Douglas Caddy

[Deleted, posted in appropriate thread instead]

From the article: Taylor explained that he feels Gaetz should address the DUI charge in a public press conference, and he erected the billboard “because he’s (Gaetz) a Trump stooge and all around TreasonWeasel,” a term Taylor uses for Republicans who whine about the Russia investigation into Donald Trump. https://politicaltribune.org/city-in-florida-sent-matt-gaetz-a-clear-message-with-mugshot-billboard-2/?fbclid=IwAR10O-j56i5NfhDLObgkh5QyPmV09TrYY_ukttdghMIl1x1ucIN1lNlYuPw

Robert Kennedy, Jr. and Adam Schiff have different opinions about whether children should be vaccinated. They are united in their opposition to Trump.

Robert Kennedy, Jr. does not have kind words for Trump: https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/18/robert-f-kennedy-jr-trump-administration-discrediting-democracy/483628002/

This was posted last month:

John Newman posted the following on Facebook this afternoon: Well, I suppose it's not hard to believe, but here we go again. Yesterday, near the end of all the exhausting threads on Veciana, I encountered a post from Gavan McMahon. I responded, and, apparently, not satisfied, he posted another FB message to me today. As most of you know, I would rather not persist answering questions from people who have not read what I have published. I also prefer to keep what I have to say easy for everyone to see rather than at the tail end of a marathon thread. With that here goes: 1. Gavan McMahon to John Newman: Dr John Newman , thank you for your work. Can you tell me when you spoke to Mr Antonio Veciana about your findings that his Alpha 66 role was under the control of Army intelligence and not CIA? What was his response to the documents that you have identified and researched that connect his Alpha 66 reporting to Army intelligence? At the AARC conference in September 2014 Mr Antonio Veciana made his public admission about working for Mr David Atlee Phillips CIA and linkage to Lee Harvey Oswald. I note that you didn't ask Mr Veciana any questions at this presentation. It is clear that there was research back in 2014, and I would imagine well before then, that provided information that suggested Mr Veciana was working for Army Intelligence.Can you explain why you did not take take this opportunity at the 2014 AARC to question Mr Veciana about your findings? Or had you contacted Mr Veciana prior to his 2014 AARC presentation about your findings? I note that at the 2014 AARC Mr Bill Simpich asked Mr Veciana whether he worked with Army Intelligence as well as with Mr David Philips during a 'bazooka attack' to which Mr Veciana said no. I note that Mr Malcolm Blunt asked Mr Veciana at 2014 AARC about his role with Army Intelligence and reference to a working crypt DUP748 and Mr Veciana being connected to 902 Military Group. Mr Veciana then responds that he was approached by a Mr Patrick Harris Army Intelligence to assist and he provided assistance at that time. Mr Blunt asks Mr Veciana if he was working for Army intelligence and CIA which he states is illegal and Mr Veciana says no. Thank you. 2. John Newman to Gavan McMahon: Malcolm and Bill, who are very close friends of mine, asked the questions that were on my mind. In addition, other researchers I am in touch with (former investigators for the HSCA) interviewed Veciana afterward and posed the questions to him that I had. I would point out that Veciana is speaks in Spanish and is now getting on in years. I am sorry to report that I move at a very slow pace on important questions on this case; I also have a very conservative methodology that requires independent attestation in order to put something in the possible or probable columns. May I ask you if you have read the Veciana chapters in my most recent book, Volume III "Into the Storm"? 🙏 3. Gavan McMahon to John Newman, John, thank you for your response. I must say I am surprised that in the last 10 years you have chosen not to talk to Mr Veciana given he is a primary not secondary source. He was 86 at the 2014 AARC and 91 now, but it appears you are reluctant to make contact with him. I would have thought an exchange with Mr Veciana would help you sort information into possible or probable columns. Can you explain why you have chosen not to talk to Mr Veciana about your findings and his role. Can you also clarify what your questions to Mr Veciana at the 2014 AARC were (via the former HSCA investigators) and his responses to these. Can you confirm who the former HSCA investigators were that you engaged at the 2014 AARC. Dan Hardway? I have one more question please. Who was the member of the Warren Commission representing the military? I will follow your book reviews etc with a view to purchasing your work. 4. SO.....here were are now. Although something tells me Gavan McMahon will not let this go, this is my final response to him: John Newman to Gavan McMahon: Your post presupposes that I have “chosen” for ten years not to talk to Veciana. And there you are wrong. That is what happens when you get ahead of your skis. Although I have been publishing books on the Kennedy Presidency since 1992, you will not find anything under my name about Veciana until Volume III, “Into the Storm,” published in 2017. I did not take the opportunity to speak to Veciana at the 2014 AARC because, as I have already told you, what questions were on my mind existed only because of what I had learned from Malcolm Blunt, Bill Simpich, and Dan Hardway. Not long after that conference, however, Dan suggested to me that I look into Veciana’s story. When Veciana’s Book, “Trained to Kill,” was publisheded in 2017, Dan Hardway posted his own concerns on the AARC website: https://aarclibrary.org/a-professional-conspirator-questio…/ At the time my book “Into the Storm” was published, Dan, and another former HSCA investigator interviewed Veciana again and asked him many questions, including questions I had. Even with Spanish translation, the interview was difficult and did not go so well. That is all I will tell you about it. I am not in a position to share the contents of that interview with you because it was given to me privately. I suggest that you should contact Dan Hardway and ask him yourself. Better still, you could contact Veciana and ask to speak with him. If you want to ask him questions about what I have written, I respectfully suggest that you read what I have written before doing so. No matter what you decide to do, if your interview with Veciana takes place, I would be—as many others would be—interested if you would post the details publicly. I have only begun to process all of the existing information. That has been my research methodology for the last thirty years. I told you before that I work slowly. Besides witnessing Veciana’s performance in 2014 and reading his autobiography several times, I have three linear feet of documents on Veciana—including all of his interviews with Gaeton Fonzi, all of his interviews and depositions, and all of the long FBI interviews with Veciana’s associates and closest friends and much, much more. I am satisfied with the records we have. If you are not satisfied and think you can shed new light on Veciana’s activities from 1959 to 2017, please contact him. And please report back what you have discovered. I wish you well.✍️🙏 A PROFESSIONAL CONSPIRATOR: Questions About Antonio Veciana and His Book: Trained To Kill © 2017 Dan Hardway — 20 April, 2017 | It appears to me that Antonio Veciana has, once again, been less than forthcoming in connection with the Kennedy assassination. I will try to explain why but, first, I w... aarclibrary.org A PROFESSIONAL CONSPIRATOR: Questions About Antonio Veciana and His Book: Trained To Kill A PROFESSIONAL CONSPIRATOR: Questions About Antonio Veciana and His Book: Trained… A PROFESSIONAL

Jim DiEugenio and John Newman are both renowned scholars and are deservedly accorded the highest respect for their knowledge by all dedicated researchers interested in the Kennedy assassination. That there may be a major disagreement developing between them as to who was primarily responsible for the assassination of JFK is a healthy sign. The controversy could lead to a rebirth of interest in the topic by the academic community, mass media and public. As someone wrote on Facebook today about this development, "Wow! There is hot magna moving underneath the surface." What Jim and John do as well as the rest of us is to assure that the Eternal Flame never dies out because the JFK assassination as a watershed event is the key to understanding what has happened since 1963 and is happening to our world today.

This thread started off with a posting by John Newman on Facebook that read: This post is only ostensibly directed at Lisa Pease The details illustrate a perfect example of what I said yesterday: “So many have for so long been invested in an orthodoxy that it is only natural that it will take time for the change to take place. That is normal. That is the nature of orthodoxies when the time comes to overturn them. I am not interested in heated arguments and will not participate in them.” Clearly Newman is declaring that those with a vested interest in promoting an old orthodoxy that is being replaced by a new belief in who was primarily responsible for the assassination of JFK are in a form of denial and that "it is only natural that it will take time for the change of take place." This is Newman's opinion as articulated by him, not by me, although I agree with him

David Talbot wrote on Facebook today and yes it includes information about the assassination of JFK: This is a must-read article about how deep power secretly operates in America. Based on documents recently donated to Yale University, the papers reveal how David Rockefeller -- the chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and the personification of deep state intrigue -- used his Washington-Wall Street network to pressure President Jimmy Carter into letting the Shah of Iran into the United States. Two weeks after Carter did so against his better judgment, a mob stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran -- and relations between the two nations became so poisonous that they've never recovered. The influential network that David Rockefeller -- scion of the oil dynasty -- used to browbeat President Carter into submission reads like a who's who of the U.S. Deep State. It included former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a lifelong beneficiary of Rockefeller family sponsorship; former CIA director and U.S. ambassador to Iran, Richard Helms; banker-diplomat John McCloy, another Rockefeller retainer who could be found at the center of many deep state operations throughout the Cold War, including his tenure on the Warren Commission; and Archibald Roosevelt Jr., another Chase Manhattan-CIA hybrid whose cousin Kermit Roosevelt Jr. had orchestrated the infamous CIA-backed coup in Iran that had replaced a democratic government with the shah's autocratic rule. David Rockefeller, whose bank had reaped billions from financial transactions with the shah's regime, was eager to keep him happy after he was deposed by a popular revolt in 1979. Rockefeller and his clubby CIA-Wall Street circle even hoped to repeat its 1953 dark victory and reinstall the shah on his Peacock Throne. Rockefeller Inc. failed to reverse Iran's history but these deep state forces did succeed in toppling President Carter and replacing him with Ronald Reagan, with its own profound tragedies for America and the world. Rockefeller's elite circle ensured Carter's defeat in 1980 by making sure the president couldn't pull off an October Surprise and win the release of U.S. embassy hostages on the eve of the election. Although this NYT article doesn't tell this part of the story, the powerful espionage forces behind the Reagan campaign pulled off its own October Surprise -- engineering a secret, treasonous deal with representatives of Iran's new theocratic government. In return for delaying release of the hostages until after the November presidential election, Iran's mullahs were promised U.S. military aid. The subsequent Iran-Contra arms deal would blow up the Reagan administration years later. One other important observation about this dark episode in U.S. history -- and unsurprisingly this part of the story is also left out by the NY Times. Several of the principal characters in the shady shah operation are also implicated in the assassination of President Kennedy and its cover-up, including Helms and McCloy and even David Rockefeller himself. As I report in my book "The Devil's Chessboard," David and brother Nelson Rockefeller were closely aligned with the deeply sinister Dulles brothers. Many of Allen Dulles's "black ops" during his rule at the CIA were secretly funded by off-the-books Rockefeller money. The Rockefeller brothers were mortal enemies of President Kennedy -- especially his liberal reform policies in Latin America which the Rockefellers feared were endangering autocratic regimes in the region along with their family's oil and financial interests. Nelson Rockefeller, governor of New York at the time, was also hoping to replace Kennedy in the White House in 1964. There is evidence that Rockefeller money was secretly used to finance the assassination operation against JFK in Dallas. There's a crack in everything -- that's how the light gets in, as Leonard Cohen enlightened us. Today there's a crack of light in the Sunday Times. The fateful decision in 1979 to admit Mohammed Reza Pahlavi prompted the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran and helped doom the Carter presidency. About this website nytimes.com How a Chase Bank Chairman Helped the Deposed Shah of Iran Enter the U.S. The fateful decision in 1979 to admit Mohammed Reza Pahlavi prompted the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran and helped doom the Carter presidency. The fateful decision in 1979 to admit Mohammed

Pease is the protégé of Jim DiEugenio and always echoes what he promulgates. Since he is writing the script for Oliver Stone's JFK 2.0 it will be interesting to see if the script takes the CIA-Did-It theory or the Military-Did-It theory. A lot rides on the decision because Stone likely does not want his upcoming TV series to embrace an old orthodox theory of the assassination that is being brushed aside by new evidence discovered and compiled by John Newman about the paramount role of the Military in the killing of JFK.

https://larryhancock.wordpress.com/2019/12/22/jfk-at-risk-3/?fbclid=IwAR1bSOMvH3S3O-dPGIejjlqZ23ga-jCETzSae1RYCNM3qNhpJnyD9whwB1s

If I were a young university graduate student today and chose to write my thesis on the subject of a conspiracy in the assassination of President John Kennedy, I would be puzzled at what I found. I would discover that dedicated researchers for decades had promulgated that the CIA and its leaders Allen Dulles and James Angleton were the conspiracy’s principal decision makers and planners. That is up until now. Then I would find that a new belief is taking hold among these dedicated researchers, led by renowned scholar John Newman, that the old conspiracy theory was not correct, that everyone had been looking in the wrong direction for all these years, and that this required reorienting research efforts by 180 degrees. The real principal conspirators were in the U. S. Military, not the CIA, and the Pentagon had labored successfully to keep itself clear of the entire tragic saga. Chief among those Pentagon conspirators was General Lyman Lemnitzer, who served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1960 to 1962 and then as Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NAT0 from 1963 to 1969. As I continued to work on my thesis I would discover that President Kennedy was intrigued by a 1962 book titled, Seven Days in May, and had even made the White House available for filming to lend authenticity to the movie based on the book. The movie was released three months after JFK’s assassination. I would then read the book and view the movie that is about a military-political cabal’s planned takeover of the U.S. government in reaction to the president’s negotiation of a disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union. After that I would wait for the dust to settle among the dedicated researchers into the JFK assassination about this new controversial theory before I finished writing my graduate degree thesis.

The Inside Story of Christopher Steele’s Trump Dossier In a new book, the founders of the firm that compiled it defend their work. https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-inside-story-of-christopher-steeles-trump-dossier?fbclid=IwAR1VYdeDaNaPGS0OGq2HGgvdEwVN4VVdGshRQl7063TUP83lOP2DdyTX47I

John Newman posted the following on Facebook today: Well, the thread yesterday expanded into several that went on most of the day. Gene Koch, Lisa Peas and I actually ended up finishing on a thread Lisa had started at some point: John Newman Lisa Pease, Gene Koch It's far more complicated than you think. I can't go into all of the details in a FB post. I reported a lot of it in Dallas. Here is just a sliver of an overview about what was going on: Veciana didn't make up his the-CIA-was-behind-everything-in-62 caper until he ...got out of prison in 1976. (I'll have more of the details about this part of it in Vol IV). DURING 1962, Veciana was telling the truth; at that time, he was just like many of the exiles who hated working for the CIA because the Agency wanted total control and obedience. Lansdale actually was interested in keeping Veciana's covert Army channel secret and making it LOOK LIKE AV was working for the CIA and that is the reason the ISR switch to Army was not done until after the missile crisis was safely over. It was Lansdale (and Lemnitzer before him) who had labored to push JFK into a war in Cuba and wanted it to look like the orders for all of A-66 raids were coming from CIA [see the Lansdale-Veciana chart during the missile crisis that I posted], while sitting in the meetings with the president pretending not to know anything about it. It's even more complicated when you throw in what Harvey was up to at the same time--not just how to publicly play his cards on the A-66 raids but also what to do about Cubela--that TFW was recruiting at the same time. Hidden inside of all of this was yet another covert operation--a plan to murder the president and pin it on Castro, who would need to be alive, not dead, for the coverup to hold. I suspect that the idea of blaming JFK and especially RFK for the whole thing was also in train at this point (fall 1962). It's what took place in February 1976--the sudden early release of Veciana from the Atlanta Penitentiary--that allows us to unlock A) the misdirection to control the narrative of the unfolding congressional investigations gearing up then and to superimpose a similar misdirection on the last 14 months of Kennedy's life to help keep the Pentagon clear of the entire saga. Yes, and there were plenty of people at CIA [McCone was not one of them but Helms was] who were in favor of all of this--then and afterward. I'm still working on that.✍️🙏 Gene Koch John Newman Sam Halpern now even more interesting then. Thanks. Lisa Pease John Newman I really look forward to watching your presentation and catching up on your research - was so focused on RFK for a while I've fallen behind. Thanks, John! TODAY: That is where we will have to leave matters for now. A lot of new data has unfolded and is continuing to do so. I'll put up my Dallas presentation on my website when I get it.

Trump Retweets Article Which Names Alleged Whistleblower https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-retweets-article-which-names-alleged-whistleblower/

Ukraine Whistleblower’s Attorney Calls for Sen. Blackburn’s Resignation from Protection Caucus http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ukraine-whistleblowers-attorney-calls-for-sen-blackburns-resignation-from-protection-caucus/ar-BBYmNWi?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE07DHP From the article: Zaid, who has spent decades in Washington representing government employees against federal agencies, was specifically referencing comments Blackburn made last month regarding the whistleblower and Vindman. “Vindictive Vindman is the ‘whistleblower’s’ handler,” Blackburn tweeted just days after Vindman, the top Ukraine advisor on the National Security Council, publicly testified that he was so disturbed after hearing Trump’s conversation with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky that he immediately reported the call to the council’s top lawyer, John Eisenberg. Vindictive Vindman is the “whistleblower’s” handler. — Sen. Marsha Blackburn (@MarshaBlackburn) November 22, 2019 Blackburn was playing into the nonsensical conspiracy theory that Vindman — born in Ukraine before moving to the U.S. at age three and eventually receiving a Purple Heart for his service in Iraq — was not loyal to the United States. Republican House attorney Steve Castor was also criticized for spending a considerable amount of time questioning Vindman’s loyalty during his public testimony.

Robert Morrow today sent me the following invaluable information: Alfred Steinberg's 1968 book on Lyndon Johnson also has the best explanation of how we got into the Vietnam War that I have ever read too. After reading Steinberg on LBJ - published in 1968, I can say it is better than anything Robert Caro ever wrote on Lyndon Johnson. My Box account contains many extremely rare and valuable "out of print" books in PDF form on the JFK assassination. Some of them, such as the Billie Sol Estes book, you cannot find used for even $500. My Box account web link is below. Website to Download Rare and very Valuable JFK Assassination Books: https://app.box.com/s/8b408e6999f8799dfd0a Review by Willam B. Catton of Steinberg’s book: QUOTE If Lyndon Johnson’s enemies ever grow forgetful, Alfred Steinberg’s massive indictment – as large as the state of Texas, as wordy as its protagonist, and more self-assured then either – should prove helpful as a sort of Compleat Guide to the Sins of LBJ. The brisk narrative ranges exhaustively from Johnson’s Texas ancestors to his recent withdrawal from the 1968 campaign, with myriad glimpeses, filtered through dozens of far-from-disinterested memories of LBJ in action. Although the author’s tone is that of the honest reporter simply “telling it like it is,” the book is a sustained diatribe; the instrument employed for this “close up” was not the camera but the hatchet. Steinberg’s Johnson has been identified before: the brutal warmonger; the coarse, foul-tongued manipulator who lied, cozened, schemed, and pressured his way to the top with no commitments or beliefs beyond an insatiable lust for wealth and power; the opportunist who professed liberalism has always been fraudulent. His largely undeserved reputation as a political mastermind and legislative magician was built, like every other favorable image he has sought to create, upon the distortions of a fanatically cultivated press-agentry. “Sam Johnson’s boy,” Steinberg concludes, too inherently narrow and shallow to grow in office or succeed as a national leader, “could not become more than the President from Texas …. He failed to emerge as a President of the United States” (p. 839). The essential character traits accompanying all of this are those of a domineering bully, boor, and cynical hypocrite, with degrees of pettiness, vindictiveness, violent temper, and egomania that suggest derangement. Associates, inevitably, are either fellow corruptionists, lackeys or dupes. (The most pathetic figure in the book, consigned to both latter categories, is Hubert Humphrey.) UNQUOTE Robert Sherrill on Robert Caro’s attitude toward LBJ in his 1982 The Path to Power: hatred. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/1982/11/21/brash-young-man-in-a-hurry/e9ec7537-246b-4ccb-868e-19423cb42cec/ QUOTE And the main passion is hatred. Or, if not hatred, then contempt. Caro loathes Johnson. He despises him. If The Path to Power is a success, it will be because Caro has conveyed that feeling so infectiously. And in that success there will be a historic irony. When Caro talks of Johnson's "hunger for power in its most naked form, for power not to improve the lives of others, but to manipulate and dominate them, to bend them to his will"; when he says that "it was a hunger so fierce and consuming that no consideration of morality or ethics, no cost to himself -- or to anyone else -- could stand before it"; when he sounds repelled by Johnson's "utter ruthlessness" in destroying enemies and his "seemingly bottomless capacity for deceit, deception and betrayal"; when he notes that a hallmark of Johnson's career was "a lack of any consistent ideology or principle, in fact of any moral foundation whatsover -- a willingness to march with any ally who would help his personal advancement," one gets an overwhelming feeling of d,ejMa vu. We are hearing exactly the same accusations that were made a generation ago by left-wing Democrats in Texas, bitter from being crushed throughout the 1950s and 1960s by Johnson's forces, the same accusations made by right-wing Texans such as J. Evetts Haly in 1964 (A Texan Looks at Lyndon), infuriated by Johnson's pious destruction of Barry Goldwater. UNQUOTE

John Newman posted this on Facebook today: This post is only ostensibly directed at Lisa Pease The details illustrate a perfect example of what I said yesterday: “So many have for so long been invested in an orthodoxy that it is only natural that it will take time for the change to take place. That is normal. That is the nature of orthodoxies when the time comes to overturn them. I am not interested in heated arguments and will not participate in them.” On three separate occasions recently, Lisa has challenged my contention that Alpha 66 did not work for the CIA. Her posts were neither heated nor personal attacks. And so, I will do Lisa the honor of answering her objections—this time. Before I begin, I must point out that Lisa was not present for my 11/23/19 presentation in Dallas, and her various protests do not show evidence of having read the Veciana chapters in Volume III (“Into the Storm”). For example, Lisa said: “I’m curious why people are so convinced Alpha 66 had nothing to do with the CIA when it was the CIA telling the Army, State and FBI what Alpha 66 was up to. I brushed off Peter Dale Scott when he came to me with that.” The facts, however, do not show that the Alpha 66 group told the CIA what it was up to. OF COURSE, there were some members—most likely who had been previous and/or concurrent members of the MRP—who were CIA informants. The fact is that the head of Alpha 66, Antonio Veciana, told the Army that he lied to the CIA on the numerous occasions when they tried to learn about the plans of Alpha 66 (see document #6). I learned long ago not to brush off Peter Dale Scott without checking my facts VERY CAREFULLY. In Cuba, Veciana had been chief of sabotage for the CIA-backed People’s Revolutionary Party (MRP). But after he came to Miami, Veciana broke away from the CIA and founded Alpha 66 in Puerto Rico in May 1962. Shortly after that, in early July, the CIA station in San Juan “emphasized” that the Alpha 66 “project” was “not an MRP activity” but that its leader, Manuel Ray, had given Alpha 66 his “blessing.” (See document #0). A few days later, Task Force W, PA-PROP officer Martha Tharp informed the chief, William Harvey that there was “no record” in Veciana’s CIA file “whether he was ever used or established contact.” (See document #1) Lisa referenced a highly redacted document from the CIA’s reading room (https://www.cia.gov/.../readingroom/docs/DOC_0000386756.pdf) and argued that it does not support my “thesis.” You can see the document in full from the MFF site. (See document #2) In this case, a CIA source in San Juan received information from some senior Alpha 66 members—Geronimo Estevez and Alejandro Ojeda—about Alpha 66 activities. This does NOT undermine my contention that Alpha 66 did not work for the CIA. What this document and others like it (see documents #3, #4 and #5) clearly demonstrate is that Bill Harvey, who was the CIA’s chief for Operation Mongoose, was worried about what Alpha 66 was up to and, as a result, was broadcasting all of the details about the group in his possession to every agency in Washington. In fact, Harvey instructed the CIA stations in Puerto Rico and Panama City to contact their local OBIDEX (U.S. Army) contacts report on Alpha 66 activities (document #4). On 22 October 1962, a three-page overview of Alpha 66 and its activities from CIA Deputy Director of Plans, Dick Helms, was sent all over Washington. The message, which asked for information on Alpha 66, did not state or even hint that Alpha 66 worked for the CIA. (See document #7.) On 30 October 1962, in the intense heat of the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy ordered DCI McCone to “stop Alpha 66 actions during the next several days.” (See document #8). As McCone told his deputy (General Carter) later that same day, “The president was informed by the DCI we have no contact with or control over Alpha 66.” Nonplused, Kennedy told McCone try and stop them anyway! I am not going to continue to debate this subject. I have only scratched the tip of a much larger iceberg. I dropped a hint to Lisa earlier related to this subject (Alpha 66 working with the Army and Lansdale instead of the CIA) and how Bill Harvey might fit—disturbingly—into the picture behind the scene. It didn’t work and, at this point, it will have to await the publication of Volume IV (“Armageddon”). The four attached photos pertain to doc #1; docs #2, 3 and #4; #6; #8’ respectively. All these documents can be found on the MFF site: Document #0: 104-10181-10205 Document #1: 104-10181-10203 Document #2: 104-10181-10202 Document #3: 104-10181-10201 Document #4: 104-10181-10200 Document #5: 104-10181-10199 Document #6: 194-10003-10417 Document #7: 104-10181-10197 Document #8: 104-10306-10020

Two Prominent Scientists Describe Their Close Encounters https://www.unknowncountry.com/dreamland/dreamland-year-end-special-two-prominent-scientists-describe-their-close-encounters/

From the summary of last night's interview of UFO scholar Richard Dolan on coasttocoastam: Dolan also discussed a document purporting to be notes of a conversation with retired Navy Admiral Thomas Wilson in which he expressed frustration with being denied access to information about supposed UFO technology. Dolan said he has confirmed that the meeting took place and that Wilson was told by a private contractor that he did not have permission to access the information but that he was informed that "we will tell you this is E.T. related and that we have made painfully slow progress in understanding it." Dolan has concluded that, with regards to UFO information, that "the special access programs are all privatized." https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2019/12/21