Joe Bauer

This essay on JFK is something I am going to save and return to many times. It articulates so well how special JFK was as a leader of men and why JFK's death in his young prime was such a loss to us all.

Agree Andrew.

Probably Paul. They do this kind of thing. We know this.

Doug, the great majority of Americans would not believe the scenario you describe...unless of course it actually happened. Yet, by that time, it would be too late. I heard Trump responding to a reporter during a televised news conference just two days ago. The reporter asked Trump if he had considered declaring a national security crisis to bypass Congress's not approving his 5 billion dollar budget allocation demand for the border wall's early stage construction. Trump responded that he had considered this Congress bypassing action and was still seriously considering keeping it open as an option. I also feel Trump and his backers are trying to come up with any wag-the-dog crisis plan ( no matter how crazy and constitution violating ) to stave off the criminal charges you mention that could have him kicked out of the presidency. Trump and his family have extensive long term organized crime dealings both with Russian and American organizations and supposedly Drug Cartels as well in the area of big time money laundering. Generally through the buying and reselling of Trump real estate. Then there are massive loans from proven money laundering financial organizations such as Deutsche Bank. And who knows how many other 100's of millions may have been been acquired via Saudi Arabia. Those condos in Panama, Trump's 55 to 60 million dollar profit sale of a Florida property to a Russian "Fertilizer King" who eventually torn down the mansion on the property. So fishy. Trump paid 40 million for the Palm Beach property and two years later sold it for 95 -100 million dollars ? Please.

John Mack ( former Harvard Psychology/Psychiatry medical department head) was very hard to dismiss as an unbalanced, paranoid or attention seeking nut. I have wondered every few years whether there are humans or hybrid humans who could read your thoughts ( maybe even control them ) and communicate telepathically to you if they wanted to. Maybe two or three times in my adult life, when I had this contemplation in my mind and was in a public place with many people around, I have myself whimsically put out a telepathic "feeler" thought message, asking if anyone close to me was receiving my thoughts, to somehow demonstrate their reception of this by doing something that I could see. Only once did I get a response. I was at my daughter's college graduation ceremony around 2003? We were outside on the college football field. I focused my thoughts on the first line of standing people about 25 yards ahead of me. Within 1 to 2 minutes, one woman ( who was with others ) actually turned around 180 degrees and stared directly at me for 4 or 5 seconds and then turn back around. I'm serious. After her turning around response, I felt a little unsettled but was still so curious I focused even more on this one person. She turned around again a minute or two later! And again looked directly at me for several seconds, but this time in a more bothered sort of way. She then turned back around. I cut off my mental telepathy experiment at that point, somewhat rattled that maybe this person was actually receiving my telepathic thoughts! I really didn't want to believe that what I witnessed was perhaps proof of your thoughts alone being received and read by other humans or hybrid beings in our every day world. I didn't want this to be a reality. My wife and I eventually just continued on throughout the weekend ( I never shared this story with her ) packing my daughter's belongings and bringing her back home. But I will always remember my strange telepathic experiment experience that day. I have read much of what Mack and Bud Hopkins have shared in interviews. Because of their significant academic backgrounds and their seemingly scientific method rational presentations, it is in the least a very intriguingly interesting story line to contemplate.

If anyone here is open at all to even the "possibility" of ET visitation and interaction here on Earth and hasn't checked out the "Sirius Project" on You Tube, I suggest you do so. And include any interviews and conference speaking engagement videos of former Canadian Minister Of Defence "Paul Hellyer" on You Tube as well. I wish the ET visitation and interaction story wasn't true. Really, I do. And if it isn't true, than we can all relax and fear only the much more comfortable continuous history of our own species being our worst enemy via war ... along with climate change, over-population with massive water and food shortages, global viral epidemics, global financial and political collapses, large scale natural disasters ( or more man-made ones like Chernobyl and the Tokohu-Oki earthquake / Fukushima Daiichi reactor melt down ) ocean and plant life ( bee die-off ) eco-damage, super solar flares and wayward meteors as the greatest current and future worries we must deal with and leave to our children and their children and their children to deal with. Isn't that ENOUGH? Who needs anything more to add to this already stressful worry mix like malevolent ET's who would probably not have our best interests in mind? Egads, it's all so depressing. Yet, here's an ironically interesting if unsettling thought ... Could it be that in the not too distant future we may wish for some "out there" help if these other Earth and mankind born disasters combined overwhelm us to the breaking point? Again, I hope it never comes to that. The idea of a highly techno-advanced and self- serving alien ET species introduction here on Earth is a frightening one as it should be. What to do about this whole ET scenario, true or false? I don't know. Look for the good in everything as much as one can and appreciate the beauty and kindness in nature and our human nature and lives on a daily basis? Hope for the best? Try everything we can to help all of our children and their children find and experience their own happiness and love and spiritual fulfillment in their lives? Even if hissing Reptilian ET's come down and tell us what to do. What else is there?

Did PDS get the above statement from Marina on tape? And why does she call Lee "Alec?" If the man Marina married in Russia was not the American born Lee Harvey Oswald ... what do we have here? Would the Russians risk so much to plan and implement such a deadly and sinister scheme? And Marina could have been executed if she broke and revealed this ( because she would have had to be a willing participant) to the American investigators. If this was such a scheme...Marina has to be one of the most steeled and disciplined female spies ever...for never breaking under years of surveillance and other investigative pressure.

Marina's true physical beauty hugely enhanced the story of her and Lee. I am sure that almost every young and even older man in America who first caught a glimpse of her in all the news coverage of the time, felt an instant attraction to her. If Marina looked like the heavy set, weathered leather faced, thick ankled plow pusher Russian women so often depicted in much our own typical anti-Russian media, the story of Lee and Marina would have been much different and hugely less attractive. Marina would have been forgotten in 3 months.

My question to those who have read a decent amount of Walt Brown's massive chronology... Can you tell us in a general way, and/or specific ways, how you feel the chronological summary of Brown helps us to understand the event more instructively and has the summary changed your personal views on the assassination and who you feel may have been the guilty parties? Has Brown's summary persuaded you to eliminated suspects who you may not have eliminated earlier before reading his summary? Thanks.

Fascinating. Doug, you certainly were right there in the mix ( truly "Being There" ) with the main characters in one of the most important abuse of power events in American Executive Branch history. The fact that you are here in the forum and have shared ( for years now ) so many personal "insider" eyewitness accounts and thoughts about this super important part of our history is a gift in my opinion. The information you have shared has added valuable background context to the story that only enhances our understanding of it's larger picture. Yet, I am sure there is still much more about the larger picture that we will never know. Doug, I sometimes ponder how most of voting America, average citizens back in 1972-1974 and to this day, never seriously grasped the significance of Watergate and all that it exposed and even their own culpability in it's creation. Think about the reality of Watergate and Nixon's downfall. A sitting President and his "entire staff" were exposed ( and imprisoned!) as hugely corrupted ( much more than the single Watergate break-in ) including organizing their own team of highly trained perps at their beck and call ( dangerous dudes such as G. Gordon Liddy ) who were blindly ready and willing to carry out their nefarious deeds now matter how dirty and law breaking and constitution violating they were. Truly scary stuff! And the head of this criminal gang was OUR PRESIDENT! A hugely lying man who along with his powerful false propaganda election machine convinced tens of millions of Americans in 1972 to view him as " THE LAW AND ORDER CANDIDATE ... HA! " over a man who "truly was" the more honest and law abiding candidate ... George McGovern! What a massively perverse and consequentially damaging deception ...and it worked! The landslide presidential election of 1972 proved in spades how naive, easily manipulated and totally wrong the majority of our adult voting citizens were in their awareness, grasp and assessment of the true reality character of the candidates ( Nixon versus McGovern ) and those powerful groups and individuals behind and funding them. This deception on the majority of the American electorate was so successful it was and still is seriously scary to contemplate how easy it was to implement. I believe that most of the voters who backed Nixon back then, never really took responsible stock of "their own serious mistake" in handing someone so corrupt the highest office in our land over another who wasn't. They never took any personal blame for their being so easily duped like that. And they didn't really learn their presidential office election lesson , especially since they have committed this same mistake many times again since Nixon imo. I think of Nixon putting his hand on the bible at his inauguration and "swearing" to faithfully uphold the Constitution of the United States in his governance as President ( twice!) and knowing full well he was really going to do whatever it took to exercise and keep his new power aside from that sacred oath to the American people, and it makes me sick and angry to this day. And I will always be worried still that the American electorate can again be manipulated like they were in 1968 and 1972. Especially by that old trick of falsely and scarily portraying one candidate over the other as more law and order abiding, more national security providing and more patriotic and troop supporting. It seems to work most of the time.

Really really weird.

Because of time constraints I can only listen to the Brown interviews later today. However, many thoughts popped into my head after listening to the beginning of the tape and reading the other postings here right now. Just one: For those who lean on and agree with Robert Oswald's assessment of his brother Lee's lone nut guilt, ( especially after Robert's conversation with Lee in jail ) have they considered whether Robert Oswald knew of Lee's attempted call to North Carolina and a John Hurt there ( which was documented ) while Lee was incarcerated in the DPD jail the night before, at any time except for perhaps years later after 11,22,1963? Of course Robert Oswald didn't know of his brother's North Carolina call the night before he talked to him at the jail. There was so much more to Lee Harvey Oswald that Robert Oswald was totally oblivious too. An added neat thing about Walt Brown to me, on top of his broad knowledge and research, is his really funny "New Joisey" sense of humor! At times as wittily sharp as a polished stand up comedian. Which he throws in just enough to make his interviews that much more easy to listen to.

E. H. Hunt involved with Chappaquiddick? Sounds like something right up his alley.

Jim, looking at the Hunt "Big Event" confession through more informed eyes, it does seem like it was a contrived tale. There would be tons of deeper information about the planning of such an action and the roles the main characters he mentions would have played, and Hunt would have known at least some of this information. I am much more inclined now to dismiss Hunt's confession. Even so, there is so much more to know about E. Howard Hunt.

This is the kind of deeper research input I was hoping to see regards E. Howard Hunt to help determine the validity of his end of life "Big Event" confession. However, no matter how much Hunt's stature, influence and credibility were diminished in his later years, he was still enough of a major covert action historical figure ( and in direct contact with the highest level ones ) in the 50's through 60's time period you feel compelled to at least contemplate his confession, especially considering it's Earth shaking guilty parties revelation. Yes, Hunt's tale of being asked to join a JFK plot in a cheap Miami motel room by Morales ( I thought it was Sturgis?) with Hunt begging off does sound cheap spy novel ridiculous. Several other aspects of his "Big Event" confession also seem contrived in the area of Hunt's decision to not be a direct participant and his being shocked when he heard JFK had actually been killed? Please. I wish I had the years it would take to study all the research to be able to say with earned credibility that I knew the full picture.

Jim D, your post above highlights Hunt's high level involvement and engagement with some of the highest ranking members of the CIA. At least until Watergate. When Doug Caddy was initially called in to help the Watergate team that was caught, he obviously had some dealings with Hunt. Did Doug get the feeling that Hunt was not respected that highly by the other Watergate Plumbers? That at that time he was considered a big mouth of sorts? Does Doug Caddy believe Hunt's "Big Event" confession? Didn't Doug also say that Hunt inferred to him over a Chinese dinner or lunch one evening ( or day? ) that the ET situation had something to do with JFK's assassination? I'm trying to figure out when Hunt's reputation became so diminished as another poster has mentioned and considered in deflating Hunt's end of life JFK big event confession story. William F. Buckley Jr. sure seemed to admire Hunt. He worked with him in Mexico City. He was a Godfather to his son. In the May, 10th,1974 episode of Buckley's TV show "Firing Line", Buckley bent over backwards to provide Hunt with national audience exposure to promote himself as a super-patriot who was being wronged by the press and the Agency for his Watergate involvement. Buckley threw Hunt softball questions that were clearly designed to give Hunt openings to explain himself in this way. Just some aspects to Hunt to consider. I don't think I am being snookered into strongly believing Hunts JFK "Big Event" confession story. I have just never seen or read enough real discussion and debate about the confession and I always wanted to hear others with high credibility share their thoughts on it. Appreciatively, this thread is providing me with more information and views on the confession than I have seen before. Hunt's throwing Cord Meyer's name into the mix could be fictional, but he then throws in the names of very serious minded and powerful JFK haters such as Harvey, Morales, Sturgis, etc. I never considered LBJ as a ruthless murder ordering crook because of what Barr McClellan wrote. I felt LBJ was this way from all the factual information out there besides Barr McClellan's account. More sources besides McClellan related LBJ was this ruthless. ( Remember Nixon's cryptic statement inferring LBJ being willing to kill to be president?") LBJ's relationship with convicted murderer Mac Wallace ( who I think most agree seems the most likely suspect in Henry Marshall's murder ) is just another factual aspect to LBJ that indicates to me he could very well have been a part of the JFK assassination. I don't think The Rolling Stone article on Hunt and his son and Costner was a total sham. The background story of Hunt's character as seen through the eyes of his son St. John rings true to me. Hunt was obviously totally intoxicated and full of himself and his "James Bond" power and position and income position for many years. But, clearly, the last years of Hunt's life he was very bitter, very broke, and probably vengeful as many here have said. Like Jim D. says, the important truth here is that Hunt probably was involved in some way with the JFK event.

Maybe the Dealey Plaza Umbrella Man was in the Houston parade crowd that day. The color of the umbrella is the same.

Larry WOW! What a great film clip of JFK in that motorcade. He certainly didn't stand next to Selassie with his arm around him and waving exuberantly to the crowd. His presence in the limo seemed oddly subdued with JFK at times sitting by himself in the back limo seat while Selassie is standing up front waving.

So Jim and Larry, I take it you feel the motive behind the E.H. Hunt "confession" was simply a scam to gift Hunt's son with a major high dollar book or film deal?

I've never seen much commentary on E. Howard Hunt's recorded JFK assassination confession. Was it all a hoax? If so, why do this and allow his son to tape record it, knowing it would be shared with the world after his death? I always wondered why hardly anyone of literary and media stature would barely touch this Hunt confession, considering not just it's Earth shaking guilty parties revelation but also E. Howard Hunt's extremely high placed career positions in our agency government for decades and his closeness to and dealings at times with many of those so high up in our elected government. Hunt was the opposite of a crazy nobody. He was a highly placed and highly intelligent somebody. What made his confession so ignored? Whether the story is true or not, why would he create such a mind blowing tale? Was it his last act of agency loyal disinformation? Was his "Big Event" JFK assassination confession a gift to his son as a possible block buster book deal ( even if it was made up ) that could hopefully have brought his son a huge book publishing advance fee? Hunt wrote many spy books that were supposedly fiction mixed with elements of true spy craft experiences. Maybe this confession was a book idea he had in mind? Hunt lied so much in his later years when confronted with investigatory committee questions. His whole adult career life was wrapped around this MO. Still, because of Hunt's prolific involvement in our highest rungs of covert intelligence and for decades, It seems illogical to not give his end of life JFK "Big Event" guilty party confession more weight than it has been given imo. Hunt's confession has been treated with no more seriousness than that given to some nut standing up in a JFK conference event audience and shouting " I KNOW WHO KILLED JFK...IT WAS WALT DISNEY!" Anyone like to give their theory as to Hunt's "Big Event" confession? And why he would put out a false hoax like this?

Regards Robert Oswald's recounting his meeting with Lee at the jail and Lee's supposed non-responsive silence to Robert's questions ( paraphrasing but something like "what the heck is going on here Lee?") what would one expect from a person accused of a "capital punishment-death sentence " crime and who knew his interview with his brother was being listened to and probably recorded? And before Oswald even had legal council ? Of course Lee wouldn't speak except to express concern for his daughter getting some new shoes. Yet, Captain Fritz didn't record his interrogations with Oswald? No stenographer present? Fritz was known for this? Obvious why Fritz did this. He could have used illegal interrogation methods on his suspects which may have worked in eliciting confessions, but could have been used to throw out some of those confessions. Hence, don't have these recorded. Look at what Fritz did to Buell Wesley Frazier in trying to intimidate him into confessing a conspiracy with Oswald? Took a swing at Frazier? Frazier put up his own dukes and warned Fritz they was gonna have one hell of a dog fight if Fritz laid his hands on him. Oswald had been through the interrogation ringer before he met with Robert. Robert was Lee's brother, but that didn't make him any better or more knowledgeable of a witness in implicating Lee and his guilt or innocence. In fact, his personal bias's toward Lee and ignorance of Lee's New Orleans activities actually made him a bad witness.

And what about the inner "steel" windshield frame indentation that no one, even Kellerman, could explain it's origin before the shooting in Dealey Plaza? And what about Kellerman's WC testimony about a "flurry" of shots raining into the limo? Two shots doesn't come close to a "flurry."

Rick, from the Rather/Posner graphics they show the first shot fired and missing but at a sharper downward angle because JFK's limo was still fairly close to the School Book Depository building. James Tague was at a distance far enough away that the first shot bullet wasn't aiming anywhere near him? Are we to believe that the first shot careemed off of the ground and took off again towards the farther away Tague?

I repeat; after JFK is hit the first time, he straightens up with his arms lifting, then bends his head down slightly ( looking as if he is struggling to breath through the blood?) and he then turns his head - rotating leftward - to look at Jackie with anguish and Jackie immediately grabs JFK's arm and pulls him closer to her which causes JFK's head and upper body to lean leftward and down slightly and then one micro second later JFK's head explodes from another shot. My point is the fact that JFK's head and upper body is moving significantly upward, downward, rotating leftward, then pulled leftward even more by Jackie's pulling ( traversing two feet leftward from his first hit position? ) then slumping downward again ... all in the short time space between the supposed 2nd and 3rd shot? All while Oswald is trying to scope realign his last and most hurried shot at a cantaloupe sized target 265 feet away that is moving that much on it's own while also moving farther away and on a downward incline slope in the limo? And with all that target movement ( 4 movement dynamics ) at the farthest distance of his shooting sequence challenge he then gets a bull's-eye hit? Wonder how many experienced hunter shooters could hit a small deer's head bulls-eye while the deer was in the back of an open pickup 265 feet away with the truck motoring away and downward and the deer is moving his neck and head all at the same time ? And using a rifle like the Carcano with a bad scope sight and not under the murderous criminal action urgency stress Oswald should have been feeling? Now THAT would be a bulls-eye shot worth bragging about.

So according to Posner, Oswald had the most unhurried time to set up and line up his first shot ( which Posner says was deflected by the tree ) then, there is a significant pause between the 1st and 2nd shots which could only mean the shooter was taking that extra time to realign his sight to his moving farther away target, and then many ear witness to the shooting sounds said that the time space between the 2nd and 3rd shots was very brief ( almost on top of each other ) in relation to the time space between the 1st and 2nd shots. Logic shouts that to take that 3rd and last shot in an obviously much more hurried time frame than the first two, and combined with the more demanding accuracy challenges of the target moving and being farther away ( smaller target ) and also moving slightly downward and the target ( JFK's head) and upper body moving forward and sideways at the same time,... that "this shot", this last and most hurried shot of all 3 would be the most difficult one for accuracy versus the first two. I wonder which one or two out of the three shots that every expert marksman could only duplicate ( only one got all 3?) hit their target The first one? The second? The third? How many of those 11 expert marksmen's one or two out of three hits were the "last shot" at a target that was the farthest away and smaller? Try hitting a cantaloupe at 265 feet ( even with a scope) that is moving not just away and downward but at the same time also separately moving sideways and downward on it's own? That's four separate target movement dynamics. That moving away target the marksmen shot at ( JFK's upper body and head ) wasn't moving separately sideways and up and down at the same time. And think of the pressure Oswald must have been feeling in firing his shots. Especially not getting a direct hit the first attempt nor a true kill shot the second? And with each booming shot opening up more risks that he would be seen doing this? The third shot on JFK would have been the hardest one for all the above reasons. It couldn't be duplicated by 11 marksmen and who were not under the pressure Oswald was feeling?