Kathleen Collins

I don't know the technology or methodology that would make the lamp pole seem to lean or not. But

watching that gif I saw a change in the pole's slant. If you move the video down so only the top of the lamp

is present, you can see its "movement" (for lack of a better word).

Dems my 2 cents.

Kathy C

The whole Alvarado/Phillips saga of the “negro with red hair” giving “Oswald” $6500 at the Cuban consulate is so obviously false we hardly need to dwell on it. The real question is…. Why would a high-ranking CIA officer push the false tale? The answer, I believe, is the same as for the following questions:

Why did “Lee Harvey Oswald” leave Texas for no apparent reason so that he could pretend to support Castro in New Orleans while being surrounded by virulent anti-Castro government agents around Clay Shaw's Trade Mart in New Orleans?

Why did a “Lee Oswald” attempt to purchase rifles just weeks before the assassination from Robert McKeown, a personal friend of Fidel Castro who was at the time on parole for selling guns to the Cuban revolutionary?

Why was “Lee Harvey Oswald” impersonated at the Soviet and Cuban installations in Mexico City?

Why, just minutes after the assassination, did J. Edgar Hoover tell Robert Kennedy that Oswald “made several trips to Cuba?”

The obvious answer is that “Lee Harvey Oswald” was being sheep-dipped as an agent of Fidel Castro so that when he was framed for the assassination of JFK, the resulting furor would end with a U.S. invasion of Cuba. It's really quite obvious.

What puzzles me is if they were sheep-dipping Oswald as a Commie (which I believe), who lived several

years in Russia, came back with a Russian bride, sided with Castro -- why didn't the ones working on the

Oswald scenario give him a decent gun? How could he shoot anybody with that piece of junk? Just give

him a decent gun. That was a mistake.

Kathy C

That editorial is a disgrace. It ignores most every key point in order to defend the indefensible.

1. It ignores that the male student was not prohibited from arguing against gay marriage in class because the female student teacher disliked his views, but because it was off-topic, and possibly disruptive to the class.

2. It ignores that the male student was preparing to drop the class anyhow, because he had fallen behind in his work.

3. It ignores that McAdams had found out about the incident involving the male student and the female student teacher through his role as an employee of the University, specifically, through his role as the male student's academic advisor.

4. It ignores that McAdams knew he was supposed to report any problems regarding the female student teacher's performance to her superiors in her department, but that he chose not to do so because he thought they would fail to punish the female student teacher.

5. It ignores that McAdams had used his blog to harass female students in the past, and had been warned not to do so ever again.

6. It ignores that he not only trashed the student teacher on his blog, but misrepresented her actions to do so, and linked to her personal webpage, so that his readers could insult her and abuse her.

In short, McAdam's did not lose his tenure over free speech. He lost it over his deliberately engaging in reckless behavior that could have cost the University untold millions in a lawsuit, should Ms. Abbate had been injured by one of McAdams' followers. McAdams had, after all, used his position with the university to gain information regarding the actions of a female student, and then used this information to publicly humiliate the student, and endanger her well-being. It was the rough equivalent of looking through her files and finding she'd had an abortion, and then posting this on a right-to-life Facebook page in which protests against abortion clinics are planned. His actions were both improper and immoral, and the university acted appropriately.

Thanks for weighing in. But, as is often the case with your posts, you are missing the main point ---in this case, the main point of the Wall Street Journal editorial, which you criticize by bringing up a host of irrelevancies (to which, apparently in the interest of pedagogy, you assign numbers).

But Pat Speer: here's the bottom line: If Smith writes something negative about Jones, and some unhinged supporters of Smith's view then come out of the woodwork and threaten Jones' welfare, or even Jones' life, is that the responsibility of Smith? Should he be seen as a provocateur in a murder plot? Or someone expressing his views in the realm of free speech?

This issue is about free speech, and defining the "legal landscape" in that area of life. The lawyer defending McAdams sees that very clearly, and his letters are really quite impressive. This case is not about whether McAdams is a nice guy, by this or that person's standard; or whether he "should have known better" etc.

Instead of providing us with a catalogue of irrelevancies, I suggest you go back and read your Voltaire.

FWIW: I too regret that an assortment of Internet creeps came out of the woodwork, and threatened Cheryl Abatto's well being. And that's apparently what happened. But there's another principle here, that's what the courts are going to have to address, and that was the focus of the Wall Street Journal editorial.

So again, instead of making numbered lists, go read Voltaire.

DSL

5/7/16 - 3 p.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

Sorry, but talk about condescension! I'm well-read and have a BA in English. Unfortunately I never read Voltaire

and I bet that's the case with most members here. So what is the name of the work you refer to and

how does it relate?

Kathy C

Why is this forum exxxing out the word "xxxx"? Cruz is saying this, not me.

Kathy C

I guess no one cares about Beckham's ear. Anyway, reading a story in the Enquirer, Trump has stated that

Cruz's father was seen with Lee Harvey Oswald, giving out fliers for Castro's Cuba. There are at least 2

pictures showing Cruz with Oswald. Trump sees this as a weird history of a presidential candidate. I didn't

read the article, but I know that these tabloids report things that are more true than not. People don't want to

acknowledge this. Imagine a candidate for President, having his father involved in the worst thing to happen

to this country. Kind of like -- George W. Bush becoming President knowing what his father did. His father,

too, was involved very much with the assassination. The father, too, was a President, crying all the time,

puking in Japan. We need another Republican like that?

I don't blame Trump for talking about it. I haven't heard Cruz discuss this claim. He came out this morning

calling Trump a pathological xxxx and a narcissist.

Guess who I'm voting for: Trump.

Kathy C

Ray, this might be the same link. It's David Lifton's theories and findings. He wrote Best Evidence, which says

Kennedy's body was altered between Parkland and Bethesda. This was the first book that said this. He doesn't

believe J.D.Tippit's body was switched with Kennedy's.

https://www.youtube.com/user/nightfri...

http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=48091&r...Best…

YOUTUBE.COM

I know Brent Holland did a show with Joseph McBride who wrote a book on Tippit. But I can't

find it.

************

David, thank you for the info about the reburial of President Kennedy. I didn't know McNamara was there.

There was a famous Archbishop there as well. Jackie showed up afterwards. The National Guard was there

that night, all over the cemetery.

Kathy C

Kath, the you tube link says it "no longer exists".

Ray, I will try to find the show for you. It's one of Brent Holland's night shows. I think he has a Facebook

following.

I looked at the stare of death photo. You cannot see his nipples. Above that I don't see any scars.

Kathy C

The Oxnard call was first said to be made by Karyn Kupcinet to Chicago to her father. Greg Parker figured out

what it was and it had no bearing on Karyn. This girl had no luck. Her father found a mobster who knew Jack

Ruby, who was originally from Chicago. At the time that Ruby shot Oswald the Mob did not want to be

associated with the Assassination. Later they bragged they did it. Anyway, Irv Kupcinet was a TV talk show host

and columnist with the Chicago Sun-Times. He tracked down Paul Dorfman, who owned a home in Palm

Springs; around 8 am PT. He informed Dorfman that this Rubinstein just shot Oswald.

Now, you talk about coincidences. Karyn Kupcinet was in Palm Springs that weekend also. I believe the Mob

bumped her off to send Kup a message to stop investigating the assassination. Her death was never solved.

She died 4 days after Oswald and wasn't found until 3 days later. Did she OD? There was no vomit found at the

scene, no drinking glass. The police found 2 sets of prints never identified.

The coroner who performed the autopsy said Karyn died of a broken hyoid bone. Three years later 2 women

were exhumed that he had worked on. One woman he said was decapitated. She wasn't. Another woman died

of natural causes, not strangulation. The Coroner was quoted as saying, "Well, at least I didn't break the hyoid

bone on that one." He is described as being a drunk. So now we really don't know what she died from.

In the 80's I was a professional astrologer. So I am going to look into her death to see if it is related to President

Kennedy's death or Oswald's regarding sidereal time.

FWIW, I spoke to a psychic about Karyn's death in 1996. She said there was a tall, dark man there and he was

there because of addiction. He spoke 2 languages.

The only thing missing from her house, which looked ransacked, were 100 methamphetamine pills, desoxyn. I

learned that later on.

I bring her up because Penn Jones Jr wrote that Karyn was the one who made the Oxnard call and that she had

foreknowledge of the assassination, which she did not.

Kathy C

Can anyone see the shooter in the upper left corner? It looks like he's leaning on a white car and is shooting.

Thank you, Michael. I am going to watch it again later. While we're on the subject of the Holocaust, 2 Kennedy researchers have come out of the closet, so to speak, as Holocaust Revisionists: Jim Fetzer and Robert Morrow. Len Colby is just the opposite as he quoted Fetzer on his signature saying, "I don't think there were 6 million Jews in all of Europe at that time." To that effect. Read his signatures as they are very funny -- he quotes people.

Kathy C

The obvious questions, in view of “Nighthawk One’s” departure without President Kennedy’s body onboard, are: (1) Who changed the plan? How did this happen? and (2) How did JFK’s body get to Bethesda Naval Hospital, if “Nighthawk One” did not take it there?

The original plan was, indeed, to transport JFK's casket to Bethesda via helicopter, as we can hear on the Air Force One tapes (below). But the plan was changed prior to AF1 landing at Andrews, due (no doubt) to the fact that somebody realized the difficulty there would be if they tried to jam JFK's very heavy and cumbersome casket onto a helicopter. So an ambulance/hearse was used instead.

There's certainly nothing conspiratorial or sinister about that change in plans whatsoever. In fact, it was a very sensible and prudent change that almost certainly had to be made.

And the answer to the #2 question above is quite simple --- President Kennedy's body got to Bethesda by way of the gray Navy ambulance. Millions of people watching television saw the casket being placed into that ambulance. (Why was that second question even asked?) ~shrug~

Below are excerpts from the AF1 radio transmissions concerning the "chopper" and the later realization by members of the Kennedy party aboard Air Force One that ground transportation would be needed to replace the chopper:

Air Force One Radio Excerpts (November 22, 1963)

More....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/aircraft-radio-transmissions-11-22-63.html

Whose face is that in the window of the ambulance? Is it a reflection?

Kathy C

Wow Brad - that was quite a post. I have never heard that explanation of Jackie's movements before. What would have happened had she gone on the warpath after returning home? She was hugely respected.

Though it's overwritten and mentions every triviality of that weekend, Death of a President by William Manchester describes Jackie throughout Nov.22, '63 and Nov. 23. The book is interesting in degrees. Sections are fascinating and much is unknown to the average reader.

Kathy C

Kathleen's post triggered a reminder to me that when interviewer's get the opportunity to question living witnesses they often do more harm than good in the questions they fail to ask their guest. The general public does not have the means or opportunities to ask questions themselves. A good example of this is the list of interviews conducted by the Sixth Floor Museum & posted on YouTube.

"...knows a bit about astrology..."

BM

In acknowledgement of Brad, but not to break the thread here, I just want to say I was once, decades ago, a professional astrologer. I don't do charts anymore. Too much work for too little money. I never bull-s------ anyone.

Kathy C

Yes, I believe TMWKK adds a lot to the discussion. Especially "The Guilty

Men," which the History Channel never repeated because of fears of a law

suit. It's an eerie episode. You can see it on youtube.

Kathy C

I want to defend Jackie Kennedy. If she was afraid of being shot like her

husband, would she get up on the trunk of the car in a pink suit where

everyone could see her? In my opinion, she was not trying to "escape."

The best thing she could have done would be to duck down with the

President's head on her lap.

There has been much discussion here that the shots came from inside the

car. Maybe when the shots hit their target (JFK) the sound was in the car.

There is one forum on the Internet filled with people who believe Jackie

killed her husband with a small gun under his chin because she was

trained by MKUltra. And some believe the driver shot Kennedy. There

are people who believe it was a fake assassination and that Kennedy

survived and went to Hyannis Port and later, when Jackie married Ari, he

died in Greece on a private island and was buried at sea.

The best evidence (excuse me, David Lifton) to me is the Nix film. There

is a white car with its back toward Elm St on the grassy knoll. It looks like

the shooter is leaning on the front open passenger door and shooting at

the limo with a rifle. You can see this in the enhanced, enlarged copy of

the film on youtube. If you look at the Bell film after the assassination, the

car is no longer there.

Kathy C

Is it me (it probably is) or is there a device in "Beckham's" ear in the

profile shot?

Kathy C

I never heard that the limo stopped west of Stemmons. I heard

that the car came to a stop and Kennedy was hit. This was near the stairs --

East of Stemmons.

Ray and others,

Here are 2 links to an Internet radio show which discussed the body moving,

etc. It's Brent Holland, host.

https://www.youtube.com/user/nightfri...

http://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=48091&r..

Kathy C

In the autopsy photo, where they have Kennedy sitting or standing up, his

ear is exactly the same as President Kennedy's. There are other things --

his hair color -- Jackie took a lock of it. The amount of hair he has. Tippit's

hairline was receding. Kennedy had so much hair. I believe Robert

Morningstar started this. He's a bit like David Icke, somewhat psychic.

Kathy C

Ray, here is a link to the Stare of Death photo and you can see a mole on

his left shoulder.

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm

Kathy C

This is an excerpt from LewRockwell.com, November 17, 2014 used for

educational reasons.

"Immediately after JFK’s assassination, Liggett was called while at

work at Restland Funeral Home. He rushed to Parkland, calling his

wife only once to let her know that he had been asked to work on the

President and that he would call her, she shouldn’t try to call him.

According to Billie Sol Estes, in his book Billie Sol Estes — A Texas

Legend, Liggett left Restland with an assistant, taking a body that

had been stored in the morgue that was similar to JFK’s body and

prepared to look like a rear head shot was the cause of death.

Estes stated that the second body was used to create false

evidence and that photographs, x-rays and even the complete brain

from that cadaver were substituted for JFK’s autopsy 'records' in

order to re-frame the documents to conform to the official story;

moreover, he stated that all of this was sent first to the White House

before being sent to the FBI, the Warren Commission and the

National Archives.

"According to Estes, the 'other body' was taken to Washington on a

private jet. If that story is true, it is a possible explanation of the

provenance of the discrepancies that exist in photographs and

x-rays which could not have been taken of Kennedy’s head. It might

also explain the enigma, noted elsewhere, of the supposed

existence of JFK’s complete brain, weighing 1500 grams, more than

an average male brain, as reported by several authors; that is

impossible, since most of his brain had been blown out the back of his head, much

of it splattering the motorcycle policeman B. J. Martin in the process. The

scenario that I previously portrayed, in LBJ: The Mastermind, had been based

partly on David Lifton’s early research, but I independently concluded that JFK’s

body was moved to a shipping crate and put on 'Air Force 2.' I have since

reevaluated that, based upon Lifton’s latest research, pending publication, which

clarifies that and proves that JFK’s body was indeed simply moved to the cargo

hold of Air Force One immediately upon delivery of the ornate casket, while the

Kennedy party was still on the tarmac. Lifton explained his findings at an address

in November, 2013, at Bismarck State University, which is available for viewing

on a Youtube video.

"Mr. Lifton has recently advised me that his latest work, now underway, will

address this point further as he has obtained additional information on how JFK’s

body was moved to Washington. Researcher / author Doug Horne has also

written what is arguably the most detailed, meticulously documented account of

the events on Air Force One and Bethesda Naval Hospital ever written to date:

The AF1 Tapes and Subsequent Events at Andrews AFB on November 22, 1963:

What Was Supposed to Happen vs. What Did Happen at the Future of Freedom

Foundation website. As I previously noted, the overall story portrayed does not

hinge on which of these scenarios was the true and complete one, the details of

which may never be known with absolute certainty. The one thing that is certain is

that the 'official' version described by the Warren Commission cannot be

reconciled with the numerous contradictions which have already been identified in

a number of books and summarized here.

"According to Episode 7 (The Smoking Guns) of The Men Who Killed Kennedy, a

day after the assassination, John Liggett returned home, unshaven, disheveled

and very tired. According to his wife, “he looked like he had been in a traumatic

event.” Yet he immediately took his wife and three step-children to Austin and San

Antonio, talking briefly and furtively to men he met at each stop as he rushed from

Dallas to these other cities, even getting a speeding ticket between Dallas and

Austin. He then took the family on to Corpus Christi, where on Sunday morning

they watched Jack Ruby shoot Oswald on live television. Upon seeing that

stunning event, he turned to his wife and said calmly, “Everything’s OK now. . . and

you could just see his face, it was like all the pressure had been taken off of him.”

Shortly after the assassination, John Liggett came into a lot of money and bought

an expensive Dallas home and then became the host of numerous high-stakes

poker parties. At one of these parties, the daughter of Lois Liggett, Debra Godwin,

stated that David Ferrie — who was a long-time acquaintance, and a short-time

'handler' of Lee Harvey Oswald in the summer of 1963 in New Orleans —

appeared, and that John said he had known him while he served in the Civil Air

Patrol."

----------

Mortician Liggett was considered the best cosmetician in the country. Did he

actually use J.D. Tippit's body to disguise him as Kennedy so it would look like the

bullets came from the back and up.

Kathy C

PANZA: The temple wound is the one that caused the head snap.

CERVANTES: No one in Dealey Plaza reported such a head snap—unless, of course, they happened first to see an altered Z-film.[35] And what about Rather[36] and DeLoach,[37] who both reported that JFK actually went forward (on that early version of the Z-film)? You might also check out Finck’s comments on viewing the Z-film.[38] And did you read Altgens’s similar comments about this?[39]

Greg,

Are you saying that there was no "back-and-to-the-left" head snap? That the edited Z film just makes it appear there was?

Yes.

Greg, when everyone moved forward in the car, it was because Agent Greer hit the brake.

Douglas, this is a rare time when I disagree with you. First

It looks like Hunt is the tramp. And Harrelson is there, smirking and having

a urine stain on his pant leg. The other man's identity has never been

satisfied. He definitely is not Sturgis.

The man in the raincoat attire looks like Hunt also. Supposedly Hunt said

he was in the postal annex (I think it's called) on a high floor watching the

assassination with binoculars.

I don't know which is true, if either. But there is a tramp photo where

Dorothy Hunt, Howard's wife, is in the picture with her hand to her mouth as

if shocked while looking at the 3 tramps. The 2 of them in the same picture.

Kathy C

But I, too, think the Kennedy Assassination is the crime of the century. It certainly was for Americans when the boys were killed and maimed in Viet Nam.

Kathy C