Jim Hackett II

Allan:

OK this is news to me about Mr. David reconsidering his position.

I'll consider this, however I must run right now for prior commitments.

Back this evening most likely.

Thanks and Best Regards

Jim Hackett II

http://users2.ev1.net/~bobdeb/jfk2/media.html

A friend's media page:

I consider Mr. Scott Myers both a good friend and a VERY good researcher:

On this page at the top, first item is this introduction:

" Dennis David's speech at the Lancer 2001 banquet

Thank you Dennis not only for making this speech but for allowing me to put in on my web site for others to hear. This speech is very inspiring and I urge everyone to listen. Dennis gave some important news regarding the search for the man who killed Lt. Cdr. Pitzer. This news is a followup to the story related by both Dennis and Dan Marvin in part six of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy."

In the following space you will find a link to a real player file of Mr. Dennis David's speech.

This link should take you to a page to select the Real Player free download for your particular Op. Sys. if you need real player.

http://www.real.com/freeplayer/?rppr=rnwk

I would also note for the consideration of all that Mr. Scott Myers offers this file completely free of charge unlike some "researchers."

I was able to download the file by right clicking the link and saving the target. To listen later or archive it to my own "stacks."

I would let each person listen and decide for themselves about the sincerity of Mr. Dennis David.

I know my own opinion is made up about the issue and those surrounding this issue.

This however does not mean my mind is closed, only that I find some things very convincing and the refutation of this or that position will have to be convincing and strong.

FWIW

Jim Hackett II

Oh and I also find Mr. Marvin's book "Expendible Elite" quite truthful for my own reasons which I will not go into here.

Mr. Dennis David has stated that Mr. Pitzer was left-handed.

Good enough for me considering Mr. David knew the gentleman, worked with him and played bridge with him.

Pretty clear isn't it?

Jim Hackett II

Uh Well Gee John:

How can I react?

I'll order this book soonest, then I would have some questions for Larry to seek his opinion as it would seem we likely agree on most things and even if we don't, that is the means to finding new data sometimes. Given civil discourse.

After having perused the table of contents and preface at Lancer's site, I am impressed as the trend of thought seems to be near the things I want to know about.

Like David Morales with that subset of likely conspirators and so forth. And a heck of a lot more I bet.

Between Dick Russell's epic book TMWKTM, Bloody Treason and Larry's work I would bet the image of the real assassination is clear.

A thought keeps returning to my thinking: Fletcher Prouty is reported to have said when asked "who knew before?" "They all knew."

In the longview I prefer, the absence of the codeword level material on the Cabinet plane bound for Tokyo is a large statement, the traitorous actions of the highest Cabinet and JCS level of the US Government must be considered if not explained.

Who stood down the 112th Intelligence Group from doing their assigned duty to suppliment the Secret Service. This had to be Cabinet or Joint Chief of Staff level. No little group of conspirators playing around on the periphery of power centers.

Or the probability that if the shooter from the rear had made the head shot, the Zapruder film would have been on the evening news and Lee Oswald would have been executed in short order by the Texas Justice system, even if he were in the second floor lunchroom all along.

Sadly given the huge nature of the jigsaw puzzle we are left with by the 5 primary US Government based "investigations" all evidentiary rules must be applied to make reasonable estimates of what is credible and what is not.

I was very VERY impressed with this point made in Larry's preface. As I was when I read that near exact point made in Twyman's Bloody Treason.

I anticipate Larry's work being a central piece of the solution, along with the seminal works of Lifton and Weisberg and Fetzer for the on scene screw ups of the execution of the coup itself. And the long view of Russell and Scott and Twyman and Larry compliment the view from a distance to get past the short focus of the Dealy Plaza impressionist painting we are supposed to be drawn into. The smoke and mirrors thereof.

We are the only Jury the case will ever get and the rules of evidence will have to be learned if we all are really ever to function as that jury. No matter our personal opinion about the guilt of Lee Oswald, the "case" deserves no less, the validity of the US Government and it's implied "consent of the governed" DEMAND we function as jurors. Jurors are charged with judging the law and the conduct of the prosecution and enforcement agents of the legal system in most states along with adjudicating the "guilt and innocence" of any accused.

If more people knew that fact and applied it when in the jury box, the very top people of the "invisible government" would quake in fear of exposure.

The American Bar association won't tell citizens this fact, nor is it in the interests of the prosecutors or the "law enforcment empire."

This is a duty of the citizenry just like voting and conscription, IMHO, but those duties have been rendered meaningless to effectively eliminate the power of the people to seek redress of grievance. I have serious problems with conscription by jerks that avoided the draft or deserted in their own time of testing.

More than enough said I reckon.

Best to all

Jim

Very much intrigued. Very much determined to acquire this book.

Moreover because my own interest is the "people factor", meaning linkages and empowerment of people commonly known to interested people.

Given to that my feeble efforts to write focus on a "longview" of the trend of history from about 1930-2002. With the November Coup being a crucial watershed point in time. Not limited to a strictly U.S. History focus as so many parallel events overlap other nations too.

Indeed this will be money well spent I am sure.

Only Best Regards

Jim Hackett II

Larry:

THANK YOU VERY KINDLY for this information.

I hope only the BEST for and to Mr. Twyman.

And to yourself naturally,

OK Now "ya Dunit!" all doubt is removed and all haste is reinforced to get your book. <Grin>

Got my curiosity up.

By the way I find the local library doesn't have this book yet, so I recommended it for purchase, for what ever good that might do. ??

The staff is usually very good about keeping current on this topic. Pro and Con. As it should be to keep all good sources open. FWIW.

Again thank you.

Jim Hackett II

Larry (or Mr. Hancock as you would prefer):

You may rest assured that I too will get your book as it seems to be quite good. and a necessary addition to my library.

I too agree that I wish Mr. Twyman would put out a new edition of Bloody Treason or a BT 2.

I am sure from the quality and depth of his work in that volumn that it was a trying task to get written.

I would also compliment his efforts to keep the readers updated on errata and such.

If he cannot or doesn't do so, I am glad to have the book he did do.

I would encourage any curious people to read this book and it is too bad that it isn't more widely available, my local library had a copy so I knew I had to get it.

I may not have as big a bookself as some but darned if I don't find myself building another additonal shelf or two every few months.

Concerning Mr. Twyman, As he said in his book this whole issue can consume and keep consuming one's life until one learns to draw a line.

And I don't know this but I would "bet" that the contentions and "flame fests" can be quite discouraging. I mean writing a good book is not easy and it becomes an almost living thing breathing life force into a crafted creative effort can make it hard to listen to some tear apart your thinking and work.

Foolhardy it would be for me to say, "can't we all get along."

It is necessary for me to "take a break" from the research sometimes, just to maintain a life outside of the "Black Ops Era." For me anyway.

On the positive side, at the encouragement of my partner the last self imposed break lead to finally starting my own manuscript after about a 6 month break.

She is the one that saved all the books CDs and printouts etc. when I thought I had thrown them out in the trash.

One day a certain Mr. Gary Mack made me mad when I heard him say on TV that "We will never know now..."

Oh but to the contrary, we know more all the time these days, in spite of efforts to convince us that the WC solved the case 40 years ago. More is "known" and provable now than ever before.

In a week or three I'll get your book. And seek to get it added to the local library and/or reserve it so I can read it before I can afford it.

It is all too clear that some people have been talking about the conspiracy from even before it's culmination in Dallas.

Best to you and all

Jim Hackett II

To ALL:

The page Bernice linked to:

This page seems to me to be OH SO typical of McMadman Nolan, to attack persons and not deal with the work or research.

Also I find it typical that McNolan attacks a dead man that can't defend his work or himself.

In short McMadman is a punk.

The JFK case is just too important to "play" with or to indulge in meaningless stuff like his page does.

We can all get heated in discussion and that is good as it lends a critical review OF RESEARCH, but when it gets to put down of persons and such, What good can that do.

It is impossible to advance any case or research when this atmosphere poisons the exchange.

Or to take another tack on the idea, what did he prove or ably say about Thomas Wilson that was really fit for discussion? Very Little.

It is just disgusting.

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep..."--James Hepburn

Borrowed from another researcher for just this one post. Beg Pardon.

Best Regards to All

Jim Hackett II

Ms. Bernice:

I have to say your posts sure bring up thought provoking points and good ones!

I read Mr. O'Toole's book, but it is another one I intend to get.

I recall a study of Mr. Buell Wesley Frasier and the conclusion that he wasn't totally honest in his textimony. It fits with a few suspicions I have about the whole TSBD arena. They are only suspicions at this point or I would go deeper.

The whole thing of Ms. Paine and Mr. Paine for that matter and the TSBD job and the rest of the people associated with the TSBD just again create more questions than it answers.

I must go see the doctors today, too soon as time is short, but I had to relate the way my youngest brother recognized me when no one did until he did.

Little guy was 6 and I was 20. I'd been gone 6 months and had as I said undergone the most intense training I had up to that time.

I got off the plane and started into the then "insecure" jetway looking for my family actually my other brother as it was my plan to surprise my Momma and Pop, but my brother didn't keep the secret.

We all were looking for each other in the crowd, and I heard my youngest brother say there he is before I saw him.

That's my brother and I'll never forget even up to death, the little guy breaking under the velvet rope barrier and running to me. Made me again wish I didn't have a duty to do and could stay home and finish reading him the Hobbit.

Anyway it's one of those family moments worth more than gold or uncountable wealth. He grew good and well and made all us proud, but to me he will always be my little brother.

Oh and even when I was skinnied down by deployment a year or so later then every one knew me at once when I came home, but I was wrecked drinking from SF to home. Silly youth.

Now he is bigger than I am, but so is my other younger brother.

Oddly I find myself glad my brothers are now too old to be drafted and I find fear my nephews or nieces will be "drafted" today or in the near future.

No! they will not! Our family has done it's duty for three generations, let Jody's sons go this time.

Jody is a name from 30 years ago, used in the military to designate the Jody at home that stole your woman and had the good job you deserved when you came home to post war depressed economy.

Jody's kids can go this time, not this family.

Off to the docs: We are gonna be fine, no worries.

Best Regards:

Jim Hackett II

Lee:

Sir you raise important questions about what really went on on the knoll.

The knoll is IN MY OPINION one of many positions, one of the BEST shooting positions in the whole arena of Dealy Plaza.

I just wonder though if some ex military intelligence asset is not or hasn't laughed himself silly at all the confusion wrought from all the contradictions and open questions.

Not that we should let this idea halt our own inquiries, I just mean that the obfuscation and confusion is a concrete part of the after action cover ops.

As for identities of the shooters, I really hope that someday we can know but I doubt we ever will.

So many have been "offered" as nominated or confessed as it makes a huge list.

The two I have the least doubts about are Mr. Harrelson, because of anthropological examination/comparisons by many to include Mr. Gary Shaw, and Mr. Jack Lawrence because of his suspicious actions and disappearance in the days of and immediately after the MURDER.

I guess too my interest falls to the jerks that empowered the gunmen as I know hired guns can be hired at any time. The underlings know very little about the empowerment and top level of the plot, I think.

I would not discount the great points you make and I too think Jim Fetzer's books are very important. MDIP in particular, as it shreds the WCReport so completely and so convincingly.

Best Regards

Jim Hackett II

Hello Dixie!

Hope all well and will stay so.

Boy you sure intrique me with this post. But in a good way.

I reckon I can hold the suspense.

I too have the error you speak of I think, the old now where do I know that from?

Or why is that name familiar?

Did I read that in this one or that one or was it from an old newsletter from the

pre-internet days of handouts and on campus speaking things?

Hmmmm?

I once started to set up a database for my own use of incidents and quotes and passages, but it became more work and stopped my research.

Makes it all the more amazing when I think of the huge amounts of amassed info as for example Ms. Mary Ferrell had.

What once started for me as a half dozen books and a few memographed mailings from Ms. Mae Brussells has grown to the point for me that I wonder where did I have that....I know I've got that somewhere. And I do find "it" but sometimes it is hours or days or weeks later. Sometimes after I forget what I wanted to recall that data for.

Anyway Best to You Dixie and Terry and Larry and Bernice and all.

until next time

Jim Hackett II

I believe that the various features of Dealy Plaza have been moved and changed since fall 1963, and that it is provable that the infamous X that supposedly marks the position of the President at Z frame 313 is WRONG, I submit this page.

I pretty much agree with all it conveys.

http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/park/1097/storm.html

Also Tom Wilson's work supports this work also.

However this does not mean I don't accept the idea of mutiple other shooters on the grassy knoll too.

Jim Hackett II

Hello Bernice:

Yes that passage you relate from WC vols has entered my thinking many times.

Such an odd thing to say and revealing.

Doesn't anyone think it strange that the WC would go as far back as grade school, if the "case" were as strong as they implied it was.

I mean an awful lot of time was consumed to paint in the picture of Lee Oswald as a lone nut, and a malcontent.

A little diggin though shatters the mirror.

I have had doubts for decades about the presumed nature and character of this man.

Even his own half brother had some question. So I am in good company when even the man's half brother wonders.

Wonders?

"Well sir: The Lee Harvey Oswald I met in Nov. of 62 was not the Lee Harvey Oswald I had known years previous".”.page 62...WC Vol X1

This is a pretty direct and unambiguous staement.

" "How did he look to you physically as compared with when you had seen him last?"..Pic replied "I would never have recognized him ,sir....he was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn't have much hair...His face features were somewhat different, being his eyes were set back maybe, you know like in these army pictures, they looked different that (sic) I remembered him. His face was rounder. Marilyn had described him to me when he went into the Marine Corp as having a bull neck. This I didn't notice at all. "WC Vol XI. .page 62."

Clearly something was being said other than 'this is my brother.'

I would know my own brothers anywhere anytime even after being away for years as I was. They knew me and I knew them. As a matter of fact at the end of training my youngest brother recognized me before anyone else did, in spite of a change in size and a 70 pound weight gain as well as no hair etc.

And that there was no doubt about who was whom. Even old friends knew who was whom. Just bigger and yes bullnecked to be sure.

It wasn't Appearance that was recognized, it was mannerism and walk and the like, the things the military cannot train out, not even the USMC.

Some what as Jim Garrison said the Russian exam disclosed in the WC vols tripped his trigger, the Mr. John Pic quotes have grabbed me for years.

I don't know what was going on for sure with Mr. Pic, but I am sure that pictures of "Lee Oswald" are not all of the same person.

I also KNOW for sure that "Marxist malcontents" don't stay in the U.S. Marines and they DO NOT get Russian language training and do not EVER hold Crypto clearances. ONI by all appearances.

I must get John Armstrong's book.

Thanks Bernice

Jim Hackett II

Y'all mean McNolan might participate here?

I won't hold my breath. And Mr Perry?

Again I doubt it, but if so it could prove interesting and quite heated.

I'd have to stay out of that one as my understanding is that McMadman pays to get his site found in google searches at the top of the lists.

The agenda of some is clear and serves something other than truth in my opinion.

Agreement is not an issue, but integrity is.

Allow a short digression:

As the best "social studies" teacher I ever had said: I don't care what position you take but be prepared to defend it with truth and reality. A real terror on essay eams though, she meant DEFEND your position. A real gift as good teachers are and under paid to be sure.

She got fired for exposing the CIA operations of the 40s and 50s to secure their "slendid little war in asia" in 1968. Some people thought she was "causing" the young people to "drop out." When it was the lies of Washington D.C. that was doing that. And that odd thing the Geneva Accord to hold elections that we never did honor. Was that a "state secret"?

The only way to thank as teacher like that is to practice what she taught.

I can easily respect one that thinks other than I do, if they can defend their view in an honest and respectful manner and that they grant my right to disagree as I do to them. That is their right to think and decide for themselves.

Jim Hackett II

For now I'll keep my opnion of John "McNolan" McAdams to myself and under my roof. It is not favorable though.

OK I broke my word...

But I had to say I did not intend to "short change" Ms. Meagher. Not by any stretch of the thought. Nor most of the early workers of truth and exposure.

General Penn Jones Jr. to be sure...but Forgive My Grief series can be very hard to find, let alone the Continuing Inquiry issues. I only have part of them.

And others I inadvertently left out.

The two books that turned my thinking around in 68 were Six Seconds in Dallas and Rush To Judgement. These readings led me into the WCR with a skeptical mind and that single act alone stopped the deception.

I like some others I know had my hopes and heartbroken by the castration of the HSCA in the late 1970s. Another great "chance" lost to the control of the intelligence empires releasing only enough to make the presentable appearance that a "job was done", when the facts are again that "we wuz had! Again"!

I left the whole mess for a while, until about 1990.

So yes it's been an off and on thing in my life.

Rex Bradford's History Matters site is FANTASTIC.

I cannot afford to buy the CDs from the site, so I DL'ed the PDF files.

All interested people ought to read the Garrison Grand Jury testimony and Trial transcripts to see what was Garrison's case. As far as I know the Garrison material is available only there -- online that is.

Without that site I would be without the Garrison material

In fact I consider it to be the ultimate site for the WCR and Vols.

I have a slight problem with Manchester though, I use his other history works, but his JFK material is not what I would recommend.

He got to the witnesses before the WC and knows more than he wrote, JE Hoover implied as much in his internal documents to and from Divisions 5 & 6.

IT IS MY OPINION that a lot of the "EARLY CONSPIRACY" works are better than most of the newer ones. If for no other reason than they are closer to the primary sources. Yes the early works must be seen through the later knowledge.

However I try to keep in mind the words of Bill Newman's and the Willis' Family as they were there and did not mince words about what they saw.

And Ms. Jean Hill - God rest her soul.

Supplemented by the ARRB documents, as well as works by SOME authors a clear picture emerges.

But we as concerned citizens should not stop there, many revealing documents are released to include a document from the Western Cartridge Company concerning the lot and order data of the ammo presumed to be Lee Oswald's.

This gem is found in the FOIA and NARA "haystack".

Again in my opinion the "haystack" nature of the latest ARRB releases are not mistakes nor is it's "haystack" nature accidental.

The Dec 2 '63 letter from Western Cartridge Company to the F.B.I is clear and demonstrates a cover up even in December '63.

It out right and plainly states that according to Western Cartridge Company records the ammo order (for the empty cartridges found in the supposed sniper's nest) was placed by the USMC and speculates that the order may have been placed as covert cover for a CIA order as NO USMC weapon ever could chamber or fire the rounds.

Stunning don't we think?

It is much MUCH more than a simple conspiracy of LBJ and JE Hoover.

Much more than Ed Clark and Mac Wallace.

John Newman's books are by me considered to be primary sources of reality, as I also place high value on Jim Garrison's On the Trail of the Assassins, moreover after I bought William Davy's Let Justice Be Done. For the "big threat" to this democracy even Garrison's Heritage of Stone lays it out.

As for Mr. Harold Weisberg, some take his style as crusty and angry and argumentative, I take his "way of thinking" as passion for the Republic. Something I value highly.

I agree with no author totally, as is a given when one commits to thinking for one's self.

In most cases it is the "baby with the bath water" syndrome, care must be taken when "picking and choosing" from source books and even documents. As with all history and the study thereof, consideration must be given to the time and perspective and or "slant" of the author and or sources in the case of released documents.

I would be remiss if I didn't point out the error of allowing any government to investigate itself or parts of the government.

Every single "investigation" has been as case of the government covering it's behind. From the WCReport to the report of the ARRB.

In effect the ARRB functioned as cover - up. Again!

Why has every single empowered investigative body been representative of the Military/Intelligence/Industrial/Government Complex?

I know that ordinary Americans value honesty and loyalty so; Why can't a group of common working class citizens be empowered to open the hidden dark tombs of secrets? The citizenry can and would I think sort and redact "sources and methods" in an honest way having integrity and truth.

It is central that ONLY the INDEPENDENT RESEARCHER has EVER given truth in this matter. The FOIA suits and digging of private citizens has been more productive than all the numerous investigations and "reports". As Dr. Cyril Wecht said the WCReport should be relegated to the shelves of fiction beside Tom Sawyer where it belongs.

However as long as liars like Posner and deceptive Reports like those that have gone out over the signatures of Earl Warren and Robert Blakey stand as REPRESENTING truth, it makes all the more CRUCIAL for the independent researchers to keep digging.

As for books I intend to get Mr. Armstrong's Harvey and Lee is on my list. I also eagerly await Mr. Doug Horne's and Mr. Phil Melanson's upcoming releases.

In closing I would be quite clear in stating my own opinion that the MURDER of Jack Kennedy was no quick Texas two step brought about by LBJ and JE Hoover and a few other people.

Never a case of two "lone nuts" altering the nature and direction of the American government.

The WCReport too has only two truths in it from cover to cover: Jack Kennedy was shot on Elm Street in Dallas Texas on November 22, 1963 and that he died.

An exaggeration? Maybe but not by much. As Harold Weisberg told me long, long ago, the WCReport is only a whitewash.

In short as a couple of people I respect said: Not that man, not with that junk weapon and not from there.

Sincerely

Jim Hackett II

I knew I forgot some.

FWIW:

Dick Russell's The Man Who Knew Too Much...positively

Peter Dale Scott:

Deep Politics 1 and 2 and 3

The Dallas Conspiracy

I understand Deep Pol 1 is available but 2 and 3 are harder to find.

Dallas Conspiracy too is worth tracking down I think it is only available in manuscript form as is Beyond Conspiracy to my knowledge.

William Turner and Warren Hinckle's Deadly Secrets is good for JM Wave and some other connections to the plot.

Harvey and Lee is on my list to get soon.

I'll make this my last entry in this thread, because I know a list of my opinion of books worth having would become nearly endless.

But as I said Posner and the like would be no where on that list, I read it out of the local library and it was a waste of my time, IMHO.

Jim Hackett II

Just my opinion:

1) Bloody Treason/Noel Twyman

2) The Assassinations/Lisa Pease and Jim DiEugenio

3) Murder In Dealy Plaza and Assassination Science/EDITED by Dr. Fetzer

4) Let Justice Be Done/William Davy

5) All of Fletcher Prouty's works [Prouty CD by Len Osanic]

6) Anything by Harold Weisberg

7) Best Evidence/ David Lifton

8) ANYTHING BUT Case Closed/ Gerald Posnoccio

FWIW

Lists are funny things, something always gets left out and remembered later.

My focus isn't so much on who fired what from where, but more the long view of who empowered the killers and who dropped the Official Cover-Up over the whole criminal enterprise.

And who keeps the censorship in place today.

I did vote for David Lifton's Best Evidence in the poll above, because of the role it played in breaking new ground and getting some new people thinking about the case in 1980 81.

Jim Hackett II

It doesn't take much reading of Dallek to figure out his version of history is edited.

In particular the premise he promotes in his book and on TV that Jack Kennedy was ill and going to die anyway.

Not in those words, but that is the image he projects. It seems not to be accidental.

In the end the people are harder to fool than captive audiences.

Great "teachers" promote the idea of one doing one's own evaluation and thinking, and being able to back up any position taken. As opposed to dictation of any one view.

The people know and see through the current of agenda, knowing the "flaws" of a human being do not discount the reality of policy and politics.

We went through a decade of "historians" refuting the premis of Oliver Stone's JFK film, that Jack Kennedy was going to withdraw from Vietnam. Then in the passage of time and the release of documents it is clear now that Stone was correct and the "historians" wrong again.

In the end the people that refuted the idea that Vietnam was NOT Kennedy's war had to eat their words.

But where are the apologies for getting it wrong?

They seem to not see any need to apologize.

To me the episode above reinforces the idea of people needing to examine data and testimony for themselves and develop primary sources, or at a minimum to return to the primary sources when possible. In short to insist on doing our own thinking.

FWIW.

Jim Hackett II

This topic is surely thought provoking.

And one thing is certainly clear from it, that there are many more things that are known than the majority of people think. The majority of folks that haven't bothered to do a little digging for themselves, that is.

I had reservations about somethings, but I know now I must get Mr. Larry Hancock's book. It is the whole issue of JM Wave and the like that I have no doubts any longer about. It ties directly to a segment of my own research and William Harvey and actions I would speculate about in the year or so before the assassination. More later, IF I can move it out of speculation and confirm with a witness to this person's actions of 62 and early 63.

But somethings are not speculative, the President did fall victim to violent death, and the plotters who ever they maybe benefitted from extreme efforts to hide their identity and connections.

It is no stretch to say that enough is known to come to valid conclusions about the nature of the conspiracy that culminated in the murder and it's attending cover-up.

Indeed some would have talked, they have done so almost from the very day of the Coup.

Jim Hackett II