Terry Mauro
-
Posts
1,791 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Terry Mauro
-
-
"I disagree in part because I saw 2 UFOs..."[/color]
You need to substantiate these claims, otherwise that's all they are, or ever will be.
I don't think I can verify my claims. No one would believe me. The policeman who took the phonecall that August night is probably dead by now. I don't remember the names of my neighbors. I only lived there a year. I do remember my best friends who witnessed this with me. Their names were Lawrence. I don't remember their mother or father's name. The kids were Cathy, Patty, Richie and Brian Lawrence. Palisades Park, NJ. 1967.
My mother left my father that October. We snuck back to the house to get our stuff one day. I went to my friends' house and there were other people living there. No forwarding address. I think the mother left the father, as he was a violent alcoholic like mine. Both families disappeared into the blue. I don't remember the date of the UFO sighting. The second one I saw was metallic and was about 10 feet away from me. I could have touched it with a broom. I stared at that Goddamned thing to memorize it. Then it began to fade into the blue sky, seemingly without moving, until I couldn't see it anymore.
Kathy
*************************************************************
"The second one I saw was metallic and was about 10 feet away from me. I could have touched it with a broom. I stared at that Goddamned thing to memorize it. Then it began to fade into the blue sky, seemingly without moving, until I couldn't see it anymore."
A lot of things can happen in a child's mind after suffering abuse at the hands of an alcoholic parent, and being forced to run like a thief in the night from their home in self protection.
-
Well I Will be the first to suggest an obvious and important addition.
How about pre-knowledge of the assassination?
To include of course Cheramie, Milteer and Martino. Does anyone else come to mind?
_____________________________________
Richard Case Nagell
_____________________________________
*****************************************************************
"Richard Case Nagell"
Good call, Tom. You beat me to the punch.
-
On page one of today's Washington Post there is an article about miscarriages of justice caused by "scientific" bullet lead analysis which had no scientific basis whatsoever. The problem began when the government tried to prove that President John F. Kennedy was killed by bullets fired from a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.
Background:
Dr. Vincent Guinn, a nuclear chemist, was called in by the HSCA to refute claims that CE399 and the limo fragments were planted. This claim had been made in the NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS by Josiah Thompson, then a professor at Haverford College. For more than ten years Thompson's claims remained unrefuted.
Guinn's "scientific" testimony became the basis on which the HSCA established that CE399 was genuine, and it formed a lynchpin for the Magic Bullet Theory, which was central to the HSCA Report.
Guinn claimed that, by comparing two pieces of bullet lead, it is possible to establish scientifically whether they came from the same batch of lead. Guinn even claimed that he could tell if two lead fragments came from the same bullet,
but this special power was vouchsafed to him only with regard to Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. He claimed scientific proof that a bullet fragment from Governor Connally's wrist came from CE399.
The FBI adopted Guinn's theory and began using it in criminal cases nationwide, with disastrous consequences for the administration of Justice, as the Washington Post points out.
Today's page one story in the Washington Post acknowledges that
"The FBI first used the technique after Kennedy's assassination, hoping to determine whether various bullet fragments came from the same gun. In July 1964, then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover wrote to the commission investigating the assassination that the bureau's findings were "not considered sufficient" to make any matches."
Hoover was quite correct, but the Post article is evasive on how, after Hoover's death, the FBI began using bullet lead analysis. The reason is that the FBI accepted Vincent Guinn and his HSCA testimony.
The travesty of justice described in today's Post originated with Vincent Guinn's attempt to shore up the magic bullet theory and prove that CE399 was not planted.
Isn't it exceedingly odd that this article makes no mention of Guinn, without whom the problem would never have arisen?
Isn't it odd that these intrepid investigators at the Post do not tell their readers that their own inquiries prove that the official explanation of the JFK assassination is full of holes?
FBI's Forensic Test Full of Holes
Lee Wayne Hunt is one of hundreds of defendants whose convictions are in question now that FBI forensic evidence has been discredited.
By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 18, 2007; A01
Hundreds of defendants sitting in prisons nationwide have been convicted with the help of an FBI forensic tool that was discarded more than two years ago. But the FBI lab has yet to take steps to alert the affected defendants or courts, even as the window for appealing convictions is closing, a joint investigation by The Washington Post and "60 Minutes" has found.
The science, known as comparative bullet-lead analysis, was first used after President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963. The technique used chemistry to link crime-scene bullets to ones possessed by suspects on the theory that each batch of lead had a unique elemental makeup.
In 2004, however, the nation's most prestigious scientific body concluded that variations in the manufacturing process rendered the FBI's testimony about the science "unreliable and potentially misleading." Specifically, the National Academy of Sciences said that decades of FBI statements to jurors linking a particular bullet to those found in a suspect's gun or cartridge box were so overstated that such testimony should be considered "misleading under federal rules of evidence."
A year later, the bureau abandoned the analysis.
But the FBI lab has never gone back to determine how many times its scientists misled jurors. Internal memos show that the bureau's managers were aware by 2004 that testimony had been overstated in a large number of trials. In a smaller number of cases, the experts had made false matches based on a faulty statistical analysis of the elements contained in different lead samples, documents show.
"We cannot afford to be misleading to a jury," the lab director wrote to FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III in late summer 2005 in a memo outlining why the bureau was abandoning the science. "We plan to discourage prosecutors from using our previous results in future prosecutions."
Despite those private concerns, the bureau told defense lawyers in a general letter dated Sept. 1, 2005, that although it was ending the technique, it "still firmly supports the scientific foundation of bullet lead analysis." And in at least two cases, the bureau has tried to help state prosecutors defend past convictions by using court filings that experts say are still misleading. The government has fought releasing the list of the estimated 2,500 cases over three decades in which it performed the analysis.
For the majority of affected prisoners, the typical two-to-four-year window to appeal their convictions based on new scientific evidence is closing.
Dwight E. Adams, the now-retired FBI lab director who ended the technique, said the government has an obligation to release all the case files, to independently review the expert testimony and to alert courts to any errors that could have affected a conviction.
"It troubles me that anyone would be in prison for any reason that wasn't justified. And that's why these reviews should be done in order to determine whether or not our testimony led to the conviction of a wrongly accused individual," Adams said in an interview. "I don't believe there's anything that we should be hiding."
The Post and "60 Minutes" identified at least 250 cases nationwide in which bullet-lead analysis was introduced, including more than a dozen in which courts have either reversed convictions or now face questions about whether innocent people were sent to prison. The cases include a North Carolina drug dealer who has developed significant new evidence to bolster his claim of innocence and a Maryland man who was recently granted a new murder trial.
Documents show that the FBI's concerns about the science dated to 1991 and came to light only because a former FBI lab scientist began challenging it.
In response to the information uncovered by The Post and "60 Minutes," the FBI late last week said it would initiate corrective actions including a nationwide review of all bullet-lead testimonies and notification to prosecutors so that the courts and defendants can be alerted. The FBI lab also plans to create a system to monitor the accuracy of its scientific testimony.
The Post-"60 Minutes" investigation "has brought some serious concerns to our attention," said John Miller, assistant director of public affairs. "The FBI is committed to addressing these concerns. It's the right thing to do."
The past inaction on bullet-lead contrasts with the last time the FBI's science was called into question, in the mid-1990s, when 13 lab employees were accused of shoddy work and of giving overstated testimony involving several disciplines, including explosives as well as hair and fiber analysis. Back then, the Justice Department reviewed hundreds of cases in which FBI experts testified, and it notified prisoners about problems that affected their convictions. The government did so because prosecutors have a legal obligation to turn over evidence that could help defendants prove their innocence.
Current FBI managers said that they originally believed that the public release of the 2004 National Academy of Sciences report and the subsequent ending of the analysis generated enough publicity to give defense attorneys and their clients plenty of opportunities to appeal. The bureau also pointed out that it sent form letters to police agencies and umbrella groups for local prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers.
Even the harshest critics concede that the FBI correctly measured the chemical elements of lead bullets. But the science academy found that the lab used faulty statistical calculations to declare that bullets matched even when the measurements differed slightly. FBI witnesses also overstated the significance of the matches.
The FBI's umbrella letters, however, glossed over those problems and did little to alert prosecutors or defense lawyers that erroneous testimony could have helped convict defendants, one of the recipients said.
"Frankly, the letters that they sent them, you know, were minimizing the significance of the error in the first place," said defense lawyer Barry Scheck, whose nonprofit Innocence Project has helped free more than 200 wrongly convicted people. The letters said that "our science wasn't really inaccurate. Our interpretation was wrong. But the interpretation is everything."
The FBI said last week that the 2005 letters "should have been clearer." Scheck has now been asked to assist the FBI's review.
Since 2005, the nonpartisan Forensic Justice Project, run by former FBI lab whistle-blower Frederic Whitehurst, has tried to force the bureau to release a list of bullet-lead cases under the Freedom of Information Act. The Post joined the request, citing the public value of the information. But the government has stalled, among other things seeking $70,000 to search for the documents.
"By stonewalling and delaying the release, Justice has ensured that wrongfully convicted citizens are deprived of their right to appeal or seek post-conviction relief because the statute of limitations in many states has expired," said David Colapinto, the lawyer for the group.
As part of its review, the FBI will release all bullet-lead case files involving convictions.
The Scope of the Cases
Most of the estimated 2,500 instances in which the FBI performed bullet-lead exams involved homicide cases that were prosecuted at the state and local levels, where FBI examiners often were summoned as expert witnesses for the prosecution.
To compile an independent list, The Post and "60 Minutes" conducted a nationwide review, interviewing dozens of defense lawyers, prosecutors and scientific experts. The effort also included a sweep of electronic court filings conducted by four summer associates at the New York law firm Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom.
In many of the cases that raise the most compelling questions, the inmates might have a hard time winning the public's sympathy. Some had criminal backgrounds and most were convicted with at least some additional circumstantial evidence linking them to gruesome crime scenes. But the common thread is that removing the flawed bullet-lead evidence has created reasonable doubt about guilt in the minds of legal experts, the courts and at least one juror.
In North Carolina, Lee Wayne Hunt, 48, remains in prison after being convicted 21 years ago of a double murder. Hunt was an admitted marijuana dealer, but has steadfastly denied involvement in the killings. The FBI testified that its bullet-lead analysis linked fragments from the victims to a box of bullets connected to Hunt's co-defendant. That was the sole forensic evidence against Hunt. State prosecutors recently conceded that the analysis should not be considered "scientifically supported and relied upon."
In addition, the attorney for Hunt's co-defendant, who committed suicide in prison, has since declared that his client carried out the murders alone.
Despite both developments, Hunt has been denied a new trial.
"What they're relying on here is technicalities to keep an innocent man in prison," said Richard Rosen, Hunt's attorney.
Another North Carolina case highlights the impact that FBI bullet-lead testimony had on local jurors. James Donald King faces execution after being convicted of killing his two wives. He admitted to killing his first wife, spent time in prison, was released on parole, remarried and then was convicted of murdering his second wife.
The court is considering whether to grant a new trial.
"If the state had not introduced evidence linking a bullet in Mr. King's car to the bullet fragments in the victim, there would have been reasonable doubt in my mind as to Mr. King's guilt," juror Michelle Lynn Adamson said in an affidavit supporting his appeal.
Other defendants have had mixed results:
* In Maryland, the Court of Appeals last year reversed the murder conviction of Gemar Clemons and ordered a new trial, concluding that the FBI's bullet-lead conclusions "are not generally accepted within the scientific community and thus are not admissible."
* In New Jersey, courts have reversed and reinstated convictions in cases involving bullet lead. The conviction of one defendant, Michael Behn, was reversed, but he recently was re-convicted on other evidence.
* Shane Ragland's conviction in the 1994 killing of a University of Kentucky football player was reversed after Kathleen Lundy, an FBI bullet-lead examiner, pleaded guilty to giving false testimony in his case about bullet-lead manufacturing. A few weeks ago, Ragland pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and is now free.
Ernest Roger Peele, a retired FBI agent who testified about bullet matching in 130 cases, stands by his testimony but said that sometimes the nuances of science get "lost in the adversarial nature of the courtroom." He said he would no longer tell jurors that bullets can be linked to specific boxes because of the science academy's findings.
Peele, who said he was frustrated that he was never contacted by the academy, added that his bullet matches were meant to be "a part of a puzzle" and never the only forensic evidence. "Is it possible there are innocent people in jail? Yes. Is it possible that bullet lead was part of that process? Yes."
The Origins of the Science
The FBI's bullet-lead analysis was created more than four decades ago to link suspects to crimes in cases in which bullets had fragmented to the point where traditional firearms tracing -- based on gun-barrel groove markings -- would not work.
So FBI scientists used chemistry to try to find matches. Their assumption was that bullets made from the same batch of lead would have the same chemical composition. U.S. bullet-makers recycle lead from car batteries and melt it down in huge amounts, and it was believed that each batch would produce bullets sharing the same trace elements.
The FBI first used the technique after Kennedy's assassination, hoping to determine whether various bullet fragments came from the same gun. In July 1964, then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover wrote to the commission investigating the assassination that the bureau's findings were "not considered sufficient" to make any matches.
By the early 1980s, the bureau was the only practitioner of the science and routinely used it to help state and local police link crime-scene bullets to those in a gun or a box owned by a suspect. There are few federal murder statutes, but the FBI routinely helps local law enforcement by providing forensic expertise in homicide cases.
In the mid-1990s, Lundy used the science to help prove that Clinton White House lawyer Vincent W. Foster committed suicide, internal FBI documents show.
In the early days, bullet fragments were subjected to neutron beams that would allow scientists to measure the presence and amounts of at least three chemical elements: antimony, arsenic and copper. If two bullets had similar measurements of those three elements -- the FBI allowed for a small margin of error -- they were declared a match.
In 1996, the bureau switched to a new method called "inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy," in which scientists identified and measured seven trace elements in the bullets, adding the elements bismuth, cadmium, tin and silver. The goal was to increase the precision of the tests. But at the same time that it was measuring more elements, the FBI doubled the margin of error for declaring matches.
"Not enough suspects were being caught in the new net using seven elements, so they chose to use a bigger net," said Clifford Spiegelman, a statistician at Texas A&M University who reviewed the FBI's statistical methods for the science academy.
The bureau conducted a study in 1991 that called bullet-lead analysis a "useful forensic tool" that produced "accurate" and "reproducible" matches.
The study, however, raised two concerns.
First, it found that bullets packaged 15 months apart -- a span that assumed separate batches of lead -- had the exact composition, potentially undercutting the theory that each batch was unique.
Second, it found that bullets in a single box often had several different lead compositions. That finding, it cautioned, should have "significant impact on interpretation of results in forensic cases."
Peele, the retired bullet-lead examiner, was the primary author of that study. He said he still felt comfortable having told jurors in the past that bullets from the same box could be expected to match, as long as his remarks were carefully qualified.
In the Hunt case, he testified that his match of the crime-scene bullets to those in the suspects' box was "typical of everything we examined coming from the same box or the next closest possibility would be the same type, same manufacturer, packaged on or about the same day."
Peele said that he always tried to tell jurors that some bullets in the same box might not match. Still, he said it was reasonable for jurors to conclude that matching bullets could have come from the same box. "I don't think it's misleading as long as it's fully explained," he said.
Some of Peele's colleagues went further. FBI examiner John Riley told a Florida jury: "It is my opinion that all of those bullets came from the same box of ammunition." A New Jersey prosecutor suggested that the bullets matched by the FBI were as unique as a "snowflake or fingerprint."
Today, the FBI regards all such testimony as inaccurate. "The science does not and has never supported the testimony that one bullet can be identified as coming from a particular box of bullets," said Adams, the retired FBI lab director.
A Challenge From Within
The FBI's about-face was prompted by a challenge from within its ranks.
William Tobin, an FBI lab metallurgist for a quarter-century, won accolades working on cases such as the crash of TWA Flight 800, in which he helped prove that the plane was downed by an accidental fuel-tank explosion, not terrorism. Shortly before he retired, Tobin was approached by a woman who believed that the bullet-lead science used against her brother, a New Jersey murder defendant, was flawed. Still employed by the bureau, Tobin was not permitted to help.
But when he retired in 1998, he decided to look further. Bullet matching had always been done by the lab's chemists, and as a metallurgist, Tobin wondered about their assumptions. Soon he joined with Erik Randich, a metallurgist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
By 2001, the two had finished a study that challenged the key assumptions that the FBI had been making about bullet lead. They found that bullets made from the same batch did not always match, because subtle chemical changes occurred throughout the manufacturing process. Tobin bought bullets at several stores in Alaska and found that a large number of bullets with the same composition and manufacturing date were often sold in the same community, suggesting that it was wrong to assume that a bullet match could be narrowed to one suspect.
"It hadn't been based at all on science but, rather, had been based on subjective belief," Tobin said in an interview. "Courts, and even practitioners, had been seduced by the sophistication of the analytical instrumentation for over three decades."
Soon, Tobin began appearing as a witness for defendants challenging FBI bullet-lead matches. Courts began to take notice, too, and the FBI suddenly faced a barrage of questions about a science that had gone unchallenged for three decades.
Adams asked the National Academy of Sciences in 2002 to examine the FBI's work, temporarily halting new bullet-lead matches. Two years later, the academy's findings stunned the bureau.
The panel concluded that although the FBI had been taking accurate bullet-lead measurements in its lab, the statistical methods and its expert testimonies were flawed.
The science "does not . . . have the unique specificity of techniques such as DNA," and "available data does not support any statement that a crime bullet came from a particular box of ammunition," the panel concluded. All the FBI could say going forward was that bullets made from the same batch "are more likely" to match in chemical makeup than those made from different batches. Adams soon declared that such testimony was so general that it had no value to jurors, and he ended the technique.
The FBI Response
The FBI went on the offensive to portray its decision in the best light.
In a news release dated Sept. 1, 2005, the bureau declared that it "still firmly supports the scientific foundation of bullet lead analysis" but that it was ending the technique because of the questions about its "relative probative value," the "costs of maintaining the equipment" and the "resources necessary to do the examinations."
The bureau also sent form letters to the more than 300 police agencies it had assisted with the science and to the umbrella groups representing local prosecutors and local criminal defense lawyers so they could "take whatever steps they deem appropriate."
The letters cited the academy's report but did not call attention to the magnitude of the FBI's internal concerns.
For instance, the letters stated that the impact of the academy's findings "on previously issued examination reports remains unaddressed." In fact, the FBI had conducted its own review to determine how often bad statistics led to mistaken matches.
In March 2005, the chief of the FBI chemistry unit that oversaw the analysis wrote in an e-mail that he applied one of the new statistical methods recommended by the National Academy of Sciences to 436 cases dating to 1996 and found that at least seven would "have a different result today." Marc A. LeBeau estimated that at least 1.4 percent of prior matches would change.
If the FBI employed other statistical methods the number of non-matches would be "a lot more," LeBeau wrote. In fact, when the bureau tested one method recommended by the academy on a sample of 100 bullets, the results changed in the "large majority of the cases," he wrote.
Despite the concerns, the FBI provided affidavits in at least two cases seeking to help prosecutors sustain convictions that were based on bullet-lead matches.
In one such affidavit introduced in Maryland, the FBI cited the academy's report but did not mention it faulted the bureau's statistical methods.
That omission concerns the chairman of the academy panel.
The affidavit "does not discuss the statistical bullet-matching technique, which is key and probably the most significant scientific flaw found by the committee," said Kenneth MacFadden, a private chemistry expert.
MacFadden and Spiegelman said they also believed the affidavit was misleading, because it estimates that the maximum number of .22-caliber bullets in a batch of lead was 1.3 million. The academy said the number could be as high as 35 million.
In a May 12, 2005, e-mail, the deputy lab director told LeBeau, "I don't believe that we can testify about how many bullets may have come from the same melt and our estimate may be totally misleading."
FBI officials said Friday they will stop using the affidavit.
"They said the FBI agents who went after Al Capone were the untouchables, and I say the FBI experts who gave this bullet-lead testimony were the unbelievables," Spiegelman said.
"60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft and producers Ira Rosen and Sumi Aggarwal, Washington Post research editor Alice Crites and staff researcher Madonna Lebling, and freelance researcher Jilly Badanes contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7111701681.html
************************************************************************
"Isn't it exceedingly odd that this article makes no mention of Guinn, without whom the problem would never have arisen?
Isn't it odd that these intrepid investigators at the Post do not tell their readers that their own inquiries prove that the official explanation of the JFK assassination is full of holes?"
Why would a bonafide "Mockingbird" rag, such as The Washington Post, cop to any journalistic "injustice" on their part, J. Ray? And, what about all those prisoners left to rot in jail on a miscarriage of justice committed because of Guinn's bumbling deductive analysis of an oversight?
-
Could Gratz and Mauro be onto something worthwhile here?
Nah... just kidding. They could be on something though.
*******************************************************
"They could be on something though."
I seriously doubt T.G. would be on anything stronger than aspirin. He's too young to have followed me through the hippie communes of NYC, and San Francisco. Besides, he's a Fascist and I'm a Socialist. We both reserve the right "to agree to disagree."
Why don't you crawl back into your hole and put a lid on it, Bev.
-
There are no bloody, damned UFO's, only gov't cover ups for whatever new fangled contraption they're interested in spending the taxpayers' hard earned cash pursuing in the name of their utterly ridiculous defense program. Americans are hard-boiled idiots, raised on too much Hollyweird fluff and bull-puckey. We know it. When are they going to get their heads out of that proverbial place where "the sun don't shine," and wake up to the facts of REAL life?
I disagree in part because I saw 2 UFOs, once with a small crowd of people and once alone and very near to me physically. I believe what I saw last was our technology. What I saw first was some kind of hologram projected against the sky, in my opinion. It was definitely playing with us and scaring us. And the police lied when they told us it was a weather balloon.
Bill Kelly brought up that Kennedy's Daily Briefs haven't been declassified. Why?
Kathy
***********************************************************
"I disagree in part because I saw 2 UFOs..."
You need to substantiate these claims, otherwise that's all they are, or ever will be.
I thought I saw one once, in 1976, looking through some long-range binoculars, in broad daylight, at 16:30 hrs PDT hovering over Coldwater Canyon, but nothing was showing up on the radar at L.A.X., and it might've been something I was smoking at the time, for all I know.
But, later on in 1983, while watching some late night show on T.V. that dealt with U.F.O.'s, there was a drawing depicting the same "spinning-top" like shape, I had witnessed that autumn afternoon hovering over Coldwater Canyon, but it was a mere sketch that could've been taken off the drawing board at Andrews Air Force base, where this contraption had apparently been sighted.
The data was inconclusive, and after having read a book David Lifton had lent me on the "Majestic" project, I came to believe that the gov't will hide behind the auspices of Project "Bluebook" as a way of covering up their own tracks with regard to any highly classified project they may be working on.
Take it or leave it.
-
From the ContraCostaTimes
November 18, 2007
By AJ Buttacavoli
Thanksgiving this year falls on Nov. 22, the 44th anniversary of President Kennedy's assassination. Although much has been written about JFK, and the avalanche of books appears to have no end, no account can begin to match what it was like to be alive during the Kennedy years.My first year of college began in September 1960, and JFK was elected in November. The impact on college students everywhere was unprecedented. Suddenly Kennedy was like a comet in the sky, a blazing light that lit the land, a man so extraordinary it was as though the second coming had occurred.It really wasn't anything he did -- it was just who he was: the youngest man ever elected to the presidency, in the process replacing the oldest man to leave office, Dwight Eisenhower; the first Catholic elected -- and so far the only Catholic.Kennedy was young, dashing, smart and witty. And by his side was perhaps the most beautiful woman any of us ever saw outside Marilyn Monroe or Audrey Hepburn. Jack and Jackie together redefined celebrity. They had something Hollywood never had -- class! That was something we knew virtually nothing about. But we soon learned.Manners were in vogue. Being civilized and cultured were acceptable virtually overnight. The ballet and the opera were no longer weird. Culture was important now, and becoming part of culture was something to strive for.Then it all ended in the twinkling of an eye, and the nation has never been the same. Indeed, it's almost as though America has been in its own dark ages and culture has descended into the pit of a black hole. That is perhaps the greatest loss of all -- that the forces of darkness should grip the nation in such a way that has never happened before in America's history....Full article: http://www.contracostatimes.com/columns/ci_7498648
*************************************************
Thank you, Mike.
For remembrance of more halcyon days, when the joy of life seemed more readily attainable, when there was so much more in the way of simple pleasures for the taking, and the appreciation of life's beautiful treasures meant more than the price tag placed upon a consumable commodity.
A happier Thanksgiving, maybe someday, for us all.
-
"That old devil Lucifer."
This is the first mistake anybody makes when they kow-tow to organized religion.
Why do you think organized religion was allowed to manifest its ugly head, in the first place? A simple way of controlling, manipulating, and separating ignorant people from their hard earned cash, which is just one reason out of millions. That is, before Operation Mockingbird was brought into being by the British and American O.S.S. in 1947, when they realized what a cash cow lay at their feet in the form of that new media "television."
Visuals were the first stepping stones to "hypnotizing," and "brain-washing" masses of populations into being voluntarily controlled in front of a cathode ray tube, of their own free will, no less.
Terry, I'll admit that when I saw your name as the latest person replying to my post, my heart was in my throat. And then I found out you actually felt the same way. We agree on something -- the Holy Roman Empire! Thank you because your opinion means a lot to me. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does.
Do you believe the Jesuits were involved in President Kennedy's assassination? I find on the Internet that a lot of people do -- but many of them are bible-thumpers, spouting a different religion. I remember Malachy Martin, a former Jesuit, who wrote books in the '70's about what he saw going on in the Vatican. I haven't read his books, but plan to do so.
Kathy
**************************************************************
"Terry, I'll admit that when I saw your name as the latest person replying to my post, my heart was in my throat."
Well, if that Bishop in Rome, whatever the hell his name is, can get away with poisoning a Pope, who was about to alter the Church's stance on divorce and abortion, then I wouldn't put anything past them doing whatever the hell they pleased in order to maintain their oligarchy and its strangle-hold on the lives of the very people they manage to extort the money that keeps their farcical religious facade in place, in this day and age.
Nothing like keeping people ignorant while maintaining the yoke of subservience around their necks, and whipping their asses all the way down the aisles to the pews they so readily contributed to, in building their "houses of the holy," while their children starved and went without shoes, just so they'd have an ostentatious house in which to worship, whom may I ask?
Why do you think people cling to their "Catholic" churches? Because they've been brow-beaten into this submissive state of believing they're unworthy sinners, doomed to damnation in the fires of hell. Bull puckey!!! It's massive crowd control and manipulation, that's what it is.
The only church I'd bother to lay my money down in would be one of the Second Baptist Churches. Want to know why? Because they're the black Baptist churches and they're the only ones believable enough to warrant my respect, or my money. And, at least they physically take care of their parishioners, taking them into the church and finding them homes to shelter them from the storm, no matter how poor they are. They manage to cleave together for the sake of the whole. Plus, they have the best and most uplifting choirs, singing the best gospel music in the world! Now, that's what I call a church! Not some damned mausoleum for some saint's bone of a relic. That ain't going to cure you!
That's where I would venture to go if I ever needed spiritual healing and uplifting of my spirits.
You don't have to be afraid of me. I'm just telling it like it is, Kath. I'm only out to eradicate ignorance, superstition, and cowardice of life, that's all.
-
He Aimed at the Stars but Hit London
By ALEX ROLAND
The New York Times Book Review
November 18, 2007
VON BRAUN
Dreamer of Space, Engineer of War.
By Michael J. Neufeld.
Illustrated. 587 pp. Alfred A. Knopf. $35.
Wernher von Braun was a giant of the 20th century. But what, in the modern imagination, did he represent? Visionary science? Cynical manipulation? The marriage of science and technology? The convergence of war and peace? Was von Braun the Columbus of space? The brains of the military-industrial complex? The face of modernity? Was he a war criminal, as many of his contemporaries believed? Or was he, as Michael J. Neufeld argues in “Von Braun: Dreamer of Space, Engineer of War,” a modern Faust, in league with the devil?
Neufeld’s thoroughly satisfying biography confirms the broad outlines of its subject’s life as they have been known for many years. Born to aristocratic parents in 1912, von Braun told his mother when he was about 10 that he wanted his life to “turn the wheel of progress.” A precocious child, he discovered rocketry and spaceflight in his teens and committed himself to putting men (including himself) on the Moon.
Even before Hitler came to power, an officer in the German Army selected von Braun from among the membership of the Society for Space Travel, an amateur rocket group, to pursue the possible military applications of this new technology. The army sponsored von Braun’s doctoral studies in physics and engineering and promptly classified and confiscated his dissertation, completed in 1934, when he was just 22.
Over the ensuing decade von Braun worked on multiple rocket programs for Hitler’s Germany, including the ballistic missile designated by the Nazi Propaganda Ministry as Vengeance Weapon 2, or V-2. In the last days of the war, von Braun and his closest aides buried their records in a mine shaft and fled west, away from the approaching Soviet Army, to surrender to the Americans. Brought to the United States as part of Project Paperclip, von Braun and his colleagues shared with the Americans what they knew about ballistic missiles. Most found places for themselves in the emerging United States Army missile program, eventually becoming citizens and pillars of the cold war arms race.
Through all this military activity, von Braun never lost his passion for spaceflight. He desperately wanted the Jupiter intercontinental ballistic missile that he developed at the Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Ala., to be the first rocket to place a man-made satellite into orbit, but the Eisenhower administration refused to launch an instrument that would raise the thorny question of overflight of Soviet territory.
When the Soviet satellite Sputnik was launched on Oct. 4, 1957, the space race was on. Von Braun and his rocket team were soon transferred to the new civilian space agency, NASA, to build the rocket that would carry humans to the Moon. The resulting Saturn launch vehicle, still the most powerful ever to leave Earth, powered the Apollo program to the fulfillment of von Braun’s dream.
It did not, however, take the route he had recommended. Instead of building a large space station in Earth orbit as a way-station to the Moon, NASA flew directly from Earth orbit to lunar orbit. When the Apollo program ended prematurely in the early 1970s, von Braun and his fellow travelers had been unable to build the infrastructure in space that they had envisioned. Disillusioned, von Braun left NASA to take a high-paying position in the aerospace industry, only to have his life cut short by cancer in 1977, at age 65.
Von Braun has been the subject of at least nine previous English-language biographies. But Neufeld’s version, exhaustively researched in German and American archives and written in clear, fast-paced prose, offers the most complete, fully documented and critical account that the imperfect documentary record is likely to yield. Neufeld acclaims him “the most influential rocket engineer and spaceflight advocate of the 20th century.” This book amply supports that judgment.
Though most previous biographies have been hagiographic celebrations, some have noted his association with — if not his commission of — war crimes in Hitler’s Germany. Neufeld also sees him as a modern-day Faust, whose power came from a bargain with the devil. The devil in Neufeld’s analogy is Nazi Germany in general and Hitler in particular, from whom von Braun personally received the cherished title of “Professor.” Neufeld scours the historical record for evidence of von Braun’s crimes, rehearsing his membership in the SS, his development of deadly weapons and, most important, his participation in the notorious slave labor program that built his V-2s at a horrible human cost.
Neufeld finds no smoking gun, no evidence that von Braun actively planned or even oversaw the crimes perpetrated on his workers, but he does believe that von Braun’s participation in the planning and operation of the Mittelwerk, the underground rocket factory manned by slave laborers from the adjacent Dora concentration camp, would make him guilty of crimes against humanity. And he demonstrates that von Braun covered up his past by dissembling and flat-out lying when confronted with the record. If not guilty of crimes against humanity, von Braun was certainly morally obtuse. Only in the summer of 1944, when the war was clearly lost, he later recalled, did there dawn on him “the realization that I might be aiding an evil regime.”
Neufeld is less attentive to the moral guilt of American leaders and institutions. Many of them aided and abetted the suppression and misrepresentation of von Braun’s history, as well as the histories of many others in Project Paperclip. In the heat of the cold war, they, too, subordinated their moral principles to what they saw as higher purposes. As the physicist Herbert York later said: “Some people regard von Braun’s unwavering dedication to the grand dream of space flight as heroic and farsighted. Others cannot overlook the grotesque means and unprincipled behavior he used to realize his dreams. I am among the latter, but in this instance I was glad to exploit his willingness to go, without argument, wherever the money was.”
Von Braun may have been, as the satirist Tom Lehrer said, “a man whose allegiance is ruled by expedience,” but his keepers behaved expediently as well. To paraphrase Lionel Tiger and Robin Fox’s judgment on the Pentagon in “The Imperial Animal” (1971), if you have a von Braun, you will use him, and he will use you.
PERHAPS the rocket baron’s most lasting legacy is his vision for space travel. In the 1950s, at the height of his popularity, von Braun used public appearances, Collier’s magazine and Walt Disney television productions to sell the public an idealized model of mankind’s future in space. His launching vehicles would be used to build a space station in Earth orbit from which humans would fly to the Moon and then to Mars. Von Braun actually cared more for the Moon mission than for Mars, but he appreciated the romantic appeal of the red planet. That paradigm so captured the imagination of NASA, and the American public, that the United States has been pursuing it ever since.
Though the NASA administrator Michael Griffin has now declared the space shuttle and the space station mistakes, NASA has vowed to continue with both while beginning to pursue the “vision for space exploration” announced by George W. Bush in 2004. That vision is a slightly revised version of the von Braun model, omitting the increasingly troubled and expensive space station. For better or for worse, we remain in the thrall of von Braun’s potent imagination.
Alex Roland is a professor of history at Duke University and a former NASA historian.
*****************************************************************
The U.S. gov't sure did a bang-up job of keeping Von Braun's Nazi origins under secure wraps all the while working on their space program, which BTW Eisenhower's original intents seemed mainly aimed for use in reconnaissance purposes and ICBM targets.
NOVA had a great special on this very same topic on PBS [KCET in L.A.] either Wednesday or Thursday this past week.
Thanks for posting this detail of Project Paperclip by Neufeld, Doug.
-
Wednesday and Thursday there was quite a bit of coverage of the Clinton/UFO issues on American tv.
Far more so than the assassination usually gets!!
Around 1993 while we were having a major COPA conference in DC, the DOD released the Bluebook files and a special report by an Army unit, a few members of which then visited the COPA conference.
A few years ago, when I began to call for Congressional Hearings on the JFK Act, the same group who recently did a gig at the National Press Club with military, FAA and other officials speaking on behalf of UFOs got total CSPAN coverage for their UFO conference, and COPA got nothing.
Then we had one COPA conference in DC and when I got there I was surprised to see TV cameras and satalite dishes set up and thought we were finally getting some coverage when it turned out they were there for another conference, the National Society of Gay and Lesbian Journalists, and George Steponapolis - Gratz can correct the spelling - was the featured speaker who got all the publicity.
Now, in still attempting to drum up interest in Congressional oversight hearings of the JFK Act, the news comming out of DC is that the UFOers want Congerssional Hearings on UFOs and the Republicans are calling for the opening of the Clinton White House files so they can rummage through Hillary's Health Commission files.
Why no interest in the fact that JFK's Daily Briefing reports are still being with held from the public? Or that the JFK Assassination Records Act still has not had oversight hearings fifteen years after it was passed? Or that the CIA still won't abide by the act and is in court to keep from doing so?
Oh, well, I guess UFOs and Hillary's dirty laundry are more important.
BK
Good post Bill. I have a few thoughts on what you said.
1] While I think there are some aspects of not-yet-identified-objects-that-fly that need exploration and explication, I agree they should not trump the JFK Assassination or 9/11 et al. The government plays with them as part of their Bread and Circus act. IMO...to keep people from looking at the really important things [not that I think 'ufo's' are without some lesser order of importance to explore, as mentioned elsewhere - but not likely extra-terrestrail...rather covert craft and technology from Earth].
2] The idea of extraterrestrials is very appealing to a confused and discouraged populace. They would have, if they exist, have lived millions or billions of years longer than our civilazation, and I imagine most would hope they'd thus have some 'answers' to the mysteries of life, existance and the universe...i.e. substitutes for religion - or trumping religion....which leaves them still with the questions unanswered.
3] People love a mystery, and here we need to use this love for JFK, RFK, MLK and and 9/11 et al. Sadly the Govt. plays up the mystery on 'UFOs' and tries to say there is none on the real mysteries of the assassinations.
4] UFOs and those interested in them are used by the propaganda machinery to cast general doubts on anyone who sees a conspiracy or cover-up of anything....ironic as they are the very ones involved in the cover-ups of the conspiracies...but this is the reality we must deal with.
5] Sadly, Americans [and others in other cultures too] are all too much involved in the glamor/glitter/scandal/sex/star/junk news and not the political news. This is encouraged by the purposeful history and political vacuum in schools and media and to keep the average person's noses out of what the oligarchy and their minions feel is their soverign turf....manipulation of things via a few overt and many covert operations.
6] Some awareness of the above may help us to work around and past this sad state of things.
************************************************************
3] People love a mystery, and here we need to use this love for JFK, RFK, MLK and and 9/11 et al. Sadly the Govt. plays up the mystery on 'UFOs' and tries to say there is none on the real mysteries of the assassinations.
4] UFOs and those interested in them are used by the propaganda machinery to cast general doubts on anyone who sees a conspiracy or cover-up of anything....ironic as they are the very ones involved in the cover-ups of the conspiracies...but this is the reality we must deal with.
5] Sadly, Americans [and others in other cultures too] are all too much involved in the glamor/glitter/scandal/sex/star/junk news and not the political news. This is encouraged by the purposeful history and political vacuum in schools and media and to keep the average person's noses out of what the oligarchy and their minions feel is their soverign turf....manipulation of things via a few overt and many covert operations.
6] Some awareness of the above may help us to work around and past this sad state of things.
Excellent appraisal, Pete.
There are no bloody, damned UFO's, only gov't cover ups for whatever new fangled contraption they're interested in spending the taxpayers' hard earned cash pursuing in the name of their utterly ridiculous defense program. Americans are hard-boiled idiots, raised on too much Hollyweird fluff and bull-puckey. We know it. When are they going to get their heads out of that proverbial place where "the sun don't shine," and wake up to the facts of REAL life?
-
The sins of some Catholic priests no more indicts the entire Catholic church than the sins of certain tv evangelists indicts all Protestants.
That is your opinion, Tim. But I say it tells more about Catholic and Protestant-run religions than I could ever have imagined in my wildest dreams before this stuff became news. Tim, I think you are trying to undercut the significance of these molestations. It wasn't a rare incident. It involved hundreds of kids and billions of dollars. Think of these Archbishops who hid these crimes and moved their priests to other parishes. This definitely impugns the Catholic Church, as these crimes were known in the hierarchy. And the molesting priests donned their collars in their new parishes and received instant respect from their believers. Like I said, if I made up this story and turned it into a novel, readers would think it improbable. I don't even think a publisher would buy it. Even Midnight magazine wouldn't touch it!
It seems to me that the higher ups who refrained from molesting kids, still understood the nature of the priesthood and the priests. That is why the priests were allowed to continue their ways, but in different parishes. I'm trying to say a grand majority of the higher ups are inclined in the same fashion. Maybe they should have turned it into a sacrament. Even Mother Angelica couldn't explain it. She said, paraphrased, "There's sex all over the media. Our poor priests have more temptation than ever." She was talking heterosexuality. What could she say to the child molestation? The media shows child molestation all over the place? No wonder she is sick. Holy Orders is a sacrament. She probably wonders how can they be breaking their vows.
That old devil Lucifer.
My maternal aunt was a nun, a Sister of Charity. In her parish a priest was found to be having an affair with a 13 year old boy. He also was caught stealing money from the Rectory safe. With these funds he was buying drugs. My aunt couldn't accept it. She said to me, "A prophet isn't known in his own land." Just couldn't accept it. I'm glad she didn't live to see all the destruction these priests have caused her religion. She broke down once and cried that because many priests are gay, people now think nuns are lesbians.
Kathy
**********************************************************
"That old devil Lucifer."
This is the first mistake anybody makes when they kow-tow to organized religion.
Why do you think organized religion was allowed to manifest its ugly head, in the first place? A simple way of controlling, manipulating, and separating ignorant people from their hard earned cash, which is just one reason out of millions. That is, before Operation Mockingbird was brought into being by the British and American O.S.S. in 1947, when they realized what a cash cow lay at their feet in the form of that new media "television."
Visuals were the first stepping stones to "hypnotizing," and "brain-washing" masses of populations into being voluntarily controlled in front of a cathode ray tube, of their own free will, no less.
-
John wrote:
Several members posted details of the plight of the poor in the United States. Tim replies by pointing out that the US has 740 television sets per 1,000 people.
I was refering to a post by Mark Stapleton who most know is from Australia. I used not only television sets but other indicia of consumptiom, as you know I did John. In addition, you purposely ignored the fact that I was comparing the data from the US with data from Australia. My point was simply that using such criteria as indicative of people living above the level of poverty, there are more poor in Australia than in the United States. Thus Mark's remark about poverty in the US was at a minimum misplaced.
That is, I submit, a logical response.
Just an fyi, its a poll so take it as you will:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...280109607660233
An America Divided Along Class Lines? 75% 'Haves' Say No
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, November 16, 2007 4:30 PM PT
As Americans take time this week to count their blessings and think of others less fortunate, they can take comfort in knowing that those who put themselves in the latter category are far fewer than they probably realize.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBD Series: Uncommon Knowledge — What The Media Misses, Misrepresents, and Ignores
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contrary to politicians and even polls that claim the U.S. is a nation deeply split between "haves" and "have-nots," a new IBD/TIPP Poll finds that three of four of us (75%) consider ourselves "haves."
This includes even those who make the least money. Fully 60% of those with incomes of $30,000 a year or less count themselves as "haves" vs. 34% who do not.
The percentage of "haves" goes up to 62% among those with incomes between $30,000 and $50,000, to 83.5% between $50,000 and $75,000 and to 90% those over $75,000.
Also contrary to conventional wisdom, a majority of Americans believe that "as a nation, we are materially better off today than we were 20 years ago." A solid 58% of the 924 adults surveyed from Nov. 2 to Nov. 8 were of that opinion vs. 37.5% who disagreed.
All in all, the IBD/TIPP Poll paints a picture of Americans satisfied with — even thankful for — what they have and how much more they have now than a generation ago.
This contrasts with the oft-heard positions of some politicians who see a widening gap between rich and poor and a need to close it. Chief among them is John Edwards, former U.S. senator and current candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, who has made the "Two Americas" the theme of his populist campaign.
The IBD/TIPP findings also differ sharply with those of a similar poll taken in September by the Pew Research Center.
When Pew asked, "Is America divided into 'haves' and 'have-nots'?" 48% answered "yes" and 48% answered "no." When it further asked, "If you had to choose, are you in the 'haves' or 'have-nots'?," 45% chose "haves" and 34% "have-nots." Another 21% didn't know or weren't sure.
IBD/TIPP asked the question this way: "All things considered, do you consider yourself to be part of America's haves or part of America's have-nots?"
The 30-percentage-point difference between IBD/TIPP and Pew on the have/have-not question is huge.
According to IBD's pollster, Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, the polls differed in several ways, including sample sizes, weighting schemes, answer options, question wording and survey content.
Be that as it may, Pew made much of the divisions that it believed it found and the changes since Gallup polled on the subject 20 years ago.
In a report titled "A Nation of 'Haves' and 'Have-Nots?," it observed that "over the past two decades, a growing share of the public has come to the view that American society is divided into two groups, the 'haves' and the 'have-nots.'
"Of equal importance," it added, "the number of Americans who see themselves among the 'have-nots' has doubled over the last two decades, from 17% in 1988 to 34% today.
"In 1988, far more Americans said that . . . they were probably among the 'haves' (59%) than the 'have-nots.' "
The IBD/TIPP data, however, do not indicate that more Americans have drifted into the "have-not" camp. In fact, the 75% who consider themselves "haves" today vs. the 59% responding to the earlier Gallup survey suggest that more have joined the "haves."
The fact that 58% believe we are materially better off also supports this finding.
A closer look at the IBD/TIPP results finds very little difference in the way men and women or the various age groups categorize themselves.
Wider differences are apparent among political affiliations, with Republicans splitting 82% to 12% among "haves" and "have-nots," Democrats at 68%-27% and independents at 77%-20%.
Racial samples were too small to generalize about. But for the record, the breakdown for blacks and Hispanics was 71% "haves" and 29% "have-nots." (For whites, it was 76%-16%.)
Among regions, the West had the most "haves," with 81%, and the Midwest had the least, with 67%. The poll also distinguished between "investors," 82% of whom said they were "haves." "Non-investors" came in at 63%.
On whether the nation is better off now than in 1987, both Republicans and independents differed with Democrats. By a 76% to 23%, Republicans agreed we're better off (with 52% agreeing "strongly"), and independents agreed 60%-39%. But only 45% of Democrats agreed vs. 49% who didn't.
Differences were also observed among regions, with the Northeast at 69% and the South at 62% agreeing more than the West (51.5%) and the Midwest (51%).
Whites split 61.5% to 36% and blacks and Hispanics 52% to 39%. Sixty-five percent of investors think we're better off than 20 years ago vs. 34% who don't. Non-investors split 50% to 42%. Respondents over 65 were the only age group that didn't think things have improved.
The poll's margin of error was plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...280109607660233
**********************************************************
And, that's most likely due to the "dumbing down" process which has so perfidiously permeated the American consciousness since the death of the New Frontier, which in fact, became the empirical goal of Wall Street's baronial oligarchs.
The majority of the population of the United States remains on the I.Q. level of that of sophisticated morons, who've been hoodwinked and bamboozled into believing they're the most highly educated, state of the art, intelligence-wise, consumers of what America has to offer, simply because they have adequate plumbing and electricity, if you really want to tear it down to the bare basics of the matter.
If we're so high-minded and sophisticated, as we've been brain-washed into believing, then someone please explain to me how we've managed to have been persuaded to vote for a fascist, war-mongering, elitist, prejudiced, administration for the last 25 years, that's done nothing for this country, but bring it to its knees, while back-channeling our major industrial and manufacturing bases to a bunch of Third World backwaters, and for what purpose?
Is anybody awake out there, or are we all just jerking off?
-
John,
Like a lot of researchers, you obviously believe that the extreme right was behind the assassination of JFK. I think this theory fails for the same reason I don't believe that anti-Castro Cubans were the driving force behind it.
In 1963, while this was a much more conservative country in general, groups like Liberty Lobby, the John Birch Society, the Minutemen, etc., were marginalized and had very little real power. It is inconceivable that they would have been able to enlist at least some members of the Secret Service (which I think had to have happened, based on the total lack of response that day). It is inconceivable that they would have been able to keep virtually all of JFK's political friends silent about the conspiracy. Do you honestly think Earl Warren would have placed his name on a report he had to have known to be bogus, for the purpose of covering up for his political enemies on the far right?
As I've mentioned before, you are playing the "six degrees of seperation" game in order to bolster your theory that those on the far right are behind everything. Kind of like the McCarthyites finding a commie behind every tree. In one of your recent posts, you actually acted as if it were suspicious that a couple of your far right bogeymen were Unitarians! Is the Unitarian religion suspect because of that? Your post certainly seemed to imply that.
As in the case of the anti-Castro theory, where I've pointed out that Castro and Cuba basically died as a political issue when JFK was killed, let's look at what the far right was lobbying for (and against) in 1963, and what happened afterwards. On virtually every issue they were concerned with, the far right "lost" after JFK was assassinated. Things did not get "better," from their point of view, with the murder of the president they thought was a commie. The dreaded Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts were passed, the Immigration Reform act was passed, the federal government became much bigger and more involved in every facet of our lives in the ensuing years. Taxes were raised at every level, and there would be no truly powerful right wing movement until Reagan was swept into office in 1980. So, if they killed JFK, they must have been just as disappointed as the anti-Castro people at what transpired afterwards.
Finally, the biggest argument against the extreme right, or anti-Castro groups being behind the assassination is the duplicity of the entire mass media. It is an obvious fact that except for a few newspapers breathing their last gasps, the entire American establishment press would have been unsympathetic to the goals of any far right group in 1963. Over the years, our culture has titled more and more to the left, making them even less likely to support dogmatic anti-communists like Gen. Walker and company. If you think that the mainstream media today is still lying about the JFK assassination because they want to protect far right wing figures they disagreed with on every significant issue, then I think you are living in a different country than I am (but then maybe you are- not sure if you're in the U.S.)
Just a word about Liberty Lobby. I believe they changed quite a bit over the years. Like Terry Mauro, I was a subscriber to The Spotlight, the weekly newspaper they published. Once Curtis B. Dall died, I think their emphasis switched from a strict anti-communist line to a less predictable, populist tone. Yes, it is quite true that they often blamed Israel (and the Mossad) for just about every international event, but I learned to look past this and found a lot of their reporting to be very valuable. For instance, they were the first ones to run stories about widespread vote fraud, which was eventually gathered together in the excellent book "Votescam" by the late Collier brothers. We saw the fruition of what was first reported in the pages of The Spotlight back in the mid-1980s when Gore was robbed in Florida in the 2000 election. They also were well ahead of the pack in reporting on the medical benefits of vitamins and healthy eating and alternative sources of energy. In the days before the internet, The Spotlight was just about the only alternative news source we had.
When we concentrate on marginal groups with no real power, we let the truly powerful forces that I believe carried out the assassination and orchestrated the coverup (CIA, FBI, Pentagon, LBJ, etc.) off the hook. This was not an easy crime to pull off, and even if these splinter groups could have managed it, there is no way they would have been able to control the likes of LBJ, J.Edgar Hoover and the ENTIRE establishment press afterwards. Do you really think that Peter Jennings was lying for three hours on ABC television, on the 40th anniversary documentary they aired, because he didn't want to expose his "friends" on the far right? Just my two cents worth.
***************************************************************
Thank you, Don.
And, The Spotlight was also the first to break the news of Operation Watchtower, the cocaine connection into the U.S., under the auspices of Bush, Sr. during his and Reagan's administrations.
-
Willis Carto, L. Fletcher Prouty and the IHR
Political Organizations & Activities
National Youth Alliance
In his book "Brotherhood of Murder," Martinez mentions the National Youth Alliance, which had its beginnings as "Youth for Wallace," and was formed during the Wallace Presidential campaign of 1968. He notes that Dr. William Pierce, whom he describes as a "Nazi," along with several founders of George Lincoln Rockwell's National Socialist White People's Party, joined the organization in the late Sixties.
The information he provides which relates to Carto's involvement in this group is sketchy, to say the least:
The behind-the-scenes power in the NYA was Willis Carto, head of the far right-wing, Washington, D.C.-based Liberty Lobby, publisher of an anti-Zionist magazine called 'Spotlight' and also publisher of a book that teaches terrorist urban warfare tactics.
Martinez continues with "After wresting control of the group from Carto..." and no further references are to be found. (Martinez, 33)
The neo-Nazi group The National Alliance grew out of "The National Youth Alliance," and is now controlled by Dr. William Pierce.
I would appreciate receiving any additional, documented, information regarding Carto's involvement with this group, and invite your contributions. ("Brotherhood of Murder" tells of Martinez' involvement with The Order, the neo-nazi organization responsible for the murder of Denver talk-show host Alen Berg and others.)
The Populist Action Committee (Richard Hatch, May, 1993)
In 1991, the Populist Action Committee (PAC) was "formally launched by the Liberty Lobby, the Washington-based populist institution that publishes The Spotlight." (Spotlight, 6-3-91, 1) The PAC is intimately tied to the Spotlight, which is "a prime mover behind the PAC." (Spotlight, 9-9-91, A-3) Unlike conventional political action committees, the PAC will not give money directly to candidates for office, but rather will "promote and publicize populist candidates, urging patriots to make direct contributions to these candidates." (Ibid)
The Kick-Off
The featured speaker at the kick-off meeting was "English populist" John Tyndall of the British National Party. (Spotlight, 6-3-91, 1) Tyndall is a British "former" National Socialist who has been quoted as saying "The Jew is like a maggot feeding on a body in an advanced state of decay." (Knight, 47) The selection of Tyndall as featured speaker for the founding meeting is an indication of the political direction of the Populist Action Committee. Tyndall was a founder of the British National Party in 1960. (Hill, page??) The original BNP was "pro-nazi and anti-semitic" and later merged with other far-right groups to form the National Front in 1967. The NF promoted the exclusion of non-whites from England. (Fielding, 67-68)
Tyndall resurrected the old BNP name when he founded a new party after the collapse of the National Front. As noted in a "Spotlight" interview, the BNP publishes _British Nationalist_ and _Spearhead_. (Spotlight, 6-24-91, 16-17) The name "Spearhead" is a throwback to the paramilitary organization in which Tyndall was active during the original BNP days. Tyndall, who sported Nazi-style stormtrooper attire in those days, was "gaoled" for his involvement in this paramilitary group. (Hill, 61)
Promoting "Populist Candidates"
According to Liberty Lobby founder Willis Carto, the PAC "will be promoting populist candidates." (Spotlight, 6-10-91, 11) The PAC does this in part by publicizing the activities of such candidates in the "Spotlight".
In one such case, the "Spotlight" directed readers to Joe Fields who in 1992 was running for a California State legislature seat under the banner of the American Independent Party. Fields is a notorious far-right activist from Southern California who in 1987 "identified himself to reporters as a member of the National Socialist American Workers Party." (Los Angeles Times March 11, 1988, 30, section 1)
Art Jones was singled out for publicity in a special PAC "wrap" addition to the Spotlight. (Spotlight, 3-9-92, A-2) The PAC identified Jones as one of "seven viable candidates for public office who are dedicated to the principles of populism...With your help, there is a chance to elect candidates unbeholden to special interests now plunging our country into ruin." Apparently, this was as far as the PAC could go, since the special PAC "wrap" noted that the "Populist Action Committee is a research and education entity not registered with the Federal Election Committee and does not endorse any candidate." (Spotlight, 3-9-92, A2) An earlier PAC report in the "Spotlight" described Art Jones as a candidate who "puts America first." "Spotlight" went on to note that "Jones has been connected to far-right nationalist groups in the Chicago area by the local media." (Spotlight, 2-24-92, 7)
In fact, local media reports had identified Jones as a leader in the American Nazi Party. (Chicago Tribune 1-20-89, 3) Jones was active in overt Nazi agitation as far back as 1979, when he was photographed at a Chicago rally wearing the swastika armband. He later became briefly involved with Civilian Military Assistance (CMA). CMA was part of the "private" support network for Reagan's contra war in Nicaragua. (Bellant, 120-122) In 1989, Jones was vice chairman of the American Nazi Party. He achieved some notoriety when he was photographed shaking hands with David Duke during Duke's run for governor of Louisiana. Even Duke, attempting to shake off his own past, called Jones a "Nazi kook." (Rose, 64)
Populist Personnel
The make-up of the advisory board of the PAC gives an idea of why such "populist candidates" would be promoted by the PAC. The members (and their descriptions) as of March 9, 1992 included:
Abe Lincoln Austin (Monetary Scientist) Mike Blair (Investigative Reporter)
Ken Bohnsack (Founder, Sovereignty)
Robert Brock (Black Nationalist)
Howard Carson (Publishing Consultant)
Capt. G. Russel Evans (Historian)
Lt. Col. James (Bo) Gritz (US Army, ret.)
Dr. Martin A. Larson (Author)
Roger Lourie (President, Devin-Adair publishing)
Donald A. MacPherson (Constitutional Attorney)
Pauline Mackey (Treasurer, ret. David Duke for President)
Tom McIntyre (Former Chairman, Populist Party)
Eustace Mullins (Author)
John Nugent (Financial Consultant)
Lawrence Patterson (Editor & Publisher, Criminal Politics)
Col. L. Fletcher Prouty (US Air Force, ret.)
John Rakus (President, National Justice Foundation)
John Rarick (Former Congressman, D-Louisiana)
Vince Ryan (Editor, The Spotlight)
Sherman Skolnick (Chairman, Committee to Clean Up the Courts)
Maj. James H. Townsend, Ret. (Editor & Publisher, The National Educator)
James P. Tucker (President, National Media Services)
Tom Valentine (Host, Radio Free America)
Raymond E. Walk (President, Rayan Associates, Inc.)
Robert Weems (Founding Chairman, Populist Party)
Some biographies may be useful in illustrating the caliber of advisors to the PAC...
Mike Blair ("Investigative reporter") is a long-time reporter for Spotlight.
Robert Brock is a "black nationalist" who promotes the repatriation of Black Americans and supports the so-called Pace Amendment to that end. This amendment would cause untold upheaval as it calls for the compulsory repatriation of most minorities in a period of one year. The Pace Amendment would establish mechanisms by which one's race would be judged by "a combination of blood type, ancestry, and appearance." (Aho, 261-263)
Brock's unusual sense of humor was revealed in a surprise appearance at Pete Peters Identity Christian camp in 1988. Brock entered the meeting hall dressed in a KKK robe and revealed himself, at the podium, no doubt to hearty guffaws. (Scriptures, Vol. V <1988>, 20) Brock also organized a 1992 Holocaust revisionist "First
Amendment" conference in Southern California (Los Angeles Times 2-2-92, 1, part
Institute for Historical Review regular Mark Weber spoke, as did Joe Fields, now with the Populist Party, and his Afrikaner-born wife Dee Fields. Joe proclaimed his belief in "the purity of the races... and the desirability of segregation." "Bo" Gritz was "featured at two Liberty Lobby conventions in 1987 and 1990." (Spotlight, 10-26-92, 5) Gritz is a regular on the Christian Identity/Patriot/Liberty Lobby circuit. Rudy Proctor, who Gritz met while attending one of Pastor Pete Peters' Christian Identity camps, paid for tapes and press releases to be sent to radio stations as part of Gritz Khun Sa publicity campaign. (Gritz, 485-486)
Gritz has also worked with another prominent Christian Identity activist, Richard Flowers, of Boring, Oregon. Flowers heads up the Christian Patriot Association (CPA), which publishes "The Patriot Review" and sponsored a Gritz campaign trip to Oregon. Flowers believes that "Blacks in general have a lower IQ than whites, and most just want to come in and take over without establishing anything themselves." (The Clackamas County Review, week ending June 3, 1992, 1-2)
The CPA distributes an array of literature and audio/video tapes through their 76-page book Catalog. (CPA Book Publisher Book Catalog 1992-1993) There are whole sections devoted to "Christianity - Race - Religion" and "The Jewish Issue." Audio tapes by old stand-bys of the Posse Comitatus movement, such as James Wickstrom, are available. (See Ridgeway, James. Blood in the Face. Thunder's Mouth Press, 1990, 133 for an example of a Wickstrom tape message)
Holocaust revisionists are well represented with tapes by David Irving and books by Arthur Butz and Austin App. Gritz has had a direct working relationship with the CPA through the National Coalition to Reform Money and Taxes (NCRMT.) Gritz's Center for Action and the CPA, as well as a number of other "patriot" organizations are allied in this project to repeal income tax, return to the use of gold and silver, etc... The January 1992 edition of "The Petitioner" newsletter, which reports on the activities of the coalition, approvingly interviewed Gritz and his campaign manager Charlie Brown and reported on Gritz's participation in the coalition. Gritz also participated in at least one Patterson Strategy conference in October 1991 (See entry for Patterson, below) (Criminal Politics, July 1991, 29)
Martin Larson's column appears practically every week in the "Spotlight." Larson writes primarily on economic matters, but manages to throw in enough other tidbits to make things interesting. For example, he feels that "the powers that be are doing everything they can to encourage breeding among welfare recipients." (Spotlight, 3-9-92, 18)
Roger Lourie's Devin-Adair company is a long-time source of right-wing publications. In addition, "Devin-Adair and Regnery published the greater part of those World War II revisionist studies which faulted the Roosevelt administration for intervening against the Axis powers." (Mintz, 48)
Tom McIntyre was chairman of the Populist Party when they nominated "former" Klansman David Duke as their Presidential candidate in 1988. (Gritz was nominated to run as Vice Presidential candidate--see above for Gritz.) (Spotlight, 3-28-88, 4)
Eustace Mullins is the author of the virulently anti-Jewish book "The Biological Jew" (Faith and Service Books, Stauton, VA, 1968). Mullins, in this lengthy comparison of Jews with biological parasites, wrote:
The Jew has always functioned best as a panderer, a pornographer, a master of prostitution, an enemy of the prevailing sexual standards and prohibitions of the gentile community....
We must remember that there is no Jewish crime per se, since the existence of the Jewish parasite on the host is a crime against nature, because its existence imperils the health and life of the host...
This religious ceremony of drinking the blood of an innocent gentile child is basic to the Jew's entire concept of his existence as a parasite, living off the blood of the host...
The Jews do not want anyone to know what Nazism is. Nazism is simply this--a proposal that the German people rid themselves of the parasitic Jews. The gentile host dared to protest against the continued presence of the parasite, and attempted to throw it off. It was an ineffectual reaction, because it was emotional and ill-informed...
Mullins' writings are a standby on the Klan/neo-Nazi circuit. A recent Sons of Liberty book list included Mullins titles such as "Jewish TV: Sick, Sick, Sick," "The Jewish War Against the Christian World," and "Easter," which the catalog tells us give a "look at the 5,000 years of history in the ongoing war between the Satanic-Jewish forces and their Babylonian religious system and the rest of humanity." (Sons of Liberty Fall 1992 catalog, New Christian Crusade Church)
Lawrence Patterson addressed the national committee of the Populist Party in 1988 when they gathered for the David Duke nomination. Patterson's "Criminal Politics" newsletter carries warnings of a "Zionist Trilateral Party" conspiracy to merge the United States, the USSR, and Europe. This conspiracy is "anti-American, anti-religious, atheistic, anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, and anti- Protestant." (Criminal, 07/91, 6) Patterson's newsletter, which went for $15 an issue in 1991, listed Eustace Mullins (see above) as contributing editor. Eric Butler and Ivor Benson were listed as correspondents. Butler has been a long time leader of the Australian League of Rights and is "considered a mentor by active racists and anti-semites throughout the English-speaking world." (Knight, 23) Similarly, Benson -- Information Advisor to the former Rhodesian government -- was a staunch supporter of apartheid in South Africa. (Ibid, 153)
Pauline Mackey is another veteran of the David Duke campaign.
Col. L. Fletcher Prouty has maintained a strong relationship with the Liberty Lobby for years. During the lengthy legal battles surrounding the Mermelstein lawsuits against the Liberty Lobby and Willis A. Carto, Prouty and fellow PAC advisory board member Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz were "prepared to testify as character witnesses on behalf of Liberty Lobby founder Willis A. Carto." (Spotlight, 10-7-91, 12)
Prouty has been a guest on the Liberty Lobby sponsored Radio Free America program dozens of times. (I understand that the Pacifica Radio folks also broadcasts a syndicated "Radio Free America" program, which should not be confused with this one.) Prouty was a featured speaker at the 35th Liberty Lobby Board of Policy convention were he said "If anybody really wants to know what's going on in the world today, he should be reading 'Spotlight'" and explained that "one of the first enemies we have in this country is usury". (Spotlight, 10-8-90, 14)
John Rarick has been "a willing enough ally of the Liberty Lobby" for years. (Mintz, 155) Rarick was a prominent activist in the segregationist white Citizens Councils.
Robert Weems was the founding chairman of the Populist Party. Weems was a "voting member of party's national executive committee" in 1988, when the party nominated David Duke. (Spotlight, 3-28-88, 4) Also the founding national chairman of the PAC, Weems was a Mississippi KKK leader. (Ridgeway, 131)
Weems was scheduled to speak in July 1991 at the "First National Identity-Christian Conference in Reidsville, North Carolina. His topic was "Internationalism and How it Relates to Race, Nation, and Faith." Other speakers at the conference included Eustace Mullins and Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz. The promotional materials for this conference included advertisements for books such as "Our Nordic Race," "White Race--True People of Israel," and "God's Call to Race." (Conference mailing, June 1991)
***************************************************************
"Willis Carto, L. Fletcher Prouty, and the IHR
Political Organizations & Activities"
Nothing like whipping a dead horse, is there?
Your tendency for this type of redundant rhetoric is starting to resemble nothing short of overkill.
I think you are not getting my point. At Michigan State University last week the philosophical progeny of those who killed JFK then covered up for the crime, were all there, present and accounted for in person. The Pioneer Fund crowds via Paul Fromm and J. Phillipe Rushton, the Liberty Lobby crowd via David Duke's friends Richard Weems and John Rarick, the Holocaust Denial IHR crowd via that British National Party Politician, the Stormfront American Nazi Party crowd via Wigginton, none other than the YAF Young Republican crowds of Thurmond, Willoughby and Morris, the Canadian neo Right crowds from the World Anti Communist League and Linda Wayne's website. Don't you get it? Don't you even pay attention? Do you fail to see the evidence right before your eyes? They were all there, together, making common cause in front of the media spotlight for everyone and anyone to see. http://www.nizkor.org
Wow, this is incredible. THEY are beating the SAME DEAD HORSE. THEY are playing the anti-Semitic Holocaust
Denial card. THEY are beating the racist card. THEY are playing the YAF and The John Birch cards. THEY are
beating the British Nationalist drum. THEY are beating the White Supremacist drum, playing the Stormfront and ANP cards, the Populist Party card, The Pioneer Fund Bell Curve cards, here in the USA because neither Canada nor England will let them do it. THEY are playing the Super Patriot card. And YOU are still blind to what they are doing? Wow.
You really either don't get it or are just ignorant or blind to what is happening right before your rose colored glasses.
Which is it? Go to YAFWatch.blogspot.com and listen to all the UTube videos and write down the names then take
out a crayon and connect the dots and compare them to the Willis Carto IHR and Liberty Lobby list above. Thanks.
***************************************************************
Populist Personnel
The make-up of the advisory board of the PAC gives an idea of why such "populist candidates" would be promoted by the PAC. The members (and their descriptions) as of March 9, 1992 included:
Abe Lincoln Austin (Monetary Scientist) Mike Blair (Investigative Reporter)
Ken Bohnsack (Founder, Sovereignty)
Robert Brock (Black Nationalist)
Howard Carson (Publishing Consultant)
Capt. G. Russel Evans (Historian)
Lt. Col. James (Bo) Gritz (US Army, ret.)
Dr. Martin A. Larson (Author)
Roger Lourie (President, Devin-Adair publishing)
Donald A. MacPherson (Constitutional Attorney)
Pauline Mackey (Treasurer, ret. David Duke for President)
Tom McIntyre (Former Chairman, Populist Party)
Eustace Mullins (Author)
John Nugent (Financial Consultant)
Lawrence Patterson (Editor & Publisher, Criminal Politics)
Col. L. Fletcher Prouty (US Air Force, ret.)
John Rakus (President, National Justice Foundation)
John Rarick (Former Congressman, D-Louisiana)
Vince Ryan (Editor, The Spotlight)
Sherman Skolnick (Chairman, Committee to Clean Up the Courts)
Maj. James H. Townsend, Ret. (Editor & Publisher, The National Educator)
James P. Tucker (President, National Media Services)
Tom Valentine (Host, Radio Free America)
Raymond E. Walk (President, Rayan Associates, Inc.)
Robert Weems (Founding Chairman, Populist Party)
No, you don't get it! Some of the above mentioned couldn't get published through the mainstream "Mockingbird" media, when they decided to blow the whistle, and therefore had to resort to being published through Liberty Lobby/Noontide Press. If it hadn't been for the availability of Prouty's works through this house, I never would've been able to have access to his material or his works.
O.K. mods. I deleted the ad hominen. You can allow this post to go up now.
-
Don, John B's posts are certainly filled with vitriol.
IMO some people such as John B, Mr Gray and Mr Kelly do not like it when I question their posts or ask them to verify their factual assertions. I think they simply want a Forum to post thir theories without any challenge to them.
I do not mean to pat myself on the back here but contrast my exchanges with Robert Charles-Dunne. Even though he is often sarcastic and sometimes even condescending, his writing is often so clever and humorous that even I enjoy it though I am the target of his sarcasm. Moreover, he challenges me to support MY posts with facts (we are now enngaged in a somehat arcane discussion of whether Judy Eisenhower was Barry Goldwater's chief of staff or merely his top administarive assistant). I think accurate facts are important to the discussion (there are too many myths and misstatements circulating about the case) and the best way to get the truth out is through this give and take.
If I was wrong about Mrs. Eisenhower's position, it is to Mr. Charles-Dunne's credit that he caught my error and he desres kudos not condemnation for it. If on the other hand the facts should bear out my position, I have the confidence that he has the intellectual integrity that he will admit I was right. In either event, with respect to the debate going on in that thread, it is important to pin down when Mrs. Esisenhower started working for BG and in what capacity. If I was wrong and had Mr., Charles-Dunne not challenged me on it, my error would have gone undetected.
I think any one wanting the truth to come out should be pleased to respond to a challenge to their facts. It is of utmost importance we get our facts correct. For example, we do not want to quote Marrs that LHO had to run down five flights of stairs when it is self-evident it was only four. ("We hold this truth to be self-evident: that six minus two is four.")
With respect to the interpretation of the facts, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and the reader can assess the logic of the opinion or inference as well as how accurately it reflects the established facts.
IMO a spirited debate is what makes the Forum both educational and enjoyable. It is not so when it deteriorates into childish name-calling.
*****************************************************************
"I do not mean to pat myself on the back here but contrast my exchanges with Robert Charles-Dunne. Even though he is often sarcastic and sometimes even condescending, his writing is often so clever and humorous that even I enjoy it though I am the target of his sarcasm. Moreover, he challenges me to support MY posts with facts (we are now enngaged in a somehat arcane discussion of whether Judy Eisenhower was Barry Goldwater's chief of staff or merely his top administarive assistant). I think accurate facts are important to the discussion (there are too many myths and misstatements circulating about the case) and the best way to get the truth out is through this give and take.
If I was wrong about Mrs. Eisenhower's position, it is to Mr. Charles-Dunne's credit that he caught my error and he deserves kudos not condemnation for it. If on the other hand the facts should bear out my position, I have the confidence that he has the intellectual integrity that he will admit I was right. In either event, with respect to the debate going on in that thread, it is important to pin down when Mrs. Esisenhower started working for BG and in what capacity. If I was wrong and had Mr., Charles-Dunne not challenged me on it, my error would have gone undetected."
Excellent, my favorite Fascist, excellent!!!
That's what I love about you, and especially yours and RCD's debates. They're an education, in and of themselves.
Now, that's an "attaboy" for T.G. and R.C.D.
Your,
Femme Nikita
-
Willis Carto, L. Fletcher Prouty and the IHR
Political Organizations & Activities
National Youth Alliance
In his book "Brotherhood of Murder," Martinez mentions the National Youth Alliance, which had its beginnings as "Youth for Wallace," and was formed during the Wallace Presidential campaign of 1968. He notes that Dr. William Pierce, whom he describes as a "Nazi," along with several founders of George Lincoln Rockwell's National Socialist White People's Party, joined the organization in the late Sixties.
The information he provides which relates to Carto's involvement in this group is sketchy, to say the least:
The behind-the-scenes power in the NYA was Willis Carto, head of the far right-wing, Washington, D.C.-based Liberty Lobby, publisher of an anti-Zionist magazine called 'Spotlight' and also publisher of a book that teaches terrorist urban warfare tactics.
Martinez continues with "After wresting control of the group from Carto..." and no further references are to be found. (Martinez, 33)
The neo-Nazi group The National Alliance grew out of "The National Youth Alliance," and is now controlled by Dr. William Pierce.
I would appreciate receiving any additional, documented, information regarding Carto's involvement with this group, and invite your contributions. ("Brotherhood of Murder" tells of Martinez' involvement with The Order, the neo-nazi organization responsible for the murder of Denver talk-show host Alen Berg and others.)
The Populist Action Committee (Richard Hatch, May, 1993)
In 1991, the Populist Action Committee (PAC) was "formally launched by the Liberty Lobby, the Washington-based populist institution that publishes The Spotlight." (Spotlight, 6-3-91, 1) The PAC is intimately tied to the Spotlight, which is "a prime mover behind the PAC." (Spotlight, 9-9-91, A-3) Unlike conventional political action committees, the PAC will not give money directly to candidates for office, but rather will "promote and publicize populist candidates, urging patriots to make direct contributions to these candidates." (Ibid)
The Kick-Off
The featured speaker at the kick-off meeting was "English populist" John Tyndall of the British National Party. (Spotlight, 6-3-91, 1) Tyndall is a British "former" National Socialist who has been quoted as saying "The Jew is like a maggot feeding on a body in an advanced state of decay." (Knight, 47) The selection of Tyndall as featured speaker for the founding meeting is an indication of the political direction of the Populist Action Committee. Tyndall was a founder of the British National Party in 1960. (Hill, page??) The original BNP was "pro-nazi and anti-semitic" and later merged with other far-right groups to form the National Front in 1967. The NF promoted the exclusion of non-whites from England. (Fielding, 67-68)
Tyndall resurrected the old BNP name when he founded a new party after the collapse of the National Front. As noted in a "Spotlight" interview, the BNP publishes _British Nationalist_ and _Spearhead_. (Spotlight, 6-24-91, 16-17) The name "Spearhead" is a throwback to the paramilitary organization in which Tyndall was active during the original BNP days. Tyndall, who sported Nazi-style stormtrooper attire in those days, was "gaoled" for his involvement in this paramilitary group. (Hill, 61)
Promoting "Populist Candidates"
According to Liberty Lobby founder Willis Carto, the PAC "will be promoting populist candidates." (Spotlight, 6-10-91, 11) The PAC does this in part by publicizing the activities of such candidates in the "Spotlight".
In one such case, the "Spotlight" directed readers to Joe Fields who in 1992 was running for a California State legislature seat under the banner of the American Independent Party. Fields is a notorious far-right activist from Southern California who in 1987 "identified himself to reporters as a member of the National Socialist American Workers Party." (Los Angeles Times March 11, 1988, 30, section 1)
Art Jones was singled out for publicity in a special PAC "wrap" addition to the Spotlight. (Spotlight, 3-9-92, A-2) The PAC identified Jones as one of "seven viable candidates for public office who are dedicated to the principles of populism...With your help, there is a chance to elect candidates unbeholden to special interests now plunging our country into ruin." Apparently, this was as far as the PAC could go, since the special PAC "wrap" noted that the "Populist Action Committee is a research and education entity not registered with the Federal Election Committee and does not endorse any candidate." (Spotlight, 3-9-92, A2) An earlier PAC report in the "Spotlight" described Art Jones as a candidate who "puts America first." "Spotlight" went on to note that "Jones has been connected to far-right nationalist groups in the Chicago area by the local media." (Spotlight, 2-24-92, 7)
In fact, local media reports had identified Jones as a leader in the American Nazi Party. (Chicago Tribune 1-20-89, 3) Jones was active in overt Nazi agitation as far back as 1979, when he was photographed at a Chicago rally wearing the swastika armband. He later became briefly involved with Civilian Military Assistance (CMA). CMA was part of the "private" support network for Reagan's contra war in Nicaragua. (Bellant, 120-122) In 1989, Jones was vice chairman of the American Nazi Party. He achieved some notoriety when he was photographed shaking hands with David Duke during Duke's run for governor of Louisiana. Even Duke, attempting to shake off his own past, called Jones a "Nazi kook." (Rose, 64)
Populist Personnel
The make-up of the advisory board of the PAC gives an idea of why such "populist candidates" would be promoted by the PAC. The members (and their descriptions) as of March 9, 1992 included:
Abe Lincoln Austin (Monetary Scientist) Mike Blair (Investigative Reporter)
Ken Bohnsack (Founder, Sovereignty)
Robert Brock (Black Nationalist)
Howard Carson (Publishing Consultant)
Capt. G. Russel Evans (Historian)
Lt. Col. James (Bo) Gritz (US Army, ret.)
Dr. Martin A. Larson (Author)
Roger Lourie (President, Devin-Adair publishing)
Donald A. MacPherson (Constitutional Attorney)
Pauline Mackey (Treasurer, ret. David Duke for President)
Tom McIntyre (Former Chairman, Populist Party)
Eustace Mullins (Author)
John Nugent (Financial Consultant)
Lawrence Patterson (Editor & Publisher, Criminal Politics)
Col. L. Fletcher Prouty (US Air Force, ret.)
John Rakus (President, National Justice Foundation)
John Rarick (Former Congressman, D-Louisiana)
Vince Ryan (Editor, The Spotlight)
Sherman Skolnick (Chairman, Committee to Clean Up the Courts)
Maj. James H. Townsend, Ret. (Editor & Publisher, The National Educator)
James P. Tucker (President, National Media Services)
Tom Valentine (Host, Radio Free America)
Raymond E. Walk (President, Rayan Associates, Inc.)
Robert Weems (Founding Chairman, Populist Party)
Some biographies may be useful in illustrating the caliber of advisors to the PAC...
Mike Blair ("Investigative reporter") is a long-time reporter for Spotlight.
Robert Brock is a "black nationalist" who promotes the repatriation of Black Americans and supports the so-called Pace Amendment to that end. This amendment would cause untold upheaval as it calls for the compulsory repatriation of most minorities in a period of one year. The Pace Amendment would establish mechanisms by which one's race would be judged by "a combination of blood type, ancestry, and appearance." (Aho, 261-263)
Brock's unusual sense of humor was revealed in a surprise appearance at Pete Peters Identity Christian camp in 1988. Brock entered the meeting hall dressed in a KKK robe and revealed himself, at the podium, no doubt to hearty guffaws. (Scriptures, Vol. V <1988>, 20) Brock also organized a 1992 Holocaust revisionist "First
Amendment" conference in Southern California (Los Angeles Times 2-2-92, 1, part
Institute for Historical Review regular Mark Weber spoke, as did Joe Fields, now with the Populist Party, and his Afrikaner-born wife Dee Fields. Joe proclaimed his belief in "the purity of the races... and the desirability of segregation." "Bo" Gritz was "featured at two Liberty Lobby conventions in 1987 and 1990." (Spotlight, 10-26-92, 5) Gritz is a regular on the Christian Identity/Patriot/Liberty Lobby circuit. Rudy Proctor, who Gritz met while attending one of Pastor Pete Peters' Christian Identity camps, paid for tapes and press releases to be sent to radio stations as part of Gritz Khun Sa publicity campaign. (Gritz, 485-486)
Gritz has also worked with another prominent Christian Identity activist, Richard Flowers, of Boring, Oregon. Flowers heads up the Christian Patriot Association (CPA), which publishes "The Patriot Review" and sponsored a Gritz campaign trip to Oregon. Flowers believes that "Blacks in general have a lower IQ than whites, and most just want to come in and take over without establishing anything themselves." (The Clackamas County Review, week ending June 3, 1992, 1-2)
The CPA distributes an array of literature and audio/video tapes through their 76-page book Catalog. (CPA Book Publisher Book Catalog 1992-1993) There are whole sections devoted to "Christianity - Race - Religion" and "The Jewish Issue." Audio tapes by old stand-bys of the Posse Comitatus movement, such as James Wickstrom, are available. (See Ridgeway, James. Blood in the Face. Thunder's Mouth Press, 1990, 133 for an example of a Wickstrom tape message)
Holocaust revisionists are well represented with tapes by David Irving and books by Arthur Butz and Austin App. Gritz has had a direct working relationship with the CPA through the National Coalition to Reform Money and Taxes (NCRMT.) Gritz's Center for Action and the CPA, as well as a number of other "patriot" organizations are allied in this project to repeal income tax, return to the use of gold and silver, etc... The January 1992 edition of "The Petitioner" newsletter, which reports on the activities of the coalition, approvingly interviewed Gritz and his campaign manager Charlie Brown and reported on Gritz's participation in the coalition. Gritz also participated in at least one Patterson Strategy conference in October 1991 (See entry for Patterson, below) (Criminal Politics, July 1991, 29)
Martin Larson's column appears practically every week in the "Spotlight." Larson writes primarily on economic matters, but manages to throw in enough other tidbits to make things interesting. For example, he feels that "the powers that be are doing everything they can to encourage breeding among welfare recipients." (Spotlight, 3-9-92, 18)
Roger Lourie's Devin-Adair company is a long-time source of right-wing publications. In addition, "Devin-Adair and Regnery published the greater part of those World War II revisionist studies which faulted the Roosevelt administration for intervening against the Axis powers." (Mintz, 48)
Tom McIntyre was chairman of the Populist Party when they nominated "former" Klansman David Duke as their Presidential candidate in 1988. (Gritz was nominated to run as Vice Presidential candidate--see above for Gritz.) (Spotlight, 3-28-88, 4)
Eustace Mullins is the author of the virulently anti-Jewish book "The Biological Jew" (Faith and Service Books, Stauton, VA, 1968). Mullins, in this lengthy comparison of Jews with biological parasites, wrote:
The Jew has always functioned best as a panderer, a pornographer, a master of prostitution, an enemy of the prevailing sexual standards and prohibitions of the gentile community....
We must remember that there is no Jewish crime per se, since the existence of the Jewish parasite on the host is a crime against nature, because its existence imperils the health and life of the host...
This religious ceremony of drinking the blood of an innocent gentile child is basic to the Jew's entire concept of his existence as a parasite, living off the blood of the host...
The Jews do not want anyone to know what Nazism is. Nazism is simply this--a proposal that the German people rid themselves of the parasitic Jews. The gentile host dared to protest against the continued presence of the parasite, and attempted to throw it off. It was an ineffectual reaction, because it was emotional and ill-informed...
Mullins' writings are a standby on the Klan/neo-Nazi circuit. A recent Sons of Liberty book list included Mullins titles such as "Jewish TV: Sick, Sick, Sick," "The Jewish War Against the Christian World," and "Easter," which the catalog tells us give a "look at the 5,000 years of history in the ongoing war between the Satanic-Jewish forces and their Babylonian religious system and the rest of humanity." (Sons of Liberty Fall 1992 catalog, New Christian Crusade Church)
Lawrence Patterson addressed the national committee of the Populist Party in 1988 when they gathered for the David Duke nomination. Patterson's "Criminal Politics" newsletter carries warnings of a "Zionist Trilateral Party" conspiracy to merge the United States, the USSR, and Europe. This conspiracy is "anti-American, anti-religious, atheistic, anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, and anti- Protestant." (Criminal, 07/91, 6) Patterson's newsletter, which went for $15 an issue in 1991, listed Eustace Mullins (see above) as contributing editor. Eric Butler and Ivor Benson were listed as correspondents. Butler has been a long time leader of the Australian League of Rights and is "considered a mentor by active racists and anti-semites throughout the English-speaking world." (Knight, 23) Similarly, Benson -- Information Advisor to the former Rhodesian government -- was a staunch supporter of apartheid in South Africa. (Ibid, 153)
Pauline Mackey is another veteran of the David Duke campaign.
Col. L. Fletcher Prouty has maintained a strong relationship with the Liberty Lobby for years. During the lengthy legal battles surrounding the Mermelstein lawsuits against the Liberty Lobby and Willis A. Carto, Prouty and fellow PAC advisory board member Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz were "prepared to testify as character witnesses on behalf of Liberty Lobby founder Willis A. Carto." (Spotlight, 10-7-91, 12)
Prouty has been a guest on the Liberty Lobby sponsored Radio Free America program dozens of times. (I understand that the Pacifica Radio folks also broadcasts a syndicated "Radio Free America" program, which should not be confused with this one.) Prouty was a featured speaker at the 35th Liberty Lobby Board of Policy convention were he said "If anybody really wants to know what's going on in the world today, he should be reading 'Spotlight'" and explained that "one of the first enemies we have in this country is usury". (Spotlight, 10-8-90, 14)
John Rarick has been "a willing enough ally of the Liberty Lobby" for years. (Mintz, 155) Rarick was a prominent activist in the segregationist white Citizens Councils.
Robert Weems was the founding chairman of the Populist Party. Weems was a "voting member of party's national executive committee" in 1988, when the party nominated David Duke. (Spotlight, 3-28-88, 4) Also the founding national chairman of the PAC, Weems was a Mississippi KKK leader. (Ridgeway, 131)
Weems was scheduled to speak in July 1991 at the "First National Identity-Christian Conference in Reidsville, North Carolina. His topic was "Internationalism and How it Relates to Race, Nation, and Faith." Other speakers at the conference included Eustace Mullins and Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz. The promotional materials for this conference included advertisements for books such as "Our Nordic Race," "White Race--True People of Israel," and "God's Call to Race." (Conference mailing, June 1991)
***************************************************************
"Willis Carto, L. Fletcher Prouty, and the IHR
Political Organizations & Activities"
Nothing like whipping a dead horse, is there?
Your tendency for this type of redundant rhetoric is starting to resemble nothing short of overkill.
Crash and burn.
-
Right Woos Left by Chip Berlet who is a self proclaimed anti-Conspiracy buff
even when hit by a plethora of conspiracies launched from the very Right
he claims to be an expert about. Sad but true. The website has some great
stuff though. Too bad he lets the far Right launch conspiracy after conspiracy
and he can't even figure any of them out. The financing for PRA is a bit questionable
too, since they really have no visible means of support otherwise and quite
a large budget for 5-6 full time staff members. Go figure. I would even maintain
that the concept of The Right deliberately and I might add conspiratorially Wooing
the Left is, in and of itself, a planned conspiracy by definition. Helloooo. Chip.
*****************************************************************
"See: Right Woos Left by Chip Berlet in your internet browser today about The Liberty Lobby and the Institute for Historical or Hysterical Revisionism which is sometimes known as the Institute for Historical Review. IHR owned by that great American Patriot Willis Carto... Oh never mind."
Chip Berlet is a pinhead, much the same as you're beginning to come across as, yourself.
If Prouty ignored you it was most likely because he already had a bead on you, and a dossier as well.
Put that in your magic twanger, Froggie!
John Bevilaqua
Personal history
John Bevilaqua was born as John Horvath in Washington, D.C., in 1947. He is currently living in North Providence, RI, where he works as an independent computer consultant. He describes his work as using "computerized database management and analysis techniques for New England corporations as well as applied to the Kennedy assassination." (Testimony to ARRB, 18 November 1994, Dallas) He grew up in Miami, FL, where he attended grammar school at St. Michael's of the Archangel, graduating in 1961, and high school at Christopher Columbus High School, graduating in 1965. In high school he was known as a fine boy, and very smart. He also played on their basketball team. He then enrolled in Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, from which he graduated in 1969. He was a Harvard classmate of both Al Gore and Tommy Lee Jones.
Bevilaqua's father was Lawrence Horvath, was born in Hungary, with the surname of his stepfather. He later changed the family's surname to his biological father's surname, Bevilaqua, when he learned that his father was still alive. Lawrence was fired from the patent office in Washington during the McCarthy hysteria of the early fifties because of his pro-Communist views. He moved his family to Miami, Florida, where John grew up.
As a result of his father's experience, John Bevilaqua has become a hater of Fascists and neo-Nazis, which he sees everywhere. He is crusading against them and anyone else whom he considers to be using their techniques. In the mid-1990s he wrote a document entitled "Red Scares, White Power and Blue Death," which is based on "personal observation and experience in Miami, Florida, with anti-Castro Cuban exiles of Alpha-66 and the 30th of November Movement, as well as the investigations that I have carried out in the ensuing years."
He typically writes and posts messages under aliases, some related to Naziism. Sometimes he writes under one alias and sends back a congratulatory note under another. A partial list of his aliases includes Michael Kensington (1992), John McLoughlin (1992 to present), Bill Patterson (Oct–Nov 1993), John McArthur (Oct–Nov 1993), Dave Henderson (Nov 1993), Bob Krieble (Nov 1993), Eric Gunderson (Nov–Dec 1993), Kurt Reston (Dec. 18, 1993), Eric Langford (Aug 1994), David R. Mitchell (Aug 1994), David Morgan (December 1994), Jan Mirilovich (1996), James R. Henderson (May 98 to June 99), Tom Jefferson (1997), Igor Beaver (Feb1996), Bill Thomas (April 1996), Richard Elvin Giesbrecht (December 2000), Richard L. Giesbrecht (Nov 2000), and Dr. Hans Eysenck (early 2001). In the early 1990s, he was cut off from the JFK Forum on CompuServe for sending threatening messages to Bill Adams, Dave Stager, and Gordon Winslow. Several times he would reenter under a different alias, only to be cut off again.
He is presently pushing three "causes": the evils of Fascism/Naziism in the world as a whole, Fascists/Nazis as the agent of JFK's assassination, and my (K. Rahn's) [and, I'm not even an advocate of Rahn's, in fact I can't stand his methodology. But, he sure in hell had you pegged! My emphasis. TM] allegedly dangerous beliefs about the assassination and allegedly illegal, Nazi-like approach to teaching my URI course on the assassination. (Yes, you read that last part right!) The following sections consider each of these causes in turn.
Naziism in the present world
John Bevilaqua is waging war on the Far Right, which he refers to variously as Nazis and Fascists. We will use these terms interchangeably. Among the organizations he considers Fascist are the John Birch Society, the Christian Crusade, Alpha-66, the World Anti-Communist League, the American Security Council, the Anti-Communist Liaison Committee of Correspondence, and, most importantly, the Pioneer Fund. Persons he considers Nazi sympathizers and/or participants in the JFK hit include (verbatim) "Dr. Robert J. Morris, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver, Major General Charles A. Willoughby, Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith, Brig. Gen. Bonner Fellers, Ray S. Cline, Wickliffe P. Draper, William H. Draper, Jr., Anastase Vonsiatsky, Edwin A. Walker, Otto F. Otepka, Ronald Gostick, Allen Dulles, John S. Rarick, Patrick Walsh, Andrij Melnyk, Yaroslaw Stetsko, James J. Angleton, Major George Racey Jordan, Senator Barry Goldwater, and Richard Nixon." Another prominent Nazi is our current president George W. Bush. His father, George H. W. Bush, and Richard Nixon surrounded themselves with Nazi advisors like Robert Haldemann and John Erlichmann. "Nazi brain scientists" (those who control people's minds) include Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, Wickliffe P. Draper, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver, me, Prof. John McAdams (who heads the political science department at Marquette University and teaches a course in the JFK assassination), and San Francisco eye surgeon and professor Dr. Gary Aguilar.
From the above list, Bevilaqua holds Drs. Robert Morris and Revilo P. Oliver in particular contempt. Here is a direct quote from one of Bevilaqua's posts: "Robert J. Morris (1917-1997) [was] one of the world's most truly demented beings who ever walked the earth. He was part of the American Security Council along with Angleton, Cline and Willoughby and was identified by Mae Brussel and Bill Turner as being one of the plotmasters and JFK murder lynchpins. He was also identified by pudgy woosy boy Whittaker Chambers who framed Alger Hiss as being "the real brains and power behind McCarthyism" at the time of Morris' obituary." In another post, Bevilaqua went on to note that Robert J. Morris had a long career devoted to conservative causes: Former president of the University of Dallas, in Irving. Chief counsel of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Internal Security from 1951 to 1953 and 1956 to 1958, "a period when the United States was tormented by the specter of Communist infiltration of every level of life." Had served on a New York State Assembly committee in 1940 that investigated New York's schools and colleges in an attempt to ferret out Communist activities. The subcommittee's hearings "corralled diplomats, scholars, businessmen, refugees and schoolteachers. It opened investigations into a possible Communist takeover of Hawaii, the Communist influence along the New York City waterfront, shipments of propaganda detected in New Orleans and creeping Communist control of U.S. military industries. Concerning the late Prof. Revilo P. Oliver, of the University of Illinois, Bevilaqua posted several of his many essays, accompanying by derogatory comments.
Another "Nazi" condemned at great length by Bevilaqua is Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, whom he called a "Nazi brain scientist." Eysenck allegedly helped prepare candidates for roles as murderers for the Nazi government and for the CIA's MK-ULTRA and Operation Bluebird campaigns. He received funding from Draper and the Pioneer Fund and transferred knowledge to them about his work for Nazis and governments in exile such as the Russian Nationalist organizations of Anastase Vonsiatsky in Harbin, Manchuria. He was the original Manchurian Candidate. Eysenck allegedly watched with great interest as one of the students he trained, Bogdan Stashinsky, personally executed several pro-Nazi colleagues of the Vonsiatsky-affiliated OUN (?), including Dr. Stepan Bandera and Lev Rebet. Stashinsky was forced to participate in the Nazi killings because his parents were Nazi collaborators during WW II and he was afraid this information would be exposed. He penetrated the OUN, learned their habits, and killed them with the Potassium Cyanide Gun known at the "Stashinsky Gun." Vonsiatsky was extremely upset by these killings, but it took him until 1963 to get revenge. They used the very tool of the NKVD assassins, LHO, from the Minsk Academy of Murder and Mayhem, Class of 1961. Bevilaqua tips his hat to Mae Brussel and Bill Turner, who were the first ones onto Willoughby (Adolph Tscheppe-Weidenbach) and Morris, in Larry Flynt's "Realist" magazine in 1983. "
How Nazis killed JFK
John Bevilaqua represents "Citizens for Democracy," an organization that as far as I can tell has only him as a member (like Oswald's New Orleans branch of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee). He claims that this group is "on the brink of solving the mystery behind the JFK assassination and finding the identity of the members of the highest levels of the 'cabal.'" He has offered this general explanation:
"JFK was killed by those who suffered from a paranoid over-reaction to the threats from international Communism due to their own mental instability. Or, they were chosen to carry out the murder because the believed so sincerely in the threats he posed. Or they were chosen to lead the murder by the Nazis who were the natural enemies of communism because they were just nuts enough to do it and because they did not possess the normal and natural restraint mechanism that would help them see just how socially unacceptable and illogical their belief systems really were."
He has also offered this specific explanation:
"Robert J. Morris, America's Benedict Arnold, was the one who plotted, managed and executed the plot to kill JFK with his sidekick Charles Willoughby using money advanced by Wickliffe P. Draper of Hopedale, Massachusetts, Draper labs, Remington Arms and Rockwell International who was the paradigm for Big Daddy Warbucks by Harold Grey. Draper's neighbor and partner, Anastase Vonsiatsky, the man who tried to kill FDR joined with Gerald L. K. Smith, the man who killed Huey Long, in running the operational and financial end of the plot, culminating in the meeting in Winnipeg, Canada known as the Winnipeg Airport Incident where the proceeds were divvied up. Smith's share was used to build and finance, Christ of the Ozarks, in Eureka, Arkansas, and Draper received his payback when Rockwell International bailed out his family's failing textile loom equipment machinery company a few years before it went totally belly up and busted. All other theories and attempts at explanation are nothing less then sheer folly and complete lunacy. I have spoken and you have been informed for perhaps the first time in your JFK experience. (Just kidding.) Quod Est Demonstratum."
A shorter version is:
"JFK was killed by those anti-Soviet counter-intelligence Nazi sympathizers at the American Security Council who were part of the Military-Intelligence Complex by the names of: Angleton, Morris, Willoughby and Cline"
As to why the Nazis killed JFK, he has these explanations:
"Fascism killed JFK in order to get free rein against Communism. Their next target is Democracy, since they have already fulfilled their 25 year plan against Communism (1963-1988). Right on schedule, too. The 25 year plan against Democracy (1990-2015) is a bit ahead of schedule as we speak. Democracy should be all done by 2010, I think."
"The Far Right did it and blamed it on the Far Left to ENCOURAGE more attacks on the Far Left and the ultimate destruction of the Russian monolith. Duhhh? Next Problem."
As to assassins, Bevilaqua says that Oswald did it as a Manchurian Candidate:
"Oswald was a trained psychopath with a propensity for violence, whose selection for inclusion in a joint NKVD and US project on programmed assassination because of his attributes and propensities made him the perfect choice as patsy in the assassination of JFK. Once word got out about who the patsy was, every US organization had to go into cover-up and denial mode for fear of having the cover blown on their covert and illegal mind-control operations like MK-ULTRA and Bluebird."
and that he had been "programmed" by Dr. Hans J. Eysenck. Using the mock voice of Eysenck, Bevilaqua wrote:
"I, Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, stole the MK-ULTRA secrets for programmed assassinations when I worked at Operation Bluebird, and hand delivered to these psychos at least a half-dozen programmed assassins, Oswald among them. This is why we inserted Oswald into the fray. Once his name popped up, there was nothing anyone could do for fear of exposing the US Government exposed plan. Why do you think that Corporal Schrand was shot in the armpit? He had his hands behind his neck and was under armed control at the time and we asked Oswald to shoot him on command. Oswald was a programmed assassin and his cover had to be kept intact."
Bevilaqua's evidence
How does John Bevilaqua know all this about the Nazi killing of JFK? It comes from three pieces of evidence, two conversations overheard by third parties and a set of anagrams in a novel. The first conversation was overheard by his father in November 1963 next door at 3638 NW 15th St., Miami. The conversation concerned a plot to kill JFK. It was actually two conversations, on the 18th and 19th of November, that his father was able to listen to from his backyard. Cubans were speaking in Spanish. The following names were allegedly mentioned: Marita Lorenz, Bosch, Dias Lanz, Pedro, Alex, and Havana Bar. Lawrence reported it to the police by telephone on November 20th. They said that they already knew about it.
The second conversation was overheard after the assassination, on 13 February 1964. As Winnipeg insurance salesman Richard Elvin Giesbrecht was having a drink in the Horizon Room of the Winnipeg airport, he is said to have overheard three men discussing what sounded like the JFK assassination and their involvement in it. When he was noticed, he was chased away. Giesbrecht later testified in Garrison's New Orleans trial of Clay Shaw, but when he could not offer enough information to allow the authorities to identify any of the persons, the lead was abandoned. Bevilaqua believes that the men were Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith, Anastase Vonsiatsky, and either Ronald A. Gostick or Patrick J. Walsh, present in Winnipeg, according to Bevilaqua, to attend a meeting of the Canadian anti-Communist League. They were in the process of dividing up the spoils (the payment) of the assassination.
The anagrams come from Richard Condon's 1959 novel "The Manchurian Candidate." Condon knew about JFK's killers but could not say how, where, or when so far in advance. He knew the names, however, and hid them in a series of 12 anagrams in order to protect himself. Bevilaqua is now deciphering these puzzles for all to see. They all point to people who knew each other, associated with each other, were all right-wing extremists, had links to the Winnipeg Airport Incident, had links to the John Birch Society, were McCarthyites, were part of the military/industrial complex, had links and reputations are pro-Nazi sympathizers, and so on.
Eleven of the anagrams, with Bevilaqua's solutions and interpretations, are given below.
* "John Yerkes Iselin" = "John E. is Rey S. Kline." "John E." becomes "Johnny" (a nickname for John Y. Iselin), and Rey S. Kline gets turned into Ray S. Cline. "Rey S. Kline" is "very similar" to Ray S. Cline. "Others" think the same thing.
* "Miss Viola Narvilly, opera singer" ... is a PERFECT anagram for "Revilo P. Oliver, is an SS Girman aly." Kevin Alfred Strom claims that this phrase does not appear in the book. He says that the actual phrases included "Miss Viola Narvilly of the great Indianapolis Opera Company" and "it like to have lifted Miss Narvilly out of her own body by her vocal cords" and "Miss Narvilly's manager tried to throw a punch at the National Chairman" and "not one single television shot had been taken of Miss Narvilly from beginning to end" and "shaking Miss Narvilly's manager loose."
* Dr. Yen Lo = "Only Red," meaning the only Commie among those in the Manchurian Amphitheatre in Manchurian Candidate.
* Etah = "Hate." One of the most common characteristics of right-wingers and inmates of mental institutions.
* Al Melvin = "1 Evil Man." This may refer to Robert J. Morris, who is in at least 5 anagrams from Manchurian Candidate, or Revilo P. Oliver, whose most famous quotation was: "I had a beatific vision last night. I woke up after dreaming that all the Jews had been vaporized." Boston, MA, July 4, 1966 at a John Birch Rally and Conference on "God, Your Country and the Family, or something like that. Oliver was asked to sever his public relationships and ties to the John Birch Society.
* Lord Morris Croftnol = "Lord, Frontal Morris...", a plaintive plea to some superior being. As in "frontal lobotomy," one of the best known but more primitive techniques for reducing aggressive or violent behavior.
* "Miss Dover and Mrs. Diamentez" = "Morris is a Demented Man." (The remaining VZSD can be used any way you like.)
* Tungwha = "What gun?"
* Ole Banstoffsen-Washington" (a fictitious person in Manchurian Candidate) = "H.B. Angleton Waffen SS Notsi" or "H.B. Angleton Waffen SS - No xxxx."
* Hugh Bone (another reference to Angleton) = "Hugh B. One" (= Hugh be one (of them), meaning the Reich Wing in America and the Reich Wing internationally.)
* Bennet Arnold Marco = "RM a Benedect Arnold," whoever RM may be.
Note how weak these anagrams are. Several don't work, or make nonsensical phrases. They are obviously being pushed past their limit. The two overheard conversations plus the anagrams sum to zero solid evidence. The ornate scenario spun from them by Bevilaqua is pure fabrication. And yet this is what is supposed to hold the key to the JFK assassination.
How to validate his beliefs
John Bevilaqua has told us exactly how to verify that his beliefs are correct:
"What if I told you that Citizens for Democracy was literally on the brink of solving the mystery behind the John F. Kennedy assassination and finding the identity of the members of the highest levels of the cabal? How would you be able to tell whether or not it was really correct? Simple. If I could show you that two other persons had already solved portions of this case years ago and left clues for everyone to follow to the ultimate conspirators would you be convinced then? Possibly. Then what if I showed you that they also reached the very SAME conclusions that I had via a completely independent set of sources and separate methodologies?
Would you be convinced of it then? Are you willing to hear more?
Well, who are they all saying was behind the JFK murder plot?
The plotters were all members of some of the most fascist and repressive organizations in the 50's and the 60's: the House Un-American activities Committee (HUAC), Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SIS), and the Pioneer Fund (TPF) of New York which is still active today with Proposition 187, the Bell Curve and the Steve Forbes presidential campaign. Later some of them ended up either on the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) or on The Council for National Policy (CNP) or The Liberty Lobby (TLL), all of which are still active today in spreading their particular brand of devisiveness and enmity."
In other words, he is right because two other people partially agreed with him!
Bevilaqua's plan of action
Notwithstanding the facts that he has no evidence and that his conclusions have not been meaningfully validated in any way, John Bevilaqua has an aggressive plan of action:
"The Pioneer Fund, Birmingham Bombers, the Eastland and DeLa Beckwith Klans, Chaney, Schwerner and Goodman, the Ghosts of Mississippi. One by one we will hunt them all down and convict them. Just you wait and see. The Pioneer Fund and their Eugenics Master Race Agendas shall be neutralized and aborted for the good of all mankind."
Exterminating the evil and dangerous Ken Rahn
John Bevilaqua, under the alias of John McLoughlin, attended the two Providence conferences on the JFK assassination, the one in 1993 sponsored by Jerry Rose and "The Third Decade," and the one in 1999 sponsored by the University of Rhode Island and my JFK class. He spoke at each, and he and I became acquaintances. After the second conference, he even volunteered to give copies of his manuscript to my class, but never followed through.
Something happened in the fall of 2000, and he turned on me with a vengeance. Writing as "Jim Anderson," he sent a very strong attacking message to alt.conspiracy.jfk, whose contents show that these feelings had been building up inside him for some time. Here is one of the tamer parts of that message:
Hey now, you are talking about our version of Mr. McCarthy, Kenneth Rann, who actually claims that he can, merely by expelling gas from his ass, rise a distance of 9.99999999 (I forget how many 9's) centimeters above a chair while in a seated position with 2 strong, but totally naked, URI football players pressing down on his shoulders, thus proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that the "head snap" could have been produced by gasses coming out of the cranial cavity from bullet number 5 which was a frontal shot thus mimicking the frontal lobotomy that Herr Doktor Rann underwent just to prove, and I quote:
"Vee Ghermans cum frum ze strong breeding stock, and ah soooo schmaaht, zat ve can akchuly undergo Total Frontal Lobotomy and still come up ticking. Vee haff so many exzess brrain zells zat vee can effun donate sum to charatees and still vin ze Nobel Prizes. Yah vohl. You can not effun see zee scarse, because zey vent in behind my eyeballs. Zay popped out the eyeball and poked around for a while and I can still do JFK research. Take a lookie here."
Bevilaqua was apparently set off by earlier comments I had made publicly in support of the theory behind the "jet effect," the idea that the mass of blood and tissue expelled forward from JFK's exploding head would have contributed to his rearward motion seen so dramatically in the Zapruder film. He combined this with my German surname and decided to mock rather than deal with the argument itself.
After falling silent for a time, he surfaced again in mid-April 2001 with a vengeance. This time he was writing as Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, "Nazi brain scientist." Added to list of outrages was the fact that the students in my JFK classes generally agreed with my approach to the assassination, something that Bevilaqua preferred to attribute to brainwashing on my part. Here is part of a message he sent to alt.conspiracy.jfk, in response to a thread on a different topic:
"You know what a shame it is when so called certified and accredited (???) professeurs actually have the audacity, under the guise of academic respectability, to profess baldfaced lies and untruths in front of these poor young kids who are paying about $100,000 to listen to falsehoods. When we were in school we used to hiss in unison if we felt we were being lied to with prevarications, mistruths or falsehoods. I witnessed a handful of students, nice kids otherwise, who had been subjected to an entire semester of distortions and brainwashing at the URI laboratory of Herr Doktor Khan. They babbled the "right" jargon on cue, used politically correct techniques of analysis and "critical thinking," which means they criticized anything that smacked of conspiracy theory, cited party line and party dogma on command, and in general just "followed orders" from above in order to get a good grade from the grade master.
…
INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY is a very strong term, but I mean this in the strongest sense. Academic Freedom does not have any room for Intellectual Dishonesty.
To bend and twist young impressionable minds when one has already revealed a pattern of the destruction of the minds of youths who have put their faith in you is an intellectual atrocity akin to mind rape and mind bending.
Anyone guilty of these intellectual atrocities and affronts against humanity should be castigated, reviled, belittled and exposed.
And I plan to do just that."
What merited this announced plan to "castigate, revile, belittle, and expose"? Apparently the combination of my last name, my speaking out about unsupported "conspiracies," my JFK class, and my support for the laws of physics.
Here is part of another post to alt.conspiracy.jfk from that same period of mid-Aril 2001. I am now Nazi scientist Dr. Runwith Khan, and the stakes are being raised to Nazi brain science and mind control:
"Just consider an entire classroom of kids watching Khan essentially using Nazi Brain Science in proving that, let's say, The World is Flat, and the entire class watches in awe and rapture, agreeing with him, writing papers on the topic, and then applauding his efforts without smirking or laughing at his efforts. THAT is Nazi Brain Science at its very best.
Sort of like hypnotized Korean POWs in Manchurian Candidate where Khan is playing the role of Dr. Yen Lo to his audience and his students think they are part of a meeting of a New Jersey Horticulture Club.
Khan even looks and sounds a little like Yen Lo, don't you think? …with that sing-song little pseudo-scientific cadence he has which is intended only to confuse his students into a trance like state so they will be more susceptible to his lies and falsehoods.
I am serious folks. This is mind control and altered state consciousness at its very best."
If you think it couldn't get any worse, you are wrong. A week later, Bevilaqua again raised the stakes in a post to alt.conspiracy.jfk, part of which reads:
"If you find and MIT, Draper Labs type he will probably support the Nuke em and Puke em, Military Industrial Complex School of Thought and be...get this....a non-believer in conspiracies in the JFK hit.
My suggestion is:
DO NOT SUPPORT HIM
DO NOT DEFEND HIM
Villify him.
Pillory him.
Expose him.
Humiliate him.
Badger him.
Call him on everything.
Lambaste him.
Degrade him.
Ream him."
These goals were contained in another message to a poster who commented on so much meanness in one person:
"The meanness comes only from those who deliberately hide or distort the truth. I want to be purged from his website and from his feeble mind forever. I will continue to call him publicly on any forgeries, distortions, or outright lies he publishes or posts, too. Until the end of time. It is a free country."
Not even the University of Rhode Island could escape his aim. Here are two paragraphs from another message to alt.conspiracy.jfk:
"His students think they are actually part of a class on logic and critical thinking when in fact they are part of a class on anything but. They are part of a class on mind control and thought control as part of the Alton W. Jones campus project at a misleading New England University
…
I am serious folks. This is mind control and altered state consciousness at its very best. Check out what Alton W. Jones did at Columbia University in the 1960's and the 1970's regarding the use of Cold War Psycholigical Warfare techniques to convince people that the Cold War was a good thing for the country."
Closing comments
It is appropriate to close this biography of John Bevilaqua by recalling the huge contrast between stimuli and reactions. His huge, complex Nazi scenario for the killing of JFK was a response to two conversations partially overheard by third parties, plus twelve anagrams, mostly imperfect, in a book written years before the assassination. His campaign against me (preceded and followed by similar but less intense actions against others) was apparently stimulated by my criticism of undocumented "conspiracies," my university course on the assassination, and my support for the laws of physics. The responses are entirely disproportionate to the stimuli.
Bevilaqua's "Final Solution" to the JFK assassination
Testimony to the Assassination Records Review Board (November 18, 1994, Dallas, Texas)
Bevilaqua's version of the Winnipeg Airport Incident (Winnipeg Free Press, 22 November 2000)
Peter Whitmey's more-careful version of the Winnipeg Airport Incident (The Fourth Decade, March 1999)
-
Buckley on himself.
FWIW.
James
That line about Dr. Revilo Oliver stating that JFKs funeral had been
rehearsed before JFK even died is quite revealing. I had forgotten about
that line but will always recall Oliver's rants in Marxmanship in Dallas.
Condon even wrote a rebuttal to all the right wing rhetoric following
the JFK hit, in what became Victor Navasky's (sp?) left wing newspaper,
The Nation. Wish I had not filed everthing into boxes and folders. It
was a really great article and might have been around Christmas of 1963
as I vaguely recall. So that also places a historical timeframe around
the intensity and the immediacy of these scapegoating tactics from
the right. Within 30 days the scapegoating was so well planned and
so well rehearsed and so intense that Condon was inspired to write
an article and have it appear in the perhaps the 4th weekly issue of
The Nation following JFKs death. Why didn't Prouty say something
like: "The right wing extremists like GLK Smith, Revilo Oliver, Billy
James Hargis, Clare Booth Luce not only knew a lot about Oswald
and Ruby immediately after the assassination but they must have
had major portions of the research on Oswald completed even before
the assassination occurred to be able to produce so many articles
about Oswald and some by Ruby in such short order with such great
detail. If they had to wait until the assassination to begin this
research there is no way possible that the volume could have reached
such a level. The content could never have been presented in such
meticulously refined and in depth detail unless they had advanced
knowledge that Oswald and later Ruby would be chosen as scapegoats
or patsies."
***********************************************************
"Why didn't Prouty say something like: "The right wing extremists like GLK Smith, Revilo Oliver, Billy James Hargis, Clare Booth Luce not only knew a lot about Oswald and Ruby immediately after the assassination but they must have had major portions of the research on Oswald completed even before the assassination occurred to be able to produce so many articles about Oswald and some by Ruby in such short order with such great detail."
Why didn't you bother to track him down and ask him yourself? You had close to 40 years to do so before he passed away.
And, even if you didn't agree with what he was writing back in the 70's and 80's, you still had a good 20 years with which to have confronted him.
Lord knows he was one of the most accessible people to reach. You could have contacted Len Osanic, who surely would have put him in touch with you.
Did you even bother to try?
-
[quote name='John Bevilaqua' date='Oct 26 2007, 05:40 PM' post='124406']
Yet another Otto Otepka defender from the Right... Lisa Pease.
Lisa Pease "from the RIGHT"?. Very far from it.
Dawn
__________________________
Dawn,
You are correct. Here's the Spartacus bio of Ms Pease:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKpease.htm
--Thomas
P.S. Maybe Spartacus is a Far Right website! LOL
_________________________
Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing....
Sorry... And where in her profile does it refer to anything from the right or the left? You have
to go to these conferences and talk to people in back hallways and let them reveal themselves to you.
For a while she even supported parts of the Michael Collins Piper thesis that the Jews were behind the JFK hit.
Come on does that sound left wing to you or centrist?
I know you never heard about Prouty's comments or Gibsons comments but certainly you must
be able to look into my Otepka posts and the story of Otepka and realize that he could have been
jailed for his transgressions. IF only someone had mentioned the leaking of classified documents to you.
Only here to straighten out the record. Otherwise Otepka and McCarthy would get off scot free from the historical
record to perpetuity.
*************************************************************
"Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
"She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing...."
Excuse me here, Mr. Bevilacqua. But, could you kindly post some documentation on all this obvious hearsay you seem to be so intent upon slinging around. You've got to show me the transcripts, otherwise your accusations fall flat on the side of provocation, IMHO.
Buy them yourself. There are transcripts or even vidoes of the conference that used to be
available on their website. Or contact Bill Kelly who might have been at that conference.
John Judge was certainly there and he probably recalls the two podium incidents from
Don Gibson and from Fletcher Prouty. Look on alt.conspiracy.jfk NO ONE and I mean
NO ONE questioned the quote, the citation or my veracity in reporting the quotes
when they were first made in the 1990s.
And the owner of Covert Action Information Bulletin, name to be provided, which you can
obtain from their website will recall, the Prouty statement and my question to him from the
podium as well as the one given to Mark Lane which has been published many times on
alt.conspiracy.jfk. And no one has denied that this exchange occurred. He even personally
walked over to me and thanked me for challenging them, for standing up to them and
for exposing them to look like the bigots and hypocrites they really are.
Went something like this:
Me: Mark, why don't you release the files of The Liberty Lobby relating to the Congress of
Freedom and the meeting where assassinations of 200 American politicians, writers and
public figures were discussed? (with Joseph Milteer present)
Mark: "Files, what files? There are NO files!"
Me: "THERE ARE NO FILES?" in a loud and sonorous tone. (nervous laughter and audience tittering)
"Where have we heard that before? THERE ARE NO FILES! That is ridiculous."
Now if this statement was in fact not reported as stated and TRUE, don't you think he
would have sued me by now? Or the Fletcher Prouty statement. He had years and
years to contradict or counter my statements and he did nothing. Now he is dead.
I am not a coward and I can back up every statement of personal observation or personal
recollection that I have ever made. Can you? And why did you come out of the woodwork now?
So now unless you can prove otherwise it looks like it is your statements which
are officially in the category of:
"...accusations fall flat on the side of provocation, IMHO."
Send an eMail to the guy at Covert Action Information Bulletin...buy the tapes.
I stand by my statements. Truth is a Defense.
I called your accusatory bluff... now call mine.
**************************************************************
"I called your accusatory bluff... now call mine."
Who's your Daddy?
http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20...eb3.318838.html
-
[quote name='John Bevilaqua' date='Oct 26 2007, 05:40 PM' post='124406']
Yet another Otto Otepka defender from the Right... Lisa Pease.
Lisa Pease "from the RIGHT"?. Very far from it.
Dawn
__________________________
Dawn,
You are correct. Here's the Spartacus bio of Ms Pease:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKpease.htm
--Thomas
P.S. Maybe Spartacus is a Far Right website! LOL
_________________________
Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing....
Sorry... And where in her profile does it refer to anything from the right or the left? You have
to go to these conferences and talk to people in back hallways and let them reveal themselves to you.
For a while she even supported parts of the Michael Collins Piper thesis that the Jews were behind the JFK hit.
Come on does that sound left wing to you or centrist?
I know you never heard about Prouty's comments or Gibsons comments but certainly you must
be able to look into my Otepka posts and the story of Otepka and realize that he could have been
jailed for his transgressions. IF only someone had mentioned the leaking of classified documents to you.
Only here to straighten out the record. Otherwise Otepka and McCarthy would get off scot free from the historical
record to perpetuity.
*************************************************************
"Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
"She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing...."
Excuse me here, Mr. Bevilacqua. But, could you kindly post some documentation on all this obvious hearsay you seem to be so intent upon slinging around. You've got to show me the transcripts, otherwise your accusations fall flat on the side of provocation, IMHO.
Buy them yourself. There are transcripts or even vidoes of the conference that used to be
available on their website. Or contact Bill Kelly who might have been at that conference.
John Judge was certainly there and he probably recalls the two podium incidents from
Don Gibson and from Fletcher Prouty. Look on alt.conspiracy.jfk NO ONE and I mean
NO ONE questioned the quote, the citation or my veracity in reporting the quotes
when they were first made in the 1990s.
And the owner of Covert Action Information Bulletin, name to be provided, which you can
obtain from their website will recall, the Prouty statement and my question to him from the
podium as well as the one given to Mark Lane which has been published many times on
alt.conspiracy.jfk. And no one has denied that this exchange occurred. He even personally
walked over to me and thanked me for challenging them, for standing up to them and
for exposing them to look like the bigots and hypocrites they really are.
Went something like this:
Me: Mark, why don't you release the files of The Liberty Lobby relating to the Congress of
Freedom and the meeting where assassinations of 200 American politicians, writers and
public figures were discussed? (with Joseph Milteer present)
Mark: "Files, what files? There are NO files!"
Me: "THERE ARE NO FILES?" in a loud and sonorous tone. (nervous laughter and audience tittering)
"Where have we heard that before? THERE ARE NO FILES! That is ridiculous."
Now if this statement was in fact not reported as stated and TRUE, don't you think he
would have sued me by now? Or the Fletcher Prouty statement. He had years and
years to contradict or counter my statements and he did nothing. Now he is dead.
I am not a coward and I can back up every statement of personal observation or personal
recollection that I have ever made. Can you? And why did you come out of the woodwork now?
So now unless you can prove otherwise it looks like it is your statements which
are officially in the category of:
"...accusations fall flat on the side of provocation, IMHO."
Send an eMail to the guy at Covert Action Information Bulletin...buy the tapes.
I stand by my statements. Truth is a Defense.
I called your accusatory bluff... now call mine.
********************************************************************
"Send an eMail to the guy at Covert Action Information Bulletin...buy the tapes.
I stand by my statements. Truth is a Defense."
No! You put it up, since you seem to frequent and are seemingly promoting this venue.
"I called your accusatory bluff... now call mine."
This is where I've come from, first and foremost, since going on line. I've been a student of Prouty's, who BTW was only able to get published out of Liberty Lobby and The Noontide Press, for his views and revelations with regard to who's really calling the shots and running the show in the U.S. gov. I've also subscribed to The Spotlight and to Lyndon LaRouche, but that doesn't make me a "rightist", or a Fascist, the way you seem hellbent on labeling Lisa Pease, a good friend of mine, as well.
And, this crap you're slinging around in your attempt to discredit Donald Gibson is pure, unadulterated horse-pucky.
So, why don't you really let it all hang out and trash all of those whom you believe to be "rightists, John Birchers, and assorted other forms of Fascist Nazi collaborators? I want to hear it, now!
For all intents and purposes, I'm a Socialist. But you? YOU, I'm really skeptical about people such as yourself, claiming to be "Leftist" in your persuasion. The use of such jargon seems antiquated and outdated, to say the least. There are different labels in use these days for the different political factions. You seem to be speaking from a different era and mindset, altogether.
An e-mail from home follows:
"Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day." - Thomas Jefferson
-----Original Message-----
From: Len Osanic [mailto:osanic@prouty.org]
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 6:28 PM
To: 'Theresa Mauro'
Cc: 'Lisa Pease'
Subject: RE: Who is John Bevilacqua and why is he making these derogatory comments...
Terry,
This guy is insane or working for an agency
He is a xxxx.
Prouty never said anything like what he claims
I knew Fletcher very well for 10 years
Len
-
[quote name='John Bevilaqua' date='Oct 26 2007, 05:40 PM' post='124406']
Yet another Otto Otepka defender from the Right... Lisa Pease.
Lisa Pease "from the RIGHT"?. Very far from it.
Dawn
__________________________
Dawn,
You are correct. Here's the Spartacus bio of Ms Pease:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKpease.htm
--Thomas
P.S. Maybe Spartacus is a Far Right website! LOL
_________________________
Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing....
Sorry... And where in her profile does it refer to anything from the right or the left? You have
to go to these conferences and talk to people in back hallways and let them reveal themselves to you.
For a while she even supported parts of the Michael Collins Piper thesis that the Jews were behind the JFK hit.
Come on does that sound left wing to you or centrist?
I know you never heard about Prouty's comments or Gibsons comments but certainly you must
be able to look into my Otepka posts and the story of Otepka and realize that he could have been
jailed for his transgressions. IF only someone had mentioned the leaking of classified documents to you.
Only here to straighten out the record. Otherwise Otepka and McCarthy would get off scot free from the historical
record to perpetuity.
*************************************************************
"Here are some of Lisa Pease's positions usually associated with far rightists...
She has made many postings about:
"Not a McCarthyite. Otepka has often been unfairly portrayed as a right-wing clone of Senator Joe McCarthy."
In fact he was a right-wing clone of Joe McCarthy. See my postings about Otepka and what he said to
defend perhaps the number one right winger in the history of the 20th Century.
She was a close friend of and a strong supporter of the thesis proposed by Professor Donald Gibson
when he he pointed the finger at the "Bolshevik Hadassic money lenders so prevalent on Wall Street..."
i.e. The Jews did it!
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was very close with L. Fletcher Prouty who once said something to the effect of:
'I don't know when the Kennedys came over on the boat from Ireland, my family has been here for at
least 6 generations... but they sure thought they could just come in here and take over the country
and tell us how to run things. Guess we showed them a thing or two.'
COPA Conference Washington, DC 1992 or 1993 timeframe...
She was also seen conferring with the Barry Goldwater's son lookalike at the same conference who
confided to me...
"Colonel Prouty is just like us on the "N**ger issues"
She doesn't bother to mention that Otepka was fired for leaking classified documents regarding
the background of Walt Rostow in an attempt to make the Kennedys, Rostow, Rusk and Acheson look bad.
What he was charged with was... unlawfully leaking classified documents to SISS....
"She has NEVER bothered to repudiate Gibson, Prouty or Otepka, or McCarthy. Anyone who falls in that
category has to be classified as right wing...."
Excuse me here, Mr. Bevilacqua. But, could you kindly post some documentation on all this obvious hearsay you seem to be so intent upon slinging around. You've got to show me the transcripts, otherwise your accusations fall flat on the side of provocation, IMHO.
-
Well, If I read this article in 1978, forsure I'd laugh. More, I could think the author is a dis-informator or a totally crazy man.
But, 30 years later, some points in the article are really interesting.
A---- we have an international link of Permindex that I read for the first time.
B---- he cited "Giannettini", an italian journalist/SID agent (SID was the successor of SIFAR after the alleged coup of 1964): actually he was behind Ordine Nero, a right wing italian organization responsible of terrorists action during 70's in Italy. And Ordine Nero was part on an international federation of fascists groups - main base in Lisbon, where the judges found documentation related.
C---- After his meeting with Kissinger in Usa, Aldo Moro was really upset, and wanted to leave politics. In the meeting, Kissinger strongly opposed "the opening to the left" of Moro (a "grosse koalition" governement with the democristians (DC) and italian communist party (PCI). We know this since 2006.
D---- Find interesting all this stuff on Italy in the Jfk case: not because material is pertinent, but 'coz we discover a great role of Italy in many aspects of the assassination (not just the rifle of course) in the later years.
So, I ask again anyone who can do this, to publish ALL the documentation pertaining PERMINDEX and SIFAR that someone seems to have, but it is now destroyed,
If the reader of this post has a contact with "first generation researchers", or people like mr. Evica, you can do this.
thnx
ca
********************************************************************
You can reach me at my personal e-mail address: tmauro@pacbell.net, whereby I might be able to send you more information directly, via your own personal e-mail, by-passing the forum.
Then, you'd be better able to decide for yourself what makes the most sense, and might even be put in contact with my own personal study group of researchers and students, if you'd like.
That's basically how I've been operating in my studies regarding the assassinations, by collaborating with those who've been mentors, to me.
You can learn quite a bit by taking that route.
Take care,
Ter
-
Just in the event that the CT Community is of the opinion that I only pick on them!
There is no such thing as a "CT Community" - that's a figment of VB's imagaination.
And Von Pain doesn't count for anything.
BK
I'll go you one better.
There's no such thing as CT.
It's CF.
Conspiracy fact.
Charles
**********************************************************
"There's no such thing as CT."
Except in the field of diagnostic radiology, and formerly known as CAT, or Computerized Axial Tomography.
Nowadays it's simply known as plain, old CT.
Therefore, anytime I see a reference made to CT'ers, I immediately think of a bunch of CT machines scanning away in a radiology department, or a diagnostic imaging center.
-
Well, it provided a few good laughs!
*********************************************************
"Well, it provided a few good laughs!"
Try this one on your "funny-bone" for size, my beloved infidel.
http://wlym.com/PDF-77-85/CAM8304.pdf
Anton Chaitkin is a member of this forum, as well.
Your,
Femme Nikita
Over the years I have received telephone calls from Anton, who asked for information that I might have on specific topics. I always found that he had diligently done his research beforehand on the topics, with the net result being that he provided me with valuable insights to which I otherwise would not have been privy.
*****************************************************************
Thank you for your comments, Mr. Caddy.
I have the highest and utmost respect for Anton and his work.
You might say that I've been somewhat of a student of his, since first being introduced to his articles in 1994.
-
Well, it provided a few good laughs!
*********************************************************
"Well, it provided a few good laughs!"
Try this one on your "funny-bone" for size, my beloved infidel.
http://wlym.com/PDF-77-85/CAM8304.pdf
Anton Chaitkin is a member of this forum, as well.
Your,
Femme Nikita
Institute for Historical Review regular Mark Weber spoke, as did Joe Fields, now with the Populist Party, and his Afrikaner-born wife Dee Fields. Joe proclaimed his belief in "the purity of the races... and the desirability of segregation." 
Clendenin J. Ryan - Baltimore millionaire and CIA funder
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
**************************************************************
"His philosophy, which I have adopted to this day, is that the American Eagle must have two strong wings to fly a straight course: a left one and a right one. The right wing has been way too strong for the past 30 years; hopefully, the left wing will strengthen in 2008 and the Eagle will again soar straight-away."
A wonderful and commendable sentiment, to be sure. But, I have little hope of ever seeing this ideal come to fruition again, Doug. Unfortunately, both parties have become too definitively melded to ever make a reasonable judgment call, in our lifetime. At least, that's how it appears from my P.O.V.