Myra Bronstein

http://www.captain-net.com/sequoia-jfkpresents.html

"Man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable -- and we believe they can do it again."

I'll post a review. I'll report back here when mission is accomplished.

I find LBJ's performance unconvincing. His 1964 Gulf of Tonkin lie had already achieved his objective of escalation. Now that he had everything he wanted perhaps he was trying to feign humanity for the sake of his image and legacy.

Interesting game simulation of the decisions facing President Johnson. The demo is free, and informative. Welcome to Escalation! Escalation is a simulation of the Vietnam War where you can make decisions as President Johnson. The decisions you make at the beginning determine what decisions you will be confronted with later and what outcome you get. No two simulations are the same! http://www.escalationsim.com/index.html Ok, I'm sorry to be killjoy here. I realize it's a kewl website and a good find. But it's inherently dishonest because it starts at 1964 when everything was a done deal and facts were irrelevant 'cause LBJ had given the military industrial thugs their bloddy reward for his promotion into the white house. So if it's trying to show the complex nature of decision making then it's missing the point because it wasn't complex and decisions were already made. The bottom line is that President Kennedy and LBJ did exactly what they wanted to do under the exact same set of circumstances at almost the same time. Kennedy collected the info and status he wanted from Vietnam in October of 1963, wrote it up with General Krulak's help (and Bobby's?), sent McNamara and Taylor to Vietnam to put on a fact-finding show. Then Kennedy sent his report to McNamara/Taylor for their perusal and signature so they'd be familiar with "their" report when they presented it to Kennedy in its nice leather binder. It concluded that things were going well enough in Vietnam for the South Vietnamese to take over, with the help of US advisers, so that US personnel could withdraw in the specified time frame. Oct 11 he issues NSAM#263 that points to the McNamarra-Taylor Report and says "make it so." Shortly after, November 20, there's this weird meeting in Hawaii with additional discussion of Vietnam policy and strategy that may have conflicted with Kennedy's policy. Then the infamous November 21 draft of NSAM#273, then on November 26 LBJ issues NSAM#273 that tries to sound like it's a continuation of 263 but it isn't. It paves the way for Johnson to quickly change course. He sends McNamarra right back to Vietnam to come to a conclusion that backs up what he's going to do so he can, and does, claim that the Vietnam war is going horribly so we couldn't possibly pull out--the opposite of what Kennedy said. That change of course happened well before 1964, so that by the time 1964 rolls around Johnson has committed to a hot war & issued supportive documentation based on the bogus fact-finding mission by the versatile McNamara. The facts are irrelevant. By 1964 Vietnam was a runaway train with the pentagon and war profiteers on board whooping it up.

Persuasive stuff. I don't know of anyone who has researched the SS more thoroughly than Palamara. Talbot even refers to Palamara's findings in "Brothers."

Well, I believe that makes it official. Teamwork with Ms. Priscilla outs Mr. Bug as a CIA mouthpiece IMO.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here John. The Gulf of Tonkin non-incident (i.e., lie) occurred August 2, 1964--before the 1964 November election. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed on August 7, 1964 and is the official congressional authorization for escalation: "It is of historical significance because it gave U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson authorization, without a formal declaration of war by Congress, for the use of military force in Southeast Asia. The Johnson administration subsequently cited the resolution as legal authority for its rapid escalation of U.S. military involvement in the Vietnam conflict." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War I don't know, however, when the additional troops were actually sent to Vietnam. Did LBJ wait 'til after the election to do that?

I knew you'd come to your senses Nathaniel.

Speaking of that unusual episode where the cabinet members were flown to two places, first Hawaii I think, then were en route to Japan when they got the news... Does anyone know how those meetings, necessitating flying long distances, originated? Who set up the meetings and/or told the cabinet members to attend?

You certainly do elevate discussions David, and have a real knack for retaining focus. ... Which reminds me--have I asked in the past 45 seconds if your idea of a debate with Bugliosi seems like it could become a reality? The prospect makes me a teensy bit (more) giddy. Myra

Oops, just now saw that you asked the same thing. Sorry Terry. Dawn, Could you elaborate on "strange things began to happen. Terry

Would you mind expanding on that Dawn? I'm unclear on the timeline here. *When, did Clinton ask aids to look into JFK and when did strange things begin to happen? *("When" can be expressed in approximate dates, parallel events, relation to prior or later events, etc. Just a rough idea of "when" would be great.) Thanks.

If this is true it really bothers me. In general I don't like to blame the victim, which Bobby certainly was. But he was also a public official, and the American people were also victims, and we deserve to know the truth. If he actually helped conceal the truth by influencing testimony to the WC then I'm seriously disappointed in him. He had no right to decide for us what we should know. Something that both Bobby and Al Gore failed to realize is that when there is a coup, the best opportunity they'll have to fight it is right then when it's the center of attention and the plotters haven't yet solidified power. In each case they were no doubt concerned about blood in the streets. But there will be more blood and suffering, long term, when the inevitable war for profit is waged. Bobby and Al seemed to think that they'd be able to work within the system to restore a legit government, when the system was already corrupted by the plotters. Once the plotters have power they won't willingly give it back just because it's an election year. People don't steal elections to do nice things or to preserve democracy. They made the exact same mistake.

Oh David, I was thinking of asking you precisely that--if there is any chance of a debate with Bugliosi. I SO hope that happens. I can just see it on youtube now...

Damn! I was afraid of that. I've never heard him cover conspiracy and love him on the war and Bush. So maybe it's time he is educated. Though I fear that anyone on tv has an unspoken agreement to stick with the party line on all things conspiracy. So much for our "free press". Beyond disgusted. Dawn As much as I adore Olberman, this info does make me wonder if he's an establishment lefty like Chomsky, The Nation, and Sir Seymour of Langley. Someone's view on President Kennedy's assassination is the most important litmus test.

Oh my, David's book is stable but Bug's dropped to #34... http://tinyurl.com/29yldk As an aside, while I was gloating over the success of Brothers, I came across this: http://tinyurl.com/2bw9vd "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army (Hardcover) by Jeremy Scahill" If anyone read it, please feel free to create a separate thread to discuss it 'cause I sure am interested...

I don't disagree. But let's celebrate the few little victories we have en route to the big victory, if nothing else for the sake of mental health. Congratulations on your very successful book David.

Ohmygod that is hilarious. And something I could imagine coming from the lovely and charming HL Hunt. Well I've learned enough to about Hunt's espionage network to allow me to learn something about Hunt's espionage network, specifically the keywords "Paul Rothermel." He was an FBI guy who headed up Hunt's culture rich gang, which apparently had other ex-FBIers as well as the ubiquitous "rouge CIA agents." And a private army--the American Volunteer Group (AVG). He bought Walker his own army! Then he could preach to them about the John Birch Society all he wanted. It would have been better if he just got him a GI Joe doll. fruitcakes with massive amts of money are frightening not funny I got my MA from a Jesuit University and had an advisor pitch me for "an intelligence agency" Well that sure is interesting Evan. I keep reading little blurbs about various religious sects being involved with espionage agencies, including the Catholic church, but this is the first reliable piece of info I've received on the subject. the major ones, including mine-The Mormons-all have intell gathering efforts-actually I'm of the opinion the Jesuits probably put the Agency to shame in some parts of the world. Thank you. At last I find some people who know another side to the Jesuits and Clerics of all kinds. There was a Jesuit, Malachy Martin, who wrote scathing books about the Jesuits, including their devil worship and Jesuit assassins. I have to research his books. Back when I was in that college, he was spreading fear throughout the S.J.s And also there was always this story that the Jesuits and the Vatican knew Kennedy was going to be hit. Cardinal Spellman knew it, allegedly. The Catholic Church did not want it known how much they hated Kennedy's politics. I guess President Kennedy wasn't killing enough commies for them. Kathy Well Kathy, one can never kill enough commies. At least if one is a patriot of a certain vintage.

Brilliant.

As much as I appreciate the concept of brainstorming, how would you account for his brother's murder? Not to mention MLK, Malcolm X...

Myra, Thanks for the link - looks fine. I would kindly ask you to fix the spelling of Mary Ferrell (with two e's, very common mistake). Also if you have an inclination to include my humble History Matters offering (www.history-matters.com) I wouldn't complain. Great list of links you have. Rex Eww, bad typo. Mary FErrell. Good to have some other eyes. It's fixed, thanks Rex. And I added History Matters of course. Hey in google, SEO links are king.

We aren't one big happy community? ... Oh wow.

Oh, nice job Rex! That is one fine site. Great framing there yourself: "Reclaiming History? Or Re-Framing Oswald?" You know your framing. So Bugliosi's sponsors were to cheap or stupid to buy reclaiminghistory.ORG! And you pounced on it. Sweet. I linked to your site: http://www.jfktimeline.com/links.html Hope that's ok. Feel free to let me know if I should reword the lead in blurb. (Dang, nice CSS too.)

excellent, Bill Kelly.... You know, it is an excellent post. The sheer size of Bug's book (and disc) are almost custom made to bog down researchers for years refuting his nonsense and name-calling. But some debunking should be done, it's just a balancing act. Other's have suggested that we post reviews on Amazon et al, and I think that's a reasonable doable step. I really like what this person has done in just four short essays: http://tinyurl.com/2coajv A concerted effort, individual or organized, to post calm informative debunking (or supportive) reviews of various books on the major websites would yield a lot of bank for the buck. Especially since it'd be free.