John Simkin

I assume you did not really mean to say that.

Thank you to those who have responded to my email. John D. Clare has emailed me to say that it should be of great use in his teaching. He requested that I put all the interviews in a new section. I have done this and it can be found here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=249

Very interesting. You reproduced the article but neglected to tell us what you think the impact will be on educational websites. In the past educational publishing was dominated by multinational corporations. As a small company it was virtually impossible to compete with these companies as you could not afford large print runs in the Third World, full-colour brochures being sent to heads of department every term, sales representatives visiting schools on a regular basis, newspaper advertising, etc. The internet has changed that. With the use of advertising, teachers can run profitable one-man businesses. In time, they will pose a serious threat to the power of the multinational corporations. A similar revolution is taking place in journalism. Journalists who found it difficult to get their editors to publish their articles about political corruption now have their own websites. People like Bob Parry, Joe Trento, Daniel Hopsicker, Sander Hicks, Robin Ramsay, etc., now publish direct to a world audience. The internet revolution is as important to the future of mass communications, as the Russian Revolution was to political systems.

Time to loosen the tinfoil hat, Ray. Sorry to spoil your pro-conspiracy echo chamber, but I'm here to stay. Well I don't know if you are a betting man, Brendan, but I would not bet the ranch on that if I were you. My time is valuable, and I refuse to waste it on a forum that allows the likes of you to waste it. This forum was established for the express purpose of genuine inquiry into the JFK assassination, something you have no interest in, quite obviously. Either you go, or I go. I will leave it to John Simkin to decide. Ray, as much as I admire your posts and detest those of Brendan, I am unwilling to restrict his right to post. As I have said many times, I am fully committed to the idea of free speech. It is to be regretted that we do not have more right-wingers like Brendan willing to take us on in debate. I can understand why they don’t do it, but if they are daft enough to take us on, it is important that we allow them to say what they want. In doing so, we are playing an important role in educating the large number of visitors who view this Forum. I reject the idea that you are forcing me to choose between Brendan and yourself. I am instead choosing to allow both of you to post. If you decide not to engage Brendan in debate, that is your choice, not mine.

As requested I will give three reasons why I do not believe the confessions of James Files. (1) A few years ago I was reading John Gilmore’s great book, Severed. It is an account of the famous “Black Dahlia” case that took place in 1947. Gilmore points out that in the first few weeks after the murder of Elizabeth Short, thirty different people confessed to the crime. The detectives knew that this sort of thing always happened in high-profile cases. Therefore, they did not make public certain aspects of the murder. In this way they were able to dismiss these thirty people from their investigation. It is therefore no surprise that several people like James Files have confessed to the killing of JFK. It seems that in any high-profile case, people will always come forward and confess to the crime. These people clearly have personality disorders and are willing to risk imprisonment and even execution in order to get their names in the papers. Does James Files suffer from a personality disorder? Maybe, but what other reason could he have for confessing? More importantly, what is he risking? What could he gain from such a confession? In 1991 Files was arrested and charged with attempting to kill a policeman called David Ostertag. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison. Therefore, the loss of liberty is not one of those things that Files is risking. It seems that Files was a career criminal who liked to boast of his links to Mafia bosses. It must have been a blow to his ego to have been convicted for only “attempted murder”. One possible gain from this confession is increased status amongst the criminal fraternity. Although he would have to be satisfied in having an influence on only the less intelligent members of this group. Maybe, he believes he could make some financial gain from this confession. Clearly, Wim Dankbaar has made a serious financial investment in the case. Wim cannot expect a return in this investment unless he can convince the public that James Files is telling the truth. That does not mean Files is not telling the truth. But it does provide motivation for both Wim to spend so much time and effort in trying to persuade serious researchers that Files is the killer of JFK. This he has failed to do. As far as I can see, only Jim Marrs is willing to say that Files is possibly telling the truth about what happened in Dallas in 1963. Even Judyth Baker can claim to have more supporters than James Files. I am not saying that I reject all confessions. It depends very much on the circumstances and context of the confession. For example, I am willing to believe deathbed confessions when they are made to close friends and relatives (John Martino). I am willing to believe confessions when they are made it a fit of anger (David Morales). I am also willing to believe confessions when they are made in confidence to people who share their extremist political views (Carl Jenkins and Chi Chi Quintero). However, I find it extremely difficult to believe a man who is unlikely to leave prison. Especially, when he is part of some “business package”. (2) The second reason I don’t believe James Files is that I completely reject the idea that the Mafia (organized crime) ordered the execution of JFK. The main reason for this position concerns a man called Arthur Flegenheimer (Dutch Schultz). In 1933 Schultz was a Mafia boss in New York. Fiorello La Guardia, the mayor of New York, instructed the city’s special prosecutor, Thomas Dewey, to investigate Schultz's business interests. When Schultz heard the news, he began making plans to have Dewey assassinated. Other gang leaders warned Schultz not to carry on with his murder plan. When he refused to take note of this demand, Louis Lepke Buchalter, one of New York's main gang leaders, paid Charlie Workman and Emmanuel Weiss to kill Schultz. On 23rd October, 1935, Dutch Schultz and three of his bodyguards, were killed while they were eating in a Newark restaurant. Mafia bosses in the United States bribe politicians, they did not kill them. They know that politicians have the power to destroy them. They have to make it in the interests of politicians to protect them. The Mafia knew that if Schultz murdered Dewey, Fiorello La Guardia would have been forced to take all necessary action to wipe out the Mafia in New York. There has never been an example of a high profile politician in the US being assassinated by the Mafia. This is a shrewd assessment of the political situation they found themselves in. All-out war on the Mafia would have followed if they had really been responsible for the assassination of JFK. The one question that the “Mafia did it” group did it cannot explain is the cover-up. How did the Mafia manage that? What we now know is that the original plan was to blame Castro for the assassination of JFK. It was hoped that this would trigger a US invasion of Cuba and the overthrow of Castro. LBJ refused to go along with this plan and instead J. Edgar Hoover, William Sullivan (head of the FBI investigation) and James Jesus Angleton (head of the CIA investigation) had to come up with the lone gunman theory. Despite the best efforts of the Warren Commission, the American public refused to buy this story and by the time of the Jim Garrison investigation, the cover-up was in serious trouble. Therefore, it was decided to develop a new strategy, Oswald was part of a Mafia conspiracy to kill JFK. Dick Billings was dispatched to New Orleans to direct Garrison towards the new target (at the time Garrison was finding evidence of CIA agents and assets being involved in the conspiracy). Information was leaked to Jack Anderson implicating the Mafia in the killing of JFK. Anderson’s articles also helped to explain the CIA connection to the assassination via the original plan to murder Fidel Castro. To his credit, Garrison refused to accept Billings redirection of the investigation. With this, Billings withdrew from New Orleans and began his smear campaign that Garrison was himself under the control of the Mafia. The establishment of the House Senate Committee on Assassinations in 1976 created another crisis for those behind the conspiracy. Especially when the incorruptible, Richard Sprague was appointed as chief counsel of the HSCA. Sprague was eventually removed and replaced by G. Robert Blakey, who had a background in fighting the Mafia. It was not therefore too difficult to persuade Blakey that the “Mafia did it”. However, just to make sure, Dick Billings was dispatched to the HSAC to help Blakey write his report. Later Blakey and Billings were to co-author the book, Fatal Hour: The Assassination of President Kennedy by Organized Crime. The dominant ideology provides a choice: If you’re a lone-nutter person, you can believe in the findings of the Warren Commission, or if you are bright enough to work out that it was a conspiracy, organized crime was responsible. (3) The final reason why I don’t believe James Files is the confession itself. Let us assume for a moment that Files is telling the truth that organized crime did kill JFK. According to Files confession, he arrived in Dallas with Charles Nicoletti at “shortly before ten o'clock” on the morning of the assassination. At “about 10:30, Mr. Nicoletti asked me how would I feel in supporting him... in backing him up on this... and he told me I wouldn't fire unless it became extremely necessary.” Files agrees and then Nicoletti asks “where would you position yourself at in Dealey Plaza?” Files replies “behind the tree behind the stockade fence on the high ridge by the knoll”. Surprisingly, Nicoletti appears a little bit shocked by this suggestion but is eventually convinced by the arguments put forward by Files. Nicoletti is so impressed by Files answer that the following exchange takes place: “He asked me then where do you think would be the best place for me? I said well, I think the Dal-Tex building... with the new change in it... I say I think the Dal-Tex building over there... that building would give you the best advantage point there. He said I think so too.” If we accept Files confession to be true, we have to believe that Nicoletti arrives in Dallas on the morning of the assassination without considering the places where the gunmen will stand. Nor has he decided who is going to be his gunman. Files recruitment seems to be an afterthought. Without this inspired decision to put Files in charge of the operation, no gunman would have been placed in front of JFK when the firing began. Is there really anyone other than Wim Dankbaar who really believes that this is the way organized crime would have planned the assassination of JFK? Then there is the issue of James Files being allowed to tell his story that organized crime killed JFK. As we know, Files is not the first “hired killer” to confess to assassinating JFK. In 1979 Charles Harrelson was paid $250,000 by drug dealers to assassinate John H. Wood. On 29th May, 1979, Wood was shot dead as he left his Alamo Heights townhouse. Wood, known as "Maximum John" for his tough sentences of drug traffickers, was the first federal judge to be murdered in the 20th century. When he was arrested he confessed to being one of the gunman who killed JFK. He later withdrew this confession but he was eventually convicted of the murder of Wood and sentenced to two life sentences. In 1988 Harrelson told the producer of The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Nigel Turner, that "on November 22, 1963, at 12.30, I was having lunch with a friend in a restaurant in Houston, Texas." He also told Turner that he would not have accepted such a contract as he knew that if he had, he would have ended up, like Lee Harvey Oswald, being killed by the Mafia. Exactly, if Files had been daft enough to accept the contract on JFK, he would be dead before he had time to convince the likes of Bob Vernon and Wim Dankbaar that he was involved in the assassination. As every serious researcher into the JFK case knows, James Files is a fraud. We also know why Dankbaar is so keen for us to believe his story. When we refuse he resorts to verbal abuse and accusations that we are disinformation agents under the control of the CIA.

I will do this tomorrow. However, in the meantime, here is James Files’ confession that he made to Robert G. Vernon on 22nd March, 1994: Q: Were you ever in the armed services? A: I was in the 82nd Airborne. I went in '59...1959, date of entry... January and in July 10 of 1959, I believe it was July 10, we shipped out to Laos. I was 82nd Airborne. Q: What were some of your duties? A: My duties at that time... we were working a special operations group to work with the Laotian Army in Laos at that time. I was there strictly as an advisor on training... with small automatic weapons... setting detonators, explosives, mechanical ambushes. There was just a handful of Americans working with the Laotians at that time... Q: Could you tell me how you first became involved in organized crime activities? A: Well, I first became.. it''s a strange way to start out... but I was racing stock cars and driving at a local track and Mr. Nicoletti had taken a shine to my driving and he'd watched me on several occasions and he had asked me once if I would drive him one evening. I took him out and test drove his car that we'd just picked up a brand new Ford... and he was pretty well pleased with my driving and from then on I became more like an assigned driver to him and I did several drivings for him on different jobs that he did. Q: Who was Charles Nicoletti? A: Charles Nicoletti, at that time, he was an up and coming figure with organized crime and he was known as one of the local hitman. As far as I'm concerned he was the best that ever lived, as far as I'm concerned. Q: What Mafia family did he work for? A: He was out of the Chicago family. Q: Who would have been the boss of the Chicago family? A: At that time, Tony Accardo. Q: That's before Giancana or after Giancana? A: Tony Accardo handed it up... headed it up... then Giancana came after that. Giancana at that time was one of the underlings, I guess you might say he was the... one of the top lieutenants at that point. Things were handed out in different branches in organized crime such as someone might handle the liquor license, someone would handle the loan sharking and booking, someone would handle the contracts for murder for hire and anything like that... Q: How did you meet him (John Rosselli)? A: I had met John Rosselli in Miami and discussed a few things with him and he... I had met him through David Atlee Phillips... David Atlee Phillips was an operative for the CIA. Through time everybody got to be fairly well good friends but I grew up basically under Chuck's wing... Mr. Nicoletti's wing. Chuck had told me we were going to do it. We'd first originally planned to do the assassination in Chicago but a lot of people didn't like that idea so then it was moved to another location. Q: When you say "we planned it" could you clarify "we"? A: Well when I say we... I was just with Mr. Nicoletti. Whatever he said do, I would do. When I say we, I'm referring like... the only thing I did was just drive the car or whatever that they needed me for. Mr. Nicoletti had asked me then at that point when we'd decided not to do it in Chicago and it was going to be moved to Dallas... when John F. Kennedy had decided to go to Dallas... a week in advance, I took the '63 Chevrolet that we had at that time.. I left and I went down a week earlier. I picked up the weapons from the storage bin that we had and loaded them in the car with everything that I thought we might need.. with a various assortment... and I left and I drove to Dallas. I stayed out at a place in Mesquite, Texas. Once I got there, I called back and notified Mr. Nicoletti that I was there and on the scene. The following day, Lee Harvey Oswald came by the motel where I was at... they had given him my location... and he took me out to a place somewhere southeast of Mesquite where I test fired the weapons and calibrated the scopes on anything that might be needed. Then he was with me for a few days in town there... we drove around... so I would know all the streets and not run into any dead ends streets if anything went wrong and we had to flee from the area... Q: Could you give me the exact chronology of what happened from the time you arrived in Dallas...? You've already said that you went out and test fired some guns and things... take me back to maybe November 21, the day before, and in your own words, tell me what happened from November 21, 1963 until the night of November 22, 1963... A: We go back... November 21, I had everything pretty well set up on my end of it as far as knowing the area, knowing the streets, memorizing a lot of the major points there and intersections... crossing railroad tracks and trestles and things... I had the weapons prepared and ready to go, I had those installed in the car where I wanted them. Everything had been calibrated all ammunition had been set and ready to use. I got a good nights sleep that night, the following morning I got up early and I went to the Dallas Cabana Hotel to pick up John Rosselli... I'm going to say somewhere shortly around 7:00 that morning, maybe a few minutes past seven... and I picked up Johnny Rosselli and we drove from the Dallas Cabana to Ft. Worth, Texas to a pancake house they had there just off the major highway. We went there to meet someone... I did not know who we was meeting.. .But he had already told me... Johnny Rosselli said we was going to meet a man by the name of Jack Ruby... that he had some things that we had to pick up. When we got there, Johnny Rosselli told me he said... I'm going to go in and sit in a booth... he says you wait and come in later... he said sit somewhere else where you can keep an eye on me... in case something goes wrong, I want you to cover my backside. So I positioned myself... after Johnny Rosselli went in... I sit at the counter... ordered a cup of coffee and sit there and waited. This real heavy set gentlemen came in and he went over and he knew Johnny Rosselli I assume cause they shook hands, they talked for a minute and they sit down in the booth together. They passed over, I'm gonna say probably a 5 x 9 envelope... manilla envelope that had some material in it, at that point. After a couple of minutes, he got up, they shook hands, he left. I went out into the parking lot, made sure the air was clear, started the car up, pulled up by the door, Johnny Rosselli come out and got in the car. I never met Jack Ruby, never said hello or anything. Johnny Rosselli got in the car with me and we started back to Dallas. He opened the envelope up and there was identification in there for Secret Service people and we had a map in there of the exact motorcade route that would take it through Dealey Plaza. Johnny Rosselli said well they only made one change. That was when he informed me they was coming off of Main Street on to Elm or on to Houston there... they made the zig-zag, the little turn that they should have never made. But when they made that, it was the only change in it. I drove him back to the Dallas Cabana, he went upstairs and I waited for Mr. Nicoletti to come down. Mr. Nicoletti came down and got in the car with me and we drove to Dealey Plaza. We got to Dealey Plaza shortly before ten o'clock. From there we parked the car... it had been drizzling rain that morning... kind of a cool morning out... I had parked the car beside the Dal-Tex building, Mr. Nicoletti and I got out and we walked up and down the complete area of Dealey Plaza, we covered every corner, walked by the buildings, looked over several different things. We were just talking, having casual talk about the weather and everything. At about 10:30, Mr. Nicoletti asked me how would I feel in supporting him... in backing him up on this... and he told me I wouldn't fire unless it became extremely necessary. I told Mr. Nicoletti, Jesus, I'd be honored to do anything to back you up. He asked me if you was to be outside here, where would you position yourself at in Dealey Plaza? I told him, I said well, from looking everything over and from walking it in the week I've been down here, I think I would choose up there behind the tree behind the stockade fence on the high ridge by the knoll up there. He says why there? I says well I've got the railroad yard in back of me, we've got a parking lot there and I've got a place to where I could stash whatever I would need. I said I can pass myself off as a railroad worker in the railroad yard for the time being until that time comes and nobody would really pay any attention to me. He asked me then where do you think would be the best place for me? I said well, I think the Dal-Tex building... with the new change in it... I say I think the Dal-Tex building over there... that building would give you the best advantage point there. He said I think so too. So we took a walk over, went through the parking lot over by the tracks, walked around through there and he seemed pretty well pleased with that. Then at that point, oh it was about 11:10, he asked me what weapon would I choose to use over there. I told him I would like to use the Fireball. He said why that one? He said you've only got one shot. I said one shot's all I'm gonna get anyway if I wait until the last moment of fire and I may not fire, I said, and it's easy to conceal and I carry it in a briefcase and nobody will pay any attention to me and it's easier to walk away from there. And that's exactly what we did at that point. Shortly before noon, we went back to the vehicle, I took the briefcase out and turned my jacket inside out, I went back into the yard... the railroad yard there... I secured the briefcase, then I hung out back there and I walked down on the grassy knoll, no one paid any attention... people were gathering. Shortly before the motorcade came, I went back up there and started securing myself in a better position so I'd be able to reach the attache case at that point... the briefcase... I knew once that I opened the briefcase up and pulled the weapon out, nobody's gonna be looking at me, the motorcade would be coming... making its first time... and I wouldn't have to remove the Fireball from the briefcase until approximately... they made the first turn on Elm Street there and I would have plenty of time at that point. At that point when they started proceeding down Elm Street, shots started being fired from behind. I assumed that it was Mr. Nicoletti because he was the one that was in the building and I knew that Johnny Rosselli was there. I remember the shots ringing out and even though the President was being hit with the rounds, I was considering it a miss because I knew that we were going for a head shot on the President. I had known that he had been hit in the body but I didn't know what part at that time. I seen the body lurch and I saw the body lurch again, I heard another shot that missed. We were supposed to hit no one but Connally, I mean no one but Mr. Kennedy. I guess Governor Connally got hit with one of the rounds at that point. I wasn't even sure of that because I was keeping Kennedy as best I could in the scope on the Fireball. When I got to the point where I thought it would be the last field of fire, I had zeroed in to the left side of the head there that I had because if I wait any longer then Jacqueline Kennedy would have been in the line of fire and I had been instructed for nothing to happen to her and at that moment I figured this is my last chance for a shot and he had still not been hit in the head. So, as I fired that round, Mr. Nicoletti and I fired approximately at the same time as the head started forward then it went backward. I would have to say that his shell struck approximately 1000th of a second ahead of mine maybe but that what's started pushing the head forward which caused me to miss from the left eye and I came in on the left side of the temple. At that point, through the scope, I witnessed everything, matter and skull bring blown out to the back on the limousine and everyone on television watching saw Jackie Kennedy crawl out there to get it. I watched her hold it in her hand, crawl back on to the car, I put the Fireball back into the briefcase, and closed it up, I pulled my jacket off, reversed my jacket so I would have, instead of the plaid side out, I would have the gray like a dress jacket more or less and I put a cap on my head, my hat, to walk away, carrying a briefcase.

Interesting article in the Guardian this week that I believe will have an impact on educational websites: The internet will overtake national newspapers in the battle for advertising spending in the UK by the end of the year, it was predicted yesterday. GroupM, which accounts for about 30% of global media buying, says in a report to be published next month that the internet will account for 13.3% of the £12.2bn UK advertising market this year, overtaking national newspapers with a share of 13.2%. The figure for web advertising could be even bigger, because the report excludes the estimated £1bn a year spent on "affiliate advertising", which largely comprises adverts placed on smaller websites. The speed at which advertisers have shifted spending to the web has surprised many. Six years ago the web was an upstart medium controlling only 1% of the multibillion-pound British advertising market, despite being lavished with media and investor attention. The related factors of growth in broadband usage and declining newspaper circulation appear to have justified the hype. "Reach is what advertisers want most," says the report. "National newspapers still have lots of it, but less reach means less ad money." GroupM, the holding company for media-buying agencies owned by WPP, adds that tabloids have been hit the hardest, with ageing readerships and celebrity magazines damaging newsstand sales. It warns that the migration of classified adverts to the internet could be dangerous for all nationals because they are such a profitable niche, accounting for a quarter of nationals' advertising revenue: "Online substitution of classified is therefore particularly threatening given print's massive operational gearing. Jobseekers know they don't need to buy nationals any more." Google will throw down another challenge to the newspaper industry today by launching its Base service in Britain. Google Base allows users to upload their own content onto the search engine's servers, in effect making the content part of the internet. Because of this, it is perceived as a major threat to print-based classified advertising. Although it has yet to make headway in US classified advertising, the Google Base concept could appeal to advertisers seeking a cheaper alternative to print. Peter Williams, finance director of Daily Mail & General Trust, said yesterday that national newspapers still held advantages over the younger medium: "The one area of media that is not fragmented is national newspapers. There are not too many national newspaper launches, but how many websites launch every day? Also, in national newspapers you can buy critical mass in one place, so we have the advantage of individual size." Having confirmed the rise of the internet, the GroupM report goes on to predict that advertising on mobile platforms - from phones to lap tops - will experience the next growth spurt: "Mobile advertising is at the start of a growth curve like that of the internet, which initially grew at annual rates of up to 200%." Mobile advertising is starting from a low base and is forecast to double to £60m this year, doubling again to £120m next year. The study warns that the strong performance of internet advertising is masking the woes of more established platforms. According to media buyers' estimates seen by the Guardian, ITV1 will generate less than £100m in advertising revenues in July - falling 18% to £96m. ITV1 turnover is now heading for a decline of 11% year on year, in a broadcast market that is expected to fall 3% overall. "Without evergreen internet spending we would be in an ad recession," said the GroupM report. "TV is having its worst year since 2001. This is not a crisis of TV advertiser confidence, but it could be the market imposing a permanent discount on a fragmented medium." Henry Rowe, managing director of Carat Digital, the online arm of Europe's largest media buyer, predicts 80% of media consumption will be digital in three or four years. Much of this is being driven by digital TV, which is in two-thirds of UK homes, and Britain's 10m broadband connections: "The future for digital media is the future for media overall, which means that phrases like 'new media' will be even more ridiculous than they are now." Mr Rowe adds that paid-for search advertising, where adverts are triggered by key searchwords, will continue to dominate internet advertising. Carat believes that more than 50% of internet advertising sold over the next few years will be derived from paid-for search. "We see see search growing for a couple of years but ultimately it will plateau when there is saturation of online consumption and internet penetration," he says. "Once traditional media are fully converted to digital and the internet, non-search advertising will become a bigger part of the total." http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1786358,00.html

David B. Perry, The Top Ten Reasons the Jim Files' Story Needs Help (1997) 1. Files claims he was involved with the mob as part of "The Chicago Family" (by timelines after September 1960). He indicated the mob was headed by Tony Accardo and that "(Sam) Giancana was an underling to Accardo." Tony Accardo turned control of the Chicago mob over to Sam "Mooney" Gianciana in the summer of 1955. 2. Files claims he served in Laos with the 82nd Airborne conducting training of that countries' soldiers in "mechanical ambushes." Because of the jungle's "triple tree canopy" airborne operations were futile. Helicopter gun ships were used instead. Additionally, he mispronounces the name given the people of Laos as Latoatians. Something which would give great offense to these proud people. 3. Files claims he was recruited for CIA operations in April 1961 by David Atlee Phillips. In 1961 Phillips was Chief of Covert Action in Mexico City and additionally ran the CIA's "propaganda shop." He had nothing to do with CIA recruitment. 4. Files claims responsibility for training some of the Bay of Pigs soldiers at the behest of the CIA and David Atlee Phillips. He describes the training as taking place in the Everglades. The preparation of invasion forces for the Bay of Pigs took place in Guatemala. 5. Files indicates training for the Bay of Pigs incursion took place at No Name Key in the Everglades. No Name Key is located about 25 miles east of Key West and about 50 air miles across Florida Bay from the Everglades. This is a distinction that would surely be known to someone actually involved in those covert operations.

I used to work for Conrad Black at the Telegraph. Not that I ever met him but he did know about me and rejected my proposal for the Telegraph to provide a Virtual School for the world’s students. My slogan was the “Telegraph’s millennium gift to the world”. He actually thought that the Telegraph was so badly thought of by British teachers that they would not use the materials. Black also had doubts about the popularity of the internet (this was in 1998). Although his knighthood was proposed by the Conservative Party, Blair seemed fairly keen for him to have it. Blair probably thought Black might tell his journalists to go easy on New Labour. However, it did not happen. Blair’s decision to allow rich foreigners to keep their tax loopholes, was probably more important to Black than his title. It definitely got him the support of the other press baron, Rupert Murdoch. I must say I have watched Conrad Black’s legal problems with great satisfaction. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths that people like Black go to increase their wealth. I don’t suppose he will end up in the place he deserves – prison.

I thought I would start this thread so that Jack White, David G. Healy and Bill Miller can discuss this topic on this thread rather than on Gary Mack's policy of selling and not selling certain books in the Sixth Floor Museum.

Ben Bradlee did suppress the story about James Angleton and Mary Pinchot Meyer in the Washington Post. (See Nina Burleigh’s book, A Very Private Woman). He also stopped Washington Post journalists from referring to the fact that Cord Meyer was a high-ranking official in the CIA (he was described as a government official in the Washington Post). Bradlee’s account appeared in his autobiography published in 1995. This was his attempt to put his own spin on the story. The story about Angleton and Bradlee searching for the diary first appeared in the National Enquirer in March, 1976. The article was based on an interview with James Truitt, a former senior member of staff at the Washington Post. Truitt also told the newspaper that Meyer was having an affair with JFK when he was assassinated. He also claimed that Mary had told his wife, Ann Truitt, that she was keeping an account of this relationship in her diary. Meyer asked Truitt to take possession of a private diary "if anything ever happened to me". The Truitts were in Japan when Mary was killed. Therefore Ann phoned Mary’s sister about the diary. Unfortunately, she told her husband who was Ben Bradlee. As a result he went out searching for the diary and when it was found handed it to Angleton. I suspect Bradlee was guilty of a crime by taking this action (tampering with evidence in a murder inquiry). This story also appeared in Deborah Davis’ book, Katharine the Great in 1979. Ben Bradlee did everything he could to stop the book from being published. Bradlee and the CIA managed to persuade the publishers William Jovanovich, to pulp 20,000 copies of the book. Davis filed a breach-of- contract and damage-to-reputation suit against Jovanovich, who settled out of court with her in 1983. So much for Bradlee being a defender of freedom of speech. I happen to have a copy of one of the books that escaped being pulped. It is a great book full of insights about the activities of the Washington Post. Davis claims that Deep Throat was Richard Ober of the CIA. It was also the first book to disclose the most secret of all of CIA covert activities, Operation Mockingbird.

I do not base my opinions of any one person. Unlike yourself who uses the same words as Wim did in his email to me that I received yesterday. I might be a good idea if you started thinking for yourself other than just being a mouthpiece for Wim. Yes, I did know John Stockwell was a CIA agent. See my web page on him: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKstockwellJ.htm Stockwell was chief of the CIA's Angola Task Force. Unhappy with the way the CIA was targeting the MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola) and resigned from the organization in December, 1976. Three months later Stockwell published an open letter to CIA Director Stansfield Turner in the Washington Post. He claimed that 98% of CIA operations in the field were "fabrications but were papered over and promoted by aware case officers because of the numbers game". This resulted in Turner initiating a "house-cleaning of the clandestine services". Stockwell has written two books on the CIA: In Search of Enemies (1978) and The Praetorian Guard: The US Role in the New World Order (1991). He has also made several lecture tours where he has spoken on CIA covert operations. He is in fact the direct opposite of being a CIA asset. Can you explain why you (Wim) concentrate on trying to smear the person rather than addressing the points that Stockwell made? This is a common CIA tactic. Not that Wim is CIA. The CIA is not imaginative enough to have come up with the idea of a rich businessman who is willing to use his money to spread the stories of people such as James Files, Chancey Holt and Judyth Baker.

BECTA asked me to remove its links from my website many months ago. It would be tempting to think that they have succumbed to pressure from American intelligence agencies because of my content on the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK, Iran Contra, the CIA drug trade in South East Asia, Operation 40 and Operation Condor (CIA sponsored assassinations of left-wing activists in the underdeveloped world), Watergate, Operation Sandwedge, etc. Although the CIA do monitor my website (and the contents of this Forum), they are not the reason why Becta does not want to be linked to Spartacus or this Forum. The conspiracy is far closer to home. They dislike our postings about the corruption of the e-learning credits. I like that bit about our content not being free. There was a time at the beginning of the e-credits scam where they refused to give links to free websites. Instead, tax payers money was used to promote the material being produced by multinational corporations. Why? Could it have something to do with those companies providing donations to the Labour Party? As someone who worked for the Guardian and who sat in some of those meetings at the Department of Education, I know how this scam worked. In my view it was blatant corruption and a wicked use of tax papers money.

One of the reasons this Forum was established was as a means of communication for the European History E-Learning Project (E-HELP). Established in October, 2004, and funded by the European Union, the overall aim of E-HELP is to encourage and improve the use of modern technology by history teachers and their students. Over the last couple of weeks we have begun interviewing a wide range of people about the process of writing history books. This includes academic historians like Colin Kidd and David Kaiser who believe that one should rely almost exclusively on contemporary documents. It also includes academic historians like Alfred W. McCoy and Gerald D. McKnight, who because of the subject matter they are interested in, have been willing to use the sort of evidence that historians usually ignore, for example, the testimony of “whistleblowers”. McCoy’s books on the CIA involvement in the drug trade (The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia) and torture (A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror) could not have been written without resorting to these sources. The responses of Kidd and Kaiser on the use of these sources highlight the dilemma that historians face if the choose to explore what I would call the area of “secret history”. Another one being interviewed is Angela John, an academic historian who writes from the perspective of a committed feminist. We would like to interview others with a particular political perspective. Has anyone got any contacts willing to be interviewed on the forum? We are also interviewing a former FBI agent you began his career as a historian by exposing the activities of J. Edgar Hoover (making him public enemy number one). William Turner went on to use the skills developed as an FBI agent to become one of America’s finest investigative journalists. He is also the author of several history books. We are also interviewing several investigative journalists who went on to become historians: Robert Parry (Iran-Contra), Daniel Hopsicker (Drugs Trade), Jim Marrs (JFK assassination), Robin Ramsay (MI5 dirty tricks), Joseph Trento (CIA and KGB), Don Bohning (Castro’s Cuba) and Sander Hicks (9/11). Several other historians have agreed to be interviewed. This includes Joan Mellen, Anthony Summers who has written biographies of people like J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, the Washington Post journalist, Jefferson Morley who is currently writing a book on the CIA, and probably my favourite historian of all, Peter Dale Scott of the University of California. Nick Cullather, former CIA staff historian and now professor of history at Indiana University has also promised to answer questions on his book, Secret History: The Classified CIA Account of its Operations in Guatemala, 1952-54 (1999). Lance Price has also agreed to be interviewed about his role as Tony Blair's spin doctor. He is also the author of a recent book on the Labour Government. Please join in this questioning (also let me know if you have contacts whom would be willing to be interviewed about the process of being a historian). The results will eventually appear on the E-HELP website. I think it will be a unique resource for students of history. Alfred W. McCoy http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6941 Don Bohning http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6932 Colin Kidd http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6978 David Kaiser http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6853 William Turner http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7007 Jim Marrs http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6850 Robin Ramsay http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6878 Robert Parry http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6893 Joseph Trento http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6899 Gerald D. McKnight http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6903 Sander Hicks http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6902 Angela John http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6761 Jefferson Morley http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6937 Daniel Hopsicker http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6995

Why is it that the only time you seem to contribute to the Forum is to make this point? Why don't you post in the the large number of threads on education and history?

Over the last couple of weeks I have being interviewing a wide range of people about the process of writing history books. This includes academic historians like Colin Kidd and David Kaiser who believe that one should rely almost exclusively on contemporary documents. It also includes academic historians like Alfred W. McCoy and Gerald D. McKnight who because of the subject matter they are interested in, have been willing to use the sort of evidence that historians usually ignore, for example, the testimony of “whistleblowers”. McCoy’s books on the CIA involvement in the drug trade and torture could not have been written without resorting to these sources. The responses of Kidd and Kaiser on the use of these sources highlight the dilemma that historians face if the choose to explore what I would call the area of “secret history”. I am also interviewing Angela John, an academic historian who writes from the perspective of a committed feminist. I would like to interview others with a particular political perspective. Has anyone got any contacts willing to be interviewed on the forum? I am also interviewing a former FBI agent you began his career as a historian by exposing the activities of J. Edgar Hoover (making him public enemy number one). William Turner went on to use the skills developed as an FBI agent to become one of America’s finest investigative journalists. He is also the author of several history books. I am interviewing several investigative journalists who went on to become historians: Robert Parry (Iran-Contra), Daniel Hopsicker (Drugs Trade), Jim Marrs (JFK assassination), Robin Ramsay (MI5 dirty tricks), Joseph Trento (CIA and KGB) and Sander Hicks (9/11). I am also interviewing Don Bohning, who worked for 35 years as a non-investigative journalist for the Miami Herald. Recently released documents show that he was a CIA asset (AMCARBON-3) since as early as 1964. He now admits to this but says he was acting as a patriotic American. He has recently published the Castro Obsession: U.S. Covert Operations Against Cuba, 1959-1965. Several other historians have agreed to be interviewed. This includes the feminist Joan Mellen, Anthony Summers who has written biographies of people like J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, the Washington Post journalist, Jefferson Morley who is currently writing a book on the CIA, and probably my favourite historian of all, Peter Dale Scott of the University of California. Nick Cullather, former CIA staff historian and now professor of history at Indiana University has also promised to answer questions on his book, Secret History: The Classified CIA Account of its Operations in Guatemala, 1952-54 (1999). Lance Price has also agreed to be interviewed about his role as Tony Blair's spin doctor. He is also the author of a recent book on the Labour Government. It is extremely useful as a resource on Blair's decision to invade Iraq. Lance will also be giving a presentation on this subject in Toulouse. (He will also be giving a presentation on dissemination.) Please join in this questioning (also let me know if you have contacts whom would be willing to be interviewed about the process of being a historian). The results will eventually appear on the E-HELP website. I think it will be a unique resource. Alfred W. McCoy http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6941 Don Bohning http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6932 Colin Kidd http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6978 David Kaiser http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6853 Daniel Hopsicker http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6995 William Turner http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7007 Jim Marrs http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6850 Robin Ramsay http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6878 Robert Parry http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6893 Joseph Trento http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6899 Gerald D. McKnight http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6903 Sander Hicks http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6902 Angela John http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6761

(1) Is there any real difference between the role of an investigative journalist and a historian? (2) How do you decide about what to write about? (3) Do you ever consider the possibility that your research will get you into trouble with those who have power and influence? (4) You tend to write about controversial subjects. Do you think this has harmed your career in any way? Have you ever come under pressure to leave these subjects alone?

(1) Is there any real difference between the role of an investigative journalist and a historian? (2) How do you decide about what to write about? (3) Do you ever consider the possibility that your research will get you into trouble with those who have power and influence? (4) You tend to write about controversial subjects. Do you think this has harmed your career in any way? Have you ever come under pressure to leave these subjects alone?

There is an interesting story in Robert Parry's Lost History that illustrates how Operation Mockingbird works. On page 130 Parry points out after his stories on Oliver North were published by AP he was recruited by Evan Thomas to join the staff of Newsweek (February, 1987). However, soon afterwards Evan Thomas seemed to lose interest in his research into North. In fact, he came under pressure not to write about North. For example, Newsweek did not send Parry, or any other member of staff to report on North’s trial in 1989. By 1990 Thomas made clear that Parry was no longer wanted at Newsweek and he agreed to leave the organization. Is it possible that Evan Thomas recruited Parry in order to keep him off the case? I say this because it has been claimed that Newsweek was a very important part of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird. See for example, Carl Bernstein’s CIA and the Media in Rolling Stone Magazine (20th October, 1977). In her book, Katharine The Great (1979), Deborah Davis points out that Newsweek was owned by the Astor Foundation. The most dominant figure of the organization was Gates White McGarrah. His grandson was Richard McGarrah Helms, a leading figure in the CIA’s Directorate of Plans that ran Mockingbird. Helms was a childhood friend of Ben Bradlee (page 141). In the early 1950s Bradlee worked for the Office of U.S. Information and Educational Exchange (USIE). This was an organization under the control of the CIA. In 1953 Bradlee went to work for Newsweek. Recently released documents concerning the Rosenberg case show that while employed by Newsweek, Bradlee was also working for the CIA. In 1961 it was Ben Bradlee who told Phil Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, that Newsweek was up for sale. Bradlee told Graham that he had heard this from his good friend, Richard Helms (page 142). Phil Graham had been recruited to Operation Mockingbird by Frank Wisner soon after the CIA was created in 1947. Wisner and Graham had both been members of the OSS during the Second World War.

Here is another good look at the James Files story: Martin Shackelford, Fair Play Magazine, Confessions of an Assassin (November, 1996) Files said he first met Lee Harvey Oswald in early 1963, in connection with gun-running, in Clinton, Louisiana, via David Atlee Phillips. Both were doing CIA work at the time. There was obviously some government involvement in the assassination, as otherwise they wouldn't have gotten the Secret Service identifications Ruby gave them. Phillips had given him the Remington Fireball for an earlier job. Files said he saw Frank Sturgis among the crowd of people on Elm Street. He also saw Eugene Brading, whom he had seen at the Cabana with Nicoletti and Rosselli. Files knew Sturgis from anti-Castro activities, as did Rosselli. Files didn't see Oswald at all that day. He and Oswald never discussed the assassination plan. He would not comment on the murder of J.D. Tippit, except to say that Oswald didn't kill Tippit, and the man who did was still alive at the time of the interview (a later reference possibly referring to the same man indicated he is now in his '80s), and had originally been assigned to kill Oswald. The man came to see Files in Mesquite after the assassination, saying there was a screwup and he had killed a cop... Problems with the James Files "Confession": (1) David Atlee Phillips, CIA propaganda expert, would seem an unlikely case officer for a Mob driver and hit man on No Name Key. This seems to be an attempt to tie Files credibly in with Oswald (the Veciana sighting in Dallas of Oswald and Phillips, as Bishop, together), but is doubtful. Also, although John Rosselli was active in Florida preparations for the Bay of Pigs, it is likely that someone other than Phillips introduced him to Files, if Files was at No Name Key. The only thing that sounds much like the real Phillips is the quote near the end about the power of the typewriter. (2) Lee Harvey Oswald as tour guide. (3) The plaid reversible coat and the bitten shell casing seem, on the surface, to provide confirmation, but both were details known prior to Files telling his story to anyone. I had heard about the shell well before Files says the fact that it was bitten was discovered (he says 1994). Some people seem to have confused the bitten casing found in the Plaza with the dented casing found in the Depository - these are two separate shell casings. (4) In connection with Oswald, Clinton and gun-running, David Atlee Phillips again seems inserted artificially into the story here. Oswald and Ruby were both connected to New Orleans people involved in gun-running, but inserting Phillips into the Clinton story is, again, highly doubtful. This is not to say Phillips' role was an innocent one, just that Files seems to be inventing things, or perhaps he was fed inventions. (5) Files overlooks the fact that the Elm Street crowd was well-photographed. Frank Sturgis was not among the crowd; nor at that point was Eugene Brading in that area; nor was Jack Ruby on the sidewalk below the knoll. None of this is difficult to check. All the relevant photos are in Groden and Trask. (6) The Secret Service man on the knoll now becomes two men in suits turning people away. There were men turning people away in the area BEFORE the assassination, but not after. It sounds as though Files flubbed some of his borrowed details. (7) He had documentary evidence, but he destroyed most of it. How convenient. (8) My guess is that Files was, indeed, Charles Nicoletti's driver, and was involved in the preparations for the Bay of Pigs, but that he is also a good con artist, skillled at blending fact and fiction, which is what I believe he has done here.

I cannot see how we provide resources that are "dependent upon or purchases, donations or subscriptions".

(1) On page 130 you point out after your stories on Oliver North were published by AP you were recruited by Evan Thomas to join the staff of Newsweek (February, 1987). However, soon after you arrived Evan Thomas seemed to lose interest in your research into North. For example, Newsweek did not send a member of staff to report on North’s trial in 1989. By 1990 Thomas made clear that you were no longer wanted at Newsweek and you agreed to leave the organization. Is it possible that Evan Thomas recruited you in order to keep you off the case? I say this because it has been claimed that Newsweek was a very important part of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird. See for example, Carl Bernstein’s CIA and the Media in Rolling Stone Magazine (20th October, 1977). In her book, Katharine The Great (1979), Deborah Davis points out that Newsweek was owned by the Astor Foundation. The most dominant figure of the organization was Gates White McGarrah. His grandson was Richard McGarrah Helms, a leading figure in the CIA’s Directorate of Plans that ran Mockingbird. Helms was a childhood friend of Ben Bradlee (page 141). In the early 1950s Bradlee worked for the Office of U.S. Information and Educational Exchange (USIE). This was an organization under the control of the CIA. In 1953 Bradlee went to work for Newsweek. Recently released documents concerning the Rosenberg case show that while employed by Newsweek, Bradlee was also working for the CIA. In 1961 it was Ben Bradlee who told Phil Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, that Newsweek was up for sale. Bradlee told Graham that he had heard this from his good friend, Richard Helms (page 142). Phil Graham had been recruited to Operation Mockingbird by Frank Wisner soon after the CIA was created in 1947. Wisner and Graham had both been members of the OSS during the Second World War. (2) On page 224 you mention that the U.S. press virtually ignored the declassification the CIA inspector general Frederick Hitz’s report into the Iran Contra report. Yet the report identified “more than 50 contras and contra-related entities implicated in the drug trade” and revealed “how the Reagan administration protected these drug operations and frustrated federal investigations which threatened to expose the crimes in the mid-1980s”. You point out that at the time the press was preoccupied by the Monica Lewinsky case. One would have thought that it was in Bill Clinton’s interest to highlight Hitz’s report. However, he never did so. It is possible that Clinton himself had been compromised over the Iran-Contra scandal and therefore the CIA knew that he could not afford to start talking about this scandal? For example, see Daniel Hopsicker’s book, Barry and the Boys: The CIA, the Mob and America’s Secret History, for information on how Clinton was linked to Barry Seal’s drug operation in Arkansas.

(1) On page 130 you point out after your stories on Oliver North were published by AP you were recruited by Evan Thomas to join the staff of Newsweek (February, 1987). However, soon after you arrived Evan Thomas seemed to lose interest in your research into North. For example, Newsweek did not send a member of staff to report on North’s trial in 1989. By 1990 Thomas made clear that you were no longer wanted at Newsweek and you agreed to leave the organization. Is it possible that Evan Thomas recruited you in order to keep you off the case? I say this because it has been claimed that Newsweek was a very important part of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird. See for example, Carl Bernstein’s CIA and the Media in Rolling Stone Magazine (20th October, 1977). In her book, Katharine The Great (1979), Deborah Davis points out that Newsweek was owned by the Astor Foundation. The most dominant figure of the organization was Gates White McGarrah. His grandson was Richard McGarrah Helms, a leading figure in the CIA’s Directorate of Plans that ran Mockingbird. Helms was a childhood friend of Ben Bradlee (page 141). In the early 1950s Bradlee worked for the Office of U.S. Information and Educational Exchange (USIE). This was an organization under the control of the CIA. In 1953 Bradlee went to work for Newsweek. Recently released documents concerning the Rosenberg case show that while employed by Newsweek, Bradlee was also working for the CIA. In 1961 it was Ben Bradlee who told Phil Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, that Newsweek was up for sale. Bradlee told Graham that he had heard this from his good friend, Richard Helms (page 142). Phil Graham had been recruited to Operation Mockingbird by Frank Wisner soon after the CIA was created in 1947. Wisner and Graham had both been members of the OSS during the Second World War. (2) On page 224 you mention that the U.S. press virtually ignored the declassification the CIA inspector general Frederick Hitz’s report into the Iran Contra report. Yet the report identified “more than 50 contras and contra-related entities implicated in the drug trade” and revealed “how the Reagan administration protected these drug operations and frustrated federal investigations which threatened to expose the crimes in the mid-1980s”. You point out that at the time the press was preoccupied by the Monica Lewinsky case. One would have thought that it was in Bill Clinton’s interest to highlight Hitz’s report. However, he never did so. It is possible that Clinton himself had been compromised over the Iran-Contra scandal and therefore the CIA knew that he could not afford to start talking about this scandal? For example, see Daniel Hopsicker’s book, Barry and the Boys: The CIA, the Mob and America’s Secret History, for information on how Clinton was linked to Barry Seal’s drug operation in Arkansas.

John R. Stockwell published his critique of the James Files Story on 23rd January, 1997. To date, no corroboration has been found in military records, by the FBI, by Bob Vernon, or anyone else to our knowledge (despite considerable efforts) of Files military service or his service in the 82nd Airborne... Normal training for a recruit, before overseas deployment is about a year. Training to qualify as an advisor in small automatic weapons, setting detonators, explosives, mechanical ambushes, would take years. Advisors in a handful of Americans working with Laotians would obviously include seasoned men - not a small, skinny, green, 17-year-old recruit... In 1955 Sam Giancana took over the Mafia family from Tony Accardo. In 1959 he was one of the most powerful crime figures in America - hardly one of the underlings.... one of the top lieutenants.... David Atlee Phillips was a propaganda specialist. Not a paramilitary man. It is very doubtful that he would be the controller of a Mafia shooter who was training Cubans... He (Nicoletti) asked me then were do you think would be the best place for me? "I said, well, I think the Dal-Tex building...." Big problem here. Mafia hits are meticulously well-planned, usually involving several people. This is 2 hours before the assassination of the President and we are to believe they are walking around saying, where do you think I should stand? Could a stranger just walk into the Dal-Tex building with a 30.06, just before the president is to drive by, and walk up to a window and shoot. (It seems there may (or may not) have been a closet with a window on the 2nd floor, by the fire escape. But, wouldnt that take some careful planning to find, identify, get a key to? And what of the sound? Rifles are loud. Would no one in the building hear the shots? He would have been firing right down Elm. Many dozens of people, including credible individuals standing almost in the line of fire. Would none of them have heard the loud shots, muzzle blast, bullets, right behind and above them? Here Files is detailing which shots hit and which shot missed. Watching through a scope, preparing to fire, how could he know there were hits and one miss? Kennedy did not lurch until after the head shot... Note that legions of researchers, carefully viewing the Zapruder film have debated for years about hits and misses. This reads much more like something Files read in a book, than an eyewitness account. Three times here, Files is zeroing in on Kennedy's left eye, side of the head, temple. Later in this transcript he does explain that he meant his own left, as he faced Kennedy. But, given the other extensive distortions in his confession the latter could easily be an artless correction of this inaccuracy. "So, as I fired that round, Mr. Nicoletti and I fired approximately at the same time as the head started forward then it went backward. I would have to say that his shell struck approximately 1000th of a second ahead of mine but that whats started pushing the head forward which caused me to miss from the left eye and I came in on the left side of the temple. At that point, through the scope I witnessed everyting, matter and skull bring (sic) blown out the back on the limo...." This is all from the books and films, not what a shooter would have seen and registered in 1/1000th of a second. Nor could he have watched matter and skull bring blown out the back on the limo. The Fireball is a pistol, firing essentially the same cartridge as the M16 rifle. It kicks like a mule. Harder than any rifle. The recoil knocks it back and up. No way he could have fired and then watched through the scope.... (readers of this are invited to go to a range and shoot one). " Nobody has paid me any money for this interview and I have asked for nothing." In fact, I understand that Files's daughter was paid $50,000 immediately after the project was sold to Dick Clark/MPI. (Files) claims Nicoletti gave him his diary of all his hits and the Secret Service badges that had been used in Dealey Plaza. Any seasoned researcher is going to put big question marks beside the assertion that Nicoletti kept or gave to Files his diary of all his hits. It would seem extremely unlikely that a Mafia hitman would keep such a record, and questionable that he would leave it with anyone else. Files initially said he and Oswald were "palling" around New Orleans with shipments of fake Thompson's submachine guns in 1961. Oswald was still in Minsk, that was a full year before he returned to the United States. A colorful part of his story is how he fired one shot with his Fireball, took the cartridge out, bit down on it, and then left it on the fence railing. There are several unresolved problems with this. First, John Rademacher found 2 Fireball cartridges, not just one. Second, Files did apparently own a Fireball.... but the serial numbers clearly indicated that it's manufacture substantially post-dated the assassination. And finally, Joe West was conferring closely with Rademacher a year before he discovered and met Files. He and I had talked about the practicality of using a Fireball for a shot from the fence (first postulated by Josiah Thompson). Joe had photographs of the dented cartridge when he went to visit Files in prison. According to Files's chronology, he would have been in Laos with the 82nd Airborne when he was still 17 years old. No authentication of his military record has ever been found. Nor does one enlist, go directly into an elite outfit, and then immediately get assigned overseas to a sensitive assignment. The boot and basic infantry training of a recruit takes about a year (I was going through the military training process in those same years.) Jump school alone is one month, and you had to qualify to make it. Much of Files's story parallels information that is in the assassination books. Was he a reader? We do not know.

I have been using bed and breakfast accommodation for over 35 years. I recently stayed at Avondale near Tewkesbury. It is more like visiting good friends than staying at a B&B. Wonderful food, marvellous house, beautiful garden, but most importantly, great hosts. My idea of the perfect B&B. I was so impressed that I created a website for him. I should point out that I am not being paid for this advert. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Tewkesbury.htm