were being shown in the White House. His men schemed to burglarize Republican headquarters and blame it on the Democrats. They schemed to plant McGovern campaign literature in the apartment of Art Brehmer, the would-be assassin of George Wallace, and the evidence strongly suggests they probably even schemed to assassinate Ted Kennedy, and after having failed, they blamed the fortunate survivor for the death of unintended victim, Mary Jo Kopechne.

Indeed, Nixon's memoirs are littered with evidence that as far as he was concerned, Chappaquiddick was nothing more than an election issue, it had nothing to do with a tragic murder. To quote Richard Nixon directly:

In the short term, I knew that Chappaquiddick would undermine Kennedy's role as a leader of the opposition to the administration's policies. In the longer term, it would be one of his greatest liabilities if he decided to run for President in 1972. It was clear that the full story of what had happened that night on Chappaquidick had not come out, [how did he know, did his plan misfire?] and I suspected that the press would not try very hard to uncover it. Therefore I told Ehrlichman to have someone investigate the case for us and get the real facts out. [we all know what that means in Nixon-speak.] "Don't let up on this for a minute," I said. "Just put yourself in their place if something like that happened to us." In fact, our private

investigator was unable to turn out anything besides rumors.

Needless to say, the truth was damaging to Richard Nixon, because if it wasn't, he would not have to rely on rumors about Chappaquiddick , for political advantage. The truth is, Nixon feared another Kennedy candidacy and Chappaquiddick was Richard Nixon's failed attempt to assassinate yet another political rival.

Read the entire article, it's covers the Kennedy assassination as well.

Alll you people who are concerned with disinformation do not appear to be exposing anybody here, who killed kennedy?

All you have to do to get the truth is to compare what Dorothy Kilgallen said on November 29, 1963, with what J. Edgar Hoover said on that very same day.

The truth is really simple, as long as the truth-tellers are not constantly targeted.

You are too weird.

I rest my case.

By the way, are you also proud of the fact that your hero, Jim Garrison, was the "official" version of Jack Ruby?

Mr. Wilson or whoever?

Please don't let the facts get in the way here, Mr. Garrison....

if you really want to discuss the assassination of John F. Kennedy, discuss this.

Believe me, I really do not mind being called "Mr. Garrison."

I have come to the conclusion (after your "Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone" thread) that you are not in the business of critically discussing any of the various Wilson-related (I say "Mr. Wilson or whoever" because its more a network of linked and uncontradictory articles and opinions than the work of one man, though he seems to be the most prominent) articles you post. Right now I am much more interested in you and your agenda.

Now: What do you think of the Peterson case?

You are stubborn. I already told you that you are trying to divert attention from the Kennedy assassination by discussing things that I know nothing about.

I think your extreme, political views are getting in the way here.

Mr. Wilson or whoever?

Please don't let the facts get in the way here, Mr. Garrison....

if you really want to discuss the assassination of John F. Kennedy, discuss this.

Well, Mr. Parsons, you are giving me the distinct impression that you are here today, stalking me without pause, because you want to bury the memory of President John F. kennedy.

In my opinion, Republicans who repeatedly wish to talk about Howard Dean, have no other agenda beyond the effort to use him, to ridicule the Democratic Party.

Now of course, you are going to tell me that you are a Card Carrying Democrat, aren't you?

In other words, you take Mr. Wilson's position on Howard Dean, what a startling surprise.

Now, do you think Scott murdered Laci Peterson?

I'm getting quite a few "distinct impression" from you.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I did not know that Mat Wilson had a position on Howard Dean and I don't care.

I do think you are very strange, trying to shift from a discussion of the Kennedy assassination, to something that I know nothing about.

No wonder you are such a big Garrison fan, you use his tactics.

Well, Mr. Parsons, you are giving me the distinct impression that you are here today, stalking me without pause, because you want to bury the memory of President John F. kennedy.

In my opinion, Republicans who repeatedly wish to talk about Howard Dean, have no other agenda beyond the effort to use him, to ridicule the Democratic Party.

Now of course, you are going to tell me that you are a Card Carrying Democrat, aren't you?

Mr. Parsons, your political views do not interest me -I understand.

Well Dawn, I think this is the closest independent researchers ever come to actually determining what happened to John F. Kennedy.

What do you think about that?

I thought you were not allowed to swear on this message board.

Dawn, I think you have been asked to seek help many times before by others, I think I will join them now.