B. A. Copeland

I often wonder if Prouty himself dealt at all with GHWB during his military career, specifically during the raids on Cuba.

Now THIS is something I ALWAYS wondered after the Watergate Affair broke out and realized that most of those who orchestrated that Coup were quite close, Haig being an insider in my personal opinion. That train of thought then lead me to wonder if, at all, he was involved with JFK's death. Excellent topic.

I remember reading Hancock's book and wondering if it was Felipe Vidal Santiago but I have not done research to know of his exact whereabouts on the day in question.

Very interesting. I think today that Psychological Warfare plays a very important and powerful role in controlling and misleading the masses in general. It has also been said that "history is written by the winners". I agree also that the internet has undermined the mass media and/or ruling establishment. Their inability to fully fully maintain and control it will certainly be their undoing.

I think we have to be very careful of the Gemstone files. I also believe that the phrase "the best place to hide information, is in disinformation" can go both ways. While the majority of the files are nonsense, perhaps a few gems can be pulled from its contents, that is...if we have the entire file wholly intact and not tampered with. I cannot remember where I heard this but I remember hearing that Onassis' son was murdered by the CIA because Onassis had begun his own personal investigation on the JFK Hit and he was warned to stop. Just a bit of food for thought. I am not endorsing such a statement but is (like many elements in the JFK case) possibly worthy of further inquiry.

Colby, interesting point, however even still, S.D is a likely possibility. There are other ways that plane could have went down. Surely, no one is going to think anything "conspiratorial" and have it published publicly (lol...) He did go a few 100ft below but even the NTSB Report does not mention this (to my knowledge) was an issue at all and I remember hearing a radio show with Michael Herzog that the maneuver Jr actually did was a regulation and typical maneuver before climbing to a higher altitude. He seemed to have went lower to make the final radio call ("Burgun/FAA's call) then climbed to a higher altitude only to crash at approx. 9:40/42. My point? While S.D could be the cause, I think that there are certain clues throughout that makes the entire affair stink.

Lets take a look at Merena for a moment. Merena (for about 5-6 months) never claimed John 'wanted to do it alone' yet...some 5-6 months after the crash, he pops up and says it, to which his own Lawyer gets involved? That seems just odd to me...The only reason I use that as an example is because it is one of the powerful "proofs" or pieces of evidence offered to show John did not have a CFI onboard that night. My claim is that given Jr's physical situation (his leg, to which one witness said he was hobbling around his plane that night, I believe it was K. Bailey) his Instruments Exam, the possibility of hazing up worse than it was all seems (to me) to suggest that there is no reason why he would not have one. I have studied that it is very difficult to pilot a plane on the ground with a leg condition such as Jr's that night, that reason alone would move me in such a direction of him having a CFI with him. Jr's death could possibly and very well be connected to 9/11 in some way, possibly I say...

According to Hankey as well, Jr was speaking with a health foods guru A. True Ott. I think this would definitely have to be substantiated or corroborated but apparently and according to Ott, Jr was gathering evidence against GHWB for his participation in the murder of his father. This article was/is published on Rense.com. and think it deserves further investigation.

George Magazine/JFK Jr wasn't a threat lol...? Well I am not totally sure about that. The man includes Oliver Stone speaking against (essentially) the W.C (mind you this is JFK's son magazine lol) and also George interviews the mother of the alleged assassin of Rabin and the basic implication of that article is/was that her son was controlled by the Mossad and that there was no way her son could have done what her son did without the Mossad's participation in preparations . I find it difficult to believe that such articles are not a threat in today's (and yesterday's) Private Intelligence Services-run world.

I think they're attempting to identify certain individuals Mr. Vaughn so that we can understand their actions on the day in question. "The main things are the plain things and the plain things are the main things."

You know...concerning the entire Z-film fakery, the logic I have seemingly always used, since I first learned of the assassination at a very young age was quite simple I felt. Basically I learned over time how many witnesses were silenced in some awful way, I learned how valuable pieces of evidence were tampered with or destroyed so on, so forth. Now the logic I used was simple, if so many witnesses were silenced "altered" (via testimony for example), eliminated or the like and if we can consider the Z-film probably (pre-alteration in my view) one of the greatest "witnesses" to the scene of the crime and yet, it has not been totally eliminated nor at least tampered with, would it not be logical to conclude in some way that it has been (or could definitely well be/could have been) "silenced" or compromised in some manner...? I mean come on, the film (pre-alteration) is probably the best witness to the crime and it comes out "perfectly" unaltered...lol? I honestly find that very difficult to believe and I always will unless very powerful evidence is given to the contrary. My apologies to go off topic a bit there Mr. White.

"Pilot error" is a theory at best lol. He also had an auto-pilot that did work, so you could say that spatial d. could have been totally avoided no? I was curious about that.

According to Keith Harmon Snow, Clinton committed war crimes when his administration made sure that "Habyarimana's private Falcon 50 jet was shot down near Kigali International Airport" and also, the destruction of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory, not to mention his 'cozyness' with Bush Sr which is suspect and his connections to the diamond trade. I'd better take my JFK discussions to another topic, sorry for jumping off here lol. Len Colby thanks for the response to my thoughts, it'll take some time but i'll get back to you.

So then.....what now of his 'followers' of his ridiculous books covering the Kennedy and King killings.....at least he's probably still on CIA payroll lol...

I think that with most (if not all) of the Bush family history we do possess, we have more reason to believe than not, that the Bush mentioned in the memo is GHWB. I would love info. on Capt, Edwards....too bad he has never really been able to be questioned or investigated.

Very interesting Mr. Simkin, thanks to Mr. J. Edgar Hoover we do know where he was on Nov. 23rd 1963 lol. I was also wondering, and it is slightly related to this topic, if anyone has ever obtained information on a "Captain William Edwards of the DIA"? He was mentioned in the famous 'Hoover memo' regarding GHWB.

So you confused the name of the paper not a big deal, but you also misremembered its content. They said he was “sighted” at the two week event but aides denied he’d been there. They did NOT say he definitely was there or when or who spotted him. Even Tom says it was unlikely he was there the weekend in question.

Unlikely, but not impossible. Some, if not most, of his staff said that they did not know where he was. Either it was a lie/cover or they honestly did not know in general, yet we have 2 papers making a big deal out of it. If he was sighted at the event, well we could count that as definitely being there. Yes, I would think that aides would say otherwise lol, like Hughes who demanded a retraction (for what? why?...what does it matter right?) If Tom says it was unlikely then at least give me some meat that would attempt to move me in that direction. Otherwise you have a paper making a "big deal" out of it involving Karen Hughes, that's a bit of meat I'd say.

OK I stand corrected, and apologize. So nearly 3 years after the fact Blow did claim that Kennedy told him this shortly after lunch that day. But he seems not to have said anything at the time or to the NTSB and even in his book he gave indication he thought there really was a CFI on board. It is available on Amazon Reader and the excerpt you quoted is on a university website

http://www.amazon.com/American-Son-Portrai...ader_0805070516

http://rts.dec.ecnu.edu.cn/yjs/ygg/ygg07/u...a1/gg06a120.htm

Most reviewers saw Blow as someone who wanted to cash in on his relationship with Kennedy after signing a non disclosure agreement and forbidding George staff from talking to the press.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Mar10.html

Why did Blow’s claim made in 2002 not affect 1999 press accounts or the 2000 NTSB report? Was that a serious question? As to why it became excepted there was no CFI see my previous posts.

Well I am not sure....the claim about his wanting to cash in seems like some sort of an ad hominem, if may not be but it surely seems considering the context. I am not sure how Blow could gain anything when he documents in his book a small, nearly insignificant exchange that would oppose the "govt. line". I am concentrating on why we would have every reason to believe that John would have had an instructor with him given the circumstances by using John's own words as reported by a good friend of his. I would honestly think or safely assume Blow lost alot when John died. Perhaps Blow's claim did not affect any account at the time because he was probably within the minority crown having such a statement in his book, so people would naturally tend to look over it unless you are digging through a rabbit hole. It was a VERY serious question because it was "common knowledge" that John did not have a CFI onboard. I also tend to take NTSB details with a grain of salt....I don't know lol. I mean hell, they do not mention much (or all) of his phone calls that day either, and those SHOULD be documented for obvious reasons. he apparently talked with a seemingly shady individual known as Robert Merena that day and Merena's story is a story in itself.

Pay attention people DID see them getting on the plane and made no mention of seeing a CFI one told Salon "I told my family, 'I can't believe he's going up in this weather'"

I think we'll both attempt to pay closer attention from this period onward. I have honestly searched for any eyewitnesses to those who would have seen them get onto the plane and have found none, could you give a few names if any of witnesses? Surely, perhaps no one mentioned that there was a CFI present, but it honestly does not mean there was not one present. I am simply studying the barrage of media accounts or front page readings that continually mentioned that John "wanted to do it alone". Please, grant me the name of this party that has reported to Salon.com.

I’ll believe Raziwell, Bailey and JFK jr.’s CFI that he didn’t have one as well as the fact none was found or went missing. Additionally he went 300 feet below regulation altitude for over a minute just before his “last contact”. Also he'd trained with 6 CFI's in the 80's and at least 3 in the late 90's, only one (from the latter) said he was "very cautions" not that he "was one of the most cautious pilots [he] had ever known"

Well lol......theoretically, that is/would be one of the reasons for the 15+ hour delay. There was "no CFI", so it would make sense to take care of that evidence. We have a report of choppers out over the sear before Stanley and his crew were ordered to search along coastal lines. We have stonewalling also by the FAA to the Kennedy Family. Actually according to the N-TAP, he did exactly what any fundamentally skilled pilot would have done I thought when he descended 300 ft. for the final radio call (reported by Burgun). Also, if one of his CFI's said that lol....would it not be enough to at least convince the average joe that "ok...the guy at least knew his stuff"? Jr. was qualified to be an instructor at least.

Filing a flight plan was not mandatory for the flight because it never went through controlled airspace, if you can turn up evidence that he normally did so for his solo flights post it here. Short of that you’ve got nothing but speculation. As I previously pointed out according to the FAA “he never called Flight Service for aviation weather information, for instance, although FAA regulations state that a pilot "should."” As for him being extra cautious because his wife was on board given the reports about their relationship I don’t know how much of a factor that would have been.

Not mandatory and perhaps he did not file one but according to Hankey, he spoke to a CFI who did not believe that John would not have done that. Being "very cautious" It doesn't seem out of the park to file one anyways. However, it would be dumb to have a flight plan show up showing the presence of a CFI when John "wanted to do it alone" lol. We have a pretty big seat missing from the plane, while 5 others were recovered, we have a 15+ hr delay in the search (when the FAA KNEW the plane was down and where it was) it smells fishy. Those are only basic fundamental points as well. There was a phone call that happened the night of the crash at approx 10-11 (the Budd call) where the N Number was given, that is more than enough reason to begin a search. I cannot fathom a reasonable excuse for the attitude of the FAA employee on the phone with Budd and my goodness Colby lol, no matter what they were going through, it was his wife and I would assume they loved one another until the moment they died. It seems fitting that a man as cautious as he would not dare try to worry or scare his wife when it came to his flying, this includes having a CFI (because he was going on visual flight rules anyway, which would be another great reason to have a CFI with him to log hours to pass his VFR exam) since he had his cast recently removed (and would also make it a bit difficult to steer on the ground before take off and possibly after) and flying at night with questionable visibility (even though it was reported as 8-10 miles).

As for the WP article lol.....it seems to bolster the standard hogwash line "dumb kennedy kid playing with danger and dies, he was too cocky" or something to that effect. I'd like the source material for the article posted. I'd like the source for "riday's flight, he told acquaintances with exhilaration..." comment, because I have Blow's words, you have the W. Posts. I don't see why Blow would not have mentioned that episode.

P.S - I also learned apparently that John was never seen flying his new Saratoga without a CFI. Perhaps it should be looked into.

Kathleen, yes, according to the SF Bee (it was definitely 1 of 2 papers that literally reported it, while 1 retracted the story) Newspaper, W was indeed at the Grove the weekend of the murder. "sigh..."I really need to locate the source correspondence for that...

Since there is no such newspaper this is obviously untrue.

Well Mr. Colby, I am not sure that syllogism would hold entirely true lol. Perhaps the paper I got wrong, but it could have been a different paper while the content could actually be true. So then, while it may not have been the SF Bee (since it does not exist) it could have been another paper, while the story of the retraction/Hughes could be indeed true. It was not the SF Bee but the Sacramento Bee and Santa Rosa Press Democrat.

Mr White that is truly very unfortunate . Thanks Mr. Hogan for the info, much appreciated.

B.A.,

What I meant is that it was "obviously untrue" that the SF Bee "was definitely 1 of 2 papers that literally reported it". The problem is this seems to be based on you memory of something you were told years ago and your recollections of event surrounding the crash has been shown to be faulty,not only did you say something was "definitely...reported" in a non-existent paper you previously claimed that Raziwell and Blow said things they didn't.

I'm not sure where W was that weekend but he was in Iowa the morning just before the crash.

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?as_q=...mp;as_scoring=a

I would not say that most of my recollections are faulty concerning the crash and no, logically something cannot be "definitely reported" in a paper that does not exist, so perhaps I mean in the particular paper that does exist, the story was reported, to which I have shown in a post from another site detailing toe very same info I received. Yes, he was flipping cakes then vanished for the most part, that is/was known. Now you have made a claim that I have claimed something you feel they did not claim, you must be careful because I have the proof for Blow's comments, that is not difficult at all seeing I've read it a million timesl. For proof of Blow's comments? Check out "American Son" pg. 261. I will quote:

"I'm flying to Hyannis Port for my cousin's wedding," he said. I glanced down as John's foot--even the short distance back from the restaurant had tired him--then gave him a skeptical look. "Don't worry," he said. "I'm flying with an instructor."

Now, here is my logical question (in general), where did the claim originate with certainty that John had NO CFI on board that plane if in his own words to Blow he was having one as well as no documented records of anyone seeing he and is company get onto the plane? I mean, what would you rather believe knowing John was one of the most cautious pilots his CFI's had ever known? For this super cautious pilot, they're also saying that no flight plan was filed, which makes no ridiculous sense whatsoever. Filing a flight plan is quite fundamental from what I have learned and something I would believe, moreso than not, that John would have done definitely, as well as have a CFI on board when his wife and sis in law are on board with him and after recently having a cast removed. We have more reason to believe than not, that not only did John possibly filed a flight plan, but that he most likely had a CFI on that plane.

Kathleen, yes, according to the SF Bee (it was definitely 1 of 2 papers that literally reported it, while 1 retracted the story) Newspaper, W was indeed at the Grove the weekend of the murder. "sigh..."I really need to locate the source correspondence for that...

Since there is no such newspaper this is obviously untrue.

Well Mr. Colby, I am not sure that syllogism would hold entirely true lol. Perhaps the paper I got wrong, but it could have been a different paper while the content could actually be true. So then, while it may not have been the SF Bee (since it does not exist) it could have been another paper, while the story of the retraction/Hughes could be indeed true. It was not the SF Bee but the Sacramento Bee and Santa Rosa Press Democrat.

Mr White that is truly very unfortunate . Thanks Mr. Hogan for the info, much appreciated.

Hankey showed me the report sometime ago but sadly I honestly cannot find it and it is driving me crazy. I will say however that there is no reason given for the retraction. I believe, and I am speculating that Hughes threatened the papers, however one paper continued to print the story and did not retract. I am sure that it could have been that W's staff would not want the general public knowing his whereabouts when he is at such an event. Ah, found the link, but it would be even better to have the actual articles from these 2 papers, here is the link:

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3324

Now the forum is a post Hankey emailed to a member of that forum, that was also the same email I received. After reading that I learned that a retraction would be given on a conditional basis, my apologies for the mistake, but I am definitely going off of memory, but I am glad I found that post. I am not not certain if one of them retracted but I could have sworn one of them did, maybe it was a point John made to me personally in the older email. The main points are simple, according to the articles and that post: 2 papers reported the Bohemian Grove incident on or around the weekend of Jr's crash, Hughes demanded retractions, the papers declined and offered a conditional.

Len I will get back to responding to each of the points you raised sometime later today hopefully. I do think it is good to build bridges of truth primarily.

-Len, what do you think concerning the fact that only 5 seats were found?

-Col. Stanley's statement to the effect of "they (choppers) were out there" some time before the search began by the Coast Guard.

-Who began the crazy claim that Kennedy was NOT on the plane with a CFI? What evidence is there to support that in any way? Carole Radziwell (who we could and probably should trust or at least have good reason to trust) Mentioned that Jr. had a CFI on the plane with him. Jr. told Richard Blow earlier that day or the day before (in Richard's book) "don't worry, I am flying with an instructor".

-What do you make of the N-Tap Radar Analysis? (it honestly does look as if someone plunged the plane into the water no doubt), and remember the fuel valve was found in the off position. Now this could have been the result of impact, not sure but when we look at Egypt 990 it can definitely have an impression, especially considering there were top military brass on that plane and the man basically shut the fuel valve off and plunged the plane into the sea.

-The news people had the ELT info. a significant time before the search began, yet it still took 10+ hours to "find" the plane. Either Col. Roarke was lying through his teeth or he is grossly incompetent.

Kathleen, yes, according to the SF Bee (it was definitely 1 of 2 papers that literally reported it, while 1 retracted the story) Newspaper, W was indeed at the Grove the weekend of the murder. "sigh..."I really need to locate the source correspondence for that.....

P.S - With all due respect to Skolnick, I take that FBI "report" as disinfo. I think it is best to deal with fundamental facts and go from there.

Indeed you're correct Mr. White, Bush's whereabouts were unknown (at least to the general public) on that very weekend. Sadly I cannot locate the personal email correspondence between myself and Hankey concerning 2 California Newspapers that had the scoop on the B. Grove story. Karen Hughes fought hard to get the 2 papers to retract their stories on the facts and, I believe one paper retracted, while the other did not. There is another individual who may have an earth shattering story if it can somehow be corroborated: A. True Ott. If anything Ott has stated on record is true concerning Jr. and why he was murdered, then it is absolutely no surprise why he had to die.

Don thanks for starting this topic, I have had my stomach turned at times trying to figure out why no one has pursued this as much as his father (well different dynamics were at play but yet still...). I don't know...maybe its me and the hopes I had for my generation and JFK Jr lol. I think there can still be good treasures of research found in the tragic death of JFK Jr.

Honestly I cannot say that there is any concrete evidence to suggest that W was involved with Jr's death but if I had to guess, it would not be far fetched IF it turned out to be true. It is very true that W had literally vanished the morning of the day Jr. died and did not return until 3 days or so later, where even his staff claimed to not know where he was. An article from the SF Bee(?) and another Paper printed the story that W was actually attending the Bohemian Grove. Karen Hughes fought to not have that info published, but they printed it anyway. Again, while I am saying Jr. was murdered, I am not saying W was behind or even involved, though it is likely.

Hankey brings up the point of "if H.W got his "ticket punched" by his participation in JFK Sr'. murder, who do you think little Georgie had to kill to get his ticket punched?" and of course I am paraphrasing. I mean while that statement does not mean much, it, for me, is simply a "hmm....interesting, but inconclusive" type of thought. It could definitely be (or should be) pursued. I'll post my source for this info later, the PC I am on is truly acting up and not allowing me to find the email I am seeking.

Hello there, Kathleen, over the years I've kept up with various topics here regarding JFK Jr. and frankly, it astounds me how there isn't hardly any time/research spent on such another significant murder (yes, the evidence strongly suggests foul play concerning JFK Jr.) but I take it you've watched John Hankey's JFK Jr. Documentary? I definitely feel more time should be dedicated to a man we lost that could have possibly prevented the mish-mash of Obama/Clinton mess we went through.

As far as Bush and 9/11, while he did definitely play a role I do believe, as I assume most here in the know, he was simply following orders and playing his part, as was Cheney. I think it is a big mistake to believe they were behind it, not that I feel anyone here in this topic is doing so, but figured I would point it out being on the subject of W.

Thank you very much Mr. Burton, I truly appreciate it and I would also like to thank Mr. Simkin for helping me become a member.

I became interested in world politics beginning with my first encounter with the murder of JFK as a child, being approx. 8 years of age and honestly could not comprehend how such a murder of that magnitude was able to happen. At that time, it was a child attempting to comprehend such an 'important' political murder. That honest inquiry and curiosity has lead me to the education forum some years ago actually and I have been severely interested in such world politics ever since that young age. I do not consider myself a researcher nor would I dare place myself among the very competent researchers but am honestly a keen observer and learner from those who are much more adept in such research.