Myra Bronstein

I know this'll sound out and out wacky Gil...'cause it is, but I've often wondered if Officer Tipton was killed for spare body parts. They probably didn't take possession of his body though, like they did the President's.

Thank you, Ron. Next I'll start losing nouns when I talk. Thank you Ron AND Mark. I've been wanting to read Caro's LBJ books anyway; I think he has the right perspective on the man (i.e., "what's not to hate?"). So I'll have to get going.

To know Johnson is to hate him. What's not to hate? Pat, I find it more likely that Bobby Baker persuaded LBJ to take the VP slot because he knew that climbing over a dead president was the only way his southern Senator boss would ever be president. I think vile ol' Senator Kerr was on board with it too. Agree that it's very unlikely that he bribed his way onto the ticket. Mmm, interesting. Wasn't aware of that possible link.

I wanted to share some photos of the Life magazine that Harry was kind enough to send. For those who read Battling Wall Street, it's really interesting to see the letter exchange, between President Kennedy & David Rockefeller, that Gibson described. Just as Gibson said Rockefeller was pushing--gently at this point--for adherence to the IMF, so rich guys can be loan sharks to poor nations without the gov't interfering and giving loans with humane and reasonable terms. But the subject was just touched on, not emphasized. It was all very general. Rockefeller was concerned with the price of gold, of course, since his family had the inside knowledge to get out of the stock market in 1929 and put their money into gold (as did Joe Kennedy). If anyone wants more details let me know. I'd sure like to see later examples of Rockefeller pushing for his desired economic policies; supposedly he got more heated. Has anyone seen these later communications?

But the autopsy photos of A brain were taken afterward at Bethesda Gil. I guess that's part of chain of events that makes the "autopsy" and "evidence"--like the photos--so clearly bogus. And it's hard to build a hypothesis around bogus evidence...

Myra, the same guys who backed the Greek coup backed Nixon. The CIA was pumping money into Greece to insure the country didn't go socialist. This money ended up in the hands of right-wing generals, the leader of whom had been on the CIA's payroll for years. Then..coincidence???...Nixon re-emerged on the political scene with the financial backing of a wealthy Greek-American, Thomas Pappas. In order to please his Greek-American backers, Nixon put the most prominent Greek-American, Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew, on the ticket. This is pretty much accepted history. What isn't as well known or established is that the money funding Nixon's campaign originally came from the CIA. I'm not sure if there's sufficient proof of this. While looking through a book on Greece from the early 70's, however, I did come across a reference to a large public works project--I think it was a dam--that was being built by Greek-American Thomas Pappas. As we now all know, public works projects are quite over-priced, and a lot of the money gets kicked back to corrupt politicians. The thought occurred that the U.S. was funding the Greek government, the government was paying Pappas, and Pappas was kicking the money back to Nixon, who'd arranged the funding for the Greeks. A big circle jerk, at the expense of democracy. Dick Cheney learned by the older Dick's side. Well that sure is interesting Pat, and frankly I didn't know any of it. Do you think it is related to Watergate? I don't think these events led to Watergate, but they had an impact on the timing. When the Dems started looking into Watergate, they knew from the beginning it could lead to Nixon's resignation. This would have led to Agnew becoming president, something even Nixon wanted to avoid. Many believe that the leading Dems, including Ted Kennedy, worked out a deal. They told Nixon they'd lay off the investigation as long as Nixon dumped Agnew and replaced him with someone palatable. This would explain why, according to Agnew, Nixon himself was the major factor in his resignation. Agnew kept looking for a vote of confidence from Nixon, or some public statement of support, during his corruption investigation, with none forthcoming. He concluded the Justice Department was being guided by Nixon (Nixon secretly guided much of the early Watergate investigation.) Anyhow, they offered Agnew a deal--go quietly and there will be no jail--and he took the offer. Nixon replaced him with Gerry Ford, a loyal Republican but also a longtime congressman with friends on both sides of the aisle. Everyone involved agreed that Ford was not necessarily the best choice but that he was the most palatable choice. I see Pat, thank you. Would you mind expanding a little on your comment that "Nixon secretly guided much of the early Watergate investigation"?

Oh sorry Peter. I was focusing too much on the "credit" comment and totally missed your point. Ayton clearly had an agenda and did not let reality intrude. It was a shameless piece of... writing.

http://www.olneydailymail.com/articles/200...xt#blogcomments "Author pokes holes in official Kennedy theory By Kevin Ryden Published: Monday, May 7, 2007 3:03 PM CDT ... LBJ While the Mafia, CIA, Russians, Cubans and any number of groups could have killed Kennedy, Tatro said, they could not get Kennedy's car to drive only 11 mph without a bubbletop through Dealey Plaza in Dallas. That came from within LBJ's powerful inner circle and some of the Secret Service, according to Tatro, who did not have kind words about the 36th president of the United States. “He was one of the most amoral human beings who ever lived,” he said. “I think he's second only to Hitler.” ... Johnson was friends with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and had information about Kennedy's womanizing and other issues and bribed his way into being on the ticket, Tatro said. He said notes from Kennedy's former secretary, Eleanor Lincoln, indicated that JFK wanted to drop LBJ from the ticket. “So, there's your motive,” he said. Trip to Texas On April 23, 1963, Johnson went on Texas radio to announce that Kennedy would be coming to the state in the fall. Neither Kennedy or the White House ever announced that, Tatro said. The only reason Kennedy decided to go, according to Tatro, was to attend a ceremonial dinner for an ailing Texas congressman. Jack Valenti, who died last Thursday, invited Kennedy and was a close and loyal friend to Johnson. “That's how they got him (Kennedy) there,” Tatro said. Valenti married Johnson's secretary, with whom Johnson had an affair, Tatro claimed. Valenti's daughter ended up tall “with big ears,” he said, alleging that Valenti's daughter was, in fact, Johnson's. ... The route the motorcade took in Dealey Plaza was surrounded by buildings and trees, he emphasized, something that bothered Jerry Bruno, who scouted the area for security for Kennedy. Texas Gov. John Connally, another close friend to Johnson who was sitting next to Kennedy in the motorcade and was shot, pushed for the route Bruno did not like, according to Tatro. Expressing his displeasure to Bruno's advice, Connally apparently stated, “This is not how we do it in Texas,” Tatro said, later alleging that Connally's job was to “sucker Kennedy to get (him) to Texas.” Bruno was asked by the White House to come back to Washington, D.C., and another aide was sent to smooth over relations with Connally. That man, Tatro said, was Bill Moyers, who is now a famous journalist and public commentator. “One of the greatest men of all time. Hogwash,” Tatro said sarcastically. When Moyers was questioned by the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Tatro said he was “less than clear on all the details” and could not recall if he had ever even visited Dallas. ... Those who believe Oswald was the lone gunman have the funds and technology to make their point, Tatro said, adding that people like him have limited resources. Jack Ruby After Ruby was convicted of killing Oswald, he wrote a lot of letters from prison. In one of those letters, Tatro said Ruby wrote, “If you hear honking of horns, it will be me. They will want my blood.” Tatro played an audio recording of the newscast in which Oswald was shot. In the recording, one hard honk can be heard, followed by a soft honk and then the gunshot that killed Oswald. Tatro believes Ruby was “trying to squeal.” Tatro noted a disparaging quote by Ruby about Johnson: “Compared to Lyndon Johnson, I am a saint.” Ruby also made many telephone calls while in prison to powerful individuals within organized crime, but the Warren Commission never investigated, Tatro said. In the late 1970s, the Washington Post published an editorial which stated that two shooters who did not know each other could have killed Kennedy. Tatro downplayed the editorial and said it showed “how stupid” the Washington Post believed people were. The Warren Commission ... The Canadian government also destroyed documents about Oswald, Tatro said after explaining that he tried to obtain that information in 1990. “If the guy did it alone and is a nut, what are you destroying this stuff for?” Tatro asked. Former President Gerald Ford was a member of the commission. In 1966, he wrote a book, “Portrait of the Assassin,” which explained that Oswald acted alone. Tatro said Ford had the book published regardless of knowing that all Warren Commission members were barred from profiting from their knowledge. The book also contained top-secret information, which Tatro said Ford did not have permission to print. “That's treason,” he said. Ford was never charged with any wrongdoing. Popular but canceled In 2003, Tatro was part of a History Channel program called “The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Guilty Men.” Part of the program discussed Johnson's alleged involvement. According to Tatro, it was the History Channel's highest-rated show ever and made more than $2 million in DVD sales. After the program concluded, Johnson's former advisors, including Valenti and Moyers, demanded the show never be played on the cable network again, Tatro said. The show was removed from the History Channel's programming. Kevin Ryden can be reached at kryden@olneydailymail.com." --- Has anyone read anything about LBJ bribing his way onto the ticket in 1960? Doesn't really makes sense to me. Kennedy had plenty of money. Some of the info is new to me and I don't know if it's true.

I guess I'm very confused about the status of any remaining brain tissue. If I'm remembering correctly: -Supposedly about 1/3 of the brain was missing at Parkland, blown out by the bullet(s). -Supposedly 100% of the brain was missing at the Bethesda autopsy. They describe the skull as an empty cracked egg shell. So, even though I know the autopsy photos are fakes, I still don't understand the presence of the brain tissue visible in the photo. -Then supposedly the brain disappeared from the national archives, reportedly taken by RFK. Where did the brain tissue come from to put in the national archives if it was gone at the autopsy?

I feel exactly the same way. I hate to see one of the few true heroes disparaged.

You might want to consolidate threads John. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9920

You make a really good point that Bugliosi was indulging in his own conspiracy theory in his book. I haven't read it so I was curious. It's doubtful that I'll read anything by that guy now.

Do you actually want "credit" from this guy? His piece struck me as propaganda. Why would you want to be associated with it?

So frustrating... Can anyone get the link at the bottom of this page to play the streaming video interview between Charlie Rose and David Talbot? http://www.salon.com/plus/index.html I just get a "page not found" error with either speed selection. Argh. On edit: Then when I go to the Charlie Rose site I can't find Talbot listed as a guest tonight. http://www.charlierose.com/home I dunno what the heck's going on... And I can't swear. It's all very frustrating.

Writeup from CBS Early Show. If anyone finds a video or audio file please let us know. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/07/...6164.shtml#ccmm NEW YORK, May 7, 2007 "(CBS) Four decades after the Kennedy presidency, Salon.com founder David Talbot has written a haunting book called "Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years." It brings to life one of the most tumultuous periods in American history and examines questions that remain unanswered to this day. ... The book begins with then FBI director J. Edgar Hoover calling RFK to tell him his brother had been shot. Talbot said Hoover expressed little sympathy. "Very cold — 'The president's been shot,' click. Almost like that," Talbot said. "He calls back later 20 minutes later — 'The president's dead' — almost with a sense of pleasure in his voice, according to Nicholas (Katzenbach), the associate attorney general under Bobby. This is what Bobby told him later. So his world caved in for Bobby at this point. He was — he was the moon that orbited around his brother. And so suddenly this — the center of his universe is gone." Even after RFK claimed to accept the findings of the Warren Commission, the book portrays him as the first assassination conspiracy theorist. Neither Kennedy brother had a shortage of enemies. RFK relentlessly pursued the mafia and he was suspicious of the CIA for their role in the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion in which President Kennedy tried to overthrow Cuba's communist government. The mafia, CIA and Cuban exiles created a triumvirate that deeply concerned Robert Kennedy. Havana, after all, was a hot spot for gambling before Fidel Castro took over and the mafia was angry, Talbot said. "They were furious with the Kennedys because Bobby was leading the most aggressive crackdown on organized crime never before seen in this country," Talbot said. "So the CIA was working with some of these cut-throat characters already. And Bobby looked at that area as the source of the plot against his brother. Because Cuba could become the Iraq of its day. That was the center of the cold war tensions — very volatile area. The Kennedys refused after the bay of pigs to invade and alienated many people within their own government as a result of this." Talbot spent three years on the book and said it was an emotional experience because he spoke to people who devoted their lives to the Kennedy brothers and saw those two men as the way to change the world — and at least for a little while, they did, Talbot said. "Tears would come to their eyes as we talked about those days," he said. "And, you know, I think the country misses that kind of idealism today. When you listen to a speech like JFK delivered near the end of his life, the peace speech at American University where he said, you know, we all inhabit the same small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's future and we're all mortal. Imagine American leaders saying that today about our enemy? That we can all live in peace together.""

Hi Gil, I read your post with a sense of wonderment last night prior to going to bed. It ran around in my head and the only thought that stuck was that you believed Connally to be involved. I've checked in on the forum today and see you've asked about Connally carrying a pistol. Is this a query in pursuit of "pointing yourself in that direction, towards the truth"?? Thanks Gary Well, that would sure explain some edits to the Z-film..

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/..._6_-_Transcript "REX: I'd like to switch forward because there's been some more recent news in the 43-year-old murder, and you've been involved in some of the news. Shane O'Sullivan, of BBC Newsnight, last fall put out a story that three high-level CIA officials were present at the Ambassador Hotel when RFK was killed. You and Washington Post reporter Jeff Morley then started tracking down the story. Can you tell us about that? DAVID: Yeah, I think it's a fascinating episode in Kennedy research. As you say, a young filmmaker named Shane O'Sullivan went on the air - on the BBC - in November, with a startling report alleging that David Morales, George Joannides, and a fellow named Gordon Campbell - and the first two have long been connected in research circles to Dallas - were caught on camera at the Ambassador Hotel the night Bobby was killed in Los Angeles. He showed clips of news footage and still photographs that were taken that night and identified them as these three men, three CIA officials who were connected, again, to the Agency's secret war on Castro. Well, this was a kind of "holy xxxx" moment, because if that was the case, then you're connecting the same people who might have JFK to the people who might have killed RFK. So I was in the finishing stages of my book, but I felt this had to be looked into before I sent my book off to the publisher, so Jeff Morley and I got an assignment from The New Yorker to look into it. With the New Yorker's resources, we were able to criss-cross he country, going from Miami to Northern California, Arizona and Washington and New England, and talked to a number of people to pin down whether or not these three CIA agents were indeed there. Well, unfortunately for Shane, and those who believed the story, we found that it simply wasn't true. Gordon Campbell - the person he identified as Gordon Campbell - turned out to be a U.S. Army official who had been attached to the CIA's JMWAVE station in Miami, but he had died in 1962, so of course it was impossible for him to show up in 1968 at the Ambassador. We also found, finally - and I'm actually looking at these photographs right now - excellent photographs taken of David Morales around 1968. We've only had a very kind of rudimentary photo of him for the most part, that was taken out of a Cuban newspaper - and it's even in my book because I wasn't able to get these other photos in time - and so we weren't able to really get a good sense of what David Morales looked like until now. And if you compare these new photos that we now have in our possession - Jeff Morley and I, we've seen four photos of Morales from that period - it's clearly not the man in the news footage at the Ambassador Hotel. The physical characteristics are just completely different. People who knew him well say the same thing when they look at Shane O'Sullivan's report and these photos. The same is true of George Joannides. We also found good photos of Joannides taken around the same time, and again, it's simply not the man caught on camera at the Ambassador. On the other hand, David Morales has told - before he died - he told his attorney Robert Walton, and he told a good friend, who I did interview again, that he was in Dallas and Los Angeles at the times of the assassinations. He went further with his attorney and told him that he played a role in it. He did tell his friend Reuben Carbajal, who again, I interviewed, that the CIA killed JFK. So it wasn't complete lunacy for Shane O'Sullivan to assume that this might have been David Morales caught on camera. We have other evidence that Morales was connected to these assassinations, but these photographs or news footage that Shane used in his films simply don't corroborate it. REX: It would certainly be the height of brazenness for three high-level CIA officials to be in the ballroom while planning that murder."

Great article. Thanks for the link. Thought this part was interesting: "REX: I'd like to switch forward because there's been some more recent news in the 43-year-old murder, and you've been involved in some of the news. Shane O'Sullivan, of BBC Newsnight, last fall put out a story that three high-level CIA officials were present at the Ambassador Hotel when RFK was killed. You and Washington Post reporter Jeff Morley then started tracking down the story. Can you tell us about that? DAVID: Yeah, I think it's a fascinating episode in Kennedy research. As you say, a young filmmaker named Shane O'Sullivan went on the air - on the BBC - in November, with a startling report alleging that David Morales, George Joannides, and a fellow named Gordon Campbell - and the first two have long been connected in research circles to Dallas - were caught on camera at the Ambassador Hotel the night Bobby was killed in Los Angeles. He showed clips of news footage and still photographs that were taken that night and identified them as these three men, three CIA officials who were connected, again, to the Agency's secret war on Castro. Well, this was a kind of "holy xxxx" moment, because if that was the case, then you're connecting the same people who might have JFK to the people who might have killed RFK. So I was in the finishing stages of my book, but I felt this had to be looked into before I sent my book off to the publisher, so Jeff Morley and I got an assignment from The New Yorker to look into it. With the New Yorker's resources, we were able to criss-cross he country, going from Miami to Northern California, Arizona and Washington and New England, and talked to a number of people to pin down whether or not these three CIA agents were indeed there. Well, unfortunately for Shane, and those who believed the story, we found that it simply wasn't true. Gordon Campbell - the person he identified as Gordon Campbell - turned out to be a U.S. Army official who had been attached to the CIA's JMWAVE station in Miami, but he had died in 1962, so of course it was impossible for him to show up in 1968 at the Ambassador. We also found, finally - and I'm actually looking at these photographs right now - excellent photographs taken of David Morales around 1968. We've only had a very kind of rudimentary photo of him for the most part, that was taken out of a Cuban newspaper - and it's even in my book because I wasn't able to get these other photos in time - and so we weren't able to really get a good sense of what David Morales looked like until now. And if you compare these new photos that we now have in our possession - Jeff Morley and I, we've seen four photos of Morales from that period - it's clearly not the man in the news footage at the Ambassador Hotel. The physical characteristics are just completely different. People who knew him well say the same thing when they look at Shane O'Sullivan's report and these photos. The same is true of George Joannides. We also found good photos of Joannides taken around the same time, and again, it's simply not the man caught on camera at the Ambassador. On the other hand, David Morales has told - before he died - he told his attorney Robert Walton, and he told a good friend, who I did interview again, that he was in Dallas and Los Angeles at the times of the assassinations. He went further with his attorney and told him that he played a role in it. He did tell his friend Reuben Carbajal, who again, I interviewed, that the CIA killed JFK. So it wasn't complete lunacy for Shane O'Sullivan to assume that this might have been David Morales caught on camera. We have other evidence that Morales was connected to these assassinations, but these photographs or news footage that Shane used in his films simply don't corroborate it. REX: It would certainly be the height of brazenness for three high-level CIA officials to be in the ballroom while planning that murder."

I've consistently read that Phil Donohue's show was canceled prior to the Iraq invasion because it gave viewers an alternative to propaganda. http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0227-04.htm

Yeah that sorta leaped out, when he said "guy." But if a giant celeb is willing to stand up and state the basic truth, even if it's not perfect, I'll take it. The media is more likely to publish something a celeb says. Bruce is right, what he says doesn't mean jack ****. The 911 'Truthers' think Charlie Sheen is the bees knees because he advocates their position, big wow. It isn't celebrities that we need on our side, but rather intellectuals and historians. John While I agree in part, I also think that celebrities can have a powerful affect. For a few months now I have been thinking of writing to Oprah and asking her to do a show on MLK. Have as guests MLK's sons (who believe in conspiracy) and Judge Joe Brown, who KNOWS there was a conspiracy. Add to the mix James Earl Ray's atty, Dr. Pepper. I think this could make a great show, but I wonder if Oprah has the guts to do it. Dawn Well instead of just THINKING about doing this I just did it. I am sure she gets tons of email with show ideas...but it does not hurt to try, so I did. I choose MLK because she has said many times how she admired him. Surely she does not believe the media cover story. But you just never know, so I also suggested a book. Phil Melanson's "The Martin Luther King Assassination". (It's a real page turner too!). Dawn Good going Dawn. Focusing on Dr King's murder makes sense for so many reasons, including the fact that the case is largely solved thanks to Dr Pepper, as described in his book An Act of State.

Yeah that sorta leaped out, when he said "guy." But if a giant celeb is willing to stand up and state the basic truth, even if it's not perfect, I'll take it. The media is more likely to publish something a celeb says. Bruce is right, what he says doesn't mean jack ****. The 911 'Truthers' think Charlie Sheen is the bees knees because he advocates their position, big wow. It isn't celebrities that we need on our side, but rather intellectuals and historians. John It isn't mutually exclusive. We can actually have historians AND celebs speaking the truth and the more the better. What we need is critical mass; the more the better. The fact is when Bruce Willis says something it gets space in a newspaper. I'll bet few people here can get the same result when they speak out.

Great material Paul. Thank you. I had no idea what Halberstam was all about. I'd planned to read some of his books, so you saved me from wasting time. Now I'll look for Warren Hinckle instead. I was thinking about the similarities with Sy Hersh as I was reading your info then you started quoting him too. Guess he and Halberstam had a lot in common. And thanks for the info about Robert Lovett BK. I'd never heard of him but he has my attention now. I was wondering how a piece of work like McGeorge Bundy ended up in President Kennedy's staff.

Yeah that sorta leaped out, when he said "guy." But if a giant celeb is willing to stand up and state the basic truth, even if it's not perfect, I'll take it. The media is more likely to publish something a celeb says.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05052007/gossi...ic_pagesix_.htm "May 5, 2007 -- ADD Bruce Willis to those who don't believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in assassinating JFK. "They still haven't caught the guy that killed [President] Kennedy," the tough-guy star tells June's Vanity Fair. "I'll get killed for saying this, but I'm pretty sure those guys are still in power, in some form. The entire government of the United States was co-opted. But, he adds, "I don't think my opinion means jack [bleep], because I'm an actor. Why do actors think their opinions mean more because you act?""

Am I the only one who thinks that the story about the party, or at least some attendees, has been largely discredited? Seems like I've read that both LBJ and Nixon were photographed elsewhere and could not have been at Murchison's.