Kathleen Collins

Thank you, Mr. Simkin. Kathy Collins

Why now? Kathy C

There has never been proof that the Kennedys were going to kill Castro. The CIA was trying to do so -- exploding cigars, poison. He was not planning to kill Castro but his joint chiefs of staff wanted to and Kennedy was afraid they were going to send a missile to Cuba without letting him know. Kennedy was using back channels to Castro, trying to end the feud amicably. On November 25 he was going to sign a document that he was going to pull out all the "advisors" by December of 1964 -- ask Greg Burnham. He was not planning Castro's death. Right now, I think Castro is dead. So this was going to be a secret operation between the 2 brothers. I don't believe it. But the CIA and the Cuban-Exiles may have decided someone must leave and they turned around and killed Kennedy in the hope that Castro would be blamed and the military could do something to Castro. But Johnson and Hoover claimed LHO killed JFK. There was a cover-up. Johnson signed a document to put troops into Viet Nam. But the lingering question: Why didn't the Kennedys investigate what happened? Why? Fear of death? Kathy C

I don't know what to think. Someone may have meant well. To me it's in bad taste. It's a doll of President Kennedy that is posed like the Thinker statue and is unclothed. I am selling figurines on eBay and that's how I found it. It's possible somebody may have bought it. Kathy C

James, I can't see a photo or a link here. I don't know why. This has happened before. Kathy C

You're absolutely correct. Greer pulled the car to the left (a certain researcher told me), stopped, took his hands off the wheel and tried to get a good look at Kennedy (Altgens photo - Man in the Doorway). Kennedy received 2 shots, one from the Grassy Knoll and possibly one from behind (Zapruder). Greer turned around and sped off in the limo as Hill was trying (successfully) to grab onto the back. Kathy C

I agree. Kathy C

I am never ashamed of President Kennedy and whenever I see The Cuban, I want to punch him in the mouth. Signaling with his arm and fingers for the limo to stop. Has anyone here ever heard of a General San Genus? He was a survivor of the Bay of Pigs. The CIA kept him to do jobs for them. He changed his name to Jose Perdomo. On December 8, 1980 Jose was the security guard when John Lennon got shot and killed. This was while Reagan was president-elect. Jose said to the Creepy Guy, "What did you do?" Creepy Guy answered, "I just shot John Lennon," and dropped his gun. He wasn't the killer. I'm not blaming Reagan for this murder, but the people around him decided to off the ex-Beatle as he was usually on the phone with radical left-wingers and giving them money. Maybe Vice President George HW Bush had a hand in this. When Reagan was shot, George HW Bush may have been behind that too. Kathy C

Please do not support Gary Mack. There is so much to do in Dallas without wasting your time at a location of lies and whose owners plan to take over Dealey Plaza on the 50th anniversary and drown out dissenting voices. Either you are on the side of truth or killers of truth. Dawn I suppose there's going to be a riot in Dealey Plaza. I wish I could go there for the 50th. Kathy C

OR...they were bored men just trying to have some fun... FWIW, I have come to conclude that the men on Kennedy's detail were not involved in his killing, but that SS investigators Thomas Kelley and Elmer Moore were involved in the cover-up... I say this, in part, because so few of the original statements and testimony of the men on the detail support the single-assassin conclusion. Several, including Roy Kellerman and Emory Roberts, thought the last two shots were bunched together, so close together in fact that they couldn't even tell which of these two hit Kennedy. One, Paul Landis, admitted he'd thought the last shot could have come from the knoll. The WC's counsel was so worried about this, in fact, that Melvin Eisenberg dashed off a memo to the commissioners telling them that the recollections of the SS eyewitnesses were of no value, and should be rejected when they failed to support the single-assassin conclusion the commission had, quite clearly, already decided upon. Now, would they have done this if these agents were in on the plot? I doubt it. I still think it stinks. All the SS in the Queen Mary did nothing, except Clint Hill. Bored men who want fun? I guess participating in a presidential assassination was a real drag. Kathy C

Excellent post. Here are a few things I know. Marilyn Monroe had been in a psychiatric ward in 1961 and left feeling better and lost some weight. Joe DiMaggio took her to the Atlantic Ocean. She bought a very small house and property. She lived in a cul de sac. There was no security. She was having an affair with the President and conceded to RFK's wish for her to sing Happy Birthday to his brother in Madison Square Garden. RFK and MM were in her dressing room alone. Someone said she was messy looking and the hair had to be done over when RFK exited her room. There was a man standing by and RFK said to him, "I hate dealing with that bitch." The following day, when it was in the papers and all over the news, that Marilyn only had sequins on and sang Happy Birthday with a lot of sexual appeal, RFK told the President he had to cut off the relationship. It looked bad. So the man who asked her to sing to John Kennedy was also the man whose mind changed about MM. She couldn't get through to the White House. She started to call the Justice Dept. RFK tried to appease the situation by talking to studio bosses. She had been fired. He was in California to make a movie of the book he wrote called "The Enemy Within." And he also talked to her psychiatrist, "Romey" Ralph Greenson. Allegedly, she was going to squeal to the press. RFK probably wanted Greenson to calm her down somehow. So he was at her house a number of times. Robert Slatzer was not the first to bring up RFK and MM. Frank Capell wrote a thick pamphlet that came out in 1964. This writer alleged that Marilyn Monroe was surrounded by Jews and Communists; and that she was having an affair with left-thinking RFK. It was a book of insinuations. Like 30 year old Pat Newcomb, Monroe's press agent. They insinuated that she was a lesbian because she wasn't married. When Marilyn died, the Kennedys took Pat Newcomb up to Hyannis for a vacation. Then gave her a job about motion pictures, located down the hall from RFK. Again, insinuations. The book that came out in 1964 was to discredit RFK. Somehow it was surpressed. But I got a copy of it from The Sons of Liberty, whoever they are. Unfortunately, all my movie star books are with my brother in another state. RFK was at her house the day she died. He was supposed to be in Gilroy, CA at Bate's Ranch. Photos exist. One photo was taken at 9:30 am of RFK with his family going to church. Monroe's death was announced around 5 a.m. He apparently flew in a helicopter back to Gilroy. If anyone could ruin a presidency, he could. Did he have an affair with MM? I don't think so. Kathy C

I never believed anything Clint Hill said or any of the other Secret Service man. They were complicit in the Kennedy Assassination as much as the shooters were, as much as the planners were. I think some of them should have been fired, especially with the pantomime that went on in Love Field. The Kennedys were sitting in the limo by themselves with no one protecting them. I wonder if there could have been shooters somewhere in Love Field. This SS man is about to start jogging next to the car (which, as yet, did not have a driver) when his boss from the next car told him to move away from the limo. The SS man throws his arms up, as if to reluctantly say, OK. It's possible someone was going to shoot the President at Love Field. Because the Secret Service man threw his arms up with such exaggeration. Someone was watching. Kathy C

Happy Birthday, Greg. Thanks for correcting Penn Jones' writing about Karyn Kupcinet. She DID NOT have anything to do with the Oxnard call. Anyway, many happy returns of the day. Sincerely, Kathy C

Technically, this topic is not about the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. But in a way it is. If this bill passes it will destroy this site and the Internet in general. Called Cybersecurity. Even Worse Than SOPA: New CISPA Cybersecurity Bill Will Censor The Web Tuesday, April 03, 2012 18:58:18 ShareAn onrush of condemnation and criticism kept the SOPA and PIPA acts from passing earlier this year, but US lawmakers have already authored another authoritarian bill that could give them free reign to creep the Web in the name of cybersecurity. As congressmen in Washington consider how to handle the ongoing issue of cyberattacks, some legislators have lent their support to a new act that, if passed, would let the government pry into the personal correspondence of anyone of their choosing. H.R. 3523, a piece of legislation dubbed the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (or CISPA for short), has been created under the guise of being a necessary implement in America's war against cyberattacks. But the vague verbiage contained within the pages of the paper could allow Congress to circumvent existing exemptions to online privacy laws and essentially monitor, censor and stop any online communication that it considers disruptive to the government or private parties. Critics have already come after CISPA for the capabilities that it will give to seemingly any federal entity that claims it is threatened by online interactions, but unlike the Stop Online Privacy Act and the Protect IP Acts that were discarded on the Capitol Building floor after incredibly successful online campaigns to crush them, widespread recognition of what the latest would-be law will do has yet to surface to the same degree. Kendall Burman of the Center for Democracy and Technology tells RT that Congress is currently considering a number of cybersecurity bills that could eventually be voted into law, but for the group that largely advocates an open Internet, she warns that provisions within CISPA are reason to worry over what the realities could be if it ends up on the desk of President Barack Obama. So far CISPA has been introduced, referred and reported by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and expects to go before a vote in the first half of Congress within the coming weeks. "We have a number of concerns with something like this bill that creates sort of a vast hole in the privacy law to allow government to receive these kinds of information," explains Burman, who acknowledges that the bill, as written, allows the US government to involve itself into any online correspondence, current exemptions notwithstanding, if it believes there is reason to suspect cyber crime. As with other authoritarian attempts at censorship that have come through Congress in recent times, of course, the wording within the CISPA allows for the government to interpret the law in such a number of degrees that any online communication or interaction could be suspect and thus unknowingly monitored. In a press release penned last month by the CDT, the group warned then that CISPA allows Internet Service Providers to "funnel private communications and related information back to the government without adequate privacy protections and controls. The bill does not specify which agencies ISPs could disclose customer data to, but the structure and incentives in the bill raise a very real possibility that the National Security Agency or the DOD's Cybercommand would be the primary recipient," reads the warning. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, another online advocacy group, has also sharply condemned CISPA for what it means for the future of the Internet. "It effectively creates a 'cybersecurity'' exemption to all existing laws," explains the EFF, who add in a statement of their own that "There are almost no restrictions on what can be collected and how it can be used, provided a company can claim it was motivated by 'cybersecurity purposes.'" What does that mean? Both the EFF and CDT say an awfully lot. Some of the biggest corporations in the country, including service providers such as Google, Facebook, Twitter or ATT, could copy confidential information and send them off to the Pentagon if pressured, as long as the government believes they have reason to suspect wrongdoing. In a summation of their own, the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress, explains that "efforts to degrade, disrupt or destroy" either "a system or network of a government or private entity" is reason enough for Washington to reach in and read any online communiqué of their choice. The authors of CISPA say the bill has been made "To provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities," but not before noting that the legislation could be used "and for other purposes," as well — which, of course, are not defined. "Cyber security, when done right and done narrowly, could benefit everyone," Burman tells RT. "But it needs to be done in an incremental way with an arrow approach, and the heavy hand that lawmakers are taking with these current bills . . . it brings real serious concerns." So far CISPA has garnered support from over 100 representatives in the House who are favoring this cybersecurity legislation without taking into considerations what it could do to the everyday user of the Internet. And while the backlash created by opponents of SOPA and PIPA has not materialized to the same degree yet, Burman warns Congress that it could be only a matter of time before concerned Americans step up to have their say. "One of the lessons we learned in the reaction to SOPA and PIPA is that when Congress tries to legislate on things that are going to affect Internet users' experience, the Internet users are going to pay attention," says Burman. H.R. 3523, she cautions, "Definitely could affect in a very serious way the internet experience." Luckily, adds Burman, "People are starting to notice." Given the speed that the latest censorship bill could sneak through Congress, however, anyone concerned over the future of the Internet should be on the lookout for CISPA as it continues to be considered on Capitol Hill. This comes from Before It's News. Kathy C

I can't contain it. I would think you people would know better. The late Robert Slatzer was a disinformationalist. I bet someone paid him to say the things he says. And the book was actually written by somebody else, as Slatzer couldn't write. The book practically indicts Robert Kennedy as a suspect in the murder. And there was no red "diary" that he told Marilyn to toss away. If Bobby knew she had such a thing, he would take it himself and destroy it. He wouldn't rely on her. He wasn't stupid. Slatzer was a fan of M. Monroe. He met her while she was making "Niagara." They had a few pictures taken of them against the Falls. It was nothing more than that. He really spread his anti-Kennedy sentiment far and wide. In later years he embellished and made up things. Like he was on the set of "Something's Got to Give" during her birthday party and took a photo of her that is actually from a costume test. One of Fox's still photographers took the picture. His biggest scam was that he married MM down in Mexico but had no record of it. The man who married them burned the certificate and poor Slatzer couldn't prove a marriage. But he said Kid Chisell was their witness. When Kid Chisell was on his death bed a reporter asked him if he witnessed a marriage between Slatzer and Monroe. He said, "I was only trying to help a friend." The studio had her down as being on set that day and working. John Gilmore wrote a book about Marilyn and called Slatzer an out and out xxxx. Slatzer was on the Niagara location set everyday. After awhile Monroe just ignored him. Someone killed her either by accident or on purpose. But not Bobby Kennedy. He was trying to help her and keep her away from the President. I doubt she felt love for him. His brother was the big draw. Kathy C

Thank you for telling me the significance of Oswald in Mexico right before the Assassination. Kathy C

I respect everyone's opinion. I think Oswald was Russian. Also I remember that Bledsoe noted that Oswald was sitting on the bus in black pants with white paint stains on them. And who the hell is Donald O. Norton? A figment of someone's imagination? On the Internet I found he owned a fishing gear store, lived about 2 hours from me. He chartered boats up and down the Atlantic Coast of Florida. I was told he was Lee Oswald. He didn't look like Oswald to me. And that his signature was similar to LHO's. Also his shop became a tourist attraction. He upped and left. Kathy C

In Harvey and Lee by John Armstrong, after Kennedy is killed, Lee came down the path of the TSBD and got into a green rambler and was probably driven off to Redbird Airport. But next JD Tippit was killed, possibly by Lee and Lee ends up in the Texas Theater's balcony. Meantime, Harvey gets home, changes his clothes. A cop car stops in front of the boarding house and beeps its horn twice. Officer Tippit is killed. Harvey retreats to the Texas Theater, doesn't pay for his ticket and someone calls the cops. The police show up and arrest Harvey. A riot ensues outside. He is taken in as the culprit. Meanwhile, Lee is taken out by 2 cops quietly, using the back door and we never hear from him again. How can he get into a rambler, yet wind up in a theater? I thought the car was supposed to take him to an airport. Can anyone make sense out of this? Kathy C

I wouldn't go that far as to say, Nixon was the "mastermind of assassinations". What assassinations are they talking about? Nixon did help in creating an assassination squad that I'm sure took orders from their handlers, it all works through a channel, and by 1968 Nixon kicked out the thirty remaining CIA assets and kept them from infiltrating into Cuba, Nixon never really liked the Cuban people, so could Nixon have said he would have done things differently had he won against Kennedy in the 1960 elections when it came to the Bay of Pigs and US military? I'm sure he did to save his own skin, however, it would have been easier to pass the buck so to say to Kennedy, then eliminate Robert Kennedy so Nixon would win his presidential election term as he sought to run against RFK. Nixon may have wanted someone assassinated and pass on certain information, but one is never to close to any operation to get caught. I don't believe that Nixon was eager for the Kennedy assassination. I think a contract of sorts was made out the night before. The assassination was already planned. Clint Murchison Jr held a meeting at his Dallas home. Hoover was there, as was Tolson, Nixon, and lastly, Johnson. I think everyone in that room was against Kennedy, except, cruelly, Richard Nixon. There was nothing for him to do but say nothing. He himself could be in danger. I think if anyone broke that contract they were performing suicide. Nixon's wife, daughters and Checkers would all be in trouble. Now the reason I say this is because a photo exists of Nixon in an airport (Dallas or Idlewild?) on 11-22-63. He either knows that Kennedy's dead or he expects to hear so. I'm sure he had a few drinks. He looks like he's crying. He and Kennedy had run against each other in 1960. Now one knew about the death of another and could not stop it. IMHO, I don't think Nixon was a part of the assassination. He just had no choice. His Moon Walk Hoax in 1969, I believe, was a secret gesture toward the dead John Kennedy who wanted a man on the moon in "this decade." If Nixon disliked Cubans, why did he hang out with Bebe Rebozo? I thought he was Cuban. Kathy C

You probably have seen this. It's about Redbird Airport and it has a picture of the landing strip: http://oakcliff.advocatemag.com/2011/03/backstory-04-11/

Happy Birthday, Kathy. You're older than me! Many more. Kathy C

I wish someone at a TV network or Life magazine or the military would put The Other Film on youtube. Someone must have access to it. What are they waiting for? Just release it. Most intelligent people believe there was a conspiracy, but there is nothing we can do about something that happened 49 years ago. Show us the film. Did H.L. Hunt have it? Kathy C I thought the other film was just a rumor / urban myth? You're talking about what others call the 'real zapruder' film correct? Unedited version where you see the entire car stop and he get shot form the front with back of head blown out? If it exists, who's seen it but a handful of people. I would imagine somebody owns it in a private collection and we'll never see it. There was a researcher named Rich Dellarosa, now deceased, who saw the other film 3 times. Twice when he was in the service and once on a college campus. This was not the Zapruder film. This was a different film. You could see the turn on Elm St, where I think someone tried to shoot Kennedy. You see how slow they were going. Then there's the limo stop and I think Secret Serice agents rushed to see if they could help Kennedy. All raced to Parkland. When the limo stopped, Kennedy received at least 2 shots, from the back and from the front which were lethal. That's the best of what I remember him telling me. There's also another gentleman on this forum who saw the film once, possibly on a college campus. The film was shot from a similar viewpoint of Zapruder's. But it's a mystery how or where the camera was. Kathy C

That was one tough read. Either his typing is poor or he's dyslexic. No wonder it's self-published. Kathy C

Robert, I just want to say how much I appreciate your work. Then I'd like you to explain how Ruby used to go to the Cotton Bowling Palace and Alfie was afraid the Feds were going to raid them. What did Alfie know about the Feds and Ruby? This can only be before he shot LHO. I know he was a drug runner and weapons runner, but how did Alfie know this? Kathy C