Terry Mauro

Dear John, Please remove my name from your mailing list, and withdraw my membership from this forum as I can no longer tolerate having my reputation sullied by, nor associated with, the likes of someone of the caliber of Nancy Eldreth. Regrettably yours, Theresa C. Mauro

Dixie wrote: Several years ago, when the Third/Fourth Decade Publication was still being published, we were offered a Manuscript type Folder of the participants speechs from an actual Seminar. I ordered this Folder, and I believe I paid somewhere around $10.00 for it. I really enjoyed reading the speeches. I also still have this folder in my collection! John, I think this would be a great idea! I, for one, would be more than happy to invest in something such as this. Maybe one of the members with access to a printing or copying facilities, or possibly you or Andy might have access to the means of facilitating a brochure of the contents of the seminar, albeit editing out the more irrelevant comments, and/or remarks that took place. This could be the makings for a small theoretical handbook on the assassination, bearing the name of the Education Forum, which could lend credibility to the work being done by the research community that has, more often than not, been stonewalled by the other commercial media and news venues. It might also help contribute to maintaining the site if a reasonably nominal fee was offered. This was an exceptionally informative arena that took place here, and in no small way, a tribute of sorts, to John F. Kennedy and all he stood for. It is something to take pride in, for all the good work that was contributed by so many who cared enough to take the time and effort to put it into words. Thank you, all. Sincerely, Terry

Nov. 27 (EIRNS)--ONLY TWO FIRMS, ADM AND CARGILL, CONTROL THREE-FOURTHS OF ALL GRAIN TRADED BETWEEN NATIONS, estimates Dr. William Heffernan in his interview with EIR, which will appear in the Dec. 3 issue, headlined "Cartel Monoculture Threatens Nations' Food Supplies." Heffernan, based in Missouri, has documented the increasing control over agriculture commodities, processing, and marketing that has taken place in the past 30 years. In his Nov. 17 interview, he said, that "the two companies prefer to say that 'they have only 8% or 9% of the grain that moves in the world' today.... That is within nations, as well as between countries. So I'm looking at what moves between countries, and they're up over three-fourths." "But when I say, 'handle'--Cargill has their own steel mills. They make their own barges. They have their own barge lines. They have their own shipping lines. They have their own telecommunications system basically, all set up. They're in the commodity markets all over the world." Heffernan stresses the control all along the line, from the grocery shelf back through to the seedstocks and farm inputs. RETAIL FOOD: In only a three to four year period, since 1999, in food retailing, "the top five firms--usually we use top four, but in this case, the top five firms--had basically gone from 24% of the market share to about 42%." Heffernan describes the rapid pace of this takeover process, "the globalization of the retail firms. So that Carrefour out of France, Royal Ahold out of the Netherlands, and Wal-Mart are, basically, just going gangbusters in Central and South America. "In Africa, the Big Three global players are not there yet, but firms out of Southern Africa, especially the Union of South Africa [sic], are doing the same in Africa even.... And it sets the stage for these other three to, probably, move into Africa, once the chains get established." "So now we're really talking {on a global basis}--the system that we talked about earlier in terms of those who provide the chemicals, and the seeds, and those types of things, now it really is all the way to the retail sector." SEEDSTOCKS: "You basically have five firms at the global level now that really control the seed stocks... Monsanto; DuPont; Dow; Syngenta, which is out of Europe; Bayer....And, those same five firms, and one other firm with them, probably have well over 75% of the agri-chemicals. And now come some changes in fertilizers. For instance, in this country, as of 2005, about 50% to 60% of the fertilizer used in this country will be from Cargill. Thus, he continued, 'all three of the major inputs are really controlled--seedstocks, chemicals, and fertilizers--' and Cargill has about 15% of the global production of potash and the potassium."

However, I am still optimistic for the future. The reason being that the wealthy and powerful members of society have an insatiable desire for even more power and wealth. For example, take the way media moguls use their power to persuade governments to maintain low tax rates on high incomes. Governments have gone along with this over the last 25 years. It is now causing serious problems for governments as a lack of revenue is causing a dramatic decline in the public services. As you rightly pointed out, the middle classes are also suffering now. They have reached the stage where they (and the state) cannot provide their children with what they enjoyed themselves when they were young. This decline in the standard of living will hopefully create a new interest in politics. Maybe, at the same time, it will see the emergence of new political parties, fully committed to changing the system. Or are all political parties, like our Labour Party, corruptible? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't get too optimistic, folks... Stocks & Economy • Trade troubles Nov. 19: Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's comments about the trade gap sent the dollar reeling Friday. CNBC's Steve Liesman reports. CNBC Greenspan warns trade gap cannot grow 'forever' Fed chief's remarks send dollar, stocks tumbling MSNBC News Services Updated: 5:08 p.m. ET Nov. 19, 2004Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan sent global financial markets reeling Friday with an unusually direct reminder that the massive U.S. trade deficit "cannot continue to increase forever." Greenspan's remarks to a conference of bankers in Frankfurt, Germany, pushed the dollar sharply lower against other major currencies. For many traders, the comments confirmed the widely held view that U.S. policy-makers favor a weaker dollar, which should help prevent the trade deficit from growing even more rapidly. Stock and bond prices fell on the view that Greenspan's warning implies that higher interest rates will be required to continue attracting the overseas investment needed to finance the twin U.S. trade and budget deficits. Related stories Stocks tumble after Greenspan remarks Dollar sinks further against euro, yen “We see only limited indications that the large U.S. current account deficit is meeting financing resistance," Greenspan said. "Yet net claims against residents of the United States cannot continue to increase forever in international portfolios at their recent pace,” he said. "It seems persuasive that, given the size of the U.S. current account deficit, a diminished appetite for adding to dollar balances must occur at some point." Greenspan's comments triggered another round of dollar selling by currency traders. The U.S. currency fell to its lowest level in four and a half years against the Japanese yen and nearly nine years against the Swiss franc. It also fell to a near record low against the euro, which was up 0.8 percent to $1.3055. Treasuries sold off further after Greenspan essentially confirmed the Fed's intention to continue raising short-term interest rates, as it has been doing steadily since June. "Rising interest rates have been advertised for so long and in so many places that anyone who has not appropriately hedged his position by now, obviously, is desirous of losing money," Greenspan said in response to a question after his speech. Greenspan's speech came on the eve of the annual meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors from the G20 group of rich and emerging market nations in Berlin, which will focus on issues of financial stability. While the falling dollar helps the prospects of U.S. producers, it makes life more difficult for export-reliant European businesses. The dollar’s 30 percent tumble over the past few years has stirred concern about a potential dollar rout that could destabilize the global economy. That dollar has fallen sharply since the Nov. 2 election on concern about the U.S. current account deficit, now running at an annual rate of $664 billion, or 5 percent of gross domestic product. Financial stability is on the agenda of the G20 meetings and would provide a forum for the major economies — United States, the euro zone, Japan and China — to hammer out any deal. Currency issues are not on the formal agenda, though officials said they could be discussed on the sidelines. While the dollar’s drop is heightening risks for the euro zone’s economic recovery, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet, speaking at the same session as Greenspan, steered clear of addressing the euro’s climb. He merely repeated his usual line that “brutal” foreign exchange rate moves are unwelcome. Greenspan's speech was all the more remarkable because officials of the Fed, which is independent, generally refrain from commenting on currency policy, which is the province of the U.S. Treasury. "It’s remarkable," said Jason Bonanca, director of foreign exchange research at Credit Suisse First Boston in New York. “In the short term, I think what he’s calling for here is a weaker dollar, even though he’s tightening (monetary policy). I think this is a watershed.” Treasury Secretary John Snow and other officials have said repeatedly that the U.S. favors a “strong dollar” whose exchange rate should be set by flexible, free markets. Currency market participants generally ignore the "strong dollar" mantra, noting that the administration has done nothing to prevent the dollar's fall. “I think it’s clear, given the language Snow is using while the dollar’s falling, that the (Bush) administration tacitly approves of a weaker dollar,” said Todd Elmer, currency strategist at Barclays Capital in New York. Greenspan's address "makes it clear that U.S. policy-makers do not want to stand in the way of market adjustment that leads to a lower dollar," said Greg Anderson, senior foreign exchange strategist with ABN AMRO bank in Chicago. “This really lays it out. It makes it clear that all of the policy-makers in the U.S. are on the same page about it." Reuters contributed to this report

The Nov. 9 interview with Perkins by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! follows here: We speak with John Perkins, a former respected member of the international banking community. In his book, {Confessions of an Economic Hit Man}, he describes how as a highly paid professional, he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then tak[ing] over their economies. John Perkins describes himself as a former economic hit man -- a highly paid professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. 20 years ago, Perkins began writing a book with the working title, "Conscience of an Economic Hit Man." Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of as kindred spirits -- Jaime Roldós, president of Ecuador, and Omar Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes. Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring Roldós and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in. John Perkins goes on to write: "I was persuaded to stop writing that book. I started it four more times during the next twenty years. On each occasion, my decision to begin again was influenced by current world events: the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1980, the first Gulf War, Somalia, and the rise of Osama bin Laden. However, threats or bribes always convinced me to stop." But now Perkins has finally published his story. The book is titled Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. John Perkins joins us now in our Firehouse studios. AMY GOODMAN: John Perkins joins us now in our firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now! JOHN PERKINS: Thank you, Amy. It's great to be here. AMY GOODMAN: It's good to have you with us. Okay, explain this term, economic hit man, EHM, as you call it. JOHN PERKINS: Basically what we were trained to do and what our job is to do, is to build up the American empire. To bring -- to create situations where as many resources as possible flow into this country, to our corporations, and our government, and in fact, we've been very successful. We've built the largest empire in the history of the world. It's been done over the last 50 years since World War II with very little military might, actually. It's only in rare instances like Iraq where the military comes in as a last resort. This empire, unlike any other in the history of the world, has been built primarily through economic manipulation through cheating, through fraud, through seducing people into our way of life, through the economic hit men. I was very much a part of that. AMY GOODMAN: How did you become one? Who did you work for? JOHN PERKINS: Well, I was initially recruited while I was in business school back in the late sixties by the National Security Agency, the nation's largest and least understood spy organization; but ultimately I worked for private corporations. The first real economic hit man was back in the early 1950s, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Teddy, who overthrew the government of Iran, a democratically elected government, Mossadegh's government who was Time's magazine person of the year; and he was so successful at doing this without any bloodshed -- well, there was a little bloodshed, but no military intervention, just spending millions of dollars and replaced Mossadegh with the Shah of Iran. At that point, we understood that this idea of economic hit man was an extremely good one. We didn't have to worry about the threat of war with Russia when we did it this way. The problem with that was that Roosevelt was a CIA agent. He was a government employee. Had he been caught, we would have been in a lot of trouble. It would have been very embarrassing. So, at that point, the decision was made to use organizations like the CIA and the NSA to recruit potential economic hit men like me and then send us to work for private consulting companies, engineering firms, construction companies, so that if we were caught, there would be no connection with the government. AMY GOODMAN: Okay. Explain the company you worked for. JOHN PERKINS: Well, the company I worked for was a company named Chas. T. Main in Boston, Massachusetts. We were about 2,000 employees, and I became its chief economist. I ended up having 50 people working for me. But my real job was deal-making. It was giving loans to other countries, huge loans, much bigger than they could possibly repay. One of the conditions of the loan -- let's say a $1 billion to a country like Indonesia or Ecuador, and this country would then have to give 90% of that loan back to a U.S. company, or U.S. companies, to build the infrastructure, a Halliburton or a Bechtel. These were big ones. Those companies would then go in and build an electrical system or ports or highways, and these would basically serve just a few of the very wealthiest families in those countries. The poor people in those countries would be stuck ultimately with this amazing debt that they couldn't possibly repay. A country today like Ecuador owes over 50% of its national budget just to pay down its debt. And it really can't do it. So, we literally have them over a barrel. So, when we want more oil, we go to Ecuador and say, `Look, you're not able to repay your debts, therefore give your oil companies, your Amazon rain forest, which are filled with oil.' And today we're going in and destroying Amazonian rain forests, forcing Ecuador to give them to us because they've accumulated all this debt. So we make this big loan, most of it comes back to the United States, the country is left with the debt plus lots of interest, and they basically become our servants, our slaves. It's an empire. There's no two ways about it. It's a huge empire. It's been extremely successful. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. You say because of bribes and other reasons, you didn't write this book for a long time. What do you mean? Who tried to bribe you, or who -- what are the bribes you accepted? JOHN PERKINS: Well, I accepted a half a million dollar bribe in the nineties not to write the book. AMY GOODMAN: From? JOHN PERKINS: From a major construction engineering company. AMY GOODMAN: Which one? JOHN PERKINS: Legally speaking, it wasn't -- Stone-Webster. Legally speaking it wasn't a bribe, it was -- I was being paid as a consultant. This is all very legal. But I essentially did nothing. It was a very understood, as I explained in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, that it was -- I was -- it was understood when I accepted this money as a consultant to them I wouldn't have to do much work, but I mustn't write any books about the subject, which they were aware that I was in the process of writing this book, which at the time I called Conscience of an Economic Hit Man. And I have to tell you, Amy, that, you know, it's an extraordinary story from the standpoint of -- It's almost James Bondish, truly, and I mean -- AMY GOODMAN: Well that's certainly how the book reads. JOHN PERKINS: Yeah, and it was, you know? And when the National Security Agency recruited me, they put me through a day of lie detector tests. They found out all my weaknesses and immediately seduced me. They used the strongest drugs in our culture -- sex, power and money -- to win me over. I come from a very old New England family, Calvinist, steeped in amazingly strong moral values. I think I, you know, I'm a good person overall, and I think my story really shows how this system and these powerful drugs of sex, money and power can seduce people, because I certainly was seduced. And if I hadn't lived this life as an economic hit man, I think I'd have a hard time believing that anybody does these things. And that's why I wrote the book, because our country really needs to understand, if people in this nation understood what our foreign policy is really about, what foreign aid is about, how our corporations work, where our tax money goes, I know we will demand change. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to John Perkins. In your book, you talk about how you helped to implement a secret scheme that funnelled billions of dollars of Saudi Arabian petrol dollars back into the U.S. economy, and that further cemented the intimate relationship between the House of Saud and successive U.S. administrations. Explain. JOHN PERKINS: Yes, it was a fascinating time. I remember well, you're probably too young to remember, but I remember well in the early seventies how OPEC exercised this power it had, and cut back on oil supplies. We had cars lined up at gas stations. The country was afraid that it was facing another 1929-type of crash/ depression; and this was unacceptable. So, they -- the Treasury Department hired me and a few other economic hit men. We went to Saudi Arabia. We -- AMY GOODMAN: You're actually called economic hit men -- EHMs? JOHN PERKINS: Yeah, it was a tongue-in-cheek term that we called ourselves. Officially, I was a chief economist. We called ourselves EHMs. It was tongue-in-cheek. It was like, nobody will believe us if we say this, you know? And, so, we went to Saudi Arabia in the early seventies. We knew Saudi Arabia was the key to dropping our dependency, or to controlling the situation. And we worked out this deal whereby the Royal House of Saud agreed to send most of their petro-dollars back to the United States and invest them in U.S. government securities. The Treasury Department would use the interest from these securities to hire U.S. companies to build Saudi Arabia new cities, new infrastructure, which we've done. And the House of Saud would agree to maintain the price of oil within acceptable limits to us, which they've done all of these years. And we would agree to keep the House of Saud in power as long as they did this, which we've done, which is one of the reasons we went to war with Iraq in the first place. And in Iraq we tried to implement the same policy that was so successful in Saudi Arabia, but Saddam Hussein didn't buy. When the economic hit men fail in this scenario, the next step is what we call the jackals. Jackals are CIA-sanctioned people that come in and try to foment a coup or revolution. If that doesn't work, they perform assassinations, or try to. In the case of Iraq, they weren't able to get through to Saddam Hussein. He had -- his bodyguards were too good. He had doubles. They couldn't get through to him. So the third line of defense, if the economic hit men and the jackals fail, the next line of defense is our young men and women, who are sent in to die and kill, which is what we've obviously done in Iraq. AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how Torrijos died? JOHN PERKINS: Omar Torrijos, the President of Panama. Omar Torrijos had signed the Canal Treaty with Carter much -- and, you know, it passed our Congress by only one vote. It was a highly contended issue. And Torrijos then also went ahead and negotiated with the Japanese to build a sea-level canal. The Japanese wanted to finance and construct a sea-level canal in Panama. Torrijos talked to them about this, which very much upset Bechtel Corporation, whose president was George Schultz and senior council was Casper Weinberger. When Carter was thrown out (and that's an interesting storyhow that actually happened), when he lost the election, and Reagan came in and Schultz came in as Secretary of State from Bechtel, and Weinberger came from Bechtel to be Secretary of Defense, they were extremely angry at Torrijos -- tried to get him to renegotiate the Canal Treaty and not to talk to the Japanese. He adamantly refused. He was a very principled man. He had his problems, but he was a very principled man. He was an amazing man, Torrijos. And so, he died in a fiery airplane crash, which was connected to a tape recorder with explosives in it, which -- I was there. I had been working with him. I knew that we economic hit men had failed. I knew the jackals were closing in on him, and the next thing, his plane exploded with a tape recorder with a bomb in it. There's no question in my mind that it was CIA sanctioned, and most -- many Latin American investigators have come to the same conclusion. Of course, we never heard about that in our country. AMY GOODMAN: So, where -- when did your change your heart happen? JOHN PERKINS: I felt guilty throughout the whole time, but I was seduced. The power of these drugs -- sex, power, and money -- was extremely strong for me. And, of course, I was doing things I was being patted on the back for. I was chief economist. I was doing things that Robert McNamara liked and so on. AMY GOODMAN: How closely did you work with the World Bank? JOHN PERKINS: Very, very closely with the World Bank. The World Bank provides most of the money that's used by economic hit men, it and the IMF. But when 9/11 struck, I had a change of heart. I knew the story had to be told because what happened at 9/11 is a direct result of what the economic hit men are doing. And the only way that we're going to feel secure in this country again, and that we're going to feel good about ourselves, is if we use these systems we've put into place to create positive change around the world. I really believe we can do that. I believe the World Bank and other institutions can be turned around and do what they were originally intended to do, which is help reconstruct devastated parts of the world. Help -- genuinely help poor people. There are 24,000 people starving to death every day. We can change that. AMY GOODMAN: John Perkins, I want to thank you very much for being with us. John Perkins' book is called, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. (The bold print is my emphasis. TM)

And, as you can see in one of the threads, Denis Morrisette thought I was a guy for the last couple of years I'd been posting over at Lancer. Must be my tomboy attitude, being the only girl raised with brothers. LOL <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, it is your name, Terry, that made me think you were a man. I'm sorry, I'm French and not still used to all the English first names. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I've started using my formal name, Theresa, more these days, to avoid being mistaken again. And, I used to cuss like a sailor, but found that to be a useless form of the English language by which to express oneself.

There are two reasons for this rule. (1) Some members have accused others of not being the people they say they are. A photograph helps to provide evidence that they are really that person. (2) I have found that people with photographs as avatars are less likely to make or receive personal attacks on the forum. I suspect that the reason for this is that the photograph helps to humanize the member. I might be wrong about this, but I thought it was worth a try. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree, John. I feel you're being very reasonable about this. I was lucky my friend, Allen sends me the pictures he takes of me, otherwise I don't know how I would've been able to send you mine if I hadn't already had a copy in an e-mail. You've been fair and helpful to me, although I did get a little worried when we couldn't get me logged on again after you'd updated my bio for me. But, Andy figured it out and all is well, now. And, as you can see in one of the threads, Denis Morrisette thought I was a guy for the last couple of years I'd been posting over at Lancer. Must be my tomboy attitude, being the only girl raised with brothers. LOL

Hey Den, Do I see you sporting camouflage BDU's in your picture? I like the trousers for myself, and have 3 pairs in ripstop cotton: black, olive, and camo. Oh, and remember you can have the cuttings of my hair in your old age in case you ever need them. BTW, I end up having 3-4 inches taken off every 3-6 months so you're assured a constant supply. LOL Dear Nic, The invitation stands, if you ever decide to head out to the left coast for vacation. Warm regards to both of you, Ter

Awesome comment about Marilyn, I'd have loved to see her - she was so gorgeous. I'll go to the store tomorrow and look into buying a tape, then get the shipping quote, and email you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A couple of times I've gone to put roses in the holder on the door of her burial vault, on the anniversary of her death, in the cemetary over in Westwood, which is not far from me, here in Culver City. One of the times I went was in 1982, and I put the, "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road", cassette of Elton John's in the Blaupunkt deck of my car and had it set for, "Candle In The Wind". It was around 16:30 in the late afternoon. I had just driven over from the hospital, and placed the roses in the cup, paid my respects, and went back to sit in my car, as you're allowed to drive into the cemetary. I opened the doors of my Scirocco, as the speakers were located there, and started the song. There were many people there that day, and many started to cry. After the song ended, I shut off the tape, closed my doors, and slowly drove away. People applauded very softly, and it was quite a poignant moment. If you ever come out to SoCal, I'll take you there if you wish. Don't forget to get back to me on the tape, and the S & H, now. I'll send a money order so you don't have to deal with a bank. Warmest regards, Ter

Yes, it was. My Dad tried taking pictures of it, but the flash wasn't working properly, and the equipment he had, at that time, was nothing like we have at our disposal today, of course. And, I guess so, about the hair, I mean. LOL LLH How are you coming along, with the flu and all? It seems to have hit quite alot earlier in the season than ever before. When you're feeling better, how about I come down and take you to dinner, after work? Take care, Chrissy. Warmest regards, Ter

It is really good to see both John Ritchson and Al Carrier on The Education Forum. I've learned much from both of you men in the past, and the beliefs I've had regarding the ballistics of this case have been validated by both of you, many times. I'm an avid reader of Weisberg, and both of you have clarified and verified just about every question I've been able to think of, so far. Sincerely, Terry

I'd like a copy, Nic. Where can I send you the payment and postage for copying it and sending it off to me? Thanks, Ter tmauro@pacbell.net P.S. When I was 10 years old, and in May of 1955, Marilyn Monroe was headlining the Ringling Bros. Barnum and Bailey Circus' opening night at Madison Square Garden. I had been badgering my Dad for months prior to the event that I just had to see her, as she had always been my favorite. She had a special appeal to children due to her child-like qualities that came across so readily on the silver, as well as, the technicolor screen. At least, that's how I perceived her to be, when I was a child. Anyway, she headed the parade around the Garden riding on an elephant that had been painted pink for the occasion. Martha Raye was also riding on a float behind her, if I remember correctly. We had seats in the front row of the Mezzanine right above her as she road by, blowing kisses to us.

Hi Denis, I have a girlfriend who's name is Denise, but spells it like your name, so for a while I thought you were a female, too! LOL LLH My hair is just about to my waist again, so I'm getting ready to have it trimmed back up to below my shoulders. I used to get it tangled in the hand control on my machine at the hospital, even pulled back away from my face. It grows like a weed. If you ever need some to make a rug for yourself in your old age, I'll send you the cuttings. But, maybe you should direct your compliments to me in private e-mail. tmauro@pacbell.net Thanks. Ter

I think Jim Root hit the nail on the head with the above statement.

Don't you think this would be more appropriate in a private e-mail, Nancy?

"...and I am not referring to Wim here. Then again I am not sure where he is on this yet. What side?" I'm sure Wim is still trying to figure out what you're talking about, just like everyone else. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, but it seems to me that if Wim is the guy with all the dough, why didn't he take care of Mrs. West, especially after he realized what he had gotten into with Vernon? I mean, like where is the humanity here, when you hang some poor widow out to dry like that? And, I'm not being snide here. I'm dead serious! I'd sure like to know what these guys have to say for themselves. Otherwise, they're both no better than a carney barker, or better yet, the hawkers outside of the strip joints on Bourbon Street. Small Timers in the Big Easy? Get bent!

My name is Theresa C. Mauro, aka Terry Mauro. I graduated from Los Angeles City College with a A.A. in Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Technology in 1976, and have been working in the field since that time. I attended California State University Dominguez Hills in 1994 in an attempt to attain my B.S. in Nuclear Medicine but was forced to leave a year and a half later, due to the scheduling conflicts in my work and study loads. So much for upgrading my credentials for now. I've been an ARRT [N]/CNMT/CTNM in Nuclear Medicine Technology since 1976-77, and reside in Culver City, CA USA, where I'm employed at Brotman Medical Center, and Western Imaging Center as a Nuclear Medicine Technologist. I have been a student of the assassination of John F. Kennedy from the day it occurred on November 22, 1963, when I was 18 years old. I became an avid student following the Warren Commission findings in June 1964, based on their absurd explanation of the ballistic accuracy regarding Lee Harvey Oswald's alleged "guilt, by association", to a weapon of questionable identification (Mauser vs Carcano). I remember the early reports shortly following the shooting. And although, at the time I hadn't totally equated the term "due process" with a citizen's right to representation in a court of law, I was still cognizant of the fact that this alleged "killer", was being repeatedly denied access to a lawyer by the obvious way in which the law enforcement officers were ignoring his requests, on national television. This reminded me of what I'd learn to associate with the terms: vigilante tactics, mob rule, and a "kangaroo court". Then came the primitive sketches rendered during the questionable [iMHO] autopsy that had taken place at Bethesda, and distributed to the press, later in June 1964, following the release of the Warren Commission Report. From what I observed there appeared to have been a total disregard for what is known as forensic accountability, vital to investigations such as homicides. Due to the slipshod manner with which crucial evidence was carelessly handled and, in my estimation, damaged and contaminated beyond a reasonable doubt, there appeared to have been absolutely no protocol in place concerning the chain of possession required when handling evidence in a case of this magnitude, an assassination of the President of the United States. This unconventional behavior on the part of these officials has led me to doubt the integrity of those whom we place in positions of government, assigned to protect and secure the interests of their citizens, and their constituency. Especially when the very principles upon which the U.S. Constitution have been erected are so blatantly and publicly ignored. I am thankful for those earlier researchers for putting themselves on the line by questioning the results they found to be contradictory, and apparently false in the Warren Report. It really drove home the point to those American people, who were beginning to have doubts in their minds, as to whose vested interests were really being catered, from that moment in history to the present one, today. My other interests include my dear friend Donna's Lippitt Morgan horse farm in Florida, and the study of the Lippitt Morgan horse lineage from the original Justin Morgan horse to his present day heirs. This is an interest I hope to pursue into my retirement, 10 years from now, when I plan to relocate to Georgia, and my own 10 acre piece of farmland.

If you photocopy the picture you can send it to my home address and I will add it to the forum. The photograph does not have to be recent. One 50 year old member is using a photograph taken at university. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi John, I sure had a hard time finding this thread again as I'm trying to avoid those that contain the name of a certain poster. As to your suggestion, I guess I'll have to make a trip to Kinko's after I start back to work, next week. Then you can e-mail me the address so I can send it to you via snail mail. Have you gotten any of my recent e-mails to you regarding the editing of my bio, and the problems I'm having in getting my bio url inserted properly, in order for it to show up at the bottom of my posts, yet? Thanks for any help you can offer, as I'm much obliged to you. Sincerely, Ter

James, Tim, and Shanet, With the shooter situated on the South Knoll, as Tosh described, and with the line of site you've drawn to the curve in Elm St. in front of Zapruder's pedestal, it sure makes the case for "triangulation" all the more applicable. Thanks, Terry

Thanks James, that's what I was trying to accomplish. Forget my in-coming e-mails since you've already taken care of it. Ter

Absolutely, Shanet.

Interesting post on another forum. I wonder if John would care to go into a little more detail about why he believes this. Do we think the United States Government, CIA and FBI, would tamper with the record and their documents during that time frame? "...The most important implication of this story for JFK researchers concerns the manufacture of false documents. The CIA have not only been involved in destroying important documents, they have created false ones. Therefore, when Oswald’s CIA file is eventually released, should we really trust what it says. The general opinion will be that as the CIA have spent so much energy making sure the file is not published, it must be true. However, for cynics like me, I believe the file was tampered with soon after the assassination. I expect the same is also true of Oswald’s FBI file. ..." Tosh http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKindex.htm <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And, when you compare those two black and white photos taken from different angles, within a short time span of one another, who's to say that the one missing the twelve to fourteen people on the underpass, wasn't altered by the gov. to remove those people from it, in order for the FBI to be able to intimidate those who professed seeing the opposite of what the gov. intended? I have never trusted the gov. on anything they've ever tried to foster on the public since June 1994. It's just plain ludicrous! Thanks to everyone for their help with the photos. I'm much obliged to all of you. Terry

Terry, Are you saying that the red circle is where Tosh and Sergio were? If so, that is not correct. They were in the area with the (other) forked tree that is circled in yellow in the photo James put up. See Tosh's reference to the "man on the left" in the photo and the car roof above him. He's saying they were above that man and the car roof. That is the same area where his daughter posted close-ups some time ago on the Lancer forum. Ron <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I see what you mean, Ron. I guess I was using that pick/up truck further down by the underpass as a reference point. Where is the p/u truck in position to the red-circled area, or has it been cropped out? Thanks, Ter