Lynne Foster

Many of you believe that Nixon had foreknowledge regarding the Kennedy assassination. What would that do to his confidence as an assassin, did he think he could get away with anything, having left the ignorant masses wondering about the Lennon conspiracy, uh, if it was in fact a conspiracy? These fools are so predictable, aren't they?

From a Harvard law Professor, why do you ask?

Since this thread is about me, I think it's only fair that I point out the entire substance...I have to respond to my own post -did you all forget that this board is supposed to be about the Kennedy assassination?

This peace is interesting: It obviously precedes the Lennon assasination: For all you intelligent skeptics, Nixon’s feigned commitment to law and order is quickly becoming the joke of the century, and it is perhaps significant to note that his relentless determination to destroy Kennedy, was even more violent. In his memoirs, Nixon exposes the obsession that he and Hoover shared to blame the Kennedy assassination on Oswald the “Communist”, an obsession which produced the bizarre claim that prior to his attempt on Kennedy’s life, Oswald planned to assassinate Nixon. Intelligent, comprehensive researchers clearly understand Nixon’s foreknowledge about the Kennedy assassination, and Nixon himself routinely betrayed his knowledge about the murder of the century. In an August 22, 1972 press conference, Nixon said: "If ten more wiretaps could have found the conspiracy [to assassinate JFK] -uh, if it was a conspiracy -or the individual, then it would have been worth it. Nixon had trouble separating the pretense from the reality, and in the end, he indicted himself. source

This is interesting: British Barrister, Fenton Bressler, proved that John Lennon was stalked and slain with the method of a political assassin in his exhaustively researched book "The Murder of John Lennon," but the media missed it. The media ignored the fact that the assassin embraced Richard Nixon's claim that John Lennon was valueless and meaningless. As late as 1992, the motivation that claimed Lennon was so vivid that Mark David Chapman told Larry King that he struck out at something that he perceived to be phony. He was not a deranged fan as the media insisted, he was a moral minority who satisfied Richard Nixon's paranoia. Indeed, Mark David Chapman has been consistent. As soon as he murdered Lennon, his boast left not a single need to second guess. According to Chapman, "I murdered a man. I took alot more with me than just myself. A whole era ended. It was the last nail in the coffin of the 60's." Indeed, it was Richard Nixon Starting Over. I can't believe this is not conclusive:

Wow, that's quite significant. I didn't know about this namebased search engine, but I did a search on John Lennon and it wasn't as productive as the Thomas Cline search. That guy is evidently behind so many scandals, it would take a 10 volume book to skim the surface. So little time, so many scandals --no wonder they get away with it.

Anybody think this murder will ever be solved, or do we need to wait for government records? Does his assassinatin have anything to do with the 'Catcher in the Rye'? Where are all the high school students who have studied the book, they ought to have something to contribute here?

Dawn, this sounds more compelling than provocative: Regardless, the Casey/Nixon agenda defined the Reagan years, and the so-called Reagan revolution was in fact a re-visitation of the Nixon years. Accomplished in the art of plotting clandestine schemes, Nixon and Casey were ideally positioned to usher in an unprecedented reign of terror. The unfinished agenda of the Nixon White House was the obvious focus of operation, and they promptly "liquidated" priority targets like John Lennon. On December 2, 1980, Richard Nixon betrayed his capacity to dominate American foreign policy through the introduction of his book The Real War, wherin he claimed confidence in "the background of those new policies that will now begin to emerge as the new administration takes office." Nixon's book paints a portrait of a nation waging an obsessive battle to win World War III. And Richard Nixon, the self-appointed patriot, placed himself at the center of the battle. Does it take very much to unravel the paranoia and the delusions of a man who was obsessively engaged in a battle to win World War III? One of the fronts of Nixon's so-called Real War was the realm of ideals and ideas, and according to the perversity that Nixon promoted "we will have to compromise some of our cherished ideals" as long as the battle is waged "in the name of that supreme priority."26 Having extolled the virtue of waging a covert, unethical war to support friends and destroy enemies, Nixon essentially justified his absolute commitment to do whatever was necessary, including the need to murder a "peacnik" like John Lennon, because in the words of Nixon's absolute delusion, "in World War III there is no substitute for victory."27 Committed to contain communism through the methods and means that totalitarian states deploy, Richard Nixon was the sort who was even able to assert that "senseless terrorism is often not as senseless as it may seem. To the Soviets and their allies, [and to those who deploy their tactics] it is a calculated instrument of national policy."28 That explains Kens State, doesn't it? Moreover, since Nixon proclaimed his absolute determination to do whatever was necessary in the multi-fronted effort to win World War III, he essentially exposed his determination to sponsor the murder of a so-called trendy like John Lennon. In his own words: If America loses World War III, it will be because of the failure of its leadership class. In particular, it will be because of the attention, the celebrity, and the legitimacy given to the "trendies" -those overglamorized dilettantes who posture in the latest idea, fount the fashionable protests and are slobbered over by the news media, whose creation they essentially are. The attention given to them and their causes romanticizes the trivial and trivializes the serious. It reduces public discussion to the level of a cartoon strip. Whatever the latest cause they embrace -whether antiwar, antinuclear, antimilitary, antibusiness -it is almost invariably one that works against the interest of the United States in the context of World War III.29 In short, what Nixon in fact exposed through his proclaimed obsessions is that he considered the murder of a "trendy" like John Lennon absolutely vital to the successful prosecution of World War III. The self-incrimination is so comprehensive that only a triumph of propaganda can ignore Nixon's compelling motivation to murder John Lennon. In Nixon's own terms, "in a less hazardous age we could afford to indulge the prancing of the trendies on the stage of public debate. But now our national survival depends on learning to distinguish between the meaningful and the meaningless."30 Hell will certainly freeze over before Richard Nixon convinces the world that the murder of John Lennon was "meaningful." The road to the murder of John Lennon had a long history of intrusive, illegal surveillance and harassment. In particular, the Nixon White House sought to "neutralize" Lennon's capacity to organize an antiwar movement and Hoover's FBI "policed" Lennon while the Immigration and Naturalization Service tried to deport him because of a 1968 conviction for possession of cannabis in London. The FBI surveillance of Lennon produced a stack of papers twenty-six pounds in weight, not to mention documents which remain classified or are "withheld in the interest of the national defense or foreign policy."31 In 1969, John Lennon protested the Vietnam war by organising bed-ins for peace. In his own words: The point of the bed-in, in a nutshell, was a commercial for peace as opposed to war, which was on the news everyday in those days. Everyday there was dismembered bodies, napalm, and we thought, "Why don't they have something nice in the papers?"32 A proposed bed-in in New York did not materialize, because, as Lennon recounted: We tried to do it in New York but the American government wouldn't let us in. They didn't want any peaceniks, so we ended up doing it in Montreal and broadcasting back across the border.33 Indeed, the effort to politically silence Lennon was less than accommodating and Lennon's lawyer exposed the full score when he told him that "if he did anything more along the lines of this anti-war rock and roll campaign he would almost certainly be immediately deported, but if he cooled it, through various legal manoeuvres, he might be able to stay."34 John Lennon did what he had to do to avoid being deported. At the same time, even though he was politically silenced, FBI harassment persisted and he appeared on the Dick Cavett show to expose the fact that he was being followed by the FBI and that his phones were being tapped. The FBI had indeed mounted a major offensive operation against Lennon, but many thought he was crazy and Lennon related the common scepticism in the following terms: "Lennon, oh you big-headed maniac, who's going to follow you around?" Most people did not understand or fathom the fact that Hoover's FBI did not have anything better to do. It was not until after the resignation of Richard Nixon that Lennon's immigration case was thrown out of court and in 1976, his Green Card finally came through. For the next four years, Lennon retired from all forms of public life, and in 1980, the self-styled peace advocate came out of retirement and prepared to mount a crusade to "turn the world on to peace." At the same time. Richard Nixon and Bill Casey were setting the stage for the Reagan declaration of war against Communism in Central America, and peaceniks like Lennon were caught in the crossfire. Reagan's foreign policy advocates prepared to satisfy the unfinished agenda of the Nixon White House and serious threats were promptly eliminated. The so-called lessons of the 1960's were very close to the hearts of "time warp patriots" who blamed the loss of the Vietnam war on the antiwar movement and they resented the influence of activists like Lennon to the point of paranoia. In short, Reagan's upcoming, anti-Communist crusade could simply not tolerate an invigorated John Lennon and "he had to be cut down before the reasons for his death became obvious: before Reagan took the oath of office on 20 January 1981, before the world realized that Lennon was coming back to being the old Lennon, the man who sang Give Peace A Chance.35 In 1969, the Vietnam war prompted the largest anti-war demonstrations in the history of the United States and young people who rallied around Lennon's protest songs infuriated the Nixon White House. The Kent State massacre was immediately followed by protesters who circled the White House and chanted "all we are saying is give peace a chance" but the spirit of the peace movement was ultimately dampened by the slaughter. Regardless, the paranoia of Richard Nixon refused to wane. The Nixon White feared Lennon's capacity to disrupt the re-nomination of Richard Nixon and Hoover promptly dispatched his political police to "initiate discreet efforts to locate subject [John Winston Lennon] and remain aware of his activities and movements." Hoover died less that a year after the Republican convention in 1972, but the prejudice, fear and paranoia that motivated the Nixon White House survived and resurfaced with a vengeance in 1980. And when Bill Casey and Richard Nixon paved the road to systematically eliminate their "enemies" John Lennon became the first known casualty of the Nixon navigated, Reagan revolution. Reagan himself reflects the fact that Nixon's extraordinary White House authority practically exceeded his own. After leaving the White House, the Reagan's were disturbed by what they perceived to be "Reagan Bashing" by the Bush team, and it was Nixon who contacted Bush's Chief of Staff, to intercede on behalf of Ronald and Nancy Reagan. "Nixon made the call, telling Sununu that attacking the Reagans was counterproductive for the White House. For whatever reason, the attacks stopped".36 Nixon certainly did not have to physically occupy the White House to exercise power. At the same time, he evidently acted as though he was in fact the official President of the United States. When, For example, Richard Reeves interviewed Richard Nixon in his "exile sanctum" in New York in 1980, his apartment was arranged like the Oval Office. "The flags, the couch, the chairs were just like it..." Indeed, Richard Nixon was so obsesses with his role-play, that when the interview was concluded, he escorted Reeves to the supplies closet "because the closet door in the faux Oval Office was in the same place as an exit in the real Oval Office."37 In retrospect, Ronald Reagan was Jimmy Carter's political adversary in the 1980 election while Richard Nixon and other ghosts from the past [like Bill Casey] were his secret enemies. Consequently, the ultimate leader of the powerful, unaccountable, parallel government within-a-government that Oliver North operated was Richard Nixon himself -which probably explains the public controversy between Oliver North and Ronald Reagan. Indeed, the secret government "was believed to have grown out of a group Mr. Casey set up during the final weeks of the 1980 presidential campaign, called the October Surprise Group.38 Casey and Nixon were evidently full of surprises and on the very day that the press headlined the announcement that a "local screwball" murdered Lennon, the political backdrop was the innocuous headline, Reagan set to announce cabinet. The claim that John Lennon was the target of a political assassination is not original. In 1989, Fenton Bresler, an intelligent British Barrister wrote a book called The Murder of Lennon, and he raises many of the serious questions about Lennon's murder that have been almost totally ignored. In particular, he convincingly argues that Mark Chapman, Lennon's assassin was brainwashed by the CIA. Indeed, all the "traditional" motivations that are ascribed to Mark Chapman are relatively absurd compared to Bresler's analysis. On December 17, 1992, Chapman was interviewed on Larry King Live, and that was certainly an eye opener in terms of exposing the real Mark Chapman. In a nutshell, Chapman reflected the demeanour of a cold, dispassionate, methodical, cold blooded murderer. In particular, Chapman ascribed a phoney motivation to account for Lennon's murder, and that is certainly the mark of a cover up. On the one hand, Chapman claimed that he "was so bonded with Lennon" and on the other, he boldly asserted that he "struck out at something he perceived to be phoney, and that extraordinary contradiction, reflects duplicity, deception and the fact that Mark Chapman was not a "lone nut." The most striking, consistent element in the short adult life of Mark Chapman is his affiliation to the YMCA. Indeed, he had given serious consideration to applying himself to a career with the International Division of the YMCA. When he was arrested, one of the few items that Chapman left "on display" for the police to find was the following letter of recommendation from David Moore, then stationed at the Geneva office of the World Alliance of YMCAs: TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN This is to introduce Mark Chapman, a staff member of the U.S. International Division of the National Council of YMCAs. Mark was an effective and dedicated worker at the refugee camp in Fort Chaffe Arkansas following the mass influx of refugees after the change in governments in Indo-China in the spring of 1975. Mark was also the youth representative to the Board of Directors of the YMCA in his home town in Georgia. Mark will be visiting YMCAs in Asia and Europe and we look forward to his visit here in Geneva. I can commend him to you as a sincere and intelligent young man. Any assistance that you can give Mark during his travels will be greatly appreciated by this office.39 It is certainly not an exaggeration to assert that the YMCA was essentially Mark Chapman's surrogate family. But what is more significant however is the mysterious, troubling implications of the fact that Chapman was not a "lone nut." In 1967, Ramparts Magazine exposed the fact that the CIA used students to gather information from abroad and in the 1970's and 1980's, the CIA was evidently using YMCA patrons as spies. Philip Agee, the first-known CIA defector blew the cover on the CIA/YMCA link, and Mark Chapman's YMCA link was evidently too substantial and too "political" to preclude a CIA link as well. In 1975, Mark Chapman, the vehemently anti-Communist Southerner applied to represent the YMCA as a counsellor in the Soviet Union, but that bid was denied because Chapman did not speak Russian. Instead, Mark visited Lebanon, where, according to radio commentator, Mae Brussell, the CIA maintained training camps for assassins at the time.40 Whether Chapman was a trained assassin or not, his Beirut experience had a profound impact on his life, and following narrative indicates that Mark's harrowing overseas experience produced a very deep, psychological impact which was ripe for exploitation: June 1975 seems to have been the first time that Mark heard gunfire, the whizzing of bullets, bombs bursting nearby and the screams of people in pain and dying. It etched deep into his consciousness. This "gentle" man, who hated violence, came back from Beirut with a cassette recording that he had actually made of the barbarous sounds of warfare. He played it time and again to anyone in Atlanta who would listen. Says Harold Blankinship: "He played us this recording he had made in his hotel room at the YMCA in Beirut of all the fighting going on. You could hear the shooting, etc. That could have affected him. He was real up-tight about it, I know that." Whether intentional or otherwise, Lennon's future killer had indeed been "bloodied" in war-torn Beirut.41 The violence of war-torn Lebanon was Chapman's first, it wasn't his last firsthand look at the miserable dislocation that war produced. After Beirut, Chapman worked with Vietnamese refugees in Fort Chaffee, Arkansas, where the YMCA was setting up services to accommodate them. Since the fall of Saigon, hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese fled to the United States and in the eyes of "time warp" patriots, antiwar activists [phonies] like John Lennon were directly responsible for that particular "mess." And so, Mark Chapman, who travelled the world at the behest of the CIA-linked YMCA, was ripe for exploitation -he was an ideal brainwash victim -he had witnessed firsthand the world disorder that so-called phonies like John Lennon were responsible for. Indeed, Mark Chapman dabbled in the philosophy of "time warp" patriots who blamed the 1960's for every ill in society, and that sort of mentality is transmitted from "patriot" to receptive ear, it did not develop in Chapman alone. Since he murdered John Lennon, Mark Chapman boasted: "I murdered a man. I took a lot more with me than just myself. A whole era ended. It was the last nail in the coffin of the '60's."42 After killing his target and simultaneously satisfying the paranoia of "time warp patriots" who are in a perpetual war against the so-called 1960's, Chapman did not flee the murder scene, he calmly started to read his copy of The Catcher in the Rye when amazed New York City police officers arrested him. Chapman obviously wanted to get caught -the implication being that he would plead guilty and the Lennon case would close without investigation. Over the years, when asked why he murdered Lennon, Chapman would direct attention to the book The Catcher in the Rye. That in turn, directs attention towards patriots like George Herbert Walker Bush, who claim to have been most influenced by the books War and Peace and The Catcher in the Rye.43 The Catcher in the Rye is about a "crusade against phoneyness" and Mark Chapman, who used the assassination of Lennon to promote the book, claimed that he was motivated by Holden Caulfield, the book's sixteen-year-old "crusader". In a nutshell, Holden Caulfield hated phonies and Mark Chapman's crusade against a "phoney" like Lennon was "ideologically" aligned with the agenda of overzealous "patriots" who were occupied by the obsession to neutralize the influence of popular antiwar activists. In the awkward words of Mark Chapman: "I have a small part in me that cannot understand the world and what goes on in it. I did not want to kill anybody... I fought against the small part for a long time. I'm sure the large part of me is Holden Caulfield. The small part of me must be the Devil."44 Seeking to activate the "big part" of Mark Chapman, his "handlers" could have easily exploited his evident compassion for children and made him believe that "phonies" like John Lennon were ultimately responsible for the horror and the dislocation of war. Friends and associates made a point of having observed a very close bond between Mark Chapman and children, and that certainly provided the opportunity to exploit his Achilles heel. In the words of Mark Chapman: "I never wanted to hurt anybody my friends will tell you that. I have two parts in me the big part is very kind, the children I worked with will tell you that."45 Chapman struggled to avoid hurting Lennon but his "big part won" and he took his gun out of his coat pocket and shot Lennon in the chest, in the left arm and in the head. Mark Chapman had evidently mustered up the courage he required to satisfy the agenda of patriots who considered themselves to be exempt from the normal restraint of the law, because in their eyes, the "big picture", the "big part", the national security interest or whatever else they chose to call it, was essentially a license to kill -and John Lennon was clearly a priority target. In the final analysis, the terrifying reality is that the impressionable Mark Chapman is just one of hundreds of thousands of young people who are not appreciably distinct, in the absence of the "exposure" they receive. Under the circumstances, since Chapman travelled the world as a guest of the YMCA, it is reasonable to expect the organization that sponsored Chapman's psychologically harrowing adventures to assume at least some responsibility for the extraordinary mental transformation -from Mark Chapman, the compassionate young man, to Mark Chapman, the awkward, reluctant assassin who had to be prodded, to murder John Lennon. If one looks at the foreign policy direction of the Reagan White House, it is glaringly obvious that "patriots" like Bill Casey and Richard Nixon were steering the course. Clearly, the "invisible prints" of the clandestine, foreign policy strategists who coordinated the entire intelligence apparatus of the government to mount a fierce, unprecedented war against dissent, belong to Casey and Nixon. Richard Nixon made that absolutely clear in The Real War, when he wrote: "I am confident that President Reagan and the members of his administration will have the vision to see what needs to be done and the courage to do it. Nixon's confidence obviously stemmed from the fact that Reagan's inclination to mount an anti-Communist crusade provided zealots like himself the opportunity to use the "acting President" to promote their vision. The Reagan/Bush years are certainly distinguished by the fact that "patriots" were routinely granted license to ignore the law as long as the intended consequence was to advance the President's anti-Communist crusade. The law was routinely violated in the process, and blatant, illegal acts of terror targeted domestic dissidents at home, and entire countries, abroad. Clearly, the CIA deployment of mines in the harbours of Nicaragua was an illegal act of war, and it is not possible to ignore the fact that the Reagan administration routinely disrespected and disregarded the law. Moreover, the paranoid, Nixon assertion that "we will do whatever is necessary" to win World War III, is a clear reflection of the violent, ominous assault that was deployed, to "neutralize" any influential activist who did not think like Richard Nixon's patriots. In the final analysis, the deaths of the people that Nixon targeted were as predictable, as they were tragic. Clearly, The Real War that Nixon waged produced Real Casualties, and "patriots" like Richard Nixon and Bill Casey were directly responsible for slaughter. One of the premises of The Real War was that the need to win on the battlefield was as vital as the need to control the public opinion arena, and the compromise of every worthy American ideal was deemed to be acceptable. After Mark Chapman hammered the so-called final nail in "the coffin of the '60's", Richard Nixon had the audacity to write a book called The Real Peace, and he was so excited about it that he privately printed and distributed it to more than 100 government officials, journalists and friends, before it was published by Little, Brown & Co. Ronald Reagan was officially the President of the United States, but time evidently warped when Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger stood before a battery of microphones in Washington to brief reporters about their "brain-dead" vision for peace and democracy in Central America. Nixon had just finished testifying before Kissinger's National Bipartisan Commission on Central America (no, Kissinger was not Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State), and one can safely assume that like any predictable ideologue, Nixon simply disseminated propaganda. He certainly did not expose the inspiration behind The Real Peace: Did he get the idea to disparage the word "peace" before or after John Lennon was murdered? In retrospect, one can confidently state that Richard Nixon always targeted his enemies and he always managed to cover up the entire truth about his covert schemes, and since he rose to national prominence through successfully framing Alger Hiss, his positive track record bodes an ominous threat to all of his political enemies. It's all here: By the way Dawn, just a little reality check, but didn't Richard Nixon conclusively silence ALL of his targets -except for Teddie who escaped. Last time I checked, John Lennon was a serious target, didn't he try to deport him first?

I choose option 4. No need to waste your breath, that is obvious, Dawn.

Wasn't that Nixon's doing? here it is, a famous British barrister proved that John Lennon was murdered -yes, it was a conspiracy. Why do the Brits get it righter? Dawn, when you say "provacative" I think it's more than conclusive -it's beyond ANY shadow of a doubt. Maybe, lawyers like you have fuzzier standards.

Oh my God, you are not serious. Look, I am sure you will be able to produce all kinds of documents that Lyndon Johnson, Howard Hunt and other "experts" manufactured, to cover theis ASSES, but DON"T BE RIDICULOUS !!!! My God, these Elian Gonzalez-style fanatics are still operational ! Give it a rest, you can't even kill Castro and now, you want him to clean out your trash.

Is this for people who want to do further research or is that a silly question?

Okay, I'll put it another way. How can you possibly win the peace when Dick and rummie have managed to unite the world -against the US? I mean, look at the crowd in Spain, they're building bridges with the muslim community, isn't that a vital development?

Don't tell me, another conspiracy debunker? Didn't ya hear, the grassy knoll was packed. Still can't connect the dots? sorry, I'm only half serious -the Onion Rocks !

What about today's errors, the war in Iraq in particular, what is the CIA going to do about that. Oh, I know the Pentagon is supposed to be in charge, but there is no difference, in the 2nd, Bush Administration.

I have to say, I am surprised and disappointed by the lack of interest in Tom Clines on this message board. I hear that CIA planes are flying over Canada, are they coming to get me LOL !

A search on google indicates that numerous phases of intelligence gathering on the Castro government were carried out by the Special Group, as well as a multitude of plans to encourage revolt inside Cuba. Records reveal more than the widely researched Operation Mongoose. Included in this collection are many little-known U.S. plots formulated to bring down Castro’s regime. Moreover, since the Special Group’s initiatives failed to topple the Cuban government, don't you think they were itching for the opportunity to succeed at something, anything..................

I really think that this thread is far more significant than anything that you and I have discussed. Let that be the final word between us. A Harvard Law professor is far more capable, when it comes to unravelling the truth -even better than mat Wilson, who unravelled Nixon.

Are you all trying to avoid the substance of this thread. That's where all the real action is.

As you all know, I believe that Kennedy was murdered because he planned to end the Vietnam war, but that's not the point of this thread. I have been thinking of the current quagmire in Iraq, and I have come to believe that peace in Iraq will never be acieved until one of 2 things happens: A/ America withdraws. B/ America AND Israel forge a peaceful alliance with Iran. As long as the current administration and countries like Iran are at each others throats, Americas enemies, perceived or otherwise, will continue to find a way to prolong the war, because they fear that they are next. That's my opinion. Now I am not proposing an American withdrawl, I think it is too late for that. But I also think that if the US fails to build meaningful alliances, a Vietnam-style withdrawl may be forced again, and that is not desirable -in my opinion.

You have wasted a great deal of space, with nothing to say. Please read this piece by Dorothy Kilgallen and tell me what you really think. Then, we will be able to engage an intelligent conversation. The thing that i find most fascinating is that you all ignore substantive threads like the following, and you engage these childish pranks because you are starved for attention. Sounds like you are either immature, the truth upsets your political motivations, or you are paid, disinformation agents. That is certainly the only 3 possibilities here, uness of course, I am hopelessly insane and I don't realize it.

Tim, This is a key fact: "Since the disclosures of the Church Committee, the distinction between the Mafia and the CIA has been blurred, and should be understood to be blurred in fact. " You have to look at it on an individual basis. For example, Howard Hunt is former CIA and Robert Maheau is former FBI. I think former agents were typically used, to keep everything out of government records.

hey, you'd think a "high school" student like owens would be fascinated by the insight of Harvard Professor, why no comment?

I think this is silly: 'My take is that decisive clarification of the JFK assassination story resides in the government's hands, in those still-secret documents.' We can't even get the truth about Bush's National Guard duty, based on government documents. I think we already know as much of the truth as will ever be disclosed/

I don't really have enough time to try to understand your effort to be funny here. The only post that you have ever made which has been substantial, as far as I can see, is that Cold war analysis. It's difficult to communicate with people who are not consistent, try to make a contribution here because I typically ignore your attacks, so you have failed to make any impact here.