Pamela Brown

More on JFK's position on Dimona...his refusal to back down or negotiate may have caused the sudden resignation of David Ben Gurion... https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2019-05-02/battle-letters-1963-john-f-kennedy-david-ben-gurion-levi-eshkol-us-inspections-dimona

I don't disagree...

With all due respect, I see this response on the Hawk missiles as a bit of a knee-jerk reaction. JFK followed through on what Truman and Ike had started; all of them weighed carefully the long-term effects of their giving Israel Hawk missiles. https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/35166 However, the Hawk missiles did not even materialize until 1969... JFK says in this article that the Jews elected him, so he had to do something for them. I don't think it was enough... I think JFK had every reason to be cautious about Dimona. Israel having nuclear capability was not part of the UN resolution. But you and I seem to be in agreement on this point, that in terms of Dimona, jFK was definitely not 'gung-ho' Israel. https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2019-05-02/battle-letters-1963-john-f-kennedy-david-ben-gurion-levi-eshkol-us-inspections-dimona

I do think there was an Israeli connection to the assassinations of both JFK and RFK. I think we need to look at both of them together. I do not see these assassinations as being done by Mossad, but though CIA via James Angleton. The goal was to serve the best interests of Israel. JFK was not gung-ho Israel. He had a balanced viewpoint and wanted reparations for the Palestinians who had lost their homes when Israel was created. He wanted inspections of Dimona, so that Israel would not develop nuclear capability. JFK, while doing the right thing for both parties, was considered a threat to their agendas for Israel. A presidency by RFK would have been no different...

Trolling conspiracy and then ending with 'that silly little Communist', was the main theme of the 2013 coverage of the JFK assassination. Why should we expect anything different this time around?

I can't believe anyone would try to claim JFK was faithful to Jackie. Papa Joe even had to pay her to stay with him... Here is a letter JFK wrote to Mary Meyer... https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/news/a15935/john-f-kennedy-mary-pinchot-meyer-love-letter/?utm_campaign=hb-2022-tradetracker&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=tradetracker&utm_term=137180

It is a bit of a puzzle to me. There is no date,so we don't know just when this was written. From what I know of the Kennedys I would say this was some sort of a joke, but something they thought Marilyn might run with. I can easily see this as dripping with sarcasm... https://www.julienslive.com/lot-details/index/catalog/180/lot/82964/MARILYN-MONROE-RECEIVED-LETTER-FROM-JEAN-KENNEDY-SMITH

I agree that Marilyn's extraordinary beauty and magnetism was a result of the deprivations in her life as well as the fantastic, though flawed, life she created for herself. It is that combination, I think, that puts her in a category of her own...

This looks like a set of the Altgens photos. The resolution is excellent. If they were made from the original negatives they are valuable...

Interesting quote about Jackie's reaction... I envision a later conversation with Bobby going something like this: "That ***** has made a fool out of me in front of the entire country! And what is worse, now Jack's secrets could out in the public eye! That could cost us the election in 64! Can't you do anything about this?"

You are right, that the changes that were made were so that Marilyn would photograph perfectly from any angle. And they were minor changes. You can see in your photo the shadow the end of her nose casts. By making the bulb smalle there is no shadow. I don't know just what it was about her jaw that needed strengthening... But it did take Marilyn four hours or more to get ready for any public appearance, so you can imagine there was some taping and spackling going on in the process. Whatever they did, the end result was incredible... Have you seen Marilyn in her bit part in All About Eve, with the fabulous Bette Davis (whom I happened to meet)... Marilyn just stole every scene she was in...

Thank you, Cory. I agree that trying to blame the victim in this case, namely Marilyn, is unhelpful... Jim also seems to be using the 'three monkeys' 'strategy...hear no evil, think no evil, etc, etc...

They definitely look uncomfortable to me...as though they were starting to perceive the implications of what had just taken place. In that sense, it mattered not what had actually taken place between them, or not. It was the public perception. Anyone could see that tongues would be wagging and questions would be asked...and Jackie's absence spoke volumes, imo...

Marilyn did have plastic surgery that we know of on her nose, to remove a 'bulb' at the end, and to strengthen her jawline...

I don't think Lawford initiated the invitation, but I am sure he encouraged her...

It looks to me that the three of them are starting to realize the implications of what just happened...

I agree. Whoever lured Marilyn into doing this performance was signing her death warrant, imo...

Those who are backing Israel no matter what they do seem to be forgetting that Israel exists due to a resolution of the UN, and it is the UN who should be dealing with the situation it has created... https://mfa.gov.il/Jubilee-years/Pages/1947-UN-General-Assembly-Resolution-181-The-international-community-says-Yes-to-the-establishment-of-the-State-of-Israel.aspx

I am also concerned about him...this has become a humanitarian nightmare...and it is only the beginning...

So have I. So have others. Are you trying to posit an appeal to authority?

It seems to me that Jim is trying to shut down conversation on this topic by using absolutes, such as 'proven', etc, and ad hominem attacks such as 'greedy', etc. And let's not forget that the 'opposition is lying' ... And, of course, we can add into this toxic mix the 'let's blame the victim' tactic...too many drugs, 'unstable', etc, etc... I am starting to wonder if we are supposed to let Jim do our thinking for us.

Joe, Methinks Jim doth protest too much...

Your opinion. You are entitled. I think you are mistaken. Nothing has been "proved". Positions are being asserted. That's all. Claiming those in the opposite camp are greedy or 'goofy' is ineffective, imo...

One thing that concerns me is that we tend to lump "CIA" into one entity. I don't think that's how it works. If we are going to make a claim that "CIA" did something we need to be a specific as possible as to just who in "CIA" we think is involved. Otherwise, it becomes meaningless. Whatever is happening could be an actual assignment within the CIA or it could be.a rogue operation using someone inside CIA, for example.

Hosty did not want to talk to me about Lee either. He kept switching the topic to Marina. I could not understand why at the time. I do think he knew more than whet he was telling us...