Kathleen Collins

Bob, I think you mean Clint Murchison Jr, who was quite old at the time. His son is now Clint Murchison III and active in Dallas. Kathy C

Whose side is he going to take? I have a book by him selling on eBay. [idyllic Books].. As I said in my book description he looks to me like if he had one drink he'd kill somebody. He angers very easily. He may have had a drinking problem at one time, which made him homicidal. I see that in his face and when someone disagrees with him. Even if he's smiling he hates you. Just my impression. I hope he's not going to do a book on Kennedy's sex life. We need a break. And what's he going to say? He's a conservative. Is he going to announce to the world that LHO did it? We've had enough books saying that, recently Bugliosi and Mark Fuhrman. Are we going to be dealing with that mentality again? Enough is enough. I would bet he's a media asset, so he's not going to tell us anything we should know. Case Closed. Kathy C

That's the youngest picture I've seen of Castro. But notice the limp wrist... Kathy C

Robert F. Slatzer is a disinformationalist. He was also a rabid fan of Marilyn Monroe. Jeanne Carmen is a hustler and Marilyn never roomed with her. Slatzer said he was at Marilyn Monroe's last birthday (36) party, given reluctantly by 20th Century Fox. No photos show him in them. I think he was allowed onto studio lots because he wrote bad westerns. He was a screen writer. I think he hovered around Monroe. Slatzer died about 4 years ago. There is a book out mentioning Marilyn Monroe and Robert Slatzer. He was not a close friend of hers. The book is called "Inside Marilyn Monroe, A Memoir by John Gilmore." He talks about the "fat" man hanging around the set (Niagara) and quietly calling her name. She posed for a picture with him, but that was about it. Slatzer is spoiling the reputations of the Kennedys. None of her friends or colleagues ever heard of him or Jeanne Carmen. Some of the things Slatzer wrote were disgraceful lies. This was especially aimed at Robert Kennedy. Kathy C

She definitely had an affair with President Kennedy. But Robert Kennedy was trying to help her in several ways. They were going to do a movie on his book, The Enemy Within. He talked to studio bosses who gave her back her job. He spoke with her psychiatrist. He was trying to get her off Jack's back and there is no proof whatsoever that Bobby Kennedy had a physical relationship with Marilyn Monroe. He was there that night. But he was being framed. Kathy C

That's a good boy. Kathy C

That's it. Anyway that's what I think. That's what makes this a worthwhile topic to me. (I know its an answer to John Simkin) I think it's interesting that some chief purveyors (and creators) of this stuff to feed a certain something are, like Edgar 'the body remover' Hoover far more sexually conflicted (Walker too) yet hide behind a certain facade. One can go far on this on a number of tangents like sociology for example. It's funny (see the whats the tsbd topic) what's often missed is right in front of one. edit typo Whoever has read the C. David Heyman book, does he include a picture of Bobby Kennedy, wife and kids, going to church on Aug.5, 1962 in Gilroy, CA, which is pretty far away from Santa Monica. I've been trying to find this picture for a long time. Kathy C

John Edwards and his affair and child with another woman. I sometimes wonder if Edwards himself prompted that coming out in public. The greyhound, Ann Coulter, called John Edwards a "fag" on Fox's Hannity and Colmes Show. Maybe he felt he had something to prove. Kathy C

Smathers was a bastard from day one. In a Jayne Mansfield biography, she reportedly said that JFK was a big zero in bed and basically she didn't care for him. She hated Jackie. She said Jackie was using her voice. When you hear Jackie speak, as Norman Mailer said, she sounded like Marilyn Monroe playing Ophelia. Kathy C

I'm glad you articulated what I, with some discomfort, felt. It was a different time back then, with a different moral compass. I suspect that his friends and family probably felt somewhat proud and even envious of his ability to seduce women, and to get away with it. It would be later, toward the end of the 60s, that American men first started to catch on to the concept that promiscuity and cheating were immoral and demeaning. One could argue that his marriage may not have been mutually satisfactory, that it was maintained only for "show," but it appears that he was still having some marital relations and children even while cheating. It almost seems to have been something of a game. As I admire President Kennedy, I was willing to overlook an incident or two of infidelity, but the the slow trickle of names and stories, some of which are probably true, makes it a lot harder to excuse or ignore. What was he thinking? I don't know about England, but in the US in the late '60's it was free love, the summer of love. People were more promiscuous. Women were allowed to enjoy themselves. And we have to remember that JFK was on daily cortisone shots and amphetamine shots, had to wear a girdle. If you can believe the Autopsy, his adrenal glands were completely atrophied. But his sister Eunice had the same Addisons disease and lived to a ripe old age. Take a look at Maria Shriver.<br><br>Kathy C

He said there's one thing he hated about this job -- having to get up on Sunday morning and go to church.

John Simkin. The biggest Forum on your education site is the JFK Debate. Why do you spend so much time working on this Forum when you hate Kennedy? You should be hunting down Nazis or something. Kathy C

Well, Kathy, do you care about the truth about your political leaders or do you want to hear stories that make you feel good? What do you like: the truth or a comfortable, soothing lie? I like the truth even if it is the ugly truth. And the truth is John Kennedy, like Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton, was rampantly promiscuous. This is well documented. And it is important because it gives us insight into who JFK was, what his character was like, what his weaknesses were. And how Lyndon Johnson and Sam Rayburn were able to blackmail/strongarm and intimidate John Kennedy into putting LBJ on the ticket as VP at the 1960 Democratic convention. They did not use the "MiMi affair," they handle plenty of other material to work with as well as threatenting to kill all of JFK's legislation. I suggest reading the "Dark Side of Camelot" by Seymour Hersh and you will learn a lot mroe about JFK, his weaknesses and his rivalry with Lyndon Johnson: http://www.amazon.co...28511461&sr=1-1 I read the book already. It's on a shelf in my hallway closet. I have no plans to sell it, as I do on Amazon [Paper and Pen] and eBay [idyllic Books]. Kathy C

Just to amplify this in light of other people's posts: I suspect that Oswald was a spy from a family of military-intel spies: John Pic, Robert Oswald. I wouldn't doubt that attempts were made, and even ongoing conditioning performed, to remake Oswald as a "Manchurian Candidate"-type assassin, or else to make him more suitable for his false-defector role. I do doubt that these efforts worked. dadvertising the unknown. But that quaver in his voice at midnight, when the reporters tell him he has been charged in Kennedy's murder, opens a different panel. Had he expected to be meeting Raul Castro instead of Henry Wade at that hour? I would love to hear Dick Russell's take on Nagell's understanding of Oswald, and also Russell's own. The Manchurian Candidate came out in 1962. Maybe Oswald saw it at the Texas Theater. I feel Oswald was from Russia due to audio tapes of him and his Russian friend. On one tape he even says a variation of the F-word and sounds American.

Since any psychologist would tell you that memory does not improve with the passage of time (it actually gets worse), and considering that Norman never mentioned this episode to anyone prior to this point, it seems obvious to me that he was (1) mentally challenged, (2) being paid to make this up, or (3) scared about something. Has this ever been discussed in the forum? Link to transcript of Norman interview: http://www.reopenken...collection.html link to the "pew" page: http://www.reopenken...782343_orig.jpg I have a weird theory. If you believe there were 2 Oswalds -- and we know Tan Jacket Man was the one looking out the 6th floor window -- could the actions of Oswald be done by Lee Oswald to further sully Harvey Oswald's innocence? And that's why he was in the building. Kathy C

Just reading this piece makes me sick to my stomach. And this is the problem of the JFK Researchers Community. It's one thing to have an affair with Marilyn Monroe, but a young woman about to be married? It paints a very nasty picture. And this is their weapon, the right-wingers use to counteract the Assassination stories. I think Judy Campbell Exner suffered for having known him. Mary Pinchot Meyer was shot dead in an unsolved crime. And the rumors of Monroe's death. This is the stuff they throw at us. More so than his policies -- the eyes glaze over. How do we fix this? Not by lies, not by retaliation. Who knows if any of this stuff is true? I mean, even myself. When I read how often they had sex and then he tells her to service Johnson and Dave Powers while he watched, it turns me off. So it must be doing a similar thing to people who don't remember him or who believe these stories. It's not like the man can defend himself. This kind of Journalism hurts the cause. And when the film JFK came out, many columnists condemned the movie. Especially Chicago's Irv Kupcinet, whose daughter was almost a character in the movie until they went with Rose Cheramie. Kathy C

A late researcher told me that Random House was CIA-controlled, a media asset. Kathy C

Whatever happened to Jack Worthington? Kathy C

I think the general opinion here is that Oswald didn't shoot President Kennedy. We have a picture and a bit of film of the man who was at the 6th floor window -- Tan Jacket Man with the shaved area atop his head. If Oswald wasn't the sniper and never shot at Kennedy, then it's a sure bet he wasn't a victim of MKULTRA. Kathy C

I wish they had let Bobby Kennedy win the presidency. But as for all these "crooks" dying in the electric chair, I don't think that would happen. Because at that time there was too much death going on. His own brother, the Viet Nam war, MLK. I think the murder of John Kennedy truly affected him and made him a different person. I think he would be against the death penalty. Only George W. Bush killed lots of people that way. Kathy C

I'm just starting to read this thread, so it's hard not to say something someone's already said. Ronald Reagan. As Governor of California, Reagan helped squelch the Kennedy Assassination. According to his younger daughter, the Reagans had company over, a party, while the Kennedy news played on the TV. No one caring about it. Is it possible that Ronald Reagan, as President Elect, had John Lennon killed, while Carter was still in as President? Reagan was asked about it and said something like it's a terrible thing. This as he's racing into a building with another man. A lot of reporters were there. They asked him if he still believed in the gun issue. President Elect Ronald Reagan said Yes. About 3 months later he himself is shot in the chest but survived it. I don't think it changed his mind any. Then the Pope got shot and also survived. But with Ronald Reagan it has been said that George HW Bush was behind it. Bush wanted a New World Order. Reagan apparently didn't.. When Bush (HW) was becoming a candidate he chose Dan Quayle as his running mate. This was insurance so he himself wouldn't get assassinated. Bush went on the tarmac and told Reagan his choice. Reagan looked incredulous. Could it be that a man I voted for in my naivete in 1980 killed John Lennon? Kathy C

Not only is E.Howard Hunt the short old tramp but his wife, Dorothy, plays a part: She's the woman with her hand over her face in shock that these maybe the men who killed Kennedy. Nice. hah? Kathy C

Will this forum be filmed? And shown over the Internet. Kathy C lennon440@gmail.com

Uh, thanks Jim... except I was not trying to justify other portions of Hill's testimony... just the contradiction between the testimony of Kellerman and the Zfilm To state that Hill was already in the seat and across their bodies before the TUP, when we see full well that he hovers over them while hangin on for dear life.. is too far a leap for me. Add to this his own testimony and I believe you read to much into his statement. This is obviously AFTER the TUP and he is still not "laying across their bodies" in the literal sense, but the figurative... as are most of the descriptions you like to use... You promoting the literal meaning when it's obvious they were talking figuratively is misleading, imo. So no Jim, my post - nor Kellerman or Hill's testimony does NOT confirm his performing these activities BEFORE TUP. In fact, these images prove he did NOT "lay across their bodies"... in fact, if you search for the word "ACROSS" in his testimony you find out what he was really laying across... Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate on the speed at which the President's car traveled from the point of the shooting to Parkland Hospital? Mr. HILL. It is a little bit hard for me to judge, since I was lying across the rear portion of the automobile. I had no trouble staying in that particular position--until we approached the hospital, I recall, I believe it was a left-hand turn and I started slipping off to the right-hand portion of the car. So I would say that we went 60, maybe 65 at the most. Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to secure a handhold or a leghold or any sort of a hold on the automobile as you moved forward? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. I had my legs--I had my body above the rear seat, and my legs hooked down into the rear seat, one foot outside the car. He may have said somehting about laying across theur bodies at some future point... but not for the WCR. In fact, if we are to take him at his word regarding the hole he sees, I think it only appropriate to take him at his word regarding his trip to Parkland Yet most disturbing is this line of Q&A.... as Purvis has tried to prove, the SECOND SHOT was 313 in the z film... AND he corroborates the idea that it is JFK's HAND we see in that photo and NOT his foot, (I think the small item in front of JFK's hand is Hill's foot)... Mr. SPECTER. When, in relationship to the second shot, did Mrs. Kennedy move out of the rear seat? Mr. HILL. Just after it. Mr. SPECTER. You say that it appeared that she was reaching as if something was coming over to the rear portion of the car, back in the area where you were coming to? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. Mr. SPECTER. Was there anything back there that you observed, that she might have been reaching for? Mr. HILL. I thought I saw something come off the back, too, but I cannot say that there was. I do know that the next day we found the portion of the President's head. Mr. SPECTER. Where did you find that portion of the President's head? Mr. HILL. It was found in the street. It was turned in, I believe, by a medical student or somebody in Dallas. Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any difficulty maintaining your balance on the back of the car after you had come up on the top of it? Mr. HILL. Not until we turned off to enter the Parkland Hospital. Mr. SPECTER. Now, what action did you take specifically with respect to placing Mrs. Kennedy back in the rear seat? Mr. HILL. I simply just pushed and she moved--somewhat voluntarily--right back into the same seat she was in. The President--when she had attempted to get out onto the trunk of the car, his body apparently did not move too much, because when she got back into the car he was at that time, when I got on top of the car, face up in her lap. Mr. SPECTER. And that was, after she was back in the rear seat? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. Mr. SPECTER. And where were the President's legs at that time? Mr. HILL. Inside the car. In fact, from the available evidence that we can actually believe is authentic... the events you describe happened much later and well after the limo would EVER have been filmed by Zapruder.... Bell shows Hill still almost vertical as he is seen in McIntyre and as he is seen later in Moore?? (I forget who took the hand that becomes a foot photo - plus I tried to include here but it would not let me add a third image.. i will post it next.) Here's a photo. Kathy C

Uh, thanks Jim... except I was not trying to justify other portions of Hill's testimony... just the contradiction between the testimony of Kellerman and the Zfilm To state that Hill was already in the seat and across their bodies before the TUP, when we see full well that he hovers over them while hangin on for dear life.. is too far a leap for me. Add to this his own testimony and I believe you read to much into his statement. This is obviously AFTER the TUP and he is still not "laying across their bodies" in the literal sense, but the figurative... as are most of the descriptions you like to use... You promoting the literal meaning when it's obvious they were talking figuratively is misleading, imo. So no Jim, my post - nor Kellerman or Hill's testimony does NOT confirm his performing these activities BEFORE TUP. In fact, these images prove he did NOT "lay across their bodies"... in fact, if you search for the word "ACROSS" in his testimony you find out what he was really laying across... Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate on the speed at which the President's car traveled from the point of the shooting to Parkland Hospital? Mr. HILL. It is a little bit hard for me to judge, since I was lying across the rear portion of the automobile. I had no trouble staying in that particular position--until we approached the hospital, I recall, I believe it was a left-hand turn and I started slipping off to the right-hand portion of the car. So I would say that we went 60, maybe 65 at the most. Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to secure a handhold or a leghold or any sort of a hold on the automobile as you moved forward? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. I had my legs--I had my body above the rear seat, and my legs hooked down into the rear seat, one foot outside the car. He may have said somehting about laying across theur bodies at some future point... but not for the WCR. In fact, if we are to take him at his word regarding the hole he sees, I think it only appropriate to take him at his word regarding his trip to Parkland Yet most disturbing is this line of Q&A.... as Purvis has tried to prove, the SECOND SHOT was 313 in the z film... AND he corroborates the idea that it is JFK's HAND we see in that photo and NOT his foot, (I think the small item in front of JFK's hand is Hill's foot)... Mr. SPECTER. When, in relationship to the second shot, did Mrs. Kennedy move out of the rear seat? Mr. HILL. Just after it. Mr. SPECTER. You say that it appeared that she was reaching as if something was coming over to the rear portion of the car, back in the area where you were coming to? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. Mr. SPECTER. Was there anything back there that you observed, that she might have been reaching for? Mr. HILL. I thought I saw something come off the back, too, but I cannot say that there was. I do know that the next day we found the portion of the President's head. Mr. SPECTER. Where did you find that portion of the President's head? Mr. HILL. It was found in the street. It was turned in, I believe, by a medical student or somebody in Dallas. Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any difficulty maintaining your balance on the back of the car after you had come up on the top of it? Mr. HILL. Not until we turned off to enter the Parkland Hospital. Mr. SPECTER. Now, what action did you take specifically with respect to placing Mrs. Kennedy back in the rear seat? Mr. HILL. I simply just pushed and she moved--somewhat voluntarily--right back into the same seat she was in. The President--when she had attempted to get out onto the trunk of the car, his body apparently did not move too much, because when she got back into the car he was at that time, when I got on top of the car, face up in her lap. Mr. SPECTER. And that was, after she was back in the rear seat? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. Mr. SPECTER. And where were the President's legs at that time? Mr. HILL. Inside the car. In fact, from the available evidence that we can actually believe is authentic... the events you describe happened much later and well after the limo would EVER have been filmed by Zapruder.... Bell shows Hill still almost vertical as he is seen in McIntyre and as he is seen later in Moore?? (I forget who took the hand that becomes a foot photo - plus I tried to include here but it would not let me add a third image.. i will post it next.) Here's a photo.