Kathleen Collins

Robert Kennedy’s Assassination – 42 Years Ago Today, Hope Died

That awful anniversary. We had a talking Mynah bird who died the same day. My mother came running into my room, yelling that Bobby Kennedy had been shot. She told my brother in the next room. He said don't tell Kathy. But I knew and I stayed up all night and even went to school that day. Because of my acute reaction -- it seemed to trigger something -- we didn't talk about the Kennedys. It was an unspoken rule. For decades.

What a painful anniversary.

Kathy C

Because, since the beginning of this conflict, Israel's neighbors have publically declared their clear intent NOT to live in peace with a Jewish State. They have declared their goal to be "driving the Jews" into the sea. This is NOT a political distinction. It is RELIGIOUS. Plain and simple.

This is what started a lot of trouble in this world: Religion. Personally, I follow no religious dogma. But I am very interested in Quantum Physics. I think that is the only way we'll ever find who we are and where we are; and why.

Like Bob Dylan said: Don't follow leaders, watch the parking meters.

Kathy C

I almost had a heart attack.

Kathy C

I am relying on memory so I will come back to this if I am mistaken, but the declassified governmental documents re MKULTRA are virtually devoid of any references to Mexico, whereas there are two sources which go into that area to some degree. Peter LeVenda's Sinister Forces being one, not sure which of the three or if possibly all three.....

The other is Timothy Leary's biography, which has a section re his being in Mexico and if memory serves, alluding to "hypnosis projects."

The problem for me is I do not believe Leary is a trustworthy source, and I think his book is spin, if not outright disinformation.....I know I am not the only one that has that perception.......

For what it is worth......Rober

Hey CK,

Have read a little of Levanda's work online and do intend to read more in time. Marks did a get a file on the MC field experiment in hypnosis which occurred in July '63. According to it, the experiment was a total flop. I would suggest there was more happening than just one field test, but as you say, officially, there is not much to go on.

Greg, you've probably seen this site. It pertains to a timeline and MKUltra in Mexico.

http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/war/mk...ra_timeline.php

It must not matter. i reckon

edit to explain a bit: it is always in the realm of doubt. It cannot be a fundament in a case. There are other good arguments that Oswald could not be definitely identified as the shooter or a part of a team) one way or another.

That about sums it up....but like so many aspects of this case that can not be resolved, the question that will always remain in my mind about this one is why there is a picture that even remotely looks like Oswald ( in the door) or GHW Bush ( on the street ) or Landsdale ( next to the "tramps") ?

These are not figments of our imaginations!

There are far too many of these "anomalies" for any rational person not to think that there is not a good possibility that they are the persons we suspect they are.

Besides, this Altgen’s photo is prima facie evidence of Secret Service inaction. Shots were fired and the agents did nothing.

Smoking gun big time.

I agree. I consider "the man in the doorway" identity irrelevant UNLESS IT IS OSWALD...and this is not provable.

I believe that saying it is Lovelady also has problems for many reasons.

I consider the GHWB image identity very probable. I take Prouty's word (who worked with Lansdale for 5 years)

to be conclusive.

Jack

Someone on this Forum said that the photo of Lovelady's face was possibly superimposed on the original photo. I remember when the picture came out people saying, "Is that Oswald?" Because we really didn't know what Oswald looked like. And people asking, "How could Oswald be standing in the doorway when he was supposed to be shooting the President"? It's like these things are thrown our way to confuse us.

Didn't Altgens claim he never took that photo? Maybe he was afraid.

Kathy C

I HAVE A LAW DEGREE BUT AM NOT LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW. MAYBE THAT WAS THE POINT OF CONFUSION.

So you went to all the trouble to become a Doctor of Jurisprudence, and then did not take the bar exam? Or did you take it and not pass?

Jack

Jack:

Many people go to law school and never practice law. I don't know Dean's situation but many people who would have been great attorneys never pass the bar exam and there are idiots (some people might point to me) who do. There really is no rhyme or reason. In Michigan people who literally give up three or four years of their life and thousands of dollars never pass the exam. In Michigan about 70% pass it the first time and in retaking it your odds go way down. Remember how many times JFK Jr, failed the exam and the headlines "The Hunk Flunks." When I took the exam over two days there were people who had gone through law school, done well, taken a bar review course, got to the test, looked at it and literally stood up and walked out crying.

I had a friend who gave up everything, took the bar exam once, and in almost thirty years could never bring himeself to take it again. Again, I have no knowledge of Dean's personal situation, but it does not impress me if one passes or fails the bar exam. I do have a respect and feel a fraternity for those who endured the law school experience. About one half of the people I started with did not finish law school. I am six hours short of the course work for completing a PHD in education and have a masters in educational leadership. However, that experience was "fun" compared to law school.

Doug Weldon

Geraldo Rivera has a law degree and never went that way; instead he decided to tell the news all the while making the news. He's a turncoat. He said LHO killed Pres. Kennedy and there was no conspiracy. And then he got the job as foreign coorespondant for FOX a week later. Can anything seem so obvious? He would not be welcomed in my home.

Kathy C

Aaaaaack! PERFECT, Kathy! Got me ... still chuckling out loud!

Martin and Lewis were close friends:

Thanks for your appreciation. I couldn't resist.

Kathy C

Martin and Lewis were close friends:

Kathy,

I don't get it. I observe that many of Judyth's critics don't even use the internet as a research tool and you (I take it) reply with

"BULL----", but when you visit a specific link (you don't like), you complain (to me or Todd?), "Was that the best you could do?",

which suggests that you really don't know how to use the internet as a research tool. So your response has confirmed my point.

After Jack had observed (based upon his own study of the autopsy photographs we have available at present) that it seemed to

him that LHO was uncircumcised, but that Earl Rose had remarked that he was, I began considering the possibility that they were

both right, where a partial circumcision seems to fit. I know you don't like it, but that is no argument. Please try to do better.

Jim

The phrase is not in common currency, so it would be unsurprising were he

to simply say "circumcised" when it was a partial but not a complete one. I

can't see this issue carrying any weight at all when partial circumcision fits.

But Jim... Dr. Rose's autopsy report said circumcised, not partially circumcised.

Are you saying he was mistaken? There would be a noticeable difference.

Jack

Most of Judyth's critics don't even use the internet for research. BULL----! I suggested some time back to enter, "circumcision, partial", to check this out. I found several articles about it. If Jack White could look at the Oswald autopsy photographs and say that, in his opinion, he appeared to be uncircumcised, yet the autopsy report says he was, it looks to me as though the evidence supports the conclusion that he had a PARTIAL CIRCUMCISION. What other hypothesis can explain more of the available evidence? That is applying logic to the data, which appears to be too much to expect from most of you on this thread. Here's one link: http://www.askmen.com/dating/dzimmer_100/1...ve_answers.html

The Final Cut

A doctor told me that I do not need to be circumcised if I can pull back the foreskin on my penis without any problems. I can do this, however, I do believe that I have an excess of foreskin. Is it possible to remove some of it, only like the little extra bit that is there? If so, will there be any long-term effects due to the removal of a bit of my foreskin?

Todd

Hello Todd,

Partial circumcision is a common procedure that's favored by many men as a happy medium. The removal of just the contractile tip allows the foreskin to retract upon erection, but still retain its protective quality as a natural shield for the head of the flaccid penis.

I went to the link you provided. It was a god------ sleazy website. Was that the best you could do? I couldn't get any info there because they wanted my email address to join. Why not a medical publication? Something with class and trustworthy medical knowledge. Not some lonely hearts boob talking to a teenager.

Kathy C

Prof. Fetzer, I am on the Internet for hours everyday looking things up. I did not look up circumcision. But I did go to the link where you sent us. When search engines receive a search phrase, a lot of summaries come up. Couldn't you have found somewhere in the results a better website to show us? I don't want to look at sleazy broads. And they wanted my email address so I could join. In other words, if I wanted to see the information you were providing, I'd have to join the site first. Can you not see this? Anyone going to that link would have to enter their email address -- and possibly pay something -- in order to learn about partial circumcision! So, congratulations. I guess you're a member there now. Lucky you!

Kathy C

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Yea,

Let's get Marina and JVB on Jerry Springer!

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

Again, I'm sorry. I was referring to a claim by Prof. Fetzer that there was a beam attached to one of our satellites that made the WTC buildings fall faster than free fall. And I asked if anyone else believed that.

Kathy C

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Pamela, I think I didn't make my statement clearly. I was referring to there being a beam atop one of our satellites that Prof. Fetzer believed caused the WTC buildings to fall faster than free fall. It was his theory. It had nothing to do with circumcision. Sorry.

Kathy C

The phrase is not in common currency, so it would be unsurprising were he

to simply say "circumcised" when it was a partial but not a complete one. I

can't see this issue carrying any weight at all when partial circumcision fits.

But Jim... Dr. Rose's autopsy report said circumcised, not partially circumcised.

Are you saying he was mistaken? There would be a noticeable difference.

Jack

Most of Judyth's critics don't even use the internet for research. BULL----! I suggested some time back to enter, "circumcision, partial", to check this out. I found several articles about it. If Jack White could look at the Oswald autopsy photographs and say that, in his opinion, he appeared to be uncircumcised, yet the autopsy report says he was, it looks to me as though the evidence supports the conclusion that he had a PARTIAL CIRCUMCISION. What other hypothesis can explain more of the available evidence? That is applying logic to the data, which appears to be too much to expect from most of you on this thread. Here's one link: http://www.askmen.com/dating/dzimmer_100/1...ve_answers.html

The Final Cut

A doctor told me that I do not need to be circumcised if I can pull back the foreskin on my penis without any problems. I can do this, however, I do believe that I have an excess of foreskin. Is it possible to remove some of it, only like the little extra bit that is there? If so, will there be any long-term effects due to the removal of a bit of my foreskin?

Todd

Hello Todd,

Partial circumcision is a common procedure that's favored by many men as a happy medium. The removal of just the contractile tip allows the foreskin to retract upon erection, but still retain its protective quality as a natural shield for the head of the flaccid penis.

I went to the link you provided. It was a god------ sleazy website. Was that the best you could do? I couldn't get any info there because they wanted my email address to join. Why not a medical publication? Something with class and trustworthy medical knowledge. Not some lonely hearts boob talking to a teenager.

Kathy C

Only today did Adele get to the "email from Adele" which Judyth alleges that Adele wrote jointly to her and

Mary Ferrell.

Adele denounces it as a forgery!

She says she has never seen it before and the writing style is not hers by a long shot. Even with close friends

she would not use the words or phrases shown in purple. She had never met Judyth, and in their first conversation

she decided that Judyth was a phony.

.............

I wrote to Adele only one time, and she was thrilled to hear from me. Here is her letter to Mary Ferrell and to me:

[From: aedisen@swbell.net (Adele Edisen)

To: maryferr@swbell.net

CC: ElectLady63@aol.com

AOLFAOLHÞ

+Return-Path: <aedisen@swbell.net>

Received: from rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (rly-yd03.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.3]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.8) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:02:42 -0400

Received: from mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.29]) by rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:02:03 -0400

Received: from AEDISEN ([207.193.29.55]) by mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net

(Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9)

with SMTP id <0G2P0057XPVKM0@mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net> for ElectLady63@aol.com;

Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:59:47 -0500 (CDT)

Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:02:34 -0400

From: Adele Edisen <aedisen@swbell.net>

Subject: Judyth's letter

To: maryferr@swbell.net

Cc: ElectLady63@aol.com

Message-id: <002101c03a4a$95282180$371dc1cf@AEDISEN>

MIME-version: 1.0

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1

Content-type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01C03A29.0C9D9D20"

X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3

X-Priority: 3

AOLFRS~

Dearest Mary,

I am absolutely speechless with surprise, joy, shock ... head-shaking astonishment. Some of your emails have been full of surprises, but this one takes the cake! First, I want to thank you; then, I want to ask how you are doing.

Now, on to Judyth's letter.

Dear Judyth - here's ONE GIGANTIC INTERNET HUG! Please, please write to me, call me. I must talk with you! Your incredible letter, which I read late at night, just has put my mind into a tailspin. If you send me anything by regular mail, please address it to my Postoffice Box: Adele Edisen, P.O. Box ....... San Antonio, TX ........(This is also for Mary's info because the postal service will not deliver to my house, even though I have a mailbox on the street. They tell me it's because having a P.O. Box is like a change-of-address, so after one year they assume everyone will know the Box address). My phone number is as Mary said, --- --- ----. Judyth, If you can, please call, or give me your phone number and I can call you. There are so many questions I have for you. I'm home most evenings after 6:00 pm Central Time. We must talk!

I look forward to knowing you. Thank you for your words of encouragement.

–Adele

Even to close friends Adele would not write ONE GIGANTIC INTERNET HUG!

What I remember about Adele from Rich's Forum -- she was a dignified woman. I cannot believe she wrote the email above. I guess you would describe it as "gushing" and it's full of baloney.

Kathy C

Perhaps Adele Edisen was not familiar, as I was, with "white" Cubans and "black" Cubans.

The close-up photo in newsprint is definitely someone with black genes. He reminds me of Karyn Kupcinet's coroner, who really botched up. I was told the surgeon was black, but when I saw newspaper photos of him, he looked possibly Spanish.

Judyth is now covering up some early lies she made to Adele. It's endless!

Kathy C

]In our exchange, we comment several times on an earlier exchange on "sodium morphate." If there is interest perhaps I could post that exchange as well, athough it would take a bit of digging. Briefly, Judyth had said (to David Reitzes again) that Ferrie had mentioned sodium morphate to her. As no such substance exists, and there is no mention of "sodium morphate" prior to the publication of the Skeleton Key to the Gemstone File in 1975, I naturally found this of interest.

I, for one, would be very interested in your exchanges on the fictional "sodium morphate" - if you have time to look for it without much hassle. I think it could be quite interesting for us to see. As you note, there was no mention of it until the Gemstone File in 1975 ... and that was online well before Judyth emerged as a "witness." I have seen where one person likened the use of "sodium morphate" in movies to use of 555-whatever phone numbers. No one is bothered with crank calls ... and no one is given the key to a perfect murder.

Maybe she meant Morphine Sulphate?

Kathy C

Partial Circumcision. What a crock. I think Jim Fetzer would come up with anything to prove himself right. He's been far-fetched in the past when, imo, he said there was a beam placed on top of one of our satellites on Sept. 11 to bring the buildings down faster than free-fall.

Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do. To me it's "out there." If you don't see things his way, he attacks you, throughout this thread.

Kathy C

The "Oswald" seen at the Stevenson demonstration was doing "miltary type turns".

One or more DP witnesses to the 6th floor shooter described him as standing "port arms".

Since Oswald's alibi is demonstrably true, I believe the shooter was not Oswald, but was military trained.

When was "Oswald" at the Stevenson protest? What's the source for this? I never heard about that.

Also, since I'm posting I might as well say this thread about Judyth has been hijacked. This shouldn't have been allowed to go on. And truthfully, I hate ballistics. Let's get back to Judyth or else just end it.

Kathy C

Forum Members: I feel that Jim Fetzer wants to opt out of the discussion of Oswald's penis and call it a "moot" point because he doesn't want Judyth "damaged," a word Doug Weldon used. So Prof. Fetzer comes up with a compromise that Oswald had a "partial" circumcision.

Greg Burnham -- says we are dehuminizing LHO. I don't think so. They even exhumed him. This is what is done when you're after the truth. That's what autopsies are about. That's what this forum is about.

Kathy Beckett -- is disgusted. I'm not. I don't think the majority of members (no pun intended) here are offended. This info on Oswald is relevant for the 2 Oswalds theory.

Judyth -- is either travelling or is sick. This is why her answer to this question defines her status here. And I think Jim and Judyth want to cover their tracks, Jim saying it is irrelevant, etc. He wants to drop the subject, yet he holds onto Judyth's other claims like a dog with a bone. Is he after truth?

Kathy C

Kathy:

Jim agrees that Judyth is a "damaged" witness."

" I agree that

makes her a "damaged witness". It does not make her story false. "

Doug Weldon

"

Right on all points, Doug.

Kathy C

"Jack Ruby visited David Ferrie's apartment one day when Judyth and Lee were there.

Ferrie introduced him to Judyth as Sparky Rubenstein. Judyth was surprised that Ferrie

briefed Ruby on their bio-weapon project. (Why not? They all worked for Marcello.) Ruby

recognized Lee , and said that he used to see him at parties when he was a boy."

I am surprised that Ferrie introduced Judyth to "Sparky" Rubenstein. I have read no one ever called Ruby "Sparky" to his face, as it would lead to a brawl. He earned the nickname Sparky as a kid in Chicago. Anything could set him off. And he was the bouncer at his own club. FWIW, Jada, the exotic dancer, called him a "maniac."

Kathy C

Wow, what an interesting story. I don't think you should feel guilt about this. The woman was probably being followed and they saw the 2 of you together several times, and they killed her because they didn't want the AIDS cure put out there. Pharmaceutical companies are ruthless, imo. They have the cure, and I wouldn't be surprised if they also have an antidote for cancer. The more people who get AIDS the more money these companes make. It's like Bell Helicoptor, etc. Keep the war going so the rich Texas men can have more money and control this country.

I think your friend was kidnapped and murdered. I don't know why she was holding out for the highest bidder. People needed an antidote. She was living with a wealthy woman.

Your description of the Mole world was unbelievable. Thanks for sharing that. Do the NY cops know about this place?

Kathy C

Forum Members: I feel that Jim Fetzer wants to opt out of the discussion of Oswald's penis and call it a "moot" point because he doesn't want Judyth "damaged," a word Doug Weldon used. So Prof. Fetzer comes up with a compromise that Oswald had a "partial" circumcision.

Greg Burnham -- says we are dehuminizing LHO. I don't think so. They even exhumed him. This is what is done when you're after the truth. That's what autopsies are about. That's what this forum is about.

Kathy Beckett -- is disgusted. I'm not. I don't think the majority of members (no pun intended) here are offended. This info on Oswald is relevant for the 2 Oswalds theory.

Judyth -- is either travelling or is sick. This is why her answer to this question defines her status here. And I think Jim and Judyth want to cover their tracks, Jim saying it is irrelevant, etc. He wants to drop the subject, yet he holds onto Judyth's other claims like a dog with a bone. Is he after truth?

Kathy C

KATHY BOTH THOSE PHOTOS SHOWING THE TWO OF THEM TOGETHER ARE COMPS..THAT HAVE BEEN MADE...BY RESEARCHERS TO SHOW A COMPARISON OF THE TWO BROTHERS TOGETHER....B

People who have seen this photo have been led to believe LHO was really there in that kitchen. LHO's picture was from when he was under arrest. Notice the handcuffs. This comparison photo leads people to believe that LHO is actually there with Robert.

Kathy C

Any info on Robert Oswald needed please, i.e. car he drove, left/right handed thanks.......basically anything

These are public records. Robert Lee Oswald lives at 2303 Antigua St, Wichita Falls, TX 76308. His other address is nearby: 2530 Shepherds Glen, etc.

Phone #: 940-691-3519 at both residences.

Kathy C

hi DAVE REALLY THERE ISN'T ALL THAT MUCH REALLY THAT IS KNOWN ABOUT HIM, THERE IS SOME ON THE WEB AND HIS INTERVIEW OTHER THAN THAT AND SUCH AS JACK OR WHOMEVER HAS HIS BOOK ''LEE'' HOPEFULLY THERE MAY BE SOME FURTHER INFO WITHIN.THAT THEY COULD POSSIBLY POST, FOR YOU, .I WILL POST SOME OF WHAT I HAVE FOR YOU, BUT I DO NOT THINK ANY IS IN A PERSONAL NATURE AS I THINK YOU ARE SEARCHING FOR, PERHAPS YOU COULD HAVE A LOOK AT THE MARY FERRELL SITE, NEVER KNOW WHAT IS IN THE MAGAZINE ARTICLES PERHAPS...PLEASE EXCUSE THE CAPS...B

Post #6

Take a good look at the photo of Harvey and Robert. Notice in another picture Robert is in the same pose without Harvey, with Marina there. Now take a look at Harvey in the picture of the 2 brothers again. We see the right side of Harvey. I know this is going to seem strange, but Harvey has a cut on his forehead that occurred when he was arrested. Notice his eyes are closed. Could Intell have posed Harvey to put into the picture with Robert when Harvey was dead?

But it looks like he still has handcuffs on. This is a fake picture.

Kathy C

I agree with Jim that the 2 b/w Polaroids shot at the hospital differ from the color

penis photo shot by the FBI at the autopsy. The b/w shots show an erection while

the autopsy slides show it flaccid. I do not know the medical significance of this.

Unlike Jim, I have never considered this suspicious. I doubt that it is retouching.

I have been unable to locate my copies of either set of photos on my computer.

I know I have slides "somewhere".

Jack

This is awkward, but -- a man can have an erection when he is dead?

Kathy C

You are behind Kathy. I was wrong. I was sleepy when I wrote that. See a later post.

Jack

It's hard keeping up with this thread. I still can't see if he's circumsized or not. What I can see is that he had huge testicles. I remember the story -- and it's probably in the John Armstrong book -- of Harvey's mother, taking him when he was very young to a doctor to see if his private parts were normal and was assured they were.

Kathy C