Charles Black

Much too spoiled for me to swallow ! Fifteen dead immediately with some burned....the other, a survivor, unscathed but disappeared ! Terrible crash of which the survivor had no warning of an impending problem. Under the reported conditions, it would take some effort on the part of the pilot to fly into the ground or a mountain, even were he a "student pilot", much less one of the more trusted in the RAF. The Rosetta Stone is WHY a "disappeared survivor" who had no inkling of a "problem", or an impending crash, in fact disappeared without seeking help for his crew mates. My reasoning tells me that the "survivor was faked"......but for reasons which I can't imagine. This story wreaks ! From my deepest paranoid and conspiratorial recesses, I can come up with but one possibility that makes any sort of semi-sense. The "survivor" sabotaged the plane and bailed out. He would have come to earth a considerable distance behind the aircraft... a problem which may have not been given proper consideration. His absence from the crash site was not a part of the planning. His duty station, in the tail gunner position, would have given him unlimited "privacy"....he would have been literally invisible to the other crew members ! Charles Black

I feel that a small consortium of "real wealth" (and Eaterners should not be excluded) were of course able to "vastly overfund" the mission. The cosortium was not to secure enough funding, as with any of those involved, the $$ needed was but a drop in the bucket. The consortium was to insure that the direction of the future was comfortable to the several interests. First priority and an easy one...Secure Lyndon and Edgar ! Then THE PLANNER ! None, above or below THE PLANNER, would be able to "map" anything but "small segments" of the PLAN! And still cannot ! Untraceable for 43 years except in our conjectures! Charles Black

Since I have only read about 150 pages of the Bug's work, I should withold comment, and would.... were the work worthy of such a courteousy. It has been my lifelong habit when studying, to vigorously outline and make comments on imporant points which I feel are particularly noteworthy, or at times "absolutely incorrect". I have decided that I cannot continue this process with the B's monstrous "work" if I am to ever finish. I have several pages (legal pad) already filled with not only untruths, but absolute lies ! Though the book is well documented...THE LIES ARE NOT ! It would not even take a particularly long time student to detect them. They LEAP forward ! I now must decide whether to trash this fictional megalith, or just continue my reading and forget the note taking. The "errors" are so numerous that one could develop a mental disturbance by attempting to find a starting point for listing them. Either Mr. Bugliosi has gone insane....truly believes that his readers are mentally retarded...or I must hope for the sake of his soul, that enough satisfaction was derived from the money that "some" agency or group paid him, that was worthy of trashing a lifetime reputation, along with "some" very good work", in order to now enter into the forefront of those whose life work has been the continuance of this Conspiracy. Yes ! It is my most avid belief that Vince Bugliosi's name can be added to those involved in the CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP the Nov. 22, 1963, Coup d'Etat. He deserves the same "respect" as those other U.S. Presidents, Congresssmen, Bureau and Agency Chiefs, members of the Judiciary and OWNERS of the major media, who have jointly and severally CONSPIRED to overthrow the U.S. Government.....and who very obviously continue to do so. This book, and the reasons for its nearly inumerable lies and misgivings, if read by persons of only semi average intelligence, should be the defining NAIL in the COFFIN of those who do not believe in the "CONSPIRACY FACT" ! To any intelligent body, this work is as horrifically self defeating as it is monstrously large. As Dr. Goebell's once said, "the larger the lie....." ! This book should tend to prove the good doctor "wrong again"! I hope the company with which I have chosen to associate Mr Bugliosi will not go unnoticed. Charles Black

If I may, I will return to Mr. Greer, in an attempt to restrict the "growing number of conspirators" which no doubt will soon include J. W. Booth. Just my opinion, but another thread has already lost its meaning and purpose. My last post on this thread will mention only two aspects concerning Mr. Greer. The first is that whether he felt right or wrong in what his actions were, as a 54 year old who could not "replace"his job", he made statements that protected that job. That should seem far fetched to no one. The other point, which has been chosen to be ignored is: Of course Greer saw persons on the overpass....they were THERE ! Of course he would have thought that this was an ideal place for ambushers! Of course he could not turn or go backward! Of course he did not want to drive further into an ambush until ordered by Kellerman to "go"! I don't know much about secret service procedure, but military procedure would have "instincted" him not to proceed blindly toward an enemy of unknown strength, that obviously occupied the high ground, when his primary mission was to protect his commander . You may debate this for forty years, but if you release from your mind this "growing" number of conspirators, and look at things with a lille less intellect and over imagination, the simplicity of the entire conspiracy is a work of art. It is the effort to overdefine it that has led to our repeated failures. Many things are simply "as they first seem", and not at all complicated until we make them so! Charles Black P.S. I would like to add, only for posterity purposes, that Mr. Greer's "advanced age" has been much over emphasized. He was only 8 years older than JFK. He was of an age that he could have been an older brother!

Regardless of what the Sunderland was "designed " to do, this was wartime, and this aircraft made many landings in open ocean. It was used for much more than coastal duties. The weather on the "day chosen", certainly would have made this operation's success highly likely. When you consider "pilot error" or navigational error over land, in friendly territory in excellent weather and only shortly into the flight....please reconsider why a crew of this caliber was chosen ! The crew was not tired or confused, hampered by weather and was over land. Consider the number of non essential members aboard this flying boat, and most importantly "who" they were. Consider the wrist shackled briefcase and to "whom" it was shackled. How can anyone suggest that this was ANYTHING other than a "very special mission". Do you believe that "Royalty" was over Scotland on a pleasure flight? I am hearing much "nay say" and not a great deal of common sense. Why so often is "the obvious" given the least consideration when it is in fact, the most, after the fact, OBVIOUS. I personally don't have any vested interest in this subject, but why are you so quick to discount what is the MOST OBVIOUS. I would think that the most obvious theory should at least be considered and dismissed, before proceding with the "highly improbable". Begin by trashing the theory that the Sunderland could not land at sea in the N. Atlantic, in August under ideal weather conditions. That is absurd! Considered a hand cuffed satchel and to whom it was attached ! Now consider the general direction in which the flight was headed.....not many possibilities. I feel also that it is absurd to suggest that in midlflight, during wartime, and in perfect weather, that the crew decided to alter the flight plan of their own volition. "It just ain't done"! Why such a distinguished crew.....was the Prince afraid of flying? Do you feel that they intended to land in enemy held territory as had Rudolf Hess? I feel that instead of considering what the mission likely "was not", a little better progress might be made, if you consider the "VERY FEW" options of what this mission "most likely" was ! Are any of you under the misimpression that such missions did not occur, and in fact, still are occurring ? Don't forget THE surviving crew member ! Charles Black P.S. The use of a "patrol boat" would have been totally unacceptable for a daylight clandestine mission. Coastal waters were highly patrolled by both coastal sea craft and aircraft.

Hello Jonathan I am terribly sorry, but it has been so long since I have truly addressed the subject of U.S. business ties to Nazi Germany, that I cannot offer anything of true value. However, there was something which I meant to mention in my previous post on this subject, but apparently failed to. In that I am pressed for time at the moment, I will just touch on the relevance that the "Sunderland" was a "flying BOAT", that was apparently headed into an area of the ocean which was heavily patrolled by U Boats. This "could be" somewhat of a stretch, but perhaps not that far. A possible rendezvous with a U Boat in mid ocean. I wish that I had more time, but with a little imagination, one might suggest that the extra dead body recovered was "the real Rudolph Hess" ! The seemingly half witted gentleman who was portrayed as Hess well past the end of the war, may not have been "The Hess" ! The Hess whom I studied was not a "dim wit" but quite bright as well as being a good pilot (which was not his field). Piloting multi engined military aircraft, was not for "dim wits" any more in 1940, than at present. I have always been unable to accept the given reason(s) for his venture. This connection, as was suggested in another post, may not at all be in the least bit ridiculous. Sorry I couldn't be of more help with your question. Charles Black

I will strongly forever maintain that a leader trained for a combat situation, would not direct his force to charge full speed ahead, at an enemy of unknown strength, that appeared to be not only directly ahead of him, but one who also occupied the "high ground". Any doubt of this shows an unbelievable lack of knowlege of military tactics. Excuse my apparent arrogance, but many of you are traversing "unknown territory" and have become lost in decades old innuendo bordering on "old wives tales". I suggest you quit pointing fingers at the "driver" Why aren't you pointing to the "Parade Route Approver". This was a sin of "commission" and not one of possible "omission" ! Killing the messenger ? Consider the situation. This is neither "rocket science" nor any "advanced" military tactics, that have not been in practice for "millenia" ! Read Julius Caesar ! Charles Black

There is so much that we don't know as a result of the disappearance of records. Body count "may have been an error ( partially dependant on the actual condition of bodies ). I feel that if Andy Jack "had an inkling of what occurred", he would have been an immediate "goner"! He could have suffered post traumatic stress .....survivors guilt?...confusion. I would say that he knows "nothing", or was a very good intelligence agent. With the distingushed crew, it is highly unlikely that they would have been off course over Scotland. Good weather....summers day...excellent visibility. May have been NO radio transmissions as a result of mission secrecy. The type of aircraft chosen would have been quite unusual, if this had not been a planned flight over a great expanse of water. A big, slow, longranged aircraft. The "number of persons in the flight crew seemed unreasonably high (4 pilots); as was the total number of personnel (15) to have been involved in a mission of highest security classification. I find strange also, as I have served as a "top secret military courrier", that the head of the "delegation", the Duke, would have been THE person with satchel handcuffed to his wrist. The aircraft was "most secure", and the handcuffed satchel becomes very uncomfortable over a long journey as it impedes normal processes such as toilet use and eating. This could have been attached to a lower ranking member of the crew / delegation. It is unikely this satchel would have POPPED open upon impact...unless it was "torn open". It is stated that the crash remains were examined and that the aircraft seemed to have undergone NO mechanical failure. I wonder if there was any way to test the amount of petrol or whether there could have been contamination of such. But, I suppose that all we know of the examination of the aircraft, due to non existant records, is merely what we are meant to know. IMHO, still the most intruiging aspect of this is survivor "Andy Jack". Why did he survive and why was he unable to "have a good idea" of what caused the crash. One might speculate, if having as paranoic a nature as mine.....that "this" Andy Jack was never aboard that aircraft and was a military intelligent agent so "planted". Why or how else could he have both survived, and also to have known nothing, regarding cause of this incident? And why would an intelligent agent have been so planted?....if in fact he was ! This looks very unprofessional and "Sloppy"! This isn't how the war was won ! Charles Black P.S. The plane could not reasonably have been off course with this crew, while flying over land, and in perfect weather. It may have dropped from an already secretively low altitude, from, as I suggested, a fuel failure.

Hello Larry Per usual, I am in agreement with the greater part of your most recent posts. I wish to reaffirm, that Greer's age (54), IMHO had little to do with his decisions. I have undergone some pretty proficient military training, and were I the driver, whether my age was 54 or 24.....looking toward that overpass as the optimal asassination position, I hope that I would have stopped "immediately", cleared the car, and covered the President. To me there were no militarily logical alternatives ! An opinion only, however, I feel that this was Greer's intial intention, and accelerated "only" after having been so ordered. I feel also that this was perhaps Kellerman's "most immediate" decision, but ordered the "go ahead" upon realizing that several occupants had already been hit and may have been mortally wounded. His subsequent comments would of course have been his following of directives. He has, in my opinion, been criticized for not attempting to proceed deeper into a "kill zone"! Once again, I personally strongly believe that this was not a "conspiracy" of thousands or even hundreds, which included "lower level" personnel! This why MORE "have not spoken", and that this coup has been an almost 44 year success ! Charles Black

Please do not turn this into a criticism of THIS forum, but of forums in general. But this particular thread, I feel, is very indicative of what often happens. WE begin with a most excellent subject, which somehow gets directed toward one tangent. This tangent or singular small aspect of the general subject, which is usually not terribly important within itself, "consumes" the original importance of the subject. The result is frequently many pages (thousands of words) that add nothing that is terribly relevant to what is sometimes a very important subject, that is "talked to death", without entering the heart of the matter. We therefore later must return to the "important and relevant" subject....and often go thru the same process....often again with the same results. I don't have a solution, merely a childish Utopian wish that discussions result in conclusions ! Charles Black

I hope not to aggravate a great many members, but I am going to attempt to "regress" or "progress" ( depending on your individual views ) from the Kupcinet diversion of this subject, which I find quite insignificant except as a matter of chatter. Studies made regarding the "numbers" of deaths, have in more recent years, attempted to "sweep under the table" the true significance of the subject! "Statistically" perhaps the "numbers alone", are less significant than what some have maintained. "Statistics" are only indicating the probability of a number of deaths likely among a given number of people and THIS is not the meat of the matter ! What I and most of us feel that is important, is the deaths and manner of deaths of THE TRULY IMPORTANT witnesses, whom could have drastically impacted this case. Persons such as Georges de Morenschildt, Sam Giancanna, and dozens more. It is not just the deaths of witnesses...it is a study of the reality of the "importance" of some of these "victims". I realize that I have no idea of how one might "rank" these individuals in order of importance, but the statistics which "we" have accepted are ridiculous, as they do not go the heart of the matter. We here on this forum KNOW that this was quite unnatural and highly unlikely ! Statistics CAN lie if the statistician is a "xxxx" ! The deaths, importance of those dead, and the manner of deaths, during the HSCA time period alone is unbelievable, to any who have come out from under the ether! Even deaths which have been labeled as "heart attacks" and "drownings" etc., are certainly not beyond suspicion. I think that it is widely accepted that heart attacks can be induced in, for all practical purposes, an undectable manner ! If one realistically looks at these, one might suggest that we have been overly and invitingly "gullible" ! No disrespect meant for the Kupcinets ! Charles Black

Hello Jack I quite understand and never did consider it personal. The only noises that I ever heard in Dealey Plaza were traffic, my wife giving me her usual "helpful hints", and my kids being their normal loud and overly active selves. I later went back alone and got a much better perspective. Charlie Black

Hello Jack Either my wording wasn't clear enough or you misconstrued, the essence of my post. My point was meant to be, that if sound supressed weapons were used, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that they were not considering whom I believe set up this operation, these certain sound supressed weapons, would have made both earwitness impressions and the dictabelt interpretations "moot"....as they would have been neither recorded nor reported. I certainly accept your statement of being there during these tests and what you heard. However, even during these tests, there were several factors not present that could not have been "imitated", reproduced, or truly even imagined. One factor was the excitement and "adrenalin rush" that many of the spectators were experiencing. You were there to "listen to sounds"! They were there for the excitement of seeing Jack and Jackie. Something that they expected would be a treasured memory. To some, this was to be their only lifetime opportunity to be so physically close to fame and importance. Any "sounds" were "secondary" at the least, in what they were attempting to perceive. Positioning of the witnesses was "a" factor. However separate witnesses in the same vehicle, or standing next to each other at street level, reported hearing different sounds. The same for SS agents.... "a flurry of shots". But my prinary point, as I stated earlier, is that I seriously feel that if any good "sound supression" was used, what has been reported regarding the sounds and the recording of sounds should no longer be a foremost consideration. There were at least two reports of "sounds similar to automatic weapons fire". I realize that I may be totally wrong regarding echoes and reverberations, as I have never been in the Plaza when gunshots were fired. Charles Black

Hello Mark Not in any way attempting to downplay your interest in the "earwitness" reports in Dealey Plaza, I would like to mention however, that in my search, I have found reason to relegate this matter to a back burner. What I found that I was faced with, were not only the echoes and reverberations involved, and the individual accuity of the hearing of different witnesss, but more importantly, I strongly feel that "some" sound supressed weapons were used. With the throngs that were massed in the Plaza along with the "various associated noises", it has been my experience that a "sound supressed" weapon, paricularly one firing a low caliber sub sonic bullet, would not only have been unrecordable on the accoustical tape, but may very well have gone unnoticed by other spectators very close to the shooter. Yes, I do feel that there is a strong possibility that such a "handgun" may have been used. The proof of this would certainly answer many questions regarding bullet trajectories, a throat wound, and possibly as many as three separate hits on Connolly and at least four on JFK. I feel that researchers and analysts have become "stuck" with the 4 deades long assumption of "TWO shooters with RIFLES". This may very easily have NOT been what happened......or at least not ALL that happened ! We perhaps need to "bail out of that box" that has been perhaps "set up for us", and begin to look at the possibility of other "REALITIES". These 40 year old "speculations" have really advanced us but little! I hope that someday we can all say, that "The solution (whatever it might prove to be), was so simple, that I cannot believe that I did not see it". Mine, however, is purely personal undocumented speculation, based only on my experience with weapons, and what I understand of the wounds. Charles Black

SORRY, But here I go again ! I can find no rationale other than ABSOLUTELY CONSPIRATORIAL, that although I pay a lot of money in order to receive over 100 television channels, I have heard NO mention of Saint John, or any portion of this matter, throughout that combined media spectrum! I have even resorted to scanning the tabloids in the supermarkets check out line. Many earth shattering occurrances there, but JFK could not make the starting lineup. We are speaking of what is most likely the most important political assassination in recorded history and not a murmur. Moments ago while channel surfing, I did find some show that was discussing Julius Caesar's demise and another lamenting Hamlet. I also heard a discussion that seemed to be in regard to Brittney Spears breasts. Not to discount the relative importance of these "items", but this is unfortunately where the minds of my countrymen have become so overly taxed, that there is no room for the triviality of the assassination of the most powerful man on earth! The "Conspiracy" seems to not even have been hampered by a "speed bump". "Disgust" is much too kind a word ! Charles Black

I am terribly saddened that only at important times such as this do I become at a complete loss for words. Tim, the prayers and well wishes of my entire family will include you. Hope can be a marvelous thing, and when combined with sincere prayer "it can create the possible"! Charles Black

Hello David Yes. there are very many "strange" possible connections. I however have been prone to maintain that many possible connections have been purposely implanted into this case, by agents of the conspiracy, to muddy up the water. I feel that the continued success of this cover however relates back to the very simplicity of its basics. I will agin briefly repeat what I think those basics are / were. 1) only a handful at the very top who were essential to the COVER (not the shooting) had to be in place. These few did not even know the specifics of the "kill"! 2) Below them was "the" planner coordinator. 3) Then degrees of the typical intelligence agency multi layering, that insured that those involved knew no more than "their own" particular role. 4) Persons with the ability to terminate threats...these persons would have no idea of the "WHY" of their hits. This is why I am one of the few who believe that the introduction of Mafia and Anti Castros was only a clever and successful tactic to misdirect thinking and investigation. There was nothing that the Mafia or the Anti Castros could provide that couldn't have been better and more surely handled by trusted government assets. The "TONGUES" of the mobsters and Cubans was too hard to control. They were bragging about the hit while not even having anything to do with it. All that they knew is what was purposely trickled down to them to satisfy them that "the thing" was going to happen. The total "brilliance and continued success" of this Coup was a result of its "Simplicity". The research community has self destructed as a result of not believing this pure simplicity ! This of course is just "my speculation"! Charlie Black

David Sam Giancanna did not write the book "Double Cross" This book is "Hearsay" ! Charles Black

I continue to maintain that I feel that the SS, as a unit, had NOTHING to benefit, as a result of the JFK hit. I am somewhat inclined to believe, and I am aware of comments and testimony to the contrary, that it WAS JFK's desire to be MORE visible to his public. JFK would not have called the entire protection detail to a meeting, and proclaimed that he wanted easier access and visibility of the spectators. He would have quietly said a very few words to one person....and it would have been done. Regardless of their "duty"....he was The Boss...right or wrong. I know that it was not the SS that planned to Parade the Pres. into the kill zone. Despite the "glamor", these are not truly highly ranked individuals. They were down the pay grade from the FBI. I don't doubt that they, on their own, made very few decisions. They were slow to react, however most of them, like the rest of the crowd, was hearing things that were not readily explainable. These men were experienced in the sound of gunfire, but they, as well many "equally experienced" Texans and military veterans, were describing sounds sounding like "firecrackers" ....which also may have actually been a planned part of the confusion. Some say they immediately identified gunfire....however these same individuals may also have so identified a motorcycle backfire. We must remember that many of these SS Agents do not have the experience with firearms that many on this forum have. It certainly was a most "uncommendable" performance, but I will continue my, against the grain belief, that the SS were not conspirators. I feel that they, including Greer and Kellerman, responded poorly to a very confusing situation. Were I the limo driver, and hearing what I thought might be gunshots, as I looked at the "overpass" that was not cleared, and was probably THE most ideal position for a shooter, I would seriously have questioned, whether I should proceed toward the shooter.....or stop....there was no way to turn left or right, nor was it possibe to back up. Who could clearly argue that if the driver thought that the assassin was to the front and above, that it may have not been the correct decision to "Stop and Clear the Car of Targets"! I often think that in many instances we are overly critical of some things that are merely human limitations. Spider Man and Superman were not present. Only persons with the normal human limitations. I think that at times, there are those that would pretend, and perhaps actually believe, that this was a conspiracy of thousands. Again ! Just a personal viewpoint. Charles Black

Hello All If we want to be SERIOUS, and consider the reality of all intelligence agency "LAYERING", and the maintenance of "Plausible Denial", I seriously doubt that more than a handful had access to the entire scheme, and even those were not privvy to many of the "individuals" involved that were not among this handful of elite. The elite very likely knew only of their other elite compatriots. This is the WHY of "no one has talked". Only those on the periphery heard rumors of a " a hit coming down" from others at the periphery. This is why I have maintained, and some think me crazy as the result, that the Mafia and the anti Castro Cubans were not involved. They could not be absolutely controlled and their silence guaranteed. They in fact were "In No Way Neded". They had nothing to offer that was probably not "better available" and more easily controlled by the True Powers who conspired. I feel that the number of "true conspiracists" were very few. This, along with multi layering, and the prejudiced termination of persons that most of us have never heard of, is the reason that this well planned Coup was a SUCCESS ! And no doubt will continue to be ! I feel at this late date, there are very few who could shed any True Light on the specifics. I feel that we will forever have only rational conjecture and speculation. We know the WHY ! We also know the "handful few". But we can never prove it with factual evidence. Even were we able to prove Z film alteration, that is only a "HOW", and not even the "operational who"....... as we "cannot prove" the chain of posession of this film. Just "my opinion" of course. Charles Black

Larry Thanks. That certainly makes sense. J. Ray I suppose "that" review will be responsible for a few thousand sales. As someone suggested, we need to barrage those sites which ask for reviews with specific critiques where warranted. I'm getting ahead of myself, but unless most of us belong on another planet, there should be many warranted opportunities. Ron I would imagine that the forum will not be destucted by the Bugliosi "carpet bombing", for at least a while. Seriously looking forward to receipt of my copy ! Charles Black

I fortunately have never been shot. There seems to be a variety of reactions that I don't feel has anything to do with pain tolerance, bravery or the location of the wound. Some people describe it as feeling like a moderate strike by a fist and are not sure that it is a gunshot wound. Others seem to scream in excruciating "real pain" which seems to persist until heavily medicated. I did read an FBI study that stated that very often a victim falls "if they realize" that they have been shot because it is a programmed response. In many cases, victims fall as a result of this programming, even tho the wound is truly not physically debilitating, while in other cases, victims continue their actions, seemingly unhampered, until they drop from bleed out or until "very near death". It is a wierd phenomenon ! John Connolly described his torso wound as feeling like a blow by a fist. I cannot help myself, so I must add that you will notice that JBC's body is not "propelled" by a military rifle hit. I bring this up to again point out that JFK's violent head and body snap is highly "not" indicative of a bullet impact. (see Dr. David Mantik..."Assassination Science", "Murder in Draley Plaza", and "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax") This unreal movement has been explained to be the result of "frame excision" and other film alteration. Regardless of what explanation you choose to believe, what you "seem to see", if true, would be a highly unnatural phenomenon, that cannot be explained by "physics" or "wound ballistics". I don't expect you to take "my word" for this if you are a doubter. This can be easily researched by everyone on this forum.( refer also to "Bullet Penetration" by Duncan McPherson and various studies available, of all places, thru the FBI ) But please...believe what you care to. I am not attempting to reopen another can of worms which wont be resolved on this or any forum ! My apologies if I have exceeded the orignal intent of this thread. Charles Black

There are two factors regarding my forthcoming question which I am well aware of: 1) The reluctance of the Justice Department to delve further into this...although I feel that this "reluctance" can be legally overcome. 2) The reluctance of the Kennedy family toward the furher disturbance of JFK's remains. If I am not mistaken, unsolved or "reopened" murder cases have in the past, involved the reexamination of an interred deceased, regardless if there was the absence of family approval. This is the way that many murder cases have been reinvestigated. I know that there are U.S. lawyers who are forum members that perhaps can clarify this subject. I strongly suspect that if the Feds or state wanted to disinter "my father" in an attempt to solve an "untried" murder, my protest would mean little. If what I believe is in fact truth, I do not understand how "Kennedy Family" wishes LEGALLY hold more weight than mine. I, again, do understand "reality"....but I am speaking of legality ! I well recognize REALITY as well as I recognize TRUE POWER! However we are talking about the better interests of a nation of 300 million people and the murder of its leader, who was also the most powerful man on earth. Is the Kennedy Family or this nation the TRUE POWER ? How can this be justified ? I am one of the few idiots on this earth that literally believes that "anything" can be done, if properly approached ! Charles Black

Just a question ! I currently have Talbot's book. But I have been told that I will not receive Bugliosi until May 28. Can there be an accurate comparison between books that are currently in circulation vs. books that are not yet on the shelf? Has Barnes & Noble provided me the wrong ingormation regarding availability of Bugliosi? Charles Black

Hello Charles What I have continued to find most discomforting in JFK research, are the topics which seem to elicit the greatest continuing interest, is the endless rehashing of forty year old discussions to which very little new material has been added. It would seem to me that the "graphic evidence" to which you refer, should be found quite significant. Not, however, for the impact which the horror of these photos provide, but as the closest likeness that I have seen, of what most eyewitnesses seem to have reported. It seems to me that "the" major area in which this study has become seemingly hopelessly mired, is the disparity between what well over a hundred eyewitnesses reported, along with the corroborating statements of the EXPERT testimony of the Parkland Trauma Staff and many in attendance at the Bethesda Autopsy, with what was reported by the Warren Commission and the official autopsy report. The confliction of various autopsy photos with each other and with the autopsy xrays and autopsy report, further supports the very simple statement that "something is obviously and seriously wrong." Finally there appears on this forum, a recreation that appears much more in accord with most eyewitness reports, and no one seems to care enough to comment on it. I don't think as educated adults, the excuse can be used that these photographs are in bad taste and too horrible to look at ! If this is the case, then progress is apparently a "side issue". A review of some of the threads which continue to resurrect, cannot, in my straightforward opinion, lead toward an END. Yet this is the direction in which we choose to tread. Our treading is becoming a treadmill ! Of course, this is but an opinion of "one"! Charles Black