Paul Brancato

Spotters and facilitators. How can anyone doubt the broadness of the conspiracy? 

I don’t think that whoever thought I wanted to punish the guilty didn’t understand my basic point. We need truth telling more than anything. There is a new series on one of the streaming services about the Lincoln assassination. It promises to be explosive. Nearly 160 years ago now, yet how many Americans know about Lincoln’s Secretary of State Stanton? What I want to see is a broad political acknowledgement of truth, and a genuine feeling of contrition. This goes for all crimes of state, for instance slavery. I was listening to a story on NPR of a child who grew up in a Japanese internment camp. She said that people theorize it can take 7 generations to undo crimes like that, unless there is a genuine attempt to heal the wounds. The Kennedy family is a long way from reaching that point, and so is the Nation. 

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Sandy,

     The distinction, IMO, is between explicit and implicitly perjorative comments.

      Paul posted an implicitly perjorative comment about the current POTUS (and the Democratic Party) by suggesting that our "withering democracy" is incapable of solving our "enormous problems."

       I merely requested clarification about which "problems" Paul was referring to, in relation to competing policy platforms.

       And, incidentally, who has been "withering" our democracy-- rolling back voting rights, enabling dark money in campaigns, etc.?

I placed our withering problems where they belong - with the political establishment on whose watch the idealism of the baby boomers was destroyed. You know, if it was the right, or far right, that killed our leaders and many others globally, the left did Jack about it. I look around today and all I see is an entrenched two party duopoly fiddling while we burn. I haven’t changed my basic political stance. I agree in most every instance in your enumeration of the vast problems we face, but not your analysis of how we got here. 

20 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

@W. Niederhut makes a good point, imho. The people funding RFK Jr, as well as those pitching him on this forum, are doing so with the hopes that he will be a spoiler in the current election. It's not about revealing the truth of the JFK assassination.

Ventura is a good man, but he's retired.

Now, let's get real: no serious candidate would consider Aaron Rodgers or Mike Rowe. At least for Ventura, it wouldn't be his entry level job in politics. But Rodgers or Rowe... forget about it.

Agree with the last paragraph. As for donors, let’s be clear about a few things. The coffers of the two major candidates dwarf RFK Jr’s coffers, and if given enough scrutiny would be full of suspect donors with agendas. Second point - the goals of large right wing donations to RFK Jr’s campaign do not have to, and I’m sure aren’t the same as RFKJr’s goals. He is surely not running to spoil Biden. That’s an absurd point of view, and illogical. He is trying to break the two party duopoly. 
in the interests of keeping this at least partly on topic, if he became president we would finally have full document release, and if not, an all out ‘war’ against the keepers of the secrets would ensue. My opinion is that this single fact outweighs all objections to whatever else might accompany his presidency, because only an unwinding of the ‘60’s’ elitist attack on the body politic can put us back on course. The US is dying before our eyes, a withering semblance of democracy unable to fix the enormous problems facing us square on. 

7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Robin is correct, The Book of the Film  is invaluable as a chronicle of just how schizoid out so called democracy is on the JFK case.

It includes the two earliest attacked on the film by Jon Margolis and George Lardner. This was over a half year before the film was released.

It was like watching a national nervous breakdown take place, centered in the MSM and spreading outward.  

Suddenly, Oscar winning director and writer Oliver Stone was evil incarnate. 

And David Belin and Jerry Ford were allowed to take their bows and trash his film.  Tom Wicker was especially sickening.  

The Ny TImes published something like 33 stories up until the premiere of the film.  Incredible.

The single biggest reason - there are many others of course - that I view the NYT and all the others major newspapers with much skepticism. The agenda is not even well hidden. Sometimes it’s placed so far in front it’s like Poe’s Purloined Letter. You don’t even see it because it’s assumed from the get go. Biggest example - pardon me if others disagree - is the automatic assumption that China and Russia are our enemies. That for sure makes us their enemies, Endlessly. 

I’ve heard this (possible VP choice) about Ventura, someone I admire btw, but do we know it’s factual? 

Surely. Amazing how often you read, without reference to this test, that this kind of evidence is not conclusive. No wonder. And still no independent verification of the test results? 

1 hour ago, Robert Morrow said:

Where in the cable does it say that Dallas Detective Don Stringfellow was the one who provided the physical description of Oswald to the 112th INTC?

I do not think the cable explicitly says that. However, I think Marguerite Oswald was the first person to put into the record that she thought her son Lee Oswald was 5 feet 10 inches, 165 pounds - as she told this to Dallas FBI agent John Fain in May of 1960.

https://robertmorrowpoliticalresearchblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/5-feet-10-inches-165-pounds-is-absolute.html

 

 

On page 3 of the document Steve posted

When Casolaro dies like that it’s not enough to say that he was led to committing suicide by believing in stories told by hucksters. Maybe Riconosciuto is a huckster, but that proves nothing in regards to Danny Casolaro’s death. I hope Jim, in reviewing this, comes to the conclusion that the documentary didn’t dig deep enough, and questions the hucksters motives, rather than his supposed affect on Danny. The big story is the Octopus. It’s a great representation of what we have been facing for decades. 

Jim - It looks correct to me.

in any case a great place to start in my opinion. 

Quote

I want to see RFK Jr win, not just run, especially if he is not on every state ballot. He’s 10 years younger than the others

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

RO-

I don't know if I want to "debate" you, as I think we largely agree that US foreign, military and trade policies have become globalist (btw, not nationalist) in the decades after the JFKA. 

My only possible disagreement with you is whether that would have happened had not JFK been murdered.

The globalists are huge--Apple, BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, WalMart, Tesla, GM, Disney, the NBA et al, and fund all the leading think tanks and relevant academic centers in the US. 

Add on the media.

JFK appeared able to forestall globalism, but he would have termed out anyway. 

We are unable to discuss much in the current context as there some participants who are rabid partisans and evidently unable to conduct civil discourse. 

There are plenty of other forums in the world. 

PS I recently posted about the media treatment of RFK2's explanation of the JFKA, and that post was deleted. So it goes. 

I consider media treatment of explanations of the JFKA---always dubbed "conspiracy theories"---as important to this forum.

But some participants see "RFK2" and go bananas. As if commentary here could have slightest impact on national elections. 

BTW, RFK2 is not a globalist. The first candidate in the JFK tradition in many, many moons. 

 

 

Peter Dale Scott did an interview with someone in RFK 2’s camp and in it he suggested that 2028 was RFK 2’s year, because he needed more time to build a political movement. I’m inclined to agree, if only for the reason that it is necessary for a party to be on the ballot in all 50 states, and that is a tall order. Now we also have the No Name Party trying to do likewise. While I don’t think of RFK 2 as a spoiler, a plot to hurt Biden and the Democrats, I’m less sure about the No Name Party, which is pledging to have a ticket with a Republican presidential candidate and a Democratic VP. 
In my view presidential elections are a rigged game, and we are constantly reminded that Democrats have to vote for Biden to forestall Trump. 

I never got around to the next trading card set I wanted to do - tales from the dead. So many good ones.

4 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Probably no one else is so undignified as to bring this up, but what separates the Z-film that RB Nichols showed the reporter from the not-so-deepfake that Bill Cooper unwisely pedaled for years?  Nichols' version was faked on film, not video?  If a film fake was circulating as far downstream as Nichols, then someone at some intelligence-friendly film lab was proud enough of their 1963 work to create extreme fakes in order to show off their capabilities, and Nichols and other intel bottom feeders were using the fakes to awe, influence and mislead viewers.

My note on The Octopus Murders: the credibility of Danny Casolaro's research would have been underscored by explaining the Ted Shackley-GHW Bush axis at CIA that created the private, international intelligence network known as the Safari Club to counteract the Jimmy Carter-Stansfield Turner budget and personnel cuts at CIA.  That, and some exploration of how banks like BCCI and Nugan Hand operated as funders of illegal clandestine ops through investments made by several countries' intel services, not just CIA's.  It was the background that enabled and informed the Reagan admin's Contra war in Central America and its flows of arms, supplies, capital and drugs.

David - I’ll check out these two videos later, but just wanted to say I appreciate your mention of the Safari Club, and the Shackley/Bush axis, and I wish the film had gone into more depth on the octopus itself. But perhaps the choice was this documentary or none. 

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Maybe the witness who reported seeing someone who looked like Oswald in the Nov 20 “silhouettes” sighting was a witness of the Nov 20 arrest of Masen by ATTU Ellsworth and fellow ATTU agents? That would agree with the date (Nov 20); could account for the DPD unable to find records or patrol officers who remembered it if it was really ATTU agents not DPD (ATTU agents had legal authority to make arrests); and it involved someone who looked like Oswald (Masen).

Ellsworth and one other ATTU agent did an undercover sting on Masen, they pretending to be what Masen thought were corrupt Irving police officers, in the weeks running up to the Nov 20 arrest of Masen by ATTU.

Does the “Irving” connection of the ATTU undercover sting on Masen make more plausible that Masen (who did not live or work near Irving) could have been in Irving where Oswald on Nov 11 was driving with a freshly repaired and sighted Mannlicher-Carcano in the car prepped for a sale to somebody—such as, say, a gun dealer such as Masen?

Greg - are you certain it was Ellsworth who arrested Masen?

Wouldn’t it be great if we could amass the supposed original Zapruder film(s) and compare? If the one we have all seen is that doctored I’m sure we’d all like to know about it. 
I watched episode one and then went back and looked at the Danny Casolaro material. His fate reminds me uncomfortably of another important whistle blower - John Garrett (Gary) Underhill, who I believe caught an early glimpse of the Octopus in action. 

I’m sure Robert would not assert that every name on the list was in the loop. We don’t know the organizational structure. I think what he is pointing out is that every name on that list, in his opinion, goes along one way or another with the basic premise of fascism and it’s somewhat hidden takeover of the USA. I would also think he wouldn’t assert that he couldn’t have missed someone. How many of us can even fathom the amount of digging over many years nearly nonstop, and the prodigious memory for names, that went into this compilation? The last few pages on this thread have been appropriately respectful, while questioning various details. The one thing Robert surely doesn’t deserve is snarky remarks, such as a few earlier in the thread. I mean, what is the point? If Robert knew how to distill the exact truth he would do so, but we simply don’t have the necessary information despite the passage of 61 years. We have the well positioned perps in government and media to thank for that, as well as Intelligence services, especially in the Military, which hasn’t been nearly as forthcoming as CIA and FBI, with related files. I believe it is entirely possible to have a lot of people involved and keeping the secrets. The relatively few whistle blowers have been dealt with. If you were one of the plotters or facilitators, and you saw people you knew to be involved suffer personal tragedies would you spill the beans? 

I blinked and missed Robert’s post. I’m a huge fan of him and his prodigious research. 
I gather that Prouty is on it. What exactly did we learn from Prouty? Lansdale was the organizer. Anything else? 

When was this broadcast? 
I think I just figured this out. I watched a similar Democracy Now story from a year ago. I’ve tried to figure out what was going on with the family’s efforts ever since, but there is a suspicious dearth of information. If we had a real President, a responsible government, we would know the truth. 

Thanks Pete. 

Greg - you are looking for evidence that Hosty or someone from FBI interviewed DeM shortly after the Walker shooting, because, even though Hosty doesn’t provide a date for that interview in his book, the context in the book implies that timing. Then you provide other tidbits that would, if they were true, support that supposition. Apparently there is evidence of an FBI interview(s) in Dec. 1963 in Haiti. There is also the possibility that George was interviewed by FBI when he later came to Dallas to testify to the WC, which I hope I’m correct in assuming took place in Dallas. Neither of those two ideas buttresses your idea. Officially the first time FBI learns of Oswald’s supposed role in the Walker shooting is from Marina after the assassination. As for Walker, even though it’s certainly true that he repeatedly said that he knew that Oswald was his shooter right after the April shooting because DPD (or someone), those statements all postdate Nov 22, 1963. I looked for anything earlier, never found any such evidence. And add to that that his conversation with National Zeitung a few days after that, a newspaper run by a Nazi btw, doesn’t have a clear timeline, at least as far as I was able to determine it. Was it Walker that informed the German journalist that Oswald had previously shot at him, or did that idea come from the journalist? Have you ever looked closely at that? It is assumed that the info came from Walker, but I couldn’t prove that, and suspect it was the other way around. I couldn’t even determine with absolute certainty who called who. If you know differently I’m all ears. 
The Dick Russell source would tend to confirm your idea, and Walker’s assertions. But if there is no corroboration for it that predates the assassination, then I’d rather add it to the list of the post Nov 22 1963 character assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald. 
One more point - who was George DeMohrenschildt really? I contend that we have never gotten to the bottom of that. 

 

16 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thank you sir.  That explains a lot possibly.  I've read of Ms. Wilkinsons evaluation of the high-resolution frames she obtained. And those of several others in her profession she conferred with.  Through my limited reading of Doug Horne and associates.  

Dr's Mantick and Chesser, independently I believe, went to the National Archives to observe the x-ray's and photographs with modern technology, the first and only ones to do so.

Ms., Wilkinson and company may well have the best expertise in the field to evaluate the film given their combined work in the industry.  From what I've read.

Yet their work is still denied to us, the people.

 

Exactly 

I get emails from the Kennedy Beacon, RFK Jr’s campaign. I particularly loved this interview, and have always thought of Scott as the Dean of researchers. He goes on to say btw that he thinks RFK Jr’s time on the national stage has not yet arrived, saying 2028 rather than 2024. He may be right about that. In today’s NYT Ezra Klein has an interview, the gist of which is that Biden is a liability. He follows that with an analysis of what an open convention might look like. John Stewart’s first 2024 Daily Show from 2 weeks ago likewise focuses on what a poor bulwark against Trump’s fascism Biden is. 

Mr. Scott mentions Army Intelligence, and without actually naming it he points to Jack Crichton and his 488th when he says that a military intelligence unit in Dallas was looking at Russia’s oil reserves. 

Thanks Bill - as usual a well researched essay. In the past I believe you used the word ‘agnostic’ to describe your opinion on whether Oswald was in MC at all. I might be mistaken about that, memories being what they are. If one sees this letter as being genuinely typed by Oswald at Ruth’s typewriter, or written by hand, either way it tends to confirm that Oswald actually did go to the Soviet embassy in MC, as well as the Cuban consulate  (I may have consulate and embassy confused here, I often do that). For me, it’s this detail, and also Ruth’s involvement, that has caused me to conclude it was a forgery. But having said that, your logic is well reasoned. It’s hard to determine which of Oswald’s actions point to his working for others in US Intelligence, and which are self motivated for his own purposes. I can see how he may have been primarily concerned with financial security. 
Then there is his visit to Hosty and the angry note he left there. That story bugs me, as it relies on witnesses only and their stories. There is no Oswald note we can examine. It’s pretty safe to assume he was there though, and motivated to do so, and possibly angry. But if he was primarily interested in financial security, and also interested in the FBI intercepting his supposed letter to the Soviets, might he have found a way to make his visit more productive? 
It always comes down to who was Oswald? It makes no sense to be that he was on his own, drumming up a spy’s life without the direction of a handler or handlers. I could see how he may have been trying to break away from his Intelligence relationships, wanting a normal family life at some point. But I have difficulty imagining that he really wanted to go to Cuba and then back to the USSR. 
 

12 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

This was published in January 1978.  
Two months later in March  ….

Was this a “strange coincidence” which I refer to in my writings or something more?

 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339362/

Cory - I see the ad (not new news to me) offering $million but don’t see anything implying that he solved the crime.