Paul Brancato

I found it, but not access to read it. 
Would you mind taking some time to explain exactly what you’re thinking? Your last few posts are intriguing but I don’t know some of the references. 

9 minutes ago, Matt Cloud said:

Is that why Bob Baer has come out to pin post-Solie activities on Redmond.  The Case of the Fourth Man?

 

(Neither Ames, Hannsen or Howard can explain the all the losses, esp. from 82-86.  I suggest everyone look up and read Mike Mattson "Counterintelligence cold case file" Intelligencer Journal Winter/Spring 2009.  There was someone above them all.)

 

 

You are referring to an article he wrote called ‘the fourth mole’? How can we access it?

Do we know the identity of Litamel-3?

On 4/16/2024 at 7:40 PM, Chuck Schwartz said:

This is a relevant article on this subject...https://archive.politicalassassinations.net/2013/04/executive-action-jfk-witness-deaths-and-the-london-times-actuary/

Did the folks arguing here twice ignore your posted link to an interesting article? 
Sure, we can argue about this death or that death, about how to calculate probabilities. But the notion that people weren’t being killed as part of the ongoing conspiracy is just absolutely ludicrous, and I can’t believe that some of you would even approach that level. The main point, and I think Bill got to this quite well, is that a carefully curated list of deaths of journalists following the case early on, and as others have pointed out witnesses dying around the time of both the Garrison trial and the HSCA hearings, is the most convincing evidence of not just the conspiracy on the day of, but of the depth of the conspiracy going forward. Busting the single bullet theory was good, and few would argue that it has been shone to be fallacy at best, but it doesn’t show the venality of the perpetrators going forward in time. One can find excuses for the Warren Commission, not that I believe them btw, but suspicious deaths in such large numbers going forward in time for 15 years puts things in its proper context. And let’s include RFK, MLK, Malcom X here too, because the context is the continued overthrow of anything or anyone that stands in the way of the power elite.
 

The information in this series of posts about dead journalists is new information for me, and I think Bill Simpich makes a good case that these deaths may have dampened the enthusiasm of other journalists to follow the trail they were trying to blaze. 

I’ve read both books, both great and important works. 

Thanks for sharing this Doug.

Wow Bill - some doozies here since your last post. It seems to me that Newman is on the wrong track. I may be mistaken, but having had many exchanges with Tommy Graves years ago before he left the forum, I think he sees a Soviet plot to kill JFK. it also seems to me that Newman is heading in the same direction. Your research on Golitsyn and Angleton and Tennent Bagley shows the trio to be paranoid at best, and certainly up to something nefarious. Can I use the word ‘liars’? 
Might I ask - what is your impression of where Newman is going with all this? Blunt, Bagley, Solie? It feels like a resurrection of James Angleton. 

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

ChatGPT is trained on a stupid amount of text, most of it from the open internet. They probably just added more content that tipped the bias in favor of Oswald-did-it, like from news stories, etc.

AI inherits the bias of its training data. If you trained an LLM on Bugliosi, Posner, Myers and the WR, you’d get very different responses than a model trained on pro-conspiracy literature. Heck humans work the same way. 

The last time I gave it a try I asked whether Otto Skorzeny and Arnold Silver knew each other, and the response was that Otto killed Arnold during the war. 
Your point is well taken 

On 4/10/2024 at 5:06 AM, Simon Andrew said:

In the early days of  chatgpt, if you typed in who killed JFK, you got a very balanced response highlighting a lot of the issues and evidence. 
A matter of days later the response was changed to reflect the WC findings.

I think that whatever model is used, someone will say it’s biased one way or another.

 

 

How do you think that happened? 

14 hours ago, Robert Reeves said:

Must say: I understand some people might find the host's Youtube annoying or whatever, it seems to be a pro Trump themed place. I am sensitive to who it might offend. So please don't take offence - not my aim to promote Trump or even bash him. I am not intending to stir up any discussion about Trump/the election. I just posted it because RFK JR spoke on it.

I transcribed as best I can what Robert Kennedy JR says

Woody Harrelson discussing his father being an assassin for the CIA, a clip I posted 7 years ago. It took me quite some digging and I eventually found it (I think) on some obscure Youtube account or another site. It was one of a vast amount of old tv clips collection I'd trawled through. But I knew what I was looking for. Anyway, I have been trying to talk to Woody myself and see if he is open to discussing the subject of his father. below 

Obviously you can see this is a very sensitive subject for Woody. But I think the likelihood of Woody coming forward with information is ever increasing. Be interesting to know if Woody has given RFK JR permission to speak about his father. I doubt he has.

 

 

 

I’d like more of that 

I can’t see much either, but Dallas police uniforms would make sense, certainly a favorite disguise for mafiosi. And there’s the police themselves, and officer Tippit,, whose death might be seen differently if he was a shooter. There were shots coming from at least one other direction, possibly more.

Your point about shooters with foreign accents is well taken - plenty of home boy haters who could shoot. 

3 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I bet that is true. I haven’t read Newman’s book in a minute but a lot of the summaries of the Haverstick book on June Cobb’s background reminded me of it. Newman did a serious deep dive on Cobb. The material is dense as hell but pretty darn interesting if I recall. Her life was like a James Bond movie. 

My understanding is that Newman’s June Cobb file has disappeared. 

Do you have a theory about who the three men were?

Oswald’s particular use of words in describing his views during these interviews sounds like a set piece, if that’s the correct term, a deliberate use of language describing his Marxism that come not from any deeply held beliefs but rather part of a crafted persona. It’s just not real. Reminds me of an undercover narc I once had a confrontation with trying to disguise his true identity by using hip jargon meant to convince me he was a legitimate dealer. Oswald is spouting jargon. 

Small note for what it’s worth - Seagrams Mexico was run by Colonel Brandstetter. According to his autobiography he was tasked in 1980 by US Army Intelligence, for whom he worked, with finding a secure home in Acapulco for none other than Licio Gelli. 

Interesting thread - thanks Geo. Have you read Italian journalist Michele Metta’s much more recent look at Permindex membership and connections? 

James Day has written several interesting articles, which are linked to the one on the Mauser. He has done a lot of interesting research tying in to his book on the Mad Bishops. 

John - I am so glad he made this short. Both Peter Levenda and Professor Caulfield appear in the film and have done such good research on this nexus of Christian Right and southern racists. I found the Wandering Bishops book to be a slog, but I’ll go back to it and see if I can finish it. I liked what might seem to be a flaw in the film, which is that David Ferrie isn’t particularly the focus of it. Rather it’s the hatred that JFK received from these ‘brethren’. 

48 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

Galloway has also been trying to wake up Jeremy Corbin to get him to form a coalition that would go after all the voters left behind by the Conservative-Labor duopoly that has emerged in Britain. An important commentator, yes, but I'm not sure he qualifies as a major politician or force just yet.  He is probably ahead of where Junior Kennedy is in the US, as the world waits for Junior's announcement about his running mate.  Or not.

I like that idea, and the apt comparison to Junior. As for Isis, whatever letter follows, I think we created it. 

So who chooses the expert Posner? A press agent who makes sure his name comes up first? 

I like this simply put article, laying bare the unacceptably ignorant BBC. 

Agree with Sandy. The military was in position at the autopsy, and were completely infiltrated into the Dallas Police and Dealey Plaza. 
I can make no sense out the continued secrecy surrounding the JFK assassination if it was simply a mafia hit. And even looking at the kingpin mafiosi, I’m more tempted to view Trafficante and Lansky with suspicion because they were never prosecuted. Marcello making statements in custody taking the blame could just as well be covering for the real kingpins.

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.