Myra Bronstein

HISTORIANS.

Nice job Robin! I know it's a ton of work. But it sure is a valuable resource and much needed. I hope there's some way you can back up the files or mirror them so this can't happen again.

David Talbot was the boss at Salon so he didn't have to answer to anyone. Most reporters have to answer to their corporate bosses who are part of the matrix. In my limited experience talking with reporters/producers/journalists/cameramen, (the ones on the street doing the real work) they're among the most naive creatures on the planet because they usually mean well and are honest, but can not or will not see the bias of their bosses. I think it's just human nature; they don't want to see that they're working for an evil entity so they block it all out.

Congragulations Don! I can't wait to read it. Is it your first book?

Great summary Bernice.

John, Just FYI it's very easy to embed a youtube video on a web page, then people only have to click on the image to watch it instead of linking to youtube. In fact that's what I'm doing tonight, for example: http://www.jfktimeline.com/speeches/rice_091262/speech.html It's just a simple tag that youtube provides, or (more reliable) you can enter the video URL in the below web tool and it outputs properly formated validating tags: http://www.gl3nnx.net/valid-xhtml-youtube.php

Well I can't find anything in English by William Reymond anyway, certainly not an interview with Marrs. This will not be one of the easier areas to explore. Then again it's not a high priority to explore it. Just would like to know if there's something to know.

In a videotaped interview with Jim Marrs, William Reymond has said that there were three teams. The second team was an explosives team situated on the west side of the underpass, and the third team was located at the Trade Mart. In his interview, Reymond does not say where he got his information, other than French Intelligence. Steve Thomas Thank you Steve. http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...54&page=147

Of course, Ray, there was much silly ranting, with questionable sanity on display. The show should be called "Wiffleball" for all the buffoonery. Talbot was trying to be reasonable, but was pilloried by the clowns, Bug & Chris. Matthews, just to mention one oddity, maintained that, because LHO was employed at the TSBDB long before the motorcade route was known, LHO must, therefore, have been a LN. Thus, no conspiracy. A stupid joke? Well, yes, it is that, but is it more? This contention has the earmark of a deliberate disinformation plant, because to the unwitting, guileless public it has a ring of simple, credible rationality or plausibility, when of course it's really mendacious propaganda. Oh. Matthews also said that the movie JFK was irrelevant & irresponsible. Punch & Judy show. Chris Mathews is ''Beltway Establishment", he never rocked a boat in his life, and never will. I just saw the replay of the Chris Mathews Hardball segment with David and Vinnie and thought that it was terrific. Of course Mathews hadn't read either book, but he cut to the chase - if LHO was the assassin and he had the job on the parade route weeks before the route was announced, it was either a lone-nut taking advantadge of opportunity, or a conspiracy that included whoever laid out the route. Who determined the motorcade route? Mathews asked? Jack Peuterbach is the answer. Talbot made most of his usual good points, and Bugliosi got in all his jabs, but in the end the public will understand that there are still many unanswered questions about the assassination, and that's the point we need to drive home in order to move to the next level. The media frenzy over Talbot vs. Bugliosi must also bring in the new evidence and research rather than rehash the same arguments over and over again. The mainstream media must reach the spectrum achieved in the wake of the JFK movie and the focus of the primary issue must be the still secret records and the failure of the government to comply with the JFK Act. When they start playing hardball over the sealed records, then we will be getting somewhere. A transcript of the Talbot v. Bugliosi/Mathews echange will be available soon. BK Chris Matthews great cry in this Wiffleball show was:"There are no unanswered questions about the assassination! Oswald, a lone nut, did it!'' Matthews is actively & effectively preventing any pressure developing on the government to cease failing to comply with the JFK Act. Yo! Miles, You say, "Matthews is actively & effectively preventing any pressure developing on the government to cease failing to comply with the JFK Act" ? I don't think Matthews knows anything about the JFK Act let alone actively & effectively preventing any pressure on the government." He's not that smart. Nor does he follow orders well. I know how to effectively deal with Mathews. One night when he's done his shift, for which he gets paid very well, I will meet him in the lobby and walk around the corner, past the Dubliner to the Irish Times bar, where we will get a beer at the bar and sit in the corner and discuss this very issue. He will buy the drinks and I will answer his very hard fastball up the middle, strike one - question - "Who in the administration arranged for the motorcade to ride past the assassin's window, his own Irish mafia?" And I'll say: Jack Peuterbaugh. (I'll know how to spell it correctly by then). And take a sip of my drink. I hope Matthews went out with Talbot and Bugliosi for a few drinks after the show, which would be his style. The Battle Lines are drawn in the sand and there's no two ways about it, it's going to come down to the assassin's motive - either JFK was the victim of a political crime or a psychological one. If a psychological one, where are all the psychs analysis? Instead even Bugliosi devotes most of his book to discussing the conspiracy, thus implanting the political and historical context of the assassination in people's minds, regardless of his own conclusions. It's all an historical analysis if Bugliosi is right, but if he is wrong? And the assassination was a conspiracy and coup instigated from within the highest levels of government - then the consequences are tremendous. BK OK, Bill. On that basis I'll agree with you. Matthews really believes he's onto a hot potato with his brilliant "either/or" conundrum. From the way it looked, however, Matthews seemed to have a private idea that maybe Talbot arranged the motorcade route, Matthews momentarily forgetting that the assassination didn't occur last week but was actually way back in 1963. Yes, it's time to feed Chirs-o a Mickey Finn & insert you, Bill, as a substitute host. Y'all are overthinking the hell outta this. Chris Mathews is a party line mouthpiece who follows a script.

Just finished posting my thoughts on the Bug's tome at Amazon. It's at 3.5 stars... Amazon.com Sales Rank: #157 Talbot's Amazon.com Sales Rank: #57 Kick...

I think you're very wise to observe what information is excluded. And if you conclude that the excluded information must be significant that would be understandable. It's the device used by Peter Dale Scott in Deep Politics. He calls it the "negative template." Most useful. But it takes... deep knowledge to know what details are omitted.

I created a separate thread for Vietnam since we're getting so deeply into Vietnam details, and detracting from discussion of Talbot's book: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10126

Continued from http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...9824&st=180 Ok, this keeps happening. Fletcher Prouty's versions of events are very different from what I read elsewhere, and his account of Diem and Nhu's murders is one example. I do consider Prouty credible so I tend to take what he says seriously. Anyway, according to Prouty in "JFK: The CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy," the Kennedy administration had decided to get Diem and Nhu out of the picture by flying them out of the country, then overtaking the palace. Prouty says the brothers believed they were flying to some conference (I don't have the book in front of me so can't quote exactly), and were actually on the airplane when they inexplicably bolted off the plane, reentered their limo, and returned to the palace. The palace was, by then, deserted because the staff knew of the coup and fled, so the brothers were alone and defenseless. They then tried to escape via the route previously described. And from there the versions are basically in sync. Has anyone seen Prouty's version collaborated by a different source? John, if you could please share the source(s) for your information it would help.

Myra, Your first of three options may be in need of review. Did you mean to write "the Pentagon" rather than "the CIA" defending itself? My money is on "misdirection." Charles I actually meant CIA Charles, in the sense that the article is a big sob story about how the poor CIA is covert so can't defend themselves against the spurious charges of the mean president. So Krock is defending them to the public. I think it's possible that the overall "defense of CIA" article, however, is an excuse to plant that little blurb about a possible CIA coup. And it may be misdirection from the pentagon. In other words, should this article be taken at face value or not?

Myra, Read the Best and the Brightest. BK Thank you BK. Myra -- On edit: Ah, now I remember. I avoided reading books by Halberstam because I got the impression he was a wee bit of a mouthpiece. I guess you think he's credible BK? (I"m not challenging your reading choices, just trying to decide if I can get reliable info from this author.)

Myra, I think James answers as much as he can on these aspects on the "not Lucien Sarti again" (spelling) thread. IIRC. He also says something along the lines of this will not be documented anywhere. I think the remarks may remain vague for the good reasons James stated. If he, Al and Ryan had trouble with some 'witnesses'...well you can guess the rest The thread in question [sarti]was one that opened my eyes to how a lot of things happened that day. It's one of my favourites on the forum. Gary You totally outed me Gary. That thread was pretty much the one I was referring to. It was revelatory to me as well. I was hoping if I caught James in a drowsy state or something he'd blurt out... more detailed revelations. Was worth a try.

-Joseph P. Kennedy advised his son President Kennedy to offer Robert Lovett any Cabinet post he might desire, right? -Lovett declines, but ends up making recommendations on who to bring into cabinet, among them: Robert S. McNamara, Dean Rusk, and (good lord) McGeorge Bundy, right? -Lovett was a New World Order warrior. So what's the story? -Did Joe know the kind of person Lovett was? -Was Joe cut out of the same cloth as Lovett? -Did Joe assume Jack was also cut out of Lovett cloth? Or -Did Joe grossly misjudge Lovett and set his son up for the introduction of a bunch of Lovett snakes in his administration? Or -Some other scenario I can't fathom?

Is anyone aware of any reasonably solid evidence that there were contingency plans in case the Dealey Plaza ambush failed? I've read vague remarks about explosives in Dealey Plaza. I've read vague remarks about another ambush team near the Trade Mart. Anyone know more about this?

I think we're all familiar with this article from the Oct 3 NY Times, by Arthur Krock, seemingly defending the CIA. It has this passage: "Among the views attributed to United States officials on the scene, including one described as a “very high American official…who has spent much of his life in the service of democracy…are the following:The C.I.A.’s growth was “likened to a malignancy” which the “very high official was not sure even the White House could control…any longer.” “If the United States ever experiences [a coup] it will come from the C.I.A. and not the Pentagon.” The agency “represents a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone.” http://www.jfklancer.com/Krock.html So is this: -Just what it seems, the CIA defending itself thru a NY Times mouthpiece? Or -Just what it seems, a high level official expressing fear of the CIA thru the media? Or -Misdirection? If, as I'm starting to believe, the pentagon was a major force in President Kennedy's murder, could this article be preemptive propaganda to deflect suspicion away from the military and towards the CIA?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Ya wanna be rich? Be a right wing mouthpiece. Ya wanna be rich and have eternal job security and get to sit in the green room sipping bottled water? Write LN dunnit books.

Uh oh... So sorry Robin. Not to be self absorbed (much) but how contagious is it? Hope you can get your site back to normal without too much work. Hi Myra. I don't think the site will be back in it's original form for some time yet ,if ever. Thanks John. Exellent. I'm going to have a good read of that information. I have emailed my web host to see what, if anything, they can do about it. ? Robin I'm sorry! Does this mean you lost a lot of the photos? Can we help? I'm sure between us all we have lots of photos.

Holy cow! Thanks Trygve. And good find Dawn. O'Reilly pontification about the Kennedy conspiracy and evidence of DeM's murder. Since Fonzi said he thought it was suicide I had my doubts. Now however...

Hi David, That's great news!!! Good for him!! I wonder if his wanting to do the movie was in any way related to his visit to the Sixth Floor Museum this year. He was in the crowd in FW on 11/22/63, and was evidently captured on a film taken by Roy Cooper. They found him in the film. He also left an Oral history there. Kathy Beckett Exactly what I was thinking Kathy. It has to be related. I hope he does it, and does the President proud. In fact if "just about every guy in his age range" wants to make a movie about President Kennedy, then they should DO IT.

DeM dies March 29, 1977. "O'Reilly's early television news career included reporting and anchoring positions at WNEP-TV in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he also reported the weather. At WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas, O'Reilly was awarded the Dallas Press Club Award for excellence in investigative reporting. He then moved to KMGH-TV in Denver, Colorado where he won a Local Emmy Award for his coverage of a skyjacking.[10][11] In 1978 while in Denver, Bill was offered a job as the Marlboro Man. He turned it down because he didn’t smoke nor wanted to promote it. (radio factor/ Feb. 21, 2007). O'Reilly also worked for KATU-TV in Portland, Oregon, as well as TV stations in Hartford, Connecticut (WFSB-TV), and in Boston, Massachusetts.[11]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O%27Reil...8commentator%29 It would be cutting it very close but it seem possible. Looks like he was in Dallas around that time.

Uh oh... So sorry Robin. Not to be self absorbed (much) but how contagious is it? Hope you can get your site back to normal without too much work.