Myra Bronstein

Well aint this a cold slap in the groin. Say there... is "groin" a swear word? I don't want to screw up and have Antti get his knickers all in a twist again. ... Oops! Is "screw up" a swear? Gosh, it's such a verbal mine field when moderators decide to police language. And I do so want to avoid having my gosh darn diddley doodley posts censored. (Is "gosh darn" a swear?) I remember girls like you from schooldays, Myra. You sat at the back of class, giggled a lot, told great jokes, popped bubble gum when teacher's back was turned (and sometimes stuck it under the desk), had the best parties and my mum warned me about you. Now I know what happened when you grew up ********************************************************** Yeah, and we were the ones who wore those black lace bras you guys ached to catch a peek of. Even if it was only a strap slipping down from under the sleeve of a blouse, or off the shoulder from under a sleeveless shirt. We were also some of the most creative writers in English Lit., and you might have even seen a paper or two of ours hanging up on the border of molding that surrounded the classroom. Or, maybe a schematic drawing of a cathode ray tube would be on display in the physics classroom, because we were talented and detailed oriented, and could be counted on when asked to draft the circuitry involved in an electrical transformer, on the blackboard for the rest of the class to copy. You see, the teacher recognized something dynamically different about us, and could count on us to deliver it when the chips were down, or when a deadline needed to be met. Everyone wanted to copy our notes, they even offered to pay us for them. And, when we grew up, we became a force to be reckoned with. How'd you know I had a 3.73 cumulative gpa for my electronics degree? Gosh diddley doodly darn you are one psychic woman Terry. Ya little minx.

It was worse for me. I taught (or did not teach) dozens of girls like Myra. The main aim was to be the centre of attention. Being told off was what they wanted. OOoooooo John, you knooooow what I want. I want to be disciplined by a stern British schoolmaster 'cause I talk dirty. Tell me I'm a naughty naughty girl... Spank me John.

Well aint this a cold slap in the groin. Say there... is "groin" a swear word? I don't want to screw up and have Antti get his knickers all in a twist again. ... Oops! Is "screw up" a swear? Gosh, it's such a verbal mine field when moderators decide to police language. And I do so want to avoid having my gosh darn diddley doodley posts censored. (Is "gosh darn" a swear?)

*********************************************************** Now, this is the Charles Black I had come to admire back in November - December, before those damned "Marilyn" threads. This is where you shine, Charlie. This is where you should be directing your time and energy. Because, this is the podium from which I first witnessed what I believed was your dogged determination in pointing your finger in the direction of the real perps. You and Myra, seemed to be the new blood so necessary in raising the conciousness, as well as the evolutionary process, in order to drag this investigation out of the mire in which it's been languishing. And, I sincerely mean that, Charles. Please don't mistake this as some kind of an attack, because that is definitely not my intention, here. Wow, thank you Terry. In fact I'm going to pounce on this to flog a project I've been wanting to work on, and it's finally to the point where I'm soliciting input: http://www.jfktimeline.com/ Everyone please keep in mind that this is a super early version. I'm just now getting the format nailed down. It will take months to really put some flesh on the bones. And a big part of the reason I'm going quasi-public with it now is because input from other researchers/historians is essential given the scope of the effort. My objective is to give context to President Kennedy's murder and thereby explain what's going on today because it's all so closely related. I'm also doing this because the murder is a huge puzzle, so I'm assembling it like a huge puzzle. Ultimately the perps & victims will be very obvious from my presentation. The format will allow for a lot of information at a glance, while incorporating drill-down capability. If someone wants to know more about a topic I'll link to my own summaries. Then if they want to know still more I'll provide links to (what I consider) the best JFK resources. Again, input info and ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Silly me. Didn't realize 'til just today that Walker was part of the plot: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKhuntHL.htm "Hunt also funded two right-wing radio shows, Facts Forum and Life Line. He used these radio stations to support the anti-communist campaign of Joseph McCarthy. He also helped to finance the political career of Lyndon B. Johnson. A member of the John Birch Society, Hunt was a close friend of Edwin Walker." I sure wonder whose car was in his driveway (that had the license plate hidden by a hole in the photo). Anyone have any theories? Maybe one associated with HL Hunt? (Just a SWAG.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medgar_Evers "On June 12, 1963, Evers pulled into his driveway after returning from an integration meeting where he had conferred with NAACP lawyers. Emerging from his car and carrying NAACP T-shirts that stated, "Jim Crow Must Go", Evers was struck in the back with a bullet that ricocheted into his home. He staggered 30 feet before collapsing, dying at the local hospital 50 minutes later. Evers was murdered just hours after President John F. Kennedy's speech on national television in support of civil rights[birnbaum, p. 490]. ... On June 23, Byron De La Beckwith, a fertilizer salesman and member of the White Citizens' Council and Ku Klux Klan, wasarrested for Evers' murder. During the course of his first 1964 trial, De La Beckwith was visited by former Mississippi governor Ross Barnett and one time Army Major General Edwin A. Walker." http://www.theconspiracy.us/9408/0029.html "...When Byron de La Beckwith was seeking to avoid indictment for the assassination of Medgar Evers, much of his political support came from former Major General Edwin Walker. Edwin Walker had been a divisional commander in Germany and was replaced by John Kennedy because Edwin Walker was violating Army regulations by obliging his troops to study the "Blue Book" of the John Birch Society. It is a violation of U.S. military regulations to force your troops to study political doctrine. Edwin Walker was fired by John Kennedy. He then came to the Dallas-Ft. Worth area where he became a protege of H.L. Hunt and in the fifth volume of the 26 volumes of Warren Commission testimony and exhibits, it is revealed, or it is documented that, Edwin Walker's John Birch Society cell was used as a vehicle for bringing military intelligence agents over from Munich, Germany to operate at the field level in the assassination of John Kennedy. It is also worth noting, too, that one of the things cited by the Warren Commission to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a politically-motivated assassin, (he wasn't an assassin at all, he was a patsy) but the Warren Commission stated that Lee Harvey Oswald had previously tried to assassinate Major General Edwin Walker, who was an ultra-right winger. Therefore, since he tried to shoot a right-winger and he wound up shooting a liberal, he was not politically motivated. This information first surfaced, according to the Warren Commission investigation or cover-up, on December 3rd 1963, when Marina Oswald revealed this to the FBI during an interrogation. The FBI then notified the Warren Commission. However, this does not explain why on November 29, 1963, a Nazi newspaper in Munich, Germany, named the Deutsch----unclear-----, published by a guy named Gerhard Frey (sp), still active on the German Nazi scene, and having a number of highly-ranked SS officers and former officials from Goebbels propaganda ministry on its editorial staff, that newspaper revealed the information that Oswald had shot at Walker on November 29, 1963, based on an interview with Edwin Walker, that Edwin Walker gave by telephone to Gerhard Frey on November 23, 1963 which was a full eleven days before Marina Oswald supposedly revealed that to the world. Now, you do not have to be Columbo or Sherlock Holmes to figure out that that throws serious doubt on the validity of the Warren Commission's investigation, but that is just one of many evidenciary tributaries leading between our various assassinations and attempted assassinations. That does not mean that, yes, Major General Edwin Walker and the Hunt organization were connected to Byron de La Beckwith and the assassination of Medgar Evers, yet at the same time when we see so many of the same elements and the same names cropping up in connection with our political assassinations, supposedly unconnected, and supposedly not having any serious political ramifications, I think we are in a position to stand back and take a look at these killings and to view them in much the same light as the assassination program conducted in Germany in the 1920s, long before the world became familiar with the name of Adolph Hitler, long before National Socialism took over in Germany and helped plunge the world into war, that there were a series, as I said, of assassinations conducted in Germany which paved the way for the rise of fascism in that country. But in addition to the leaders of the German revolution, such as Karl Liebnick (sp) and Rosa Luxembourg (sp), doctrinaire communists themselves, democratic leaders ranging from Kurt Eisner (sp), Karl Guirise (sp), Gustav Landauer (sp), Walter von Rattenau (sp), these are names that history has not remembered and they should have. As we look at our assassinations and our attempted assassinations, I think it is important that we clear away the obfuscation, that we learn to see the forest despite the trees that have been placed in our way, because in my opinion, and I think the evidence argues very strongly in that regard, we here in the United States went through a similar historical event to the assassination programs in Germany and Japan that paved the way for the rise of fascism in those countries. And, if we do not recognize the facts concerning our own history and understand what happened and why it happened, we ourselves are going to ultimately face results as devastating as what eventually stemmed from the assassination programs in those countries as well."

Thank you for posting this Gil. Excellent. Do you have any more footage of President Kennedy speaking on civil rights?

Yes those lyrics are eerie. I wonder if that song was standard fare for dignitaries, or if it was a special number just for the occasion.

Gil, you're sharing some great footage. Do you compile and edit the footage? If so do you have longer clips of the segments you use?

I'm so glad we can easily see such footage now. It sure is obnoxious, though, that LBJ's murderous mug is visible right behind the President.

Classic video. Thanks for posting it Gil.

Great footage Gil, thanks! Sort of funny too. John Kennedy had Joe Kennedy backing him, and Truman has Boss Pendergast to install him into office so he could pontificate about democracy. I notice Truman didn't mention Pendergast in his speech.

For one thing, having the film in their possession enhanced the status of the owners and editors in Washington. From a social caste point of view, snagging the Zfilm was the ultimate "get" for a news outlet. It turned the Saturday Evening Post, Newsweek and Look into also-rans for years. Also consider how media outlets behave when they are in possession of something that turns out to be bogus. For example, Germany's Stern magazine couldn't wait to serialize the fake Hitler Diaries. imo, when people have something truly valuable they keep it close to the vest and release tidbits. Once they release it fully to the public, it's not theirs any more, their cachet evaporates. In the media and in politics, status is everything. "Status." Ok, asked and answered. News organizations squirrel away crime evidence for status rather than newsworthiness. This is a most informative thread. Myra, this may seem hard to believe, but it's clear to me that Life Magazine bought the Z-Film for two reasons, 1) to keep the gruesome film from becoming a public spectacle 2) to make a boatload of cash. Life was big news in the 60s, and having the Z film meant millions of sales. Just as importantly, having the film prevented their competitors from getting millions of sales. I'd bet you the purchase paid for itself within the first year. As far as alteration, I don't think there was any. There is reason to suspect that the FBI and Warren Commission deliberately printed the head shot frames in the wrong order, in order to hide that the head went back after the shot. As Life executive C.D. Jackson was close to Warren Commissioner John McCloy, there's also a possibility Life colluded with the WC to keep certain frames from the public. Since Jackson died in 64, however, it's possible his promises died with him...which might explain the magazine's switcheroo in 66. Well it is hard to believe Pat, but at least you offer a scenario where there could be some legitimacy to Time/Life's possession of the film. I do have a hard time getting past the fact that Luce was the one that snapped up the evidence.

http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%...20Brussell.html "Three weeks after the Watergate break-in, while the establishment press was calling it "a caper" and "a third-rate burglary," Mae Brussell completed a manuscript titled "Why Was Martha Mitchell Kidnapped?" She named names—John Mitchell, L. Patrick Gray, Richard Nixon, the FBI, the CIA—and I published her first by-lined article in The Realist. "The CIA that killed President Kennedy and Robert Kennedy," she wrote, "did a test case in Greece on canceling elections. Andreas Papandreou, often compared with John Kennedy, appeared to have a good chance of winning the Greek election in 1967. The U.S. Army, the CIA and government agencies helped replace their elections with a coup d'etat. . . . The significance of the Watergate affair is that every element essential for a political coup in the United States was assembled at the time of the arrests." Mae Brussell contends that Nixon's own Watergate plumbers, and the entire intelligence network they represented, were prepared to overthrow Nixon whenever it was deemed necessary by the true powers. Ultimately, she believes, the same men who brought Nixon to power via the Kennedy assassinations were also pulling the strings at Watergate." http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...ters+bill+still Per Bill Still, Producer/Narrator of The Money Masters at Tax Freedom Rally 2006, explaining how he got involved in investigative journalism: "In October 1973 I was sitting watching the Watergate hearings with my dad, and he told me a story that drastically changed my life... He told me that a couple weeks earlier he'd been approached by someone claiming to be affiliated with the Nixon White House and asked how he and his friends in the military would feel about a military takeover of the US government, the purpose of which would be to install President Nixon into office for a third term, and possibly subsequent terms. He was told there was virtually unlimited money behind the effort, and that any military office that wished to join could name his price. [He then explains his dad's background, and why he would have been so critical to the coup effort. Still wrote about the episode in a book, and notes that no media person ever called his father to ask about the episode.] After my dad told me this he and I tried to alert the DC press corp. We actually had an appointment scheduled with Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the Washington Post reporters who ended up authoring the book and the movie "All the President's Men." But they blew us off and only sent their editor Bob ? down to talk to us. And of course nothing appeared in the Washington Post about this. They had Watergate all figured out. They didn't need somebody muddying the waters with some vast conspiracy tale. In the months that followed, between October '73 and Nixon's resignation in August '74, I continued to try to push the story and got a lot of heat for it. I looked down the barrel of a 38 special; believe me that's no fun. It was a time of car chases and paranoia and during that period I slept with a 9mm handgun under my pillow.... It was a scary time and I feared for my life every day. And once Nixon resigned the pressure was off but it took me quite a while to realize it. I knew that I was going to have to write about this incident and the meaning of it because no one else was going to do so." He wrote about the Nixon incident in his first book: "New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies" by William T. Still http://www.amazon.com/New-World-Order-Anci...0988&sr=8-1

Interesting thoughts Gil. I've wondered about Oswald's planned move to DC. It would make sense if they were moving him into patsy position. Any idea why the DC assassination did not take place?

For one thing, having the film in their possession enhanced the status of the owners and editors in Washington. From a social caste point of view, snagging the Zfilm was the ultimate "get" for a news outlet. It turned the Saturday Evening Post, Newsweek and Look into also-rans for years. Also consider how media outlets behave when they are in possession of something that turns out to be bogus. For example, Germany's Stern magazine couldn't wait to serialize the fake Hitler Diaries. imo, when people have something truly valuable they keep it close to the vest and release tidbits. Once they release it fully to the public, it's not theirs any more, their cachet evaporates. In the media and in politics, status is everything. "Status." Ok, asked and answered. News organizations squirrel away crime evidence for status rather than newsworthiness. This is a most informative thread.

No. ... Not one to over discuss things eh Kathy? You take the astonishing position that there's nothing at all odd about a major new organization purchasing then hiding one of the most significant pieces of evidence in one of the biggest crimes ever committed, and feel no need to explain your thought process. Well your succinctness sure keeps the thread short. There is that upside. We would have to know all the details of the murder to understand the purpose of altering evidence wouldn't we? Given that we (or at least I, don't want to speak for you) don't know all the details I can only speculate about the purpose of altering major evidence like the Z-film. Among the possibilities: -Hiding the possibility that the presidential limo came to a stop. -Hiding the possibility that one of SS agents in the front seat of the presidential limo did something incriminating. (Even more incriminating than sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while the president is murdered.) -Hiding indisputable evidence of a shot from the front. -Hiding indisputable evidence of more than three shots fired. There are infinite possibilities, and infinite reasons for altering footage of a successful plot to murder a US president. Gee, altering the Z-film to hide shots hitting multiple parts of the limo and occupants from multiple angles just might serve the exact same purpose--"to make Oswald very much look like the assassin"--eh? Wow that is so poetic. What does it mean? Edited langauge.

Hey hey hey, let's show the proper respect. After all, you're talkin' about a Recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, awarded by President Ronald Reagan on April 21, 1987. And he received his reward...I mean award the same time John McCone got his. He sure fell in with the right crowd: "The President today announced his intention to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award of our government, at a luncheon to be held at the White House on June 23, 1987. The following individuals will be given this prestigious award by the President: ... General Lyman Lemnitzer, for his contributions of outstanding military service to his country. Mr. John McCone, for his contributions in the fields of public service and national interests of the United States as former Director of CIA." http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/spee...987/042187e.htm I guess LLL made an important connection when he and Reagan served on the Rockefeller Commission together, huh? "President Gerald R. Ford created the Commission on CIA Activities within the United States on January 4, 1975. He directed the Commission to determine whether or not any domestic CIA activities exceeded the Agency's statutory authority and to make appropriate recommendations. He appointed Vice President Nelson A. Rockefeller chairman of the Commission. (The Commission is often referred to as the "Rockefeller Commission.") Other members were ...Lyman L. Lemnitzer, Ronald Reagan... http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/guides/...20-%20Files.htm The Warren Commission and Rockefeller Commission sure were well stocked with right wingers who hated President Kennedy because he fired them.

So for the alteration nay-sayers, back to my original questions about the circumstances of Time/Life's possession of the Z-film. Do you find it at all odd that a major news organization--Time/Life--would purchase a film showing the assassination of the President of the United States, and do nothing with it for years other than print a few stills?

Maybe they'll publish it on President Kennedy's birthday. Obviously, I have not read the unpublished book. But it is more of the same. Oswald did it alone from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Kathy It's been scheduled for release on President Kennedy's birthday for quite a while: http://www.amazon.com/s/002-5533782-275606...=Mozilla-search Can't let a major anniversary like that pass without a propaganda eruption to offset the inherent good publicity. Here's what I've long wondered about those who deny that the Z-film is altered. Do they truly believe that a film with that kind of evidentiary significance would sit unmolested in the vault of Henry Luce, the Dean of CIA Mockingbird propagandists, for years? Just knowing the provenance of the Z-film should be enough to discredit it as evidence. I for one shan't be wasting good money on it, might give it a look once it hits the liberies. It will be Posner with his flies done up. I will probably end up buying Bugliosi's book and studying it in detail. As far as the Z-film being altered and Luce being part of some conspiracy etc., I seem to remember that it was Life Magazine, FROM its study of the Z-film, that first called for a new investigation. In November 1966. Now why would they do that if the film had been altered to hide a conspiracy? Well, maybe because the film shows Kennedy and Connally react seconds apart, and raises great doubt they were hit by the same shot... That's interesting Pat; I've never heard that Life took that stance. If you have sources that you can share so that we can look into it ourselves it'll be even more interesting. Thanks.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news...13txdigest.html "Friday, April 13, 2007 DALLAS JFK assassination photo for sale A grainy, fingerprint-smudged black-and-white photograph taken when President Kennedy was assassinated is going up for auction. The Polaroid picture taken by Mary Ann Moorman shows the president and first lady Jackie Kennedy ducking as their motorcade passed through Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963. Abraham Zapruder, who famously filmed the assassination, is visible in the distance. For years, the picture had been on loan to the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, but Moorman, who is in her 70s, decided to sell it, said Lou Fausak, owner of Legend Sales Inc., which sells items for customers on eBay. "We're sorry that it's not going to be part of our permanent collection, but beyond that, we're not going to comment," museum spokeswoman Deborah Marine said. Fausak said he expected the picture to have a minimum reserve of about $500,000 when it becomes available for 10 days starting Monday. "Something like this, there's just no telling what it's going to go for," he said."

Do you recommend it? Any other books on McGeorge Bundy you'd recommend?

Maybe they'll publish it on President Kennedy's birthday. Obviously, I have not read the unpublished book. But it is more of the same. Oswald did it alone from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Kathy It's been scheduled for release on President Kennedy's birthday for quite a while: http://www.amazon.com/s/002-5533782-275606...=Mozilla-search Can't let a major anniversary like that pass without a propaganda eruption to offset the inherent good publicity. Here's what I've long wondered about those who deny that the Z-film is altered. Do they truly believe that a film with that kind of evidentiary significance would sit unmolested in the vault of Henry Luce, the Dean of CIA Mockingbird propagandists, for years? Just knowing the provenance of the Z-film should be enough to discredit it as evidence.

Well if Jimmy Wales, founder of Wiki Propagandapedia, is involved then I automatically mistrust any stated motives.

OHMYGOD. I'm reading "Executive Action" by Mark Lane (et al) now. It's a "fictionalized" account of President Kennedy's murder (in the same way that the WCR is a "factual" account." It has frequent footnotes to define the jargon. At one point a high level CIA agent (Preston) says to an asset he's trying to persuade to sign on as an assassin: Preston>"I've never seen a better cover plan. You will be personally escorted from the scene ty the S.S." ... Asset>"The S.S.?" Preston>Our straight penetration agents. And you'll have S.S. shoes" too." Footnotes: S.S.--The Secret Service Penetration agents--Agents who infiltrate another organization for life Shoes--False documents Ahem... Pg 48 of hardcover version, eighth printing May 1975 GOOD eye Chuck. --- Oswald's last words by Mae here, for context: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/LHO.html "... 1:10 - 1:30 P.M. Lee Harvey Oswald Visited by Mother, Marguerite Oswald, and Wife, Marina Oswald (To his Mother.) "No, there is nothing you can do. Everything is fine. I know my rights, and I will have an attorney. I already requested to get in touch with Attorney Abt, I think is his name. Don't worry about a thing." (To his Wife.) "Oh, no, they have not been beating me. They are treating me fine. . . . You're not to worry about that. Did you bring June and Rachel? . . . Of course we can speak about absolutely anything at all. . . . It's a mistake. I'm not guilty. There are people who will help me. There is a lawyer in New York on whom I am counting for help. . . . Don't cry. There is nothing to cry about. Try not to think about it. . . . Everything is going to be all right. If they ask you anything, you have a right not to answer. You have a right to refuse. Do you understand? . . . You are not to worry. You have friends. They'll help you. If it comes to that, you can ask the Red Cross for help. You mustn't worry about me. Kiss Junie and Rachel for me. I love you. . . . Be sure to buy shoes for June." 2:15 P.M. Lineup for Witnesses William W. Scoggins and William Whaley "I refuse to answer questions. I have my T-shirt on, the other men are dressed differently. . . . Everybody's got a shirt and everything, and I've got a T-shirt on. . . . This is unfair." 3:30 - 3:40 P.M. Robert Oswald, Brother, in Ten-Minute Visit "I cannot or would not say anything, because the line is apparently tapped. [They were talking through telephones.] . . . I got these bruises in the theater. They haven't bothered me since. They are treating me all right. . . . What do you think of the baby? Well, it was a girl, and I wanted a boy, but you know how that goes. . . . I don't know what is going on. I just don't know what they are talking about. . . . Don't believe all the so-called evidence." When Robert Oswald looked into Lee's eyes for some clue, Lee said to him, "Brother, you won't find anything there. . . . My friends will take care of Marina and the two children." When Robert Oswald stated that he didn't believe the Paines were friends of Lee's, he answered back, "Yes, they are. . . . Junie needs a new pair of shoes." (Robert Oswald told the Warren Commission, "To me his answers were mechanical, and I was not talking to the Lee I knew.") ..." ... More and more I get the feeling that Marina and Robert, for whatever reason, and there are many possible reasons why they could or would not, have not yet told all that they know regarding Harvey and what part, if any, they had played in supporting him in his various activities. After reassuring Marina that she was free to speak, even though they were being monitored, the word of caution to Robert about the tapped phone is especially interesting. What information were they worried about revealing to the Dallas authorities? Is it possible that, knowing of the tap, Oswald was sending a message through the tap in hopes of getting help? Hm, interesting question. Of course that still leaves the original question about the meaning of the shoe comments. But it makes it seem even more possible that, if he was trying to communicate over a tap, he could have been talking about "shoes" = documents/cover. He couldn't be real precise in his situation. He may have been getting as close as he dared to get to his real meaning.