Gene Kelly

Jim: In response to the "Garrisonism" comment, I found this interchange from Greg Doudna's interview of John Curington in March 2018 to be telling, as far as an agenda is concerned: GD: What about Garrison, in Louisiana? JC: Well, he came in our office. He became a big pest. I imagine I talked to him maybe twenty-five or thirty times. He had nothing to hang his hat on. Of course, he was always trying to get a little money. And Mr. Hunt, as far as I know, never let him have a nickel. GD: He was asking Hunt for money? For what? JC: to help build his case. GD: How’s the money going to help build his case? JC: Well, you have to have traveling expenses. You have to—and he’s on a limited budget with the DA’s office—you know he was just an attorney there. GD: But he suspected Hunt. How is he asking a suspect for money? JC: Well, I never got that feeling in talking to him. Mr. Hunt may have met him a time or two, but he’d step into my office, when Garrison came in. GD: So, Garrison was seeking extra funds for the investigation? JC: Yeah. He was seeking funds to help him on the investigation. Of course, as a district attorney, you know, you have certain things available to you, but if Garrison could pick up ten thousand here, or twenty thousand there, he wouldn’t be averse to it, no. Garrison wanted to make a name for himself, and he didn’t care whose toes he stepped on to do it there. And he got laughed out of the courtroom. GD: OK. Thank you, Mr. Curington. Curington reappeared in 2018, publishing memoirs of his time with H. L. Hunt, co-written by one Mitchel Whittington who has stated that he makes his living writing regional books about history, folklore, and the supernatural. One review of the book calls it a 'pious fiction', and had this to say: The reader will be disappointed with lacking first-hand sourcing, as this is just another of those books. Even though warned by other reviews, it reads like an old Classic Tales comic book and/or Cliffs Notes pamphlet. There is a constant feeling of the all-encompassing phrase 'believe me when I tell you' lingering about the shallow text. If you consider Hunt and/or Murchison Jr were likely involved with "the deed" itself, you'd best look for other writings in which their names appear with "Momo" and "Bulldog" because this appears as frosting without a cake or vice versa. The author almost apologetically warns you, early and later vaguely, of his haphazard inferences. The book does not jibe with known facts; he has written a pious fiction. In 1975, Curington was convicted of mail fraud in connection with embezzlement schemes, and received a probated sentence, with no jail time. Joan Mellen analyzed Curington's June 1977 National Enquirer story in Our Man in Haiti and characterized it as disinformation history. Casing the Dallas Police station, the night before Oswald was killed by Ruby, and the alleged Hunt meeting with Marina Oswald, appear far-fetched, and not to be taken seriously ... and are consistent with the title/content of this thread (i.e., incredible allegations). Gene

Jim I try to avoid acrimonious debates with other posters and want to give Greg (and others) the benefit of the doubt, plus learn what I can from their posts. That said, it's a red flag for me that anyone would try to exonerate or defend the Paines - on any level, for any assertion - as they stand out to me as treasonous and criminal, just as they stood put to Vincent Salandria. I am a Philly guy, and Vince Salandria is one of the true heroes of the search for truth in Kennedy's murder. The Paines have Philadelphia roots and backstories that hit close to home for me. Michael and Ruth were married in Philadelphia in 1957, and they lived in Paoli (nearby where I attended college). Ruth moved in with Michael at the Arthur Young farm in Paoli, where the couple remained until the summer of 1959. Ruth later took a job as the Principal of the Greene Street Friends School. in the Germantown section of Philadelphia. Whenever I drive past these familiar locations, I can't help but think about these two evil individuals, which still chills me to this day. It's also a big red flag for me when someone tries to discredit you, as I very much respect your work and opinions. Gene

Greg I don't have a position (or interest) in whether Ruth was performing surveillance of "leftists" (i.e., Cuban sympathizers). More to the point, during his March 1964 Warren testimony, Michael Paine made a comment to Commission Counsel Wesley Liebeler that Oswald had a certain “business to do” keeping track of various groups. It's unclear from his statement whether this was a slip of the truth or if he was fabricating to incriminate Oswald. However, Liebeler didn't follow up on this curious comment. So, it's possible that the metal file cabinets (and what was inside of them) was simply one more piece of incriminating evidence against Oswald. Or maybe it was Michael who was surveilling Mr. LIEBELER - Were you at the house on Saturday? November 9th? Mr. PAINE - I was at the house probably on Saturday and certainly on Sunday. I think that weekend I remember stepping over him as he sat in front of the TV, stepping past, one of these things laying on the floor and thinking to myself for a person who has a business to do he certainly can waste the time. By business I mean some kind of activity and keeping track of right-wing causes and left-wing causes or something. I supposed that he spent his time as I would be inclined to spend more of my time if I had it, trying to sense the pulse of various groups in the Dallas area. Hoover appears to have been annoyed by Ruth's frankness. After certain comments she made to the press complaining about leaks of her testimony, Hoover sent a memo to the FBI Dallas Field Office urging them to reprimand her. Michael Paine appears to be an "actor" and disingenuous ... an avowed pacifist, who worked for Bell Helicopter. You provided information labelled as "Update on the Ruth Paine metal file boxes-- important" (emphasis added) that included the FBI comment that Ruth was a sincere Quaker who believed in God. I do not think that has anything to do with what was in those filing cabinets, who was compiling it, and what it was being used for. I am not interested in cross-examining Jim DiEugenio ... nor being cross-examined by you. Gene

Greg Are we then left with this? "It should further be noted that several metal cases of correspondence of Ruth Paine's were inadvertently taken by the Dallas Police Department on November 22, 1963, under the mistaken impression that they were correspondence of Lee Oswald's. This correspondence was examined by Special Agents Ronald E. Brinkley, Ben S. Harrison, and Leland D. Stephens. This correspondence was examined again on December 5, 1963, by Special Agents James P. Hosty, Jr., and Warren C. De Brueys at the Dallas Police Property Room. This correspondence reflected that Mrs. Ruth Hyde Paine is apparently a sincere Quaker and believes in God. Mrs. Paine, in one letter, made a statement that we should help Latin America to prevent Latin America from becoming Communist controlled. This correspondence also showed that Ruth Paine was concerned with aiding persons less fortunate than herself." Suely, you don't believe this simple but misleading FBI characterization. The Paines were certainly not a coincidental accident of history ... I see nothing coincidental whatsoever about them. As Vincent Salandria once remarked, they are "beacons" that light the way to the people behind the murder of John Kennedy. And they were very predicably used by Allen Dulles and his cabal: "Once one recognizes the Kennedy assassination as a conspiracy, one must conclude that the Paines had been carefully selected by the U.S. intelligence services to fulfill their important functions. Probability theory, a branch of mathematics, dictates that the invaluable work of the Paines, which served to incriminate Oswald as the assassin, and to frame him, could not have been left by the conspirators to happenstance. One cannot rationally attribute to happenstance the cause of the series of actions of the Paines, which served to impute guilt to Oswald. Such a conclusion defies the axioms and logic of probability theory. So, the Paines were a necessary part of the conspiracy to kill Kennedy and to frame Oswald. It also necessarily follows that since the Paines had been assigned their roles by the assassins, the Paines could serve as beacons showing the way to identify the conspirators who had selected them. If there was true justice in this case, Ruth and Michael Paine would be indicted rather than treated as victims, and truth, if not justice, will be better served”. I've posted on this topic previously, mostly in response to the diatribes of Paul Trejo. Your long posts and logic seem to follow a similar pattern. Here are ten reasons not to proceed with Ruth's beatification: The Paines moved from Pennsylvania to Irving Texas (where Marguerite lived) the same September 1959 week that Oswald left his mother and defected. When Oswald returned to Dallas in 1962, the Paines were still there ... as though they were waiting for him. Lee and Marina randomly meet the Paines at the Glover White Russian party. When the enigmatic George de Mohrenschildt left for Haiti, Ruth and Michael stepped-in as his "benefactors" ... almost as a hand-off to the Paines. The Oswalds move in with them for nothing more than Russian language tutoring - to better learn Russian - in order to teach at St. Mark's School to one lone sign-up student. Both the Paines and the Oswalds maintain separate residences from their respective spouses ... serving to obfuscate any future examination of links or associations. Michael and Ruth conveniently separate (ostensibly for cruel treatment) but remain amicable; Mike watching over Lee, while Ruth watches over Marina. ut the assassination somehow reunited the Paines, and Michael moved back in with Ruth. Two babysitters whose marriage ends in 1971. Ruth appears on the scene to whisk Marina away whenever Oswald has somewhere important to go (e.g., New Orleans, Mexico City). Ruth's visits to the Neely Street apartment coincide with the same days the rifle and revolver are ordered/shipped. Obtaining the critical/timely job for Oswald at the TSBD via a random conversation with a neighbor. Marina Oswald was cut off from Ruth Paine within days of the assassination ... advised by the Secret Service to stay away from Ruth because “she was sympathizing with the CIA.” In her New Orleans grand jury testimony, Marina stated: “Seems like she (Ruth) had friends over there and it would be bad for me if people find out a connection between me and Ruth and CIA.” Damming evidence against Oswald flowing exclusively from the Paine garage (e.g., backyard photographs, Kleins order, radical magazines, Mexican bus ticket). Their incredulous lack of knowledge of a rifle (early on) followed by their certain knowledge of its storage/discovery in their garage. The incriminating Walker shooting note found in a book sent to Marina (after the assassination). Ruth later claimed that she gave a great deal of thought to Oswald's alleged plot to kill Walker - how he had cased and photographed Walker's house while planning the murder - which to her, was proof that Oswald acted alone, and that he had shown he had the means and the desire to kill a public figure. The mysterious Minox camera, which the FBI changed the property invoice description as a "Minox light meter". Two months later, the FBI allegedly picked up a Minox camera from Michael Paine described as rusty and inoperable. Paine said in a television interview that the camera had been returned to him by the FBI in the summer of 1964; and that his apartment was burglarized and all of his camera equipment, including his Minox camera, was subsequently lost. No one was more instrumental in making the ersatz case against Oswald than the Paines. The Paines are the most quoted testimony in the Warren Commission record (over 6,000 questions) ... no one is even a close second (in the witness chair for a combined nine days). They were the "darlings" of the Warren Commission. And Allen Dulles was 'helpful' to Ruth Paine's testimony on more than one occasion. Each time her Russian language tutor is mentioned, Dulles headed off the line of questioning by asking something else before Ruth can answer. When the Commission finally did get around to asking Ruth Paine about her Russian language tutor, Dulles was conveniently absent from the hearings that day. They are characterized as an average middle-class religious couple who just happened to associate with a Marxist assassin and his Russian wife. most accommodating to the Oswalds before November 22nd; but highly incriminating for Lee afterwards. A virtuous Quaker -Unitarian couple who belonged to the ACLU (ideologically liberal) but did nothing to help Oswald with legal assistance after the assassination. To the contrary, they performed skillful/scripted character assassination of the alleged lone-nut assassin. For the following 30 years, they remain untouched (i.e., HSCA, ARRB), untainted (albeit with income tax returns classified) and under-investigated I hesitate to wade into this thread, but any absolution of the Paines is a hot button for me. Frankly, it insults my intelligence. I could've added more facts and examples, but ten seemed enough. And to quote Ian Fleming, once is happenstance, twice is coincidence ... three times is enemy action. Gene

Paul I have not read any of Adamson's work. I had never heard of him until digging into the Zapruder affiliations. It turns out that Adamson knows quite a bit about George de Mohrenschildt and has authored a 10-volume treatise on him called "Oswald's Closest Friend". A 2004 Reno News article summarizing the Art Bell/George Noory radio show “Coast to Coast,” Adamson states that he became obsessed with De Mohrenschildt in 1992, after reading his 240-page Warren testimony. He contacted the West Palm Beach Sheriff’s office in 1992 and obtained a copy of De Mohrenschildt's personal phone book for genealogical research. One of the volumes is titled "Allen Dulles' Paine Must be Let Luce (Oswald's Closest Friend: The George De Mohrenschildt Story, Volume 6). Another volume is about George's brother, Dimitri, entitled "The Very First Cold Warrior: Dimitri Von Mohrenschildt" who died in 2002 at the age of 100. One of the book reviews states the following: Dimitri founded the Russian Review while he worked for the OSS and was instrumental in the promotion of the CIA's Radio Free Europe. William H. Chamberlin, a conservative columnist for the Wall Street Journal, was Dimitri's close friend and allegedly instructed Allen Dulles on how to shape the Warren Commission. Adamson describes himself as a historian and self-taught genealogist who graduated in 1985 from Santa Monica City College majoring in real estate and was a postal worker for several years. He was briefly a member of the EF in 2005 where he described his self-published books. There is an interesting EF thread in December 2011 about George de Mohrenschildt's "suicide" that gets into the Larry Flynt story and involves Adamson. His style and content come across as unorthodox, and much of his focus is on George Bush, Allen Dulles and The Dallas Council on World Affairs. Adamson's interviews have been over the phone, as he is apparently reticent about having his likeness put on TV or in print (a picture is attached). Gene

Ron For starters, there is an EF Thread begun in November 2009 entitled "Abraham Zapruder and Jeanne LeGon". It contains some very interesting facts and comments about Abraham Zapruder and his affiliations. In the news clippings and TV footage, Zapruder is seen with a masonic pin on his lapel. A Freemasonry website states that Zapruder was an Inspector-General (33rd degree) of the Scottish Rite. He was also an active member of the Dallas Council on World Affairs and The Crusade for a Free Europe, CIA-backed domestic groups in Dallas whose membership included some notable figures including George DeMohrenschildt. The Baron's wife, Jeanne LeGon, worked with Abraham Zapruder at a clothing company called Nardis of Dallas (owned by Bernard Gold). The timeframes are This information is sourced from a January 2000 article in The Fourth Decade by Harrison Edward Livingstone, and also from author Bruce Adamson who stated that Zapruder and LeGon worked "side by side" at Nardis (in 1953-54) - corroborated by several individuals who worked there - and documented in his book "The de Mohrenschildt Story". He confirmed that Zapruder's obituary mis-stated the year of Zapruder's departure from Nardis as 1949 ... when it was really 1959. As you piece all of these coincidences together, it seems that Le Gon and Zapruder were not simply seamstress and tailor. Originally named Eugenia Fomenko, Jeanne LeGon (later Jeanne de Mohrenschildt) first moved to Dallas in 1953 where she was employed by Nardis Sportswear. In April 1954 she relocated to California but returned to Dallas where she met George de Mohrenschildt. She divorced her then husband (who complained to the FBI that she was a communist spy) and later married George ... apparently the same year that Zapruder formed his own company called "Jennifer Juniors". Jeanne testified before the Warren Commission: Mr. Jenner: All right. Now, eventually, you reached Texas. How did that happen? Mrs. DE MOHRENSCHILDT. Well, my daughter had asthma. She is a very allergic child. And her health was really terrible. In spite of all the care given to her, she just could not stand the New York climate. And our family doctor said the only way to save her--she was getting really sick from antibiotics and penicillin--is to change the climate. So, I was very anxious to change the climate going to California, that was my aim. But I could not reach California. Mr. Gold, of Nardis Sportswear in New York, wanted to open a suit department. And, of course, the buyers did know me all over the country--the same buyers--recommended to get in touch with me and engage me. And it was pretty good. It was $20,000 a year, plus two trips to Europe, with expenses paid, and about $7,000 to buy the models--you just cannot go in and look at the shows. I went to Texas in 1953, I believe. Mr. Jenner: Did your husband accompany you? Mrs. DE MOHRENSCHILDT. I came in the summer, and then I had to go immediately to Europe. And he came over in the fall, when my daughter returned from camp. He came over in the fall, and then shipped all the furniture. In the meanwhile, I stayed with the Golds. They have a very big mansion. Harrison Livingstone, in Killing Kennedy (1995), maintained that Zapruder was directed to go to the Plaza in order to film that day, but does not state by whom, other than possibly hinting at his co-partner, Erwin (Irwin) Schwartz. No firm proof on this point was furnished, beyond the suspicious delayed return of Schwartz to the Dal-Tex office of Zapruder at about 2:00 PM. Schwartz, alleged to have had mob ties and a friend with Jack Ruby, took an active role in the subsequent negotiations of the film rights. Zapruder was born in the Ukraine in 1905 and emigrated to the U.S. in 1920 where he worked for a dress manufacturer in New York. He moved to Dallas in 1941 and worked for Nardis, a local clothing manufacturer. In 1959, Zapruder started his own company which he called "Jennifer Juniors" which occupied the 4th and 5th floors of the Dal-Tex Building across the street from the TSBD. Zapruder was a dress manufacturer and wholesaler outlet representative for the New York company, Jennifer Juniors (or Jennifer of Dallas), although Livingstone and other authors dispute the legitimacy of this company as it existed at the Dal-Tex Building. It has been alleged that Jennifer Juniors vacated its premises at Dal-Tex Building by the end of 1964 and filed for bankruptcy. Zapruder was a member of the Temple Emanu-El Congregation. He died in 1970 from stomach cancer. Gene

Ron: Thanks for creating this thread and summarizing the complex story of the Zapruder film. As with many subtopics in the assassination, it's difficult to wade through and is passionately debated on both sides of the alteration "fence". Dino Brugioni and Doug Horne are (imho) credible and compelling witnesses to the factual evidence. Like other controversial assassination subtopics (e.g., Oswald, the Paine's, the autopsy), the film's provenance and handling are simply fishy. In fact, there's something 'off' about Zapruder himself, and how his film came to be the centerpiece, that I cannot wrap my arms around (call it an instinct) ... but that's a more difficult two-beer discussion. Some speculate that that the additional sum of $100,000 that Time Inc. agreed to pay Zapruder the following Monday, in a new contract was in reality “hush money,” in exchange for his silence for the change in image content. Why on earth would authorities allow a media conglomerate to purchase the exclusive print rights for such an important piece of evidence? And yet that happened the very next morning, less than twenty-four hours after the assassination ... and then the film is kept from the public for the next 12 years. The renegotiated contract (highly unusual) gave Time the motion picture rights which it did not acquire in the first contract on Saturday, but - after paying the considerable amount - Time never commercially exhibited the Zapruder film as a motion picture. Further, the payments to Zapruder were made in $25,000 increments, after the first of every year, through 1968. Suppression of evidence and very fishy indeed. You make several very good points, including the fact that experts have examined the extant film digitally, frame by frame in high resolution, and every one of them conclude that the film is not only an altered film, but a badly altered film. The following comment can be found on Jefferson Morley's website: A chunk of the footage is literally just dropped without explanation; the motion blur doesn’t match from frame-to-frame; the image is zoomed-in and cropped down to remove everything in front of the limo during the kill shots: a big sign appears and blocks everything (without obeying physics). The entire film has the image resolution of a child’s watercolor painting ... it does not compare to a professional 35mm Hollywood effects job. Besides what is obviously missing on the extant film (e.g., additional frames of the head shot, Jackie's reactions, the limousine stop), I would add the following to the list: The differences between the “Brugioni” NPIC event (Saturday evening) and the “McMahon” NPIC event (Sunday evening) call into question the true chain-of-custody of the Zapruder film the weekend of the assassination. Richard Stolley’s recollection that the original film went to LIFE’s printing plant in Chicago on Saturday for immediate processing, warrants reexamination. The original was most likely diverted after it arrived in Chicago and sent to D.C., arriving at NPIC at about 10 PM (per Dino Brugioni’s recollection). The 8 mm camera original was apparently flown to Hawkeye Works early Sunday morning, after enlargement prints had been made for the McCone briefing boards. The CIA’s lab technicians would have had most of the day to remove whatever was objectionable in the film, as well as to add the painted-on exit wound consistent with the enlarged, altered head wound depicted in the autopsy photos. Brugioni, during his 2009 interviews, recalled that the Secret Service agents who arrived with the film at NPIC on November 23rd, and who directed the analysis of the film, paid particular attention to the portion which showed the limousine just ahead of the Stemmons sign, its subsequent disappearance behind the sign, and then the frames after it reappeared. Captain Sands, NPIC’s Deputy Director, called in Homer McMahon and Ben Hunter to perform the work required by “Bill Smith” of the Secret Service, who then forbade both McMahon and Hunter from discussing their work with any of their NPIC colleagues (including Brugioni). The fact that the same work crew was not used on Sunday night reveals that a covert compartmentalized operation was afoot. A 1975 CIA presentation on the NPIC analysis (to the Rockefeller Commission) - replete with sketchy dates and little documentation - appears to have been a conscious decision to obscure the NPIC analysis. The CIA summary implies that NPIC relied on timing/frame numbers printed in LIFE Magazine, deflecting attention away from the actual analysis done, and to the Secret Service’s supposed sole responsibility for any analysis. The documents that came out of the Belin-Rockefeller investigation of the CIA show that the agency did not begin its study of the movie until after photographs had appeared in LIFE. The NPIC analysis had effectively disappeared from the record. The only “documentation” that the Zapruder film was in Rochester at Hawkeyeworks are the six interviews conducted by the ARRB staff (by David Horne and others) with Homer McMahon and Ben Hunter. Most compelling, McMahon, during his 1990s ARRB interviews, stated that it was his impression that JFK reacted to "6 to 8 shots fired from at least three directions". I have attached some pictures taken a few years back while visiting Rochester that (at least for me) create a sinister feeling about the Hawkeyeworks location ... what possible valid reason would there be to send the film there that weekend, other than for alteration and coverup? Gene

David I logged-in and saw your note. Sandy correctly references the Mallon article, which contains the following quote: Marguerite Oswald, who speculated that the assassination had been a government-sponsored "mercy killing," and who thought that her son, like J.F.K., deserved a burial at Arlington National Cemetery, showed up one day in 1964 at 2515 West Fifth Street and asked to take photographs "for the historical record." Ruth obliged, even if Mrs. Oswald "was not friendly, I would say." Marguerite left the house within minutes. Among the annotations to Ruth's testimony in Marguerite's copy of the Warren Commission transcripts — preserved at Texas Christian University with a ragbag of her other papers — one finds the following reflections: "The proud and perfect Quaker . . . I keep saying she is a fraud and xxxx. She is evil, and selfish and the cause of it all. I would wipe up the floor with her." Even Ruth, so devoid of mockery, now has trouble taking Marguerite Oswald, who died in 1981, with complete seriousness: "She was a trip." Gene

Doug Quite the story. I can't imagine why Sturgis (raised in Philadelphia) would "confess" to Cardinal Cooke but - if it was provided as part of a formal Catholic confessional (which is a sacrament) - then it cannot be revealed. This is called “the sacramental seal,” which is inviolable by Church dogma. The priest cannot be compelled by law to disclose a person’s confession. So, I have reason to doubt this sensational story. Furthermore, I also cannot imagine a senior church official like a Cardinal taking this man's "confession". The timing of the alleged confession in 1971 is also interesting, as its a year before the Watergate burglary, and during the time that Sturgis was deeply involved in Operation Chaos undermining of anti-Vietnam War protests and other (illegal) domestic activities (i.e., dirty tricks). Sturgis later served 13 months of a 4-year sentence for the Watergate burglary and was released in January 1974, while being denied a pardon by President Carter. In 1977, he sued the CREEP, alleging that the burglars had been misled into thinking they were acting with government sanction. Sturgis gave quite a lot of very public interviews during those days. Frank Fiorini changed his name to Frank Anthony Sturgis early in life, adopting the surname of his stepfather. Notably, his new name resembled that of 'Hank Sturgis', the fictional hero of Howard Hunt's 1949 novel, Bimini Run, whose life parallels Frank Sturgis' life from 1942 to 1949. Ironically, Fiorini lived in a section of Philadelphia called Germantown, a few blocks from where Ruth Paine worked at a Quaker Friends School. He attended a public high school. I'm not sure that Frank was what is called a 'practicing' Catholic. Sturgis and Marita Lorentz spread false stories and disinformation about the assassination, with little or no evidence to support their allegations. I am unsure of what to make of the NYPD Detective Rothstein, who took Sturgis into custody for an alleged 'sanctioned CIA murder' of Lorenz. In an interview with the New York Post after he posted bail, Sturgis said that he believed communist agents had pressured Lorenz into making the accusations against him. The charges against Sturgis were dropped after the prosecutor told the judge that his office found no evidence of coercion. The Village Voice described Sturgis and Lorenz as "two of the most notoriously unreliable sources in America". After Hunt's death in 2007, his sons made public his so-called deathbed confessions (another dubious "confession"). In an April 2007 issue of Rolling Stone Magazine, St. John Hunt detailed a number of individuals purported to be implicated in the assassination by his father ... including Sturgis. I can't envision Howard throwing Frank under the bus, but it makes for good tabloid sensationalism. Gene

This was really good Michaleen ... thanks for sharing. If you think about it, his first JFK movie accomplished the unthinkable ... it prompted the ARRB and Records Act, particularly given the Administration in power at the time. That's quite an accomplishment ... Stone's movie truly touched a national nerve. He summarizes the Review Board nicely - an investigation conducted from 1994-1998 that most interested parties don't fully appreciate, as it didn't get the press coverage that it deserved -as having the power to declassify files, and the power to call witnesses back, many of whom provided testimony that didn't match what was said earlier. They called new witnesses also, but unfortunately couldn't get very far because they were blocked by the CIA and other agencies. It appears as though they (the ubiquitous "they") didn't really want to know who killed John Kennedy. As to why the government has been slow to releases the remaining records, Stone provides insight: "I think they were shocked that we were able to piece together [a lot] from these files that they released, 60,000 pages or so," the director says. "People like [former Assassination Records Review Board member] Doug Horne really went through the material and understood its implications." Stone also characterizes Jim Garrison fairly (and succinctly) ... and while he lost the Shaw trial and thus failed, he kept searching for the truth. Garrison therefore gave us an opening into the autopsy, and he unveiled the Zapruder film. As Oliver states: without those key pieces of the story, you can't build a case. Gene

What I have liked about Stone's commentary is that it is balanced and unemotional. This demeanor is very convincing and adds to the legitimacy of what we see/hear. If one comes off with too much passion or emotion, viewers and listeners read into that negatively. Keeping your cool, almost in a dispassionate sense, is very effective at getting a controversial point across ... especially to those less studied in the intricacies of the case, or on the fence as far as their belief in a cabal or larger scheme. That said, I think Jim D. would complement Oliver's presence nicely (my analogy would be the color commentator on sports broadcasts, such as Tony Romo does so well on NFL games). Jim could speak with authority on those aspects that Oliver's defers to him. In the documentary, Stone provides limited commentary (almost in an understated way), and effectively lets the facts and the witnesses speak for themselves. I believe that viewers have found that tactic to be compelling. You raise a good point about avoiding a discursive dialogue which could wander all over the place. This is a trap that is easy to fall into with a story as convoluted and controversial as the JFK case.

Ron: FWIW, Smerconish has been a popular talk show host in Philadelpha for quite a while. In my experience, he has always been a breath of fresh. He's a Philly guy, so I have some bias here. I would bet that - if we were to educate him about the JFK case - he would come around and acknowledge the truth. It's a shame that he accepts the Posner rubbish, but it shows how deeply embedded the MSM mantra has become. Smerconish was born in Doylestown, Pennsylvania and graduated from Central Bucks High School West, a high school near where I live. He received a degree from Lehigh and his JD from the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Smerconish had a close relationship with the Democratic Mayor of Philadelphia, Frank Rizzo. In 1986, he was involved in Senator Arlen Specter's re-election win. He is also of counsel to the Philadelphia law firm of Kline & Specter. He has urged the Republican Party to pursue "moderation on social issues in order to advance a suburban agenda for the GOP". In 2010, he announced in a newspaper column that he had left the Republican Party. He describes himself as a talk show host who was a lawyer (vice a lawyer who is a talk show host.) Philadelphia Magazine named him the City's best talk show host in 2004. When in 2007, MSNBC fired Don Imus for a racial slur, Smerconish was guest host, and his role then became one of appearing daily with Tamron Hall, host of News Nation, and as a guest host of Hardball for five years. In early 2014, Smerconish left MSNBC broadcast on CNN Saturdays at 9:00 am ET. He also writes a Sunday column in The Philadelphia Inquirer. He argues the Republican party today does not resemble the one he joined in 1980, largely due to politicians taking cues from the media. Gene

Tracy I'm also thinking you've made a good point. One document (classified, and finally released 57 years later) doesn't mean it's the "ground truth". What's clearer to me now is that this is linked to the Odio visit, that there were two Oswald's of interest (Lee and Leon), and that Nagell's story is a very credible and important contribution. CIA was playing the FBI and had Hoover over a barrel with all of this, as the name Oswald became radioactive to all parties. I sure wish that we could see what was in Win Scott's safe, which Angleton quickly stole/hid. Gene

The document is interesting as it states he entered (apparently by car) on the 26th (a Thursday), and he then does the embassy visits (Friday and Saturday), talks to the infamous Kostikov (allegedly a "wet works" specialist) on October 1st, and then drives back to Laredo a week later (on 10/3). But it doesn't insinuate or mention that he had companions or was accompanied by anyone. Plus, our patsy LHO apparently didn't drive ... so it could've been Leon. It would be good to compare these logistics with those offered by Richard Nagell, who observed/interacted with LHO and two companions in Mexico. Compare the best estimate date given for the Silvia Odio visit (Wednesday 9/25) ... with a call back by Leopoldo on Friday, emphasizing the gun, "loco", JFK animosity, Bay of Pigs etc. It fits (although it's quite a lot of driving). What particularly stands out and strikes me is that the Odio visitors emphasized several times that they were "going on a trip". In that context, it all seems to be a setup, as a legend is being created. I have also come to view the FBI's actions (and subsequent stories) as an effort to protect their reputation - not necessarily to assist in the assassination - as this was also painting Hoover into a corner (if we believe that LHO was being run by the FBI). Hoover and FBI are being blackmailed and cannot allow LHO to be painted as their agent, meeting with the bad guys ... so they obfuscate and produce disinformation, to dissociate themselves from Oswald. It also seems a transparent effort to implicate and discredit Manolo Ray and JURE (via Silvia), as they had to know she would relay this information to her father. Now Manolo has culpable knowledge or Mens Rea. He too is being set up. And it strongly appears that the Soviets (and Cubans) were also being set up and blackmailed. No wonder Nagell had orders to inform and/or eliminate Oswald (and that he had himself arrested). It's a wonder he lasted another 30 years (Nagell died from 'heart disease' on November 1, 1995, in Los Angeles, one day after the ARRB had sent him a letter asking for information). Pretty slick psychological operation (by someone who knew just how all of this works). Gene

Studying the Odio incident - and identifying the two visitors who accompanied Oswald - is an important piece of evidence in the plot. Ms. Odio was targeted for a reason ... the dots that I would connect are with Manolo Ray (and CIA's rejection of his JURE leadership. I really like Larry's conclusion articulated in his "Tipping Point" analyses: In the end, we can only speculate that the Odio incident may have been a sanctioned counterintelligence dangle against JURE, possibly using JMWAVE assets associated with DRE (initially the visitors had asked for Syrita Odio, a college student with DRE friends). Several such individuals, including Carlos Hernandez, were still being used in JMWAVE activities at that point in time – Carlos and others had even been sent overseas to help disrupt a recent international student conference. However, if that were true, it would add an interesting twist to the report of Lee Oswald with Hernandez, attempting to buy rifles from Robert McKeown in approximately the same time frame as that reported for the Odio contact. It's very interesting that the two individuals who had approached Oswald in New Orleans were exiles known personally to Richard Case Nagell (all the way back to Mexico City). Further, John Martino knew that they were exiles playing at being Castro agents, corroborating Nagell in a general sense as to their role playing. The ostensible goal of the Odio visit was to solicit letters referencing JURE (signed by a JURE member with high level ties to Ray). If such letters were planted along with a patsy after the assassination, they could have been used to associate a Cuban-sponsored assassin with JURE ... considered an adversary by CIA. Net result, get rid of Castro, get back into Cuba, eliminate JURE and Ray as a contender for power in a "free" Cuba. But Sylvia didn't buy it ... she thought the visitors were suspicious, perhaps Castro agents. The follow-up phone call after the visit would still have served to tie Oswald with possible Cuban agents, if Sylvia had gone to the FBI or Police the afternoon of Nov. 22. The patsy was being sheep-dipped, and he didn't seem to appreciate why. I'd speculate that the September visit to Odio was also intended to incriminate or discredit Ray and his movement as well (and perhaps tie them along with Castro to the pending JFK murder). It has all the earmarks (and sloppiness) of the duplicitous Howard Hunt and David Phillips.

Jim I watched the documentary this weekend, and it was excellent. In a case as convoluted and complex as JFK, you distilled the key aspects expertly. No one knows the ins/outs of the JFK case better than you. As I watched it, it felt like a visual summary of all the great posts that you've shared with us thru the years, along with the well-researched Destiny Betrayed material. What casual viewers will never know is how much noise and disinformation one must wade through to get at the ground truth. I was proud to see your exclusive credit at the end: "written by James DiEugenio" ... I say proud, because I told everyone within earshot that I trade posts with you on the EF. My friends - whom I have been trying for years to get interested in the facts - paid you and Oliver the simplest and best compliment by summarizing the film in one word: "compelling" Kudos, and looking forward to the full-length version. Gene

I am a fan of Joan Mellen, although she has some stubborn notions about certain topics. However, I am not a fan of Phil Nelson's work, nor his conjectures about LBJ. And his criticism of Mellen's writing style seems vindictive and over the top ... can we take seriously a retired property-casualty insurance agent commenting on a university professor who teaches creative writing? Here is how Joseph Green described Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book in a 2013 Kennedy's and King article: Phillip F. Nelson with a sizable work on the subject, wanting to go further than anyone has before. His view of Johnson is comparable to Sherlock Holmes’s description of Professor Moriarty: “He is the Napoleon of crime … He sits motionless like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations, and he knows very well every quiver of each of them.” To put us back on track - or at least address Jim and David's comments about Allan Eaglesham and Pitzer - there is also an enlightening discussion thread on the EF ("William Bruce Pitzer") begun on May 9, 2004 with comments from Allan, who debates Wim Dankbaar and JVB. A guest named "Dangerous Dan" (purportedly Marvin himself) also participates. The entire debate goes on for several months, with ad hominem attacks by Dankbaar, nonsensical comments by JVB, and a debate about the left-handed/right-handed aspect (Allan points out that Pizer played golf right-handed). Notably, Mrs. Pitzer pursued the autopsy report after being influenced by author Harrison Livingstone. Jerrol Custer's credibility is questioned, including the fact that he told William Law that Pitzer's right hand was congenitally deformed. Also, he appears to have overstated his familiarity with Chief Pitzer ... he asserted to William Law that he knew Pitzer well, which was inconsistent with his statement to the ARRB in October 1997. Eaglesham backed off in 1995 with his efforts to get the case reopened because - having learned of Pitzer's extramarital affair - he was sensitive to the repercussions for Mrs. Pizer if all that it proved was that he had committed suicide. A 2011 article by John Kays entitled "Can We Rely on Eaglesham’s Proof, LCDR William B. Pitzer Died from Suicide?" states the following: Allan Eaglesham had initially believed in a homicide argument for Lieutenant Commander William B. Pitzer’s mysterious death, on October 29, 1966. A great deal of investigation into Pitzer’s death unpeeled the layers of mythical conspiracy (for Eaglesham), and brought him to the shores of logic. Eaglesham couldn’t back everything out of the ‘conspiracy parking lot.’ The most auspicious tidbit that Eaglesham couldn’t repudiate is what Lt. Col. Dan Marvin told the camera for Episode 6. Dan Marvin was contracted by the CIA to kill Pitzer, but eventually turned it down. Gene

I saw the Airplane in November 1968 at The Electric Factory in Philadelphia. To put it mildly, she had an irreverent and dynamic stage personality. After 1972, they split into two groups: Jorma Kaukonen and Jack Casady moved on full-time to their own band, Hot Tuna. Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, and the remaining members of Jefferson Airplane recruited new members and regrouped as Jefferson Starship in 1974, eventually adding Marty Balin. Here is what Grace said about creating White Rabbit: The song is a little dark. It’s not saying everything’s going to be wonderful. The Red Queen is shouting “off with her head” and the “White Knight is talking backwards”. Lewis Carroll was looking at how things are run and the people who rule us. All fairytales that are read to little girls feature a Prince Charming who comes and saves them. But Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland did not ... Alice was on her own, and she was in a very strange place, but she kept on going and she followed her curiosity – that’s the White Rabbit. A lot of women could have taken a message from that story about how you can push your own agenda. The 1960s resembled Wonderland for me. Like Alice, I met all kinds of strange characters, but I was comfortable with it. I wrote White Rabbit on a red upright piano that cost me about $50. It had eight or 10 keys missing, but that was OK because I could hear in my head the notes that weren’t there.

Jim Nigel Turner's series (TMWKK) caught a lot of people's imagination at the time (mine included) and was good television. Unfortunately, many of the "stories" go nowhere, when you earnestly explore them. They become distractions that harm the credibility of legitimate investigation, tantamount to disinformation. These sensational anecdotes (mainly narrated by Gary Mack and Robert Groden) sent many interested readers down disappointing rabbit holes (e.g., McClellan, the Wallace fingerprint, Corsican assassins and the French Connection, Pitzer's suicide and Daniel Marvin, JVB's affair with LHO, Madeleine Brown and the Murchison meeting, LBJ and his confidant Billie Sol Estes, Liggett the mortician from hell, sewer shooters, Charles V. Harrelson and The Tramps, Badgeman and Gordon Arnold, the prescient Joseph Milteer, et al). All of it reminds me of the Jefferson Airplane song "White Rabbit": Go ask Alice When she's ten feet tall. And if you go chasing rabbits And you know you're going to fall, Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar Has given you the call. Call Alice When she was just small. When the men on the chessboard Get up and tell you where to go Nigel Turner was censured by the British Parliament, and there was an attempt to revoke Central Television’s franchise based on making inaccurate broadcasts in British law. The Turner series ultimately set the legitimate JFK research community back or at least confused the playing field considerably (imho). It also served to give those who seek the true story a bad name, and served as grist for conspiracy theorist critics. Historian Stanley Kutler describer the series thus: Their work is a parody of assassination theories and beliefs; surely, this is history as a joke the living play on the dead. Such programs reflect our desperate desire to embrace a conspiracy rather than the crucial question of truth. Assassination conspiracy theories and books expounding them proliferate. But film is special. A conjurer's sleight-of-hand and verbal misdirection are ready ingredients for manipulating a mass audience. Some viewers saw TMWKK as a public relations success for the research community, with impact analogous to Oliver Stones JFK in that it revived interest in the case. On the positive side of the ledger, it exposed some interesting evidence and prompted viewers to question the facts versus blindly accepting the official narrative. Some interpreted the red herrings contained within TMWKK as disinformation, a mix of fact and fiction intended to cloud/confuse. Stated differently, far-fetched ideas draw outlandish personalities, thus leading the public further away from the truth. Others had mixed feelings about the series. John Simkin for one stated that the series contained some fascinating interviews, albeit far too subjective, characterizing it as more like tabloid journalism than historical accounts. He also made the point that the series lacks a political dimension (e.g., the connections between the assassination and JFK's foreign policy) which surely resonates today. Gene

The picture below is a person of interest ... one who got away. Wonder where he ended up? I doubt that he went to prison for 50 years. Michael Wayne (real name Wien) was a twenty-one-year-old from England who professed to be of Jewish background, and not from the mid-east. Wayne worked at Pickwick Bookstore on Sunset Boulevard. He had gained entry to the pantry by obtaining a press button, and even managed to get into Kennedy’s suite on the 5th floor earlier in the night. When Kennedy went down to the Embassy room to make his speech, Wayne followed. He was loitering in the kitchen, was asked to leave, but returned shortly before the shooting took place. What happened after Wayne was arrested and handcuffed by Ace Security Guard Mallard is unclear, and troubling. An LAPD supplemental report to Michael Wayne’s interview states: This investigator received information that the business card of Keith Duane Gilbert was in the possession of Wayne, at the time of his apprehension after Sen. Kennedy was shot. Gilbert is reported to be an extremist and militant who has been involved in a dynamite theft, previously. The suspicious Wayne may have been a Sirhan 'double', or in cahoots with the Polka Dot Girl. Wayne (Wien) allegedly had a rolled-up tube (presumably a signed poster of RFK) and was noticeably fleeing the scene when several individuals chased him. He was detained because they thought he had a gun. Other accounts have him working in an antiques store in LA, and a 'collector'. Still others link him with Godarzian/Khan, an Iranian who had penetrated RFK's campaign team before the assassination. Given the dubious motive ascribed to Sirhan (anti-Israel, Phantom jets, Palestine) pointing disingenuously towards the Middle East - and the allegations about Mossad/Iranian assassins - Wayne/Wien is not simply a person of interest. If one were to connect the dots, his involvement points towards a central player in all of the plots and subterfuge ... James Angleton. So, here we have a guy who resembled Sirhan; was: seen in a group that included Sirhan; obtained a ride from the notorious Khaibar Khan; was observed (by several people) to have a gun as he ran out of the pantry; and was apprehended by an ACE security guard. Wayne denied any knowledge of Keith Duane Gilbert (a white supremacist, Minuteman, and a founder of The Socialist Nationalist Aryan People's Party), and did not remember having his card. But Gilbert’s LAPD file contained a business card as well; one belonging to Michael Wayne. LAPD Sergeant Manual Gutierrez purportedly spent a great deal of time trying to find out whether there was any association between Wayne and Gilbert, a radical Minuteman activist. Gutierrez did not believe Wayne’s denials of a relationship, and ultimately pushed to have Wayne polygraphed. Not surprisingly, Hernandez determined Wayne was "truthful" about not knowing Gilbert. The LAPD and SUS ended up claiming that that the Michael Wayne card in Gilbert’s file referred to a different person; they never explained the reverse possession, nor did they adequately investigate Wayne’s affiliations and connections.

Pat My thoughts and prayers go out to you. I went thru some similar experiences this past year. Stay the course, and keep the faith. Best, Gene

From personal experience, I have found that many, to whom I try to explain what happened, do not want to engage in the discussion. I'm not sure if that's because it occurred so long ago (i.e., what does it matter today), or because its too difficult to fathom our own government's treachery in JFK's murder. Some know (in only a broad sense) of the Warren Commission findings, and even less know anything about the HSCA ...the former for a magic bullet controversy, the latter for a Grassy Knoll intrigue. Very few have ever heard of Jim Garrison and his investigation, and - while the movie JFK pricked the nation's conscience - virtually no one knows anything about the ARRB or what's contained in those released records (and more pointedly why they were withheld for so long). If I were to give a presentation that expands upon the more recent revelations, I would entitle it "The Devil's in the Details". Gene

Gents This is an interesting thread. While not a journalist or PR expert (I am an engineer by trade, trained in physics), my thought has always been to keep it simple when explaining a complex story (e.g. teaching quantum mechanics to undergraduates). First, characterize the story as JFK's murder and avoid using the word assassination, to call it for what it was. My lead-in, when asked, has always been simply that "there's a lot more to the story than meets the eye". Let that thought percolate, then pick a few simple (basic) points like Michaleen's observation that Connally was hit by a separate bullet. Things that appeal to common sense. Like a good PowerPoint presentation, keep it to three compelling points (the word 'bullets' seems inappropriate here). For me and the JFK case, these are: agencies like the FBI and CIA have the investigatory power to know what really happened ... their capabilities are impressive, and the fact that they didn't prevent the plot from developing, or quickly ascertain who was behind it, speaks volumes. Just imagine this happening today to the President ... no stone would be left unturned, and each/every perpetrator would be brought to justice (promptly). Why didn't that happen 50 years ago? two "independent" federal investigations were largely unsuccessful in getting to the bottom of the story, and establishing a credible, satisfying conclusion. Important records were withheld (or in some cases, destroyed), and some are are still protected. How can that be, and what is so sensitive that 50 years later is still a mystery? the individuals who plotted and executed this murder were proficient at what they did ... hence no smoking guns, irrefutable evidence, candid confessions, damming memos, names/faces of shooters. Instead, what we have is a lot of smoke and mirrors ... distraction and deception. Someone who could enlist/infiltrate police complicity, control evidence and witnesses, compromise the media, influence an autopsy, manipulate a New Orleans DA's investigation and stonewall Congressional inquiries. So we must reflect and ask, who is expert at pulling all of that off? Once we rule out Oswald, the Mob, the JBS/far right, Castro, a foreign government ... only one candidate sticks out (like a sore thumb). I once asked a colleague (who had been an HSCA investigator) who did it - and why it wasn't exposed by now - and he tellingly remarked: "what makes you think that's the worst thing that they've ever done?" One of my favorite quotes is from an Esquire article about the 1975 Church Committee hearings, by writer Tim Crouse, remarking about what limited information the CIA divulged at the time (the so-called "family jewels"), almost as a willing and cooperative partner to the Committee's chief counsel (FAO Schwartz, Jr.): “It’s a queer thing to hear the chief Senate investigator talking as if he and the CIA were partners in the search for the truth.... It does not seem to have occurred to Schwarz that the CIA was, is, and always will be in the business of deception. One suspects that the Agency may be trying to peddle certain crimes of its own choice, trying to guide the Church Committee toward certain items and away from...God knows what." Gene

Jim I know this is a little off the thread topic, but Destiny 2nd Edition is an eye-opener for me. I didn't fully appreciate how disingenuous Blakey was, nor how unsatisfying the HSCA conduct was. And how duplicitous Billings, Sheridan and others actually were. I have become more convinced with time (and the emergence of previously withheld documents) of how spot-on Jim Garrison was, and what a courageous and important effort his investigation represented (where would we be, without it?). While I could optimistically speculate that their behavior was prompted by a narrow (albeit flawed) view that they were protecting the nation and national security, it was highly unethical and actually treasonous. When I look at the attached picture of the Warren Commission working attorneys, it saddens and repulses me. History has shown that JFK was on a path for peace - not one of Communist appeasement - although many historians apparently don't want to acknowledge it that way. Perhaps our more important battle is not to identify who murdered the President, but rather to ensure an accurate historical record and accounting. My fear is that anyone today who wants to understand what happened needs to assimilate an awful lot of information. This considerable amount of due diligence aside, they must also wade through a mountain of conflicting disinformation and misleading anecdotes, after having been conditioned by years of craven media reporting. So, the importance of the ARRB releases, your 2nd edition, and the new screenplay can't be underestimated, as far as further educating the public. Gene

And a happy birthday to Sir Mick ... just turned 77 years old!