James DiEugenio

Love these really curious readers who digest and fully understand the work before commenting. Just do some geometry and physics and figure out how high in the air those lines extend and then how long they appear on the film. Then ask yourself, as she does: Can that really be cavitation at work? Or as Mili wrote and FC ignores: "If exploding brain creates massive holes—and we know JFK had a massive hole at the top of his head extending into the right rear—then how could exploding brain appear as two long, rather straight, slender lines?"

A lot of this information is interesting. But there are a couple of mistakes. John says he does not know if Ted Cruz dad was named Miguel. Cruz' father is named Rafael not Miguel. That picture at 8:37 is Shaw, it might be Ferrie, but it is not Oswald. The Federal Reserve Order was not what people say it was. It was only a technical correction. But Kennedy was trying to loosen up the flow of money, bypassing the Fed, through his currency comptroller James Saxon. If Garrison told John that LBJ reversed Kennedy's Indochina policy within 48 hours that is amazing. Because that did not come out until many years later. And according to John Judge's mother, who worked at the Pentagon, the order to crank up troop deployments did come through very quickly after JFK's death. I was not aware of that one. Where are these files going to be held at? Baylor? Rex Bradford?

What is one to make of the fact that Obama did nothing, but Trump is at least investigating the case? Obama was such a disappointment.

PB: For what reason would they do that? Because if Oswald was not there then that means someone impersonated him, and a false trail was then set up to conceal that. Since almost all the info about MC came from the CIA, if this was exposed, then this would be incriminating of them. The reason they would do the charade would be to place LHO in contact with the Cubans and Russians before the assassination.

These are some good ideas, I wish you guys were on the committee.

Thanks Evan, and also be open to new information and a different point of view.

Milicent Cranor is one of the best we have on the ballistics and medical evidence. Glad to have her at Kennedys and King.com She is one of the most original and interesting writers we have. Here she is on: What the heck are those white lines in the Zapruder film? https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/bullet-trails-on-the-zapruder-film?fbclid=IwAR3iDbtsGIu6C-gDeT3KLqremhcdNtYQGLgiXDR9EBTt6IwZsO7ITe3cNkM

IMO, one of the worst aspects of Moldea's book and a point I really took him apart on was his protection and excuses for Cesar. With the latest research by Lisa and Von Pragg, Cesar was likely not the sole assassin. But for Moldea to pull the stunt he did to try and get him off was pretty much beyond the pale.

Yes, there will be approaches to congress first. Plus there are a few lawyers involved--Alcorn, Schnapf, Krieg, Simpich--who can then approach DOJ. I have proposed trying to get to the newest and most progressive members of the House. Especially AOC and Pressley. Senator Robert Kennedy would have been at home with both of them.

According to Stone, he did not have one gun at his home nor does he have a permit to carry one. Which would have been pretty easy for the FBI to check on. The idea that they needed the huge surprise raid is also undermined by the fact that he has been under electronic surveillance for two years. When I read the indictment I think of FBI agent Strzok's testimony before congress, the most valuable five words to come from that circus: Collusion is not a crime. This is why I think almost all the charges in the bill come from after the election and from Stone's testimony before congress. I should add one last point. And I am not saying this is relevant to the case, because I do not think it is. Both Corsi and Stone wrote books advocating conspiracy in the JFK case.

Len Osanic will have a program on the Lennon case in the future. Tom Jackman of the Washington Post just ran a story on the Truth and Reconcilation Committee. Hopefully the LA Times and NY Times will follow. If you can believe it the NY Times actually suggested such a thing for the JFK case back in the late nineties.

I have never thought very much of Moldea as an author. But his book on RFK was exceedingly bad. He got really PO'd at me when that critique came out. But I have a funny feeling that John Hunt is going to beat him up even worse in his posthumous book.

Ray: You never read Moldea's book. Towards the end, he tries to explain that whole thing away with one of the most wild, bizarre scenarios that I ever read. I spent several pages breaking it apart and showing how absurd it was in The Assassinations. I concluded that if one had to go to these lengths then it proved the contrary to what the author was proposing.

But Cory that was just very smart reporting, right? The other things is, as I read the indictment, it does not say that the whole Wikileaks alleged association was part of the actual indictment, it says that was something Stone was not forthcoming about.

I really don't fully comprehend this. I mean to send a SWAT team to arrest a guy who is a 66 year old writer? And they already had his email communications. The only way I see this being relevant to what Mueller is supposed to be after is that he will contend that Assange got the e mail communications from the Russians and then Bannon wanted Stone to get them from Assange. Is that it?

I never heard of either one of those. Am I glad I started this thread.

Cory, Duck Duck Go works as well as Google? You are speaking from experience I assume? Because Yahoo does not.

But Joe, how many people did that? And being a writer you know that the longer the text the harder it is too manage and to find a through line. Which is important in keeping the reader's attention. I want John to sell as many books as he can. He does not have Caro's built in publicity machine since he is not in bed with the MSM

Speaking of which, we now have a special section on Congo and the murder of Hammarksjold up at K and K. https://kennedysandking.com/articles/the-murder-of-hammarskjold I have always felt this was disgracefully ignored by the research community. In these article we give the reader both the gestalt overview of the Congo conflict, which was enormous in scope and also had large ramifications, plus the research on Hammarskjold's murder. If you do not have a good background on this, read here. If you are interested in what happened to JFK, then you should be interested in this.

Unfortunately, there is no Kindle version yet. I guess when Amazon collapsed Crate Space into Kindle there is now a problem with the process. BTW, if I was advising John, I would tell him to stick to five volumes. Please do not do six. You want people to read the thing don't you? Its the same problem I had with Doug Horne.

Thanks Steve, that is even better.

To answer Steve: I have come to the conclusion over time that JFK was not killed for any one specific reason e.g. Cuba, Vietnam, monetary policy etc. I now believe today he was killed for the whole panoply of policies but especially what he was doing with is foreign policy in the Third World. And I see Cuba and Vietnam as extensions of that. To David: Again, I am talking about Hammarskjold. Which is what this thread is about.

Thanks for that Micah. I did not even know that browser existed. It looks good.

From one of the best news sites out there, the late Bob Parry's Consortium News https://consortiumnews.com/2019/01/18/narrative-control-firm-targeting-alternative-media/ When one combines this with what I have heard about what Google is doing with their search engine, its kind of discouraging. I heard about this from Russ Baker and I then tested it. I did a four part series on the Kennedys and Civil Rights. If you punch that rubric into Bing or Yahoo, it will come up on the first page 2-3 times. If you punch it into Google, it comes up once. Maybe this is why? https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/dec/20/googles-earth-how-the-tech-giant-is-helping-the-state-spy-on-us There is a war on for the space between your ears. And these guys will try anything to win. As Thomas Jefferson said, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

He is referring to the man who said it not the reply. Somebody hollered out the window and say: "Where is your rider?" And to your recollection, Frazier says, "I dropped him off at the building." How did you talk with those people at KFC? Sign language? BTW, Davey does this a lot, that is, he distorts the original testimony with all kinds of tricks, breaking it up, enlarging certain parts to make them central, when they are not etc. Like I said, he is the equivalent of a cardsharp.