Terry Mauro

Gee Mike, that was very thoughtful of you to acknowledge Bernice, Myra and myself, as respected members of DellaRosa's forum...

____________

Dixie

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

...

So, I've managed to make some long-term and lasting friendships over the years from these forums. I've considered myself fortunate to have been able to personally get together with quite a few West Coast collaborators, who've been at the hub of my extended family for almost a decade now. I will finally make the journey to Florida in April. I've got the round-trip ticket, Rich and Shel, in my hot little hand, right now. And, as I've always stated and mean it, to those I've personally bonded with, like Len Osanic, Dix, Bean, Dawnie, Cris Carroll, Barb Junkkarinen, John Geraghty, and the same goes for Billy Kelly, John Judge, Mike Hogan, Myra Bronstein, Charles Drago, Tim Gratz, even Charles Black, and of course, I won't forget Harry Dean. Oh, and Simkin, too. If you're ever in L.A., "Mi Casa, su Casa." And, if you know how to drive a standard shift, 5-speed Ford XLT-Ranger pick-up truck, "Mi Caro, su Caro." But, you'll have to drop me off at work in the morning. It gets 35 to 37 mpg on the open road.

...

That was very nice. Thanks Mike.

And thank you Terry. (I think I'll take out a second mortgage on mi casa! )

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

"And thank you Terry. (I think I'll take out a second mortgage on mi casa! )"

Len and Dix will tell you my word is as good, as my aim is true. Come soak up some SoCal sun when the days grow shorter up in the northern parallels.

Duplicate post deleted by T. Mauro 8-29-07 08:33 PDT

Behind the global blending of allies and former enemies was their secret

backchannel agreed upon, experimental plan for progress. Mainly put into

action with the seeming collapse of the USSR { Soviet Union}

A workable international conversion to "Keynesian economics" {John Manard

Keynes, British Socialist & economic theorist} and the successful gradual

easing of intrenched ideologies {give-and-take} by the major participance

ongoing some years prior to, and more obviously since the world-altering

deal between so-called American capitalism and Soviet Communism.

With Keynesian economics accepted and applied came the since drastic

direction away from U.S. Constitutional basics, via legislation and executive

decrees. The Russian population having undergone even more direct arbitrary

changes during this now almost successful,decades-long, but often disruptive

transition.{eg; Mid-east invasions by Soviets, and Americans et al.}

The aim of 'the scheme' is to complete an international cradle-to-grave

{although burdensome and boring socialism}, an individual and collective

leveling-out on every social, religious, and economic plane.

It is now at this point that even a 'greater danger' is found, as powerful

forces mostly within the United States, both political and religious, vie for

the position of control over 'this globalist scheme' by any, even desperate

means, if nessasary in 'combination' as is in 2007 presently taking place.

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

"The aim of 'the scheme' is to complete an international cradle-to-grave

{although burdensome and boring socialism}, an individual and collective

leveling-out on every social, religious, and economic plane.

It is now at this point that even a 'greater danger' is found, as powerful

forces mostly within the United States, both political and religious, vie for

the position of control over 'this globalist scheme' by any, even desperate

means, if nessasary in 'combination' as is in 2007 presently taking place."

Correct me if I'm wrong here, Harry.

I, personally, have nothing against the philosophy of Keynesian economics, per se. Instead, am I misinformed as to what I perceive to be a Malthusian, draconian form of economic policy that has been embraced, and in place, especially having commenced in the early 1980's, by Wall Street, and designed specifically for what was then destined to become part of Bush The Elder's, "Points of Light" and "New World Order," aka "Global Geopolitical Project," by which the American industrial manufacturing base was slated to be totally dismantled and rendered all but impotent by the 21st Century? Enter the international "free" trade agreements concocted of NAFTA and AFTA, which made the GATT appear antiquated in comparison.

On paper, this may look all well and good for boosting The Third World countries' ability to sustain themselves in a new, seemingly more attractive "global" economy. But, what about the darker underpinnings to this new policy, such as the loss of viable jobs on American soil, jobs and employment opportunities which sustained the U.S. economy throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries? All this, so that corporate America might be able to legally incorporate out sourced sweat-shops on foreign soil in order to lower their overhead? This may sound financially logical when taking into consideration the high cost of rent and taxes no longer needed to be shelled out for factory space in the States, but what are the repercussions to the economic structure of the United States? Are we destined to end up like India, or S.E.A. with crumbling infrastructures, no viable means of employment except for service oriented venues, while only a handful of people in comparison to the general population [like the ones who answer the calls you place to your American manufacturers' sites in request for equipment repair, and/or applications assistance, only to find yourself routed to a number in Calcutta, or Beijing], have the opportunity to make a "living wage," access to affordable housing, and/or medical care?

What's wrong with the picture here? How did we allow ourselves to be downgraded to such a paltry level of existence? Or, am I too far off-base in my observations? What's even more frightening is that the younger generations will accept, as de rigeur, the doubling and tripling up of families inhabiting living spaces designed for one family, along with reaping the consequences high density population usually ends up wreaking upon infrastructures designed for single family occupancy, like overloaded sewage lines, and lack of adequate parking, for starters. They won't know any better, because that's all they've ever been exposed to, or presented with, as options. I realize I am speaking from the urban setting, here. But, that's where the ever-burgeoning masses seem to migrate in search of already dwindling employment opportunities. You're encouraged to re-invent yourself, or become entrepeneurial in your "quest" to sustain a viable source of income. How many people actually have that kind of vision by comparison? Then again, you may counter, that when people are actually starving is when their real capacity for ingenuity will kick in. That's what I consider to be "Wall Street" speak.

On another note, will we eventually have only 1 political party from which to choose? The "World," or "Global" Party?

Ter

I am pleased to state that a well known celebrity has agreed to render assistance in raising funds for an advertisement.

I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad.

I think it would be helpful to set up an organization that would allow tax deductibility of contributions for the ad.

There would also be an escrow fund established so contributions would be returned unless enough are received to pay for the ad.

The ad will be straightforward. It will detail why there are "fresh leads" to be investigated, e.g. the Joannides litigation, the new NAA studies, the Gene Wheaton allegations, the possible solution to the Odio incident and what it means, etc. The ad will be low key and not endorse any specific assassination theories since we will need a broad base of support.

Then it will request readers to get involved in a campaign to have a new investigation of these leads, preesumably through a special prosecutor.

A LOT of work needs to be accomplished to: 1) draft the correct ad; 2) raise funds for it; and 3) organize a lobbying campaign to get Congress to act. We might accomplish 1 and 2 but fail to accomplish 3. But IMO we will never accomplish 3 unless we generate a groundswell of public support through the ad.

This may be our last opportunity since witnesses, maybe even conspirators, will continue to die.

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

"I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad."

From what I've observed over the years, the standard form in asking for donations usually reads, or asks in increments of: 5 dollars, 10 dollars, 15 dollars, or 25 dollars, with a box denoting "other," should the donation be for a larger amount [or smaller], depending upon the subscriber's means. I would think 25 dollars might be doable for some folks.

Ter

Gee Mike, that was very thoughtful of you to acknowledge Bernice, Myra and myself, as respected members of DellaRosa's forum...as well as, regarding our female intuition...:-) There are some other females of Rich's forum that would also agree with us.

As to both Craig Lamson and John Simkin being banned from Rich's forum, we also know the reasons...but then, it is just not my inclination to tell these facts. But, in the case of Craig, I most likely don't need to state the reason anyway....although I have personally never had a conflict with Craig. I also don't believe Rich would ban anyone over just one incident. There have been some banned members (from all the forums) that I hated to see leave, but most of the time the whole forums applauds. Quite often, what I later hear from that person, is not the way it actually was. However, I also belive sometimes some things can be misunderstood or misintrepreted.

As I previously mentioned, I am a member of several forums and actually enjoy them all. Each seems to have a different approach to various so-called theories. I personally find this to be

quite necessary to my own ways of thinking. Or I should say, to not get bogged down in tunnel vision.

Rich has extended an offer for all (except the paat banned membsrs) to join his forum. It is no longer necessary to pay the donation, as before. Although some still wish to do so, to help with his expenses of operating the forum all on his own. Rich is a good man, but he won't take any crap from disrupters.

Some of you might find this to be humorous! At one time Bernice, Terry Mauro and I, were known as "Jack'S Girls" (Meaning Jack Ruby's Girls). Then since we three were about the only females on Rich's forum at that time, we decided to become known a s"Rich's Girls." This was mostly just for fun and not actually a part of the forum itself. Sometimes we would help Rich out with some project though. Then once Rich was interviewed on Black Op Radio. He mentioned Rich's Girls and even mentioned our names, as his helpers. We were surprised, but got a big kick out of that. But actually I think we mostly put a lot of laughs and humor in his life, since he is not a well man! But things change and also several other females began joining his forum, so we got away from that classification of being Rich's Girls....although sometimes we still joke about it.

I do wish the Nix photo discussion and the other film discussion was on differnt threads, since I feel there is possibly more to discuss about that photo.

Thanks again Mike!

____________

Dixie

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

Yep! Those were the days when the main forums of rational thought, and choice, were Prouty's [Len Osanic], JFKResearch [Rich DellaRosa], and Lancer [Debra Conway]. McMadman's, the newsgroups, and the .alts, were known as The Jungle, The Nuthouse, and The Snakepit. I met Dix at Prouty's. We were the only "chicks" on that forum, although at first, everyone thought I was a guy because of the spelling of my nickname Terry, with a [y]. LOL But, Dix knew what I was. I met Bean [bernie], my pet nicknames for Bernice, over at Rich's. I always, and still do, look to Dix for verification or clarification, and sometimes downright castigation for some of my antics. But, basically she's the Mr. Spock of a trio which would place Bean as a Capt. Kirk, and myself as that hyper doctor, "Bones" played by DeForest Kelley of the old or original StarTrek series.

So, I've managed to make some long-term and lasting friendships over the years from these forums. I've considered myself fortunate to have been able to personally get together with quite a few West Coast collaborators, who've been at the hub of my extended family for almost a decade now. I will finally make the journey to Florida in April. I've got the round-trip ticket, Rich and Shel, in my hot little hand, right now. And, as I've always stated and mean it, to those I've personally bonded with, like Len Osanic, Dix, Bean, Dawnie, Cris Carroll, Barb Junkkarinen, John Geraghty, and the same goes for Billy Kelly, John Judge, Mike Hogan, Myra Bronstein, Charles Drago, Tim Gratz, even Charles Black, and of course, I won't forget Harry Dean. Oh, and Simkin, too. If you're ever in L.A., "Mi Casa, su Casa." And, if you know how to drive a standard shift, 5-speed Ford XLT-Ranger pick-up truck, "Mi Caro, su Caro." But, you'll have to drop me off the work in the morning. It gets 35 to 37 mpg on the open road.

All I would wish for is that everyone be able to put their differences aside in order to work together on the common thread/theme of what's been at stake here for the past 40-odd years. The assassinations. And, I include MLK, and RFK when I say that. All the other infighting and speculation regarding NASA, or who's better than who, who's more qualified than who, are meaningless and smack of ego-posturing. Why not put all the animosity aside for a moment, take some time out to pool your ideas and your expertise together, and rationally discuss it, like intelligent human beings? Who knows what you might learn from one another?

FWIW.

Ter

Come on, guys (and gals!), Help me out here.

What about Barry Scheck who is with the Innocence Project and who gained fame (notoriety anyway) in the Simpson case? I think he might be good. What say you?

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

Hi T.G.,

I would suggest whomever is left from the original "Dream Team," along with Mark Lane and Alan Dershowitz. Wouldn't Dershowitz be able to switch gears for a case such as this one?

Your femme Nikita

Well when Tomlinson was deposed by--guess who--during the WC hearings, he certainly seemed a LOT less sure where he found CE399 than he did on the 1988 Nova show:

Mr. Specter. Now, just before we started this deposition, before I placed you under oath and before the court reporter started to take down my questions and your answers, you and I had a brief talk, did we not?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. And at the time we started our discussion, it was your recollection at that point that the bullet came off of stretcher A, was it not?

Mr. Tomlinson. B

Mr. Specter. Pardon me, stretcher B, but it was stretcher A that you took off of the elevator.

Mr. Tomlinson. I believe that’s right.

Mr. Specter. But there is no question but that at the time we started our discussion a few minutes before the court reporter started to take it down, that your best recollection was that it was stretcher A which came off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes, I believe that it was—yes.

Mr. Specter. Have you been interviewed about this matter by any other Federal representative?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes.

Mr. Specter. Who interviewed you about it?

Mr. Tomlinson. I don’t remember the name of either one of them, but one was the FBI and one was the Secret Service man.

Mr. Specter. How many times did the FBI interview you?

Mr. Tomlinson. Once.

Mr. Specter. How many times did the Secret Service interview you?

Mr. Tomlinson. Once.

Mr. Specter. When did the FBI interview you?

Mr. Tomlinson. I believe they were the first to do it.

Mr. Specter. Approximately when was that?

Mr. Tomlinson. I think that was the latter part of November.

Mr. Specter. And when did the Secret Service interview you?

Mr. Tomlinson. Approximately a week later, the first part of December.

Mr. Specter. Now, do you recollect what the FBI man asked you about?

Mr. Tomlinson. Just about where I found the bullet.

Mr. Specter. Did he ask you about these stretchers?

Mr. Tomlinson. Well, he asked me about the stretchers, yes, just about the same thing we’ve gone over here.

Mr. Specter. What did the Secret Service man ask you about?

Mr. Tomlinson. Approximately the same thing, only, we’ve gone into more detail here.

Mr. Specter. What did you tell the Secret Service man about which stretcher you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. I told him that I was not sure, and I am not—I’m not sure of it, but as I said, I would be going against the oath which I took a while ago, because I am definitely not sure.

Mr. Specter. Do you remember if you told the Secret Service man which stretcher you thought you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. Well, we talked about taking a stretcher off of the elevator. but when it comes down on an oath, I wouldn’t say for sure, I really don’t remember.

Mr. Specter. And do you recollect whether or not you told the Secret Service man which stretcher you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. What do you mean?

Mr. Specter. You say you can’t really take an oath today to be sure whether it was stretcher A or stretcher B that you took off the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. Well, today or any other day, I’m just not sure of it, whether it was A or B that I took off.

Mr. Specter. Well, has your recollection always been the same about the situation, that is, today, and when you talked to the Secret Service man and when you talked to the FBI man?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes; I told him that I wasn’t sure.

Mr. Specter. So, what you told the Secret Service man was just about the same thing as you have told me today?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. When I first started to ask you about this, Mr. Tomlinson, you initially identified stretcher A as the one which came off of the elevator car?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes; I think it’s just like that.

Mr. Specter. And, then, when—

Mr. Tomlinson (interrupting). Here’s the deal—I rolled that thing off, we got a call, and went to second floor, picked the man up and brought him down. He went on over across, to clear out of the emergency area, but across from it, and picked up two pints of, I believe it was, blood. He told me to hold for him, he had to get right back to the operating room, so I held, and the minute he hit there, we took off for the second floor and I came back to the ground. Now, I don’t know how many people went through that—I don’t know how many people hit them—I don’t know anything about what could have happened to them in between the time I was gone, and I made several trips before I discovered the bullet on the end of it there.

Mr. Specter. You think, then, that this could have been either, you took out of the elevator as you sit here at this moment, or you just can’t be sure?

Mr. Tomlinson. It could be, but I can’t be positive or positively sure—I think it was A, but I’m not sure.

Mr. Specter. That you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes.

Mr. Specter. Now, before I started to ask you questions under oath, which have been taken down here, I told you. did I not, that the Secret Service man wrote a report where he said that the bullet was found on the stretcher which you took off of the elevator—I called that to your attention, didn’t I?

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes; you told me that.

Mr. Specter. Now, after I tell you that, does that have any effect on refreshing your recollection of what you told the Secret Service man?

Mr. Tomlinson. No; it really doesn’t—it really doesn’t.

Mr. Specter. So, would it be a fair summary to say that when I first started to talk to you about it, your first view was that the stretcher you took off of the elevator was stretcher A, and then I told you that the Secret Service man said it was—that you had said the stretcher you took off of the elevator was the one that you found the bullet off, and when we talked about the whole matter and talked over the entire situation, you really can’t be completely sure about which stretcher you took off of the elevator, because you didn’t push the stretcher that you took off of the elevator right against the wall at first?

Mr. Tomlinson. That’s right.

Mr. Specter. And, there was a lot of confusion that day, which is what you told me before?

Mr. Tomlinson. Absolutely. And now, honestly, I don’t remember telling him definitely—I know we talked about it, and I told him that it could have been. Now, he might have drawed his own conclusion on that.

Mr. Specter. You told the Secret Service agent that you didn’t know where—

Mr. Tomlinson (interrupting). He asked me if it could have been brought down from the second floor.

Mr. Specter. You got the stretcher from where the bullet came from, whether it was brought down from the second floor?

Mr. Tomlinson. It could have been—I’m not sure whether it was A I took off.

Mr. Specter. But did you tell the Secret Service man which one you thought it was you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. I’m not clear on that—whether I absolutely made a positive statement to that effect.

Mr. Specter. You told him that it could have been B you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. That’s right.

Mr. Specter. But you don’t remember whether you told him it was A you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. I think it was A—I’m not really sure.

Mr. Specter. Which did you tell the Secret Service agent—that you thought it was A that you took off of the elevator?

Mr. Tomlinson. Really, I couldn’t be real truthful in saying I told him this or that.

Mr. Specter. You just don’t remember for sure whether you told him you thought it was A or not?

Mr. Tomlinson. No, sir; I really don’t remember. I’m not accustomed to being questioned by the Secret Service and the FBI and by you and they are writing down everything, I mean.

Mr. Specter. That’s all right. I understand exactly what you are saying and I appreciate it and I really just want to get your best recollection.

We understand it isn’t easy to remember all that went on, on a day like November 22d, and that a man’s recollection is not perfect like every other part of a man, but I want you to tell me just what you remember, and that’s the best you can do today, and I appreciate that, and so does the President’s Commission, and that’s all we can ask a man.

Mr. Tomlinson. Yes, I’m going to tell you all I can, and I’m not going to tell you something I can’t lay down and sleep at night with either.

I REPEAT MY MAIN POINT: VB SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED THE CONTROVERSY ABOUT WHERE CE399 WAS FOUND, AND WHY IT WAS OF SUCH CRITICAL IMPORTANCE, AND HE THEN COULD HAVE USED TOMLINSON's WC TESTIMONY TO MINIMIZE THE CONFLICT.

MOREOVER DOES IT NOT SEEM QUITE CLEAR FROM THE FIRST FEW QUESTIONS THAT TOMLINSON SOFTENED HIS MEMORY RE WHERE HE FOUND THE BULLET AFTER SPECTOR HAD A "BRIEF TALK" WITH HIM BEFORE HIS TESTIMONY STARTED?

SPECTOR'S "BRIEF TALK" WITH TOMLINSON MAY HAVE CHANGED THE COURSE OF HISTORY!!

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

"MOREOVER DOES IT NOT SEEM QUITE CLEAR FROM THE FIRST FEW QUESTIONS THAT TOMLINSON SOFTENED HIS MEMORY RE WHERE HE FOUND THE BULLET AFTER SPECTOR HAD A "BRIEF TALK" WITH HIM BEFORE HIS TESTIMONY STARTED?

SPECTOR'S "BRIEF TALK" WITH TOMLINSON MAY HAVE CHANGED THE COURSE OF HISTORY!!!"

Well, hell yeah! And, how about throwing in a few licks like, BADGERING A WITNESS? HARRASSING A WITNESS? How about, COERCING A WITNESS ABOUT TO BE DEPOSED BY POSSIBLY INTIMATING A THREAT OF PERJURY, ON SAID WITNESS' PART, IF HIS DEPOSITION DIDN'T COMPLETELY JIBE WITH THE ONE HE GAVE TO THE S.S., or the F.B.I.? This, of course, resulted in a case of Alzheimer's due to the sheer fear of being jailed, for perjuring himself.

Specter and Tomlinson reminded me of Bud Abbott and Lou Costello in their skit, "Who's On First?"

Specter is a xxxx and a faker. He got where he is today by lying his ass off.

Your femme Nikita

Thanks, Greg, thanks, Terry.

I think Greg has some great ideas.

It might be interesting to get someone with "credentials" e.g. a published author, to write to every member of congress to see if there are even a handful who are at the outset interested.

In order to convince Congess to put the resources (both time and money) into a new investigation, I think it will be important to identify areas of investigation needed because of developments since HSCA closed operations. I certainly think the Joannides matter is important because it appears that Joannides was actively working to obstruct the HSCA investigation. Despite what the courty might rule, I am sure the public would want the CIA to "come clean" on Joannides. The problem is that I suspect that at the current time only a very small percentage of Americans are even aware of the Joannides case and its potential significance.

I also think Congress would be a lot more inclined to re-open an investigation if there was a public outcry for one. That is one thing I hope the supplement, if done right, might be able to accomplish.

Interesting what Sen. Dodd (a presidential candidate) would think of a new investigation. As you know, he was a member of HSCA.

Does anyone know if there is truth to the story that HSCA had a number of investigative suggestions that it turned over to the DOJ?

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

"It might be interesting to get someone with "credentials" e.g. a published author, to write to every member of congress to see if there are even a handful who are at the outset interested."

Exactly.

"In order to convince Congess to put the resources (both time and money) into a new investigation, I think it will be important to identify areas of investigation needed because of developments since HSCA closed operations. I certainly think the Joannides matter is important because it appears that Joannides was actively working to obstruct the HSCA investigation. Despite what the court might rule, I am sure the public would want the CIA to "come clean" on Joannides. The problem is that I suspect that at the current time only a very small percentage of Americans are even aware of the Joannides case and its potential significance."

And, that's why a project such as this one be undertaken, if for no other reason than to inform that larger percentage of the American population, of just these discrepancies, and how the positioning of someone such as a Johannides, served to obstruct and subsequently derail the HSCA investigation. The same may be said for Dulles' appointment to, and his coordination of, the Warren Commission. Secrets of the Secret Team in action.

...

We ought to be able to complete an advertisement demonstrating (conservatively) why a conspiracy existed that can fit on a single page and run it in the US Today on November 22.

I'd like to see our members e.g. Michael Griffith, Larry Hancock and Pat Speer assist in writing the piece.

...

Now THAT is a freakin' brilliant idea.

I second the nomination of Larry Hancock.

How many thousands of dollars do we need?

(I'm sure we can't afford as much space as Kuntzler.)

Ok, so just brainstorming this... We need:

-To decide which newspaper we want to target and research prices.

-The copywriter; Larry is ideal (contingent on his agreement ).

-A treasurer or treasurers to collect and save the money and make sure this project is not somehow sabotaged.

A lot of thought needs to go into that...

-A coordinator.

-Legal input (Dawn?).

-A way to insure that if one person on the team flakes out the project goes forward without losing much time or work.

-A way to deal with the inevitable agitators and infiltrators.

-Stated goals, for example--insistence that all papers from the JFK act be released, that the murder FINALLY receive a proper investigation, that the documents that are sealed until 2013 or whatever be released, etc...

-A call to action--something we want the audience to do to move us towards our goals.

BK is very strategic and practical and could (if willing) help us come up with goals and calls to action.

-Ideally do this as a coalition of forums Education/John, Lancer/Debra, Research/Rich, etc.

-Then we might need a group name.

We should do this.

We really should do this.

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

"-Ideally do this as a coalition of forums Education/John, Lancer/Debra, Research/Rich, etc."

Excellent proposal, Myra! And, don't forget Len Osanic from Prouty's. osanic@prouty.org. These forum admins need to coalesce and form a more united front. Hell, I've been begging for them to do that for years. We need to pool the best and the brightest of our human resources, here and now.

How about a triumvirate of coordinators consisting of B.K., T.G., and C.D., for starters. That seems like a pretty well-balanced-across-the-board swath of political and philosophical representation. The triumvirate could select P.R. representatives, John Geraghty, for one, and Nathaniel H., for another, come to mind. These reps could be counted on to be strategically placed, and would best serve in delegating to those selected as most qualified, based upon prior experience, to carry out the actual foot work. A small base of operations could be organized, even if only in cyber-space, with a staff of volunteers who could help set up fund raisers, or take contributions, no matter how large or small, to help with the overhead, and possibly defray some of the cost.

That's just one idea. I'm quite sure there are others out there in the research community with a whole lot more expertise at organizing something like this. But, in any event, you can count me in.

LBJ understood more clearly than JFK the powerful undercurrent that was

about to sweep away a dying political age, and of the new one that was coming

to birth. Neither President JFK or Vice President LBJ were 'seriously' concerned

with the possibility of assassination.

On becoming President, LBJ began to serve two distinct political factions, the

dying old, and the 'newbirth radicals'. Unwilling to continue after his first four

years as president, LBJ refused to consider a second term.

LBJ had served both political factions well. The more powerful newbirth radicals

had quickly become a vast majority long before LBJ's first year in office had

expired, certainly in their steering LBJ's direction in the 'official'

{ Warren Commision} outcome of the JFK assassination.

These 'newbirth radicals' intend to, and likely will remain in power for hundreds

of years while using the names, republican, democrat or by any other title, or a

name covertly indicating a specific combination of religio/politic preference.

H.J.Dean

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

"These 'newbirth radicals' intend to, and likely will remain in power for hundreds

of years while using the names, republican, democrat or by any other title, or a

name covertly indicating a specific combination of religio/politic preference."

I see what you mean, Harry. Though, I'd liken them to the "neo-con-artists" of the "1 party - 2 branches" regime.

Paul,

We are on the same page.

I for one am most keenly interested in JFK's journey, if you will -- his intellectual growth and spiritual evolution.

Certainly the latter phenomenon does not lend itself to quanitfication. And I suspect that, for large groups of materialists and moral relativists, use of the term doesn't pass the laugh test.

Nonetheless, an appreciation of the words spoken by JFK at American University on June 10, 1963 -- one enhanced by a comparison with previous public pronouncements (for fine example, his inaugural address) -- reveals to me a flowering mind and liberated spirit undergoing metamorphoses that no force on earth could hinder.

But that tiny pieces of base metal projected at high speed could banish from our shared plane.

Charles

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

Exquisitely well-put, C.D.

Thank you.

I think President Kennedy was well beyond liberal and even beyond progressive.

He was positively revolutionary.

Three words: American University speech.

Talk about being out of the mainstream.

Furthermore he was out of the mainstream on pretty much every subject or issue.

And the mainstream was crawling with fossils and fascists.

As David Talbot said:

"He is still a man ahead of his time."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...35905-4,00.html

A revolutionary idealist.

I suppose there never will be a time for someone like that.

I wholly agree.

Charles

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

My father, a former Democrat and supporter of FDR, became a Republican after Truman took office. He voted Republican for the rest of his life.

He had respect for JFK, especially after witnessing his stance on the Bay of Pigs incident, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and his proposal to withdraw the "advisers," that had been stationed, in Vietnam by 1964. He referred to Kennedy as a Liberal-Conservative, and admired the way he handled the steel workers strike and the coal miners' grievances.

FWIW, I would call JFK a progressive revolutionary. Although, I'm sure the hawks surrounding his administration would've balked at any POTUS seeming so bold as to garner recognition as some kind of "revolutionary." A term they preferred to label back-water, Third World, insurgents who refused knuckle under to their demands, or those of the puppet dictators they installed amidst bloody coups. For a country, whose birth was delivered during the American Revolutionary War, how easily these hawks were wont to forget their own bloody, and humble beginnings.

It wouldn't be until the year 1994, when Newt Gingrich, and his conservative "revolution," as he would refer to the Republican take-over of the House, would the term be used in reference to the U.S. gov. And then, only in this utmost bastardized form. It never ceases to amaze me at how a "play on words" can turn a simple descriptive noun, or adjective, into a metaphorical sword to be turned around and used against you. Semantics... Oh, to master the logistics of it all...

Robert Morrow in his book First Hand Knowledge (Morrow, Robert. First Hand Knowledge. New York: S.P.I. Books, 1992. pp. 274-280) recounts his encounter with another CIA assett who tells him that Mary Meyer has told another CIA wife too many things and that she is trouble.

Mr. Janney: Thank you for posting this fascinating material, and good luck with your book project.

A word of caution: Even a busted clock is right twice a day, but you should know that Robert Morrow is considered a person of very doubtful credibility in JFK/RFK research circles.

John Davis (author of Mafia Kingfish) was working on a book on Mary Meyer. I heard that John suffered a serious stroke some time ago and may have been forced to give up the project. Perhaps he would share the results of his own research with you.

I am aware that Robert Morrow's reputation as a researcher is questionable in some circles. But both Dick Russell ("The Man Who Knew Too Much) and Noel Twyman ("Bloody Treason") have used some of Morrow's assertions and have found that they checked out with other sources.

Furthermore, the actual day that Nina Burleigh called Morrow to interview him for her book on Mary Meyer his good friend John Williams was present during this call. Burleigh tried to completely blow off everything Morrow said, completely discrediting him in her book. She also attempted to do the same thing when she interviewed Dovey Rountree (Crump's attorney), subsequently suggesting that Crump was actually guilty. But Roundtree's authorized biographer, Katie McCabe, was physically present when Burleigh interviewed Dovey and was astounded to read how Burleigh had twisted many things that Roundtree had said. John Williams told me in no uncertain terms that Morrow was more upset at Mary Meyer's death than he was JFK's, as did Morrow's wife.

My father entered the CIA in 1949-50, having graduated from Yale University with a master's degree in Russian Area Studies. At one time he ran what was called "OCI," or the Office of Current Intelligence. He held a number of different jobs throughout his career, one was in Science & Technology that I know of, but many others I don't know of. He died young at 59 years old when he was director of personnel. He was career CIA.

I knew John Davis but not well. I actually have a copy of his unfinished manuscript on Mary Meyer. A good friend of Davis' asked John "what happened to your book on Mary?" Davis replied "I decided I wanted to live." Davis' friend told me in no uncertain terms that John's life had been threatened and he was told not to publish what he had. Davis, of course, was using much of Leo Damore's research, which I originally tried to procure for Nina Burleigh's book.

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

"My father entered the CIA in 1949-50, having graduated from Yale University with a master's degree in Russian Area Studies. At one time he ran what was called "OCI," or the Office of Current Intelligence. He held a number of different jobs throughout his career, one was in Science & Technology that I know of, but many others I don't know of. He died young at 59 years old when he was director of personnel. He was career CIA."

Thank you, for being so forthcoming with this. My God, that is far too young, indeed! I'm sure the stress of the job alone, can take its toll on a body, health-wise.

As far as the release of your book is concerned, have you ever thought of hiring a body-guard, or someone you completely trusted, or could count on against all odds? It might be in your best interests, especially when your book goes to the presses. You're going to need to make sure someone has your back for you, considering the impact of the information you're about to reveal, and what effect it may have on the status quo.

Terry, obviously the HSCA had to correspond with someone at the CIA to obtain access documents, answer questions, etc., and it was not going to be the DCI, obviously. So the CIA was going to appoint a liason officer. How else would the process work?

Should Blakey have been more suspicious of the CIA particularly after it failed to disclose its attempts to kill Castro to the WC? Probably so. But there still needed to be a channel of communications. Just as there was an FBI agent assigned specifically to liason with the CIA, and I am sure vice-versa. Liason officers are just the way government works. Similar to a public relations officer who is the interface between the institution and the press and the public.

Regarding your Sherlock Holmes point, as I said, no one at the HSCA suspected that Joannides had a role with the Cuban exiles, and an important role at that.

Should the HSCA have demanded to inspect the job record and assignments of each of the CIA people with whom it was dealing? In retrospect, probably so. But that is hindsight. It's like asking why Earl Warren never asked Allen Dulles if the CIA had ever engaged the Mafia to try to kill Castro. He did not ask because he never would have suspected such a thing.

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

"Should the HSCA have demanded to inspect the job record and assignments of each of the CIA people with whom it was dealing? In retrospect, probably so. But that is hindsight. It's like asking why Earl Warren never asked Allen Dulles if the CIA had ever engaged the Mafia to try to kill Castro. He did not ask because he never would have suspected such a thing."

Thank you, my love. I'm so glad you're back. I missed your excellent rationale and explanation as to the whys and wherefores of many of these situations that were seemingly kept under wraps and away from public scrutiny. Then again, I can be such an impatient little hot-head at times.

Especially when something seems drastically amiss, and I can't for the life of me, figure out how something like that could have managed to slip under the radar.

I'll let Blakey off the hook, since you've succeeded in convincing me that it really was out of his hands.

Your Femme Nikita

Terry, of course it was the CIA that assigned the people who would serve as its liason with the HSCA. Nothing unusual about that.

The problem however is that Joannides was involved with JM/Wave, the DRE, etc, and should have been a WITNESS. But that was never disclosed to anyone at the HSCA including Blakey. If Blakey was unaware of the conglict-of-interest, which he was, there was of course nothing he could do about it.

He was of course livid at the CIA when Joannides' role was discovered by Jeff Morley.

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

"Terry, of course it was the CIA that assigned the people who would serve as its liason with the HSCA. Nothing unusual about that."

What do you mean, "Nothing unusual about that."? No one in their right mind should have been entrusting the C.I.A. to do anything but stonewall the HSCA. That is, unless you're inferring that the whole HSCA was an intended fiasco, doomed from the start, being that it was set up under similar corrupted, and rigged circumstances harking back to the Warren Commission's dubious appointees?

"The problem however is that Joannides was involved with JM/Wave, the DRE, etc, and should have been a WITNESS."

Well, no Sherman, Herman, Issac, Thurman, Sherlock! All the more reason to question some "liason" appointed by the freakin' C.I.A.! Wouldn't ya think?

"He was of course livid at the CIA when Joannides' role was discovered by Jeff Morley."

Yeah, and for all we know he could've been working for the man [The Company], himself. So, as far as I'm concerned, he still didn't do a good enough job. If he had been on top of it, he would have interviewed Johannides from the outset of his appointment. Especially, someone assigned by the C.I.A.! Therefore, if Blakey had no suspicions regarding the C.I.A., then for all we know he was already unwittingly, or unduly influenced, or prejudiced in their favor. And, that ain't exactly what I'd describe as an unbiased committee member. Sorry. He blew it.

Nikita

And who, in the goddamned blue blazes of hell, does the United States of America think they are? No! Who in the goddamned blue blazes of hell does the fascist Bush administration, voted into power by a bunch of pea-brained, sniveling, "But, he promised us he wouldn't raise our taxes." And/or, "We can maintain our Christian superiority...Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition..." All while backing a dirty war over an imaginary stash of "weapons of mass destruction," which BTW, never did seem to materialize. "But, he's our president, right or wrong!" [Pardon me while I'll wretch and puke]. This kind of pinhead, knee-jerk, idiocy-bordering-on-imbecilic, sheeple-talk, along with the undying pledge of allegiance of a vindictive, moronic, greed-driven, mendacious electorate, is what put us into this, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive..."

How does it feel to be a part of such a mean-spirited, callous, blood-thirsty, selfish, tyrannical, dictatorial autocracy, such as the one presently proliferating in the United State of America. Because, it sure in hell ain't a democracy. I do mean to tell ya.

SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? Are we going to let these bastards continue getting away with this? I'd rather go down in a blaze of glory than stand by for one minute more, forced to watch this carnage. This cuts and divides my family right down to the very core. Why? Because I can't fathom why a member of my family, a supposedly reasonable and intelligent human being, aside from being my own flesh and blood, would sell his soul to the devil at the crossroads. I no longer answer my brother's e-mails since he voted for Bush. And, why did he vote for Bush? Because he was afraid that his "right to bear arms" would be taken away by the Democrats. Hey, if "Freeway Ricky," the gangs of South Central, and the Locos en Los Barrios can continue to remain armed and dangerous in the "police" state of California, so can any other citizen who desires to do so. Because, that's what it will all eventually come down to. Right or wrong, Mr. G.W. Pinhead, along with the real rogues running the show: Rove, the Lying Rat-Out, and Cheney, the Genocidal Maniac.

And, you mean to tell me they had the cojones to subpoena Michael Moore?

My Country 'Tis 0f Thee, sweet land of Germany...Of thee I sing.

Said like a REAL concerned Patriot! If we don't do something about what is going down [and I do not mean 'voting' every four years in pre-rigged elections] we will soon have lost the chance to EVER recover the Nation...we've already lost the Nation.

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

"...we will soon have lost the chance to EVER recover the Nation...we've already lost the Nation."

The only thing left to do will be, "Lock, load, and take that next hill." All on U.S. soil, no less. Where it actually should take place, instead of continually wreaking havoc all over the rest of the globe. The problem is with "us" as in, "We have met the enemy and they are U.S.," not the other way around.

Let me try to answer some of the question that the members of this panel have raised, based on my research for my book (tentatively entitled Mary's Mosaic).

.

The question has been asked who really was "William L. Mitchell," the alleged assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer? What we know about Mitchell is that the day after the murder, he went to police in Washington and told them that he believed he passed Mary Meyer on the towpath as he was running east back to Key Bridge and she was walking west toward Fletcher's Boat House. Mitchell told police that a black man (who just happened to fit Ray Crump's description - the man who was charged with the murder) was following her about six hundred feet behind her. Mitchell told police that he ran the towpath regularly, worked at the Pentagon, and was a part time teacher at Georgetown University. Mitchell testified at Crump's murder trial in July, 1965, but his testimony was largely discredtied by Crump's attorney, Dovey Roundtree, Esq. who became a legend after getting Crump acquitted.

Mitchell was listed in the DoD directory in the fall of 1964 as "2nd Lt. William L. Mitchell." But then he disappears from the directory in the winter (1965). He shows up at the trial (July, 1965) and tells reporter Roberta Hornig that he is now a full time teacher in the mathmatics department at Georgetown University (GTU). The only problem with this is that there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" ever teaching at Georgetown. Leo Damore thoroughly researched this in 1991-2. I again researched it a couple of years ago: there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" teaching in ANY department at GTU.

Mitchell's place of residence was an apartment at "The Virginian" at 1500 Arlington Blvd. in Arlington, Va. Damore researched this address and found evidence that this was a known CIA safehouse. I followed this up two years ago and two former CIA personnel confirmed that it was indeed an agency safehouse, as were certain teaching appointments at GTU.

In my possession are several hours of tape recorded interviews between Damore and Crump's attorney Dovey Roundtree, Esq. (Award winning author Katie McCabe is now finishing the authorized biography of Dovey Rountree). Both Roundtree and Damore talk about Mitchell and how "convenient" his testimony was, and they both suspected his involvement. Mitchell never returned any of Roundtree's calls before the trial, and Damore could never locate him. So, as a last resort, Damore wrote Mitchell a letter and sent it to his last known address, the address given in the court transcript.

During the very late evening of 3/30/93, "Mitchell" contacted Damore by telephone. The call allegedley lasted more than two hours into the early morning of 3/31/93. At approximately 8:30am on the morning of 3/31/93, Damore called his attorney and good friend Jimmy Smith. Damore started to tell Jimmy about the call and Jimmy started taking notes - 5 pages of them. I have these notes and I have a recorded interview with Attorney Smith going over every detail of his notes.

"Mitchell" told Damore that he had been very impressed with his book Senatorial Priveledge (SP) and what he had uncovered. He wanted to tell Damore what happened but did not want to be the fall guy. "Mitchell" told Damore that he had several aliases, had been a former FBI agent, and then was recruited into the CIA. He had been assigned to surveillance of Mary Meyer right after the Warren Commission had been released. The order then came down to terminate her. There are a number of other details that I do not want share at this point because they are central to my book.

Damore told his attorney that he had taped the call, but I could never find the tapes. I have substaniated however from talking to two of Damore's closest friends that he became quite anxious subsequent to this call in the weeks following because he believed he was being watched.

I have not given up finding the real identity of "William L. Mitchell." But my main military researcher, Roger Charles who won the prestigious Peabody Award for his research with SY Hersch on Abu Ghraib for 60 Minutes II, says the area that Mitchell worked in at the Pentagon was surrounded by other CIA spooks. Charles feels that there is a good case to be make that "Mitchell" was CIA.

Ironically, the last job my father had at the CIA was "Director of Personnel" when he died in 1979.....

Now, let's look at another question: Why was Mary Meyer assassinated (not murdered) ? Mary was killed two weeks after the Warren Commission was released. She bought a paper back condensced version of the WC the day it was released and started reading it. She was furious. She knew it was a complete whitewash, and wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. She told friends that she was thinking seriously of coming out and revealing the truth of what she knew. Allegedley, she confronted Angleton and her former husband Cord about the absurdity of the WC. I think she knew at this point that certain people within the Agency had engineered the assassination. For the future of the CIA, she was definitely a big problem. And she was courageous enough to speak out.

Robert Morrow in his book First Hand Knowledge (Morrow, Robert. First Hand Knowledge. New York: S.P.I. Books, 1992. pp. 274-280) recounts his encounter with another CIA assett who tells him that Mary Meyer has told another CIA wife too many things and that she is trouble. Substaniating this event, I have an account from another CIA official who worked under Richard Helms in the Plans Directorate that they had asked another "helpful" CIA wife to talk to Mary and "settle her down...." in an effort to keep her quiet.

In David Talbott's new book Brothers, the author mentions Bill Walton and how Bobby Kennedy urged him to keep his trip to Russia right after the JFK assassination and take a message to Georgy Bolsholakov. Bobby knew Oswald was just the patsy, and eventually came to believe that the Agency was deeply involved in his brother's demise. Bill Walton was also an artist and a very good friend of Mary Meyer's. He would often escort her to White House social events, knowing full well the affair she was having with JFK. Without going into further details, let's just say that Walton talked to Mary after the assassination and tried to help with her grief.

Mary knew too much. As someone once said, "she knew where all the bodies were buried....." They had to get rid of her because she was too independent and could not be controlled. Think of the trouble she would have caused.

I have not forgot about further comments about Timothy Leary and the CIA and will tackle that one shortly.

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

"Ironically, the last job my father had at the CIA was "Director of Personnel" when he died in 1979....."

If you don't mind me asking, how many years and how many different levels of employment did your father have with the C.I.A.? And, how old was your father when he died in 1979?

Thank you.

In response to Terry, Terry, it was not Professor Blakey who assigned Joannides to be the CIA liason(or one of them) to the HSCA. I know from his statements that Blakey now regrets not taking seriously his staff's complaints about Joannides.

Why do you think Blakey even knew Joannides before the CIA assigned him to be the (a?) liason officer with the HSCA?

Let's hope Morley et al win their appeal re the Joannides documents.

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

"Why do you think Blakey even knew Joannides before the CIA assigned him to be the (a?) liason officer with the HSCA?"

Probably because I haven't trusted many gov. appointees since the year of 1964, especially those put in key positions regarding any investigation concerning the assassinations.

But, first and foremost, are you suggesting that the C.I.A. assigned Johannides? Because. if this is true then the HSCA was corrupted and doomed before it even started!

Second of all, Blakey should have definitely been on top of this, and yanked Johannides on a "conflict of interest" issue. He didn't do his job, plain and simple as that. He allowed this to go down, right under his nose. Therefore, I consider him to have been complicit with the C.I.A., especially for not having taken evasive measures to dismiss Johannides.

Third of all, I would never trust the C.I.A. to do anything, even if they tried to assign God, Himself to the HSCA!

"Let's hope Morley et al win their appeal re the Joannides documents."

It'll be a cold day in hell, before that ever happens, my friend.

With love,

Your Femme Nikita.

Duplicate post deleted by T. Mauro on 7-29-07 at 14:43 hrs PDT

Here's an article about the use of mercenaries in Afgan (the one in Southern Asia, not the one in South America ):

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf...mp;ItemID=13328

"Afghan Rifts; Guns For Hire

by Conn Hallinan

July 19, 2007

The rising tide of Afghan civilian deaths has opened a rift between the U.S. and NATO's 37,000-member International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). According to NATO officials, the U.S.'s increasing use of air power has badly damaged support for the war in both Afghanistan and Europe.

Daan Everts, the senior NATO civilian in Afghanistan, says the U.S. has created 'a fallout that is negative because the collateral damage and particularly the civilian casualties are seen as unduly high, certainly by the Afghan people. This is of concern to us.'

German Defense Minister Franz Joseph Jung said, 'We have to do everything to avoid that civilians are affected. We are in talks with our American friends about this.'

The issue has split German Chancellor Angela Merkel's 'Grand Coalition.' While Merkel's Christian Democrats generally support the war, their coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SDP), is suddenly feeling pressure on its portside from the newly formed united Left Party. SDP leaders have come out against renewing the current mandate to deploy German troops in Afghanistan, a vote that will come sometime this fall.

The rising tide of Afghan civilian deaths-over 1,800 killed in 2007-has helped fuel a push for United Nations participation to end the conflict. Leading the drive is British Secretary of Defense, Des Browne.

In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Browne said the solutions to narcotics, security, and establishing the rule of law are political, not military. 'An overarching campaign plan is required to develop all of these disparate strands together. It has to be a strategic plan, not just a military plan...and there is no organization better placed than the UN to take that role.'

Browne said that if the international community cannot find a political solution, 'then I say to you that we have no moral right to ask our young people to expose themselves to that danger.'

In the meantime, in spite of opposition by the Kabul government, senior U.S. military officers and European nations, the Bush Administration is forging ahead with a plan to use massive aerial spraying of the herbicide glycophate to destroy Afghanistan's opium crop.

More than 90 percent of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan, and the drug trade generates about one third of the country's gross domestic product. Projections are that this year the crop will be larger than in 2006 The Germans are so opposed to the spraying that they say they will reconsider their participation in the NATO operation if it goes forward. Many military leaders are unhappy as well. Gen. Dan K. McNeil, NATO's commander in Afghanistan, says his forces are not equipped or trained to deal with drugs. 'Eradication done improperly is counter-intuitive to running the counter-insurgency because it will alienate people and you may have more insurgent people appearing than you had before.' Many Afghans agree. According to Mirwais Yasini, a member of the Afghani parliament's Committee on Counter-Narcotics, 'Aerial eradication will maximize the antagonism against the government.'

DynCorp, a private mercenary company that has done extensive spraying of coca plants in Columbia, has been contracted to do the job. Using DynCorp is hardly a coincidence. The new U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, William Wood, oversaw the company's aerial spraying campaign in Colombia

'The U.S. is hell-bent on eradication,' Harvard University Professor Robert Rotberg, an expert on conflict resolution at the Kennedy School of Government, told the Financial Times. 'They claim it worked in Columbia and so it will work in Afghanistan. It is not clear to anyone it worked in Columbia.'

Actually, it is quite clear. Coca acreage in Columbia increased 9 percent in 2006, following a 26 percent increase in 2005. Coca acreage is the same today as it was when the spraying campaign began in 2001.

Have gun, will travel?

Widespread use of mercenaries in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Latin America by the Bush Administration has drawn the attention of the United Nations Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries, according to upsidedownworld.com.

'We have observed that in some cases the employees of private military and security companies enjoy an immunity which can easily become impunity,' says Jose Luis Gomez del Pardo, chair of the UN Working Group, 'implying that some states may contract these companies in order to avoid direct legal responsibilities.'

The Working Group found that mercenaries were recruited from throughout Latin America and then flown to Ecuador to train at the huge U.S. base at Manta. Others were trained in Honduras at a former training camp used during the Reagan Administration's war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

According to the Working Group, mercenaries working for a subsidiary of an Illinois-based company, Your Solutions Inc., suffered 'irregularities in contracts, harsh working conditions, wages partially paid or unpaid, ill-treatment and isolation and lack of basic necessities such as medical treatment and sanitation.' A major reason for using private security companies is that they are not subject to Congressional oversight."...

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

"DynCorp, a private mercenary company that has done extensive spraying of coca plants in Columbia, has been contracted to do the job. Using DynCorp is hardly a coincidence. The new U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, William Wood, oversaw the company's aerial spraying campaign in Colombia

'The U.S. is hell-bent on eradication,' Harvard University Professor Robert Rotberg, an expert on conflict resolution at the Kennedy School of Government, told the Financial Times. 'They claim it worked in Columbia and so it will work in Afghanistan. It is not clear to anyone it worked in Columbia.'

Actually, it is quite clear. Coca acreage in Columbia increased 9 percent in 2006, following a 26 percent increase in 2005. Coca acreage is the same today as it was when the spraying campaign began in 2001."

So, who made these axxholes King Of The World?

"We have observed that in some cases the employees of private military and security companies enjoy an immunity which can easily become impunity,' says Jose Luis Gomez del Pardo, chair of the UN Working Group, 'implying that some states may contract these companies in order to avoid direct legal responsibilities.'

The Working Group found that mercenaries were recruited from throughout Latin America and then flown to Ecuador to train at the huge U.S. base at Manta. Others were trained in Honduras at a former training camp used during the Reagan Administration's war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

According to the Working Group, mercenaries working for a subsidiary of an Illinois-based company, Your Solutions Inc., suffered 'irregularities in contracts, harsh working conditions, wages partially paid or unpaid, ill-treatment and isolation and lack of basic necessities such as medical treatment and sanitation.' A major reason for using private security companies is that they are not subject to Congressional oversight."..."

And who, in the goddamned blue blazes of hell, does the United States of America think they are? No! Who in the goddamned blue blazes of hell does the fascist Bush administration, voted into power by a bunch of pea-brained, sniveling, "But, he promised us he wouldn't raise our taxes." And/or, "We can maintain our Christian superiority...Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition..." All while backing a dirty war over an imaginary stash of "weapons of mass destruction," which BTW, never did seem to materialize. "But, he's our president, right or wrong!" [Pardon me while I'll wretch and puke]. This kind of pinhead, knee-jerk, idiocy-bordering-on-imbecilic, sheeple-talk, along with the undying pledge of allegiance of a vindictive, moronic, greed-driven, mendacious electorate, is what put us into this, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive..."

How does it feel to be a part of such a mean-spirited, callous, blood-thirsty, selfish, tyrannical, dictatorial autocracy, such as the one presently proliferating in the United State of America. Because, it sure in hell ain't a democracy. I do mean to tell ya.

SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? Are we going to let these bastards continue getting away with this? I'd rather go down in a blaze of glory than stand by for one minute more, forced to watch this carnage. This cuts and divides my family right down to the very core. Why? Because I can't fathom why a member of my family, a supposedly reasonable and intelligent human being, aside from being my own flesh and blood, would sell his soul to the devil at the crossroads. I no longer answer my brother's e-mails since he voted for Bush. And, why did he vote for Bush? Because he was afraid that his "right to bear arms" would be taken away by the Democrats. Hey, if "Freeway Ricky," the gangs of South Central, and the Locos en Los Barrios can continue to remain armed and dangerous in the "police" state of California, so can any other citizen who desires to do so. Because, that's what it will all eventually come down to. Right or wrong, Mr. G.W. Pinhead, along with the real rogues running the show: Rove, the Lying Rat-Out, and Cheney, the Genocidal Maniac.

And, you mean to tell me they had the cojones to subpoena Michael Moore?

My Country 'Tis 0f Thee, sweet land of Germany...Of thee I sing.

My own view is that it was Tosh who posted his own obituary. I suspect this was triggered by the way members responded to the death of Tim Carroll. I suppose it is most people's fantasy to find out how people respond to news of our death.

Yes, everyone would like to hear the eulogies at their funeral. I'm not challenging your view above John, and keep it open as a possibility, but can't imagine what [if that were so] Tosh could have in mind for being able anytime in the future to invent for his return......crash and journey out through the desert, mountains or jungle on foot against all odds?.....

Tosh, if you did this...you've gotten yourself in a very strange situation, indeed, and can only suggest that the sooner it is ended [if it is indeed not true] the easier it will be to be forgotten and less damaging in the end. Your friend -even though you didn't send me any message about the love of my life, my dog Crazybear's death.

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

"...my dog Crazybear's death."

Peter, I am truly sorry to hear this. I only wish there was more I could've done. More that anyone, or someone, could have done, if the truth be known.

My condolences and my heart, go out to you. Our critters are just like our children, only they give us unconditional love, and will lay down their lives for their master.

Bless your heart, Peter. And, bless your dear, sweet, Crazybear's.

Ter

I don't consider it a war between Conspiracy Theorists vs. Lone Nuts, as much as a battle between those seeking the truth and complete story who keep an open mind and work with the goal of solving the case(s) to a legal and moral certainty, (vs) and those with an agenda - and closed mind - whether LN or CTs.

Some CTs, like G. Robert Blakey, Dan Moldea and those who say it will also be a mystery and we will never know the truth are worse and more dangerous than CTs, who we know merely attribute a false psycho motive to their assassin.

Besides CT and LNs, there is a third, and growing body of independent researchers without an agenda other than the truth, who are beginning to make a difference despite the opposition from both other camps.

BK

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

"Some CTs, like G. Robert Blakey, Dan Moldea and those who say it will also be a mystery and we will never know the truth are worse and more dangerous than CTs, who we know merely attribute a false psycho motive to their assassin."

Worse and more dangerous for getting away with putting Johannides on the HSCA. He can burn in hell for that supposed "oversight."

And, yes I will whip that dead horse into eternity.

When I mentioned a woman acting strange and had strange things to say about her father, I was not speking of Tosh's daughter. This was nother woman that Kathy mentioned. The best way to explain her, is to say that she seemed to have mental problems. She had her father mixed up in the JFK Assn. as well as a part of the investigation. Yet she seemed to add more and more to her imaginations. But it is just not pertinent to what we are actualy discussing here. Before she left the forunm for a time, she was a normal and intelligent member. When she came back, she was so strange!

Hi Dixie.

That would be Laura Landsberg Hanning - unrelated to Tosh. It's a curious story, but as you indicated, she seemed to unwind more and more as time went on.

http://home.earthlink.net/~lhann10243/

- lee

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

I have her old phone number in my book. She and her husband were moving from Maryland or Virginia to someplace in the Midwest from what her last phone call with me was in regard to. She was supposed to e-mail me or call me with her new number, but I never heard from her again. She was a sweet girl. Alas that was, what? Three or four years ago? In any event, whenever all that fighting between Vernon and Dankbarr was going on over at Lancer.

Terri is right!! ...

Dixie

"Terri" is wrong.

"TerrY" is right.

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

HAH! HAH! HAH! HAH! HAH!

Well, I'm glad somebody remembers around here, Jeez Louise! I thought I was losing it for a minute, what with totally flying past the title of the damned post, to begin with. DUH!

Thanks, Doo, Bean, Ron, and Myra, for reminding me I need new lenses for my glasses.

Tosh's daughter was on the Lancer Forum.

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

Thanks, Ron.

It must have been during that interim when I left JFKResearch and went over to Deb's.

I knew she had been posting, and if I remember correctly, she had a sick child, at the time.