Joe Bauer

Good interview as always.

I'll be listening.

1 hour ago, Ron Ecker said:

 

The point of my post was not how to describe Donald Trump. Describe him any way you want to. The point I tried to make is that Trump caving in has nothing to do with "his personal character, priority agenda and belief system." He caved in because like any president of the United States, he had damn well better fear the CIA.

 

 

Ron, I see your point.

I do however,  feel his personal character does play into how he looks at, understands and responds to our secret government and their power.

Ron, using the term "loose cannon" in describing Trump is irresponsibly downplaying of his true and much more dangerously flawed complete makeup IMO.

He's a loose "everything!" 

The term "maverick" would also be a frivolously romanticized description of Trump as well.

Could you ever imagine JFK ( even drunk ) expressing himself the way that Donald Trump does on a daily basis?

Comparing Trump to JFK actually makes you cringe.

Excuse my personal feeling Trump presidential performance comments to a degree, but this thread "is" about Trump's caving in on the JFK file release issue and I feel it's appropriate to express why ( IMO ) he did this relative to his personal character, priority agenda and belief system. 

Trump's latest manic, ADD disjointed rant interview on Fox Morning program two days ago was the most disturbing exchange I've ever heard spoken by a sitting American President.

Already feeling the extremely adolescent level insecure, self-obsessed and daily conflict loving, needing and creating Trump is not emotionally fit for this office, this latest Trump rant on national TV reinforced that feeling to a degree of almost disbelief. 

Disbelief that the majority of American citizens seem purposely choosing to avoid acknowledging, facing and speaking out about this all too obvious and real crisis of dangerously failed Presidential leadership.

IMO we have a corrupt and emotionally unbalanced nut in this office.

As news journalist Anderson Cooper said yesterday regards Trump and this mind blowing Fox TX interview, it sounded like "one of those people who sit on park benches talking to themselves."

Expecting someone of this mentality to care about and stand up for the legally mandated release of long held JFK files ( except in the context of how this may help or hurt his own political standing only ) is such a waste of time and energy.

Bart, that posted copy of the 11,23,1963 Fort Worth Star "front page" article regards Craig's 11,22,1963 statements which echo and IMO verify his later claims about his Oswald sighting in front of the TSBD and his ( Craig's ) presence in the DPD building ( obviously homicide division ) later that same day to ID Oswald compel me to shout out a Will Fritz type yell..."Roger Craig's Story Is Cinched!"

That FWS article is "truth shining gold" here Bart. Thank you so much for posting.

Such a beautiful and touching sharing.

I am sure I will always keep part of this essay in my mind and heart , without even trying to do so.

To read something so human interaction touching, inspiring, encouraging and "funny" by David  in his current medical condition state is simply amazing to me.

What a great writer David Talbot truly is.

1 hour ago, Rick McTague said:

Joe,

Two things in this interview about Craig's presence in Fritz's office that really solidifies his account for me:

1. At ~25:26 of this video, he says "... went right into Captain Fritz's office" followed by "and we went into Captain Fritz's inner office" - very clearly, Craig was inside the office.

2. At 26:00 Oswald's response was due to Fritz asking Craig about Oswald "Was this the man you saw?" "Yes.  And it was." then Fritz telling Oswald "Now this man saw you leave.". Now how could Fritz say "this man" (Craig) if Craig wasn't even present?

 

Rick, exactly.

Why would Fritz adamantly state in his WC testimony that Roger Craig never sat in his office while he was interrogating Oswald?

However, he wouldn't rule out Craig being perhaps there...right outside his office and looking in the door or through the window.

Craig's claim about his presence in Fritz's office with Oswald and quoting multiple full sentence questions and statements made by Fritz to Oswald while Craig was there seems too specific and elaborate for something made up IMO .  And those Fritz questions and statements to Oswald did seem to fit Fritz's style of speaking ( "now take it easy son. We're just trying to find out what happened here.")

And quoting Oswald, who was asked about the car Craig saw him get into on Elm street. as saying that "that station wagon belonged to Mrs. Paine, don't try and drag her into this" is so far out of left field...why would Craig even come up with something so easily suggestive of a wild made up story? He risked his credibility with that statement but stuck to it.

Discrediting Roger Craig in any way was a very important part of any cover up because of what Craig had told the media regarding everything from the rifle ID to Fritz's questions to Oswald and Oswald's answers back. Specific points that threw the official story out the window.

Fritz was a case. Hanging on to his position well beyond his prime abilities.

When Fritz shouted "this case is cinched" to the crush of reporters just hours after the JFK assassination, even I as a 12 year old knew that something was very wrong and illogical with this statement.

It seemed to me that even ordinary murders with a suspect never admitting guilt, no one able to identify the suspect as the killer, and with many contradictions in the crime scene and crime lab findings and with the evidence shipped off to Washington, would never elicit such a certain verdict of guilt in such a ridiculously short period of investigation time.

Then when you see Fritz's bizarre, doddering,  slow motion behavior while he walked ahead of Oswald in the DPD building basement seconds before Oswald was whacked by Jack Ruby, it just adds to the suspicion that Will Fritz had some nefarious intentions in this whole affair.

Fritz's over-the-top treatment of Buell Wesley Frazier in his interrogation of him is just another crazy part of Fritz's behavior.

I'll always believe Roger Craig over good ole boy Will Fritz.

Just curious, do those here who now feel that the man in the photos above is certainly not Roger Craig believe this negatively effects Craig's credibility?

Especially in regards to Craig's claim that he ( Craig ) was brought into Fritz's office while Fritz was interrogating Oswald and Craig's account of what was asked of Oswald and Oswald's responses to the specific questions Fritz supposedly asked as Craig mentions?

Trygve, I do see now that the tramp escorting officer I had in mind has a clear double chin. Not apparent in the photo you first posted.

Ears the same. Rifle looks the same.

By the way...do you think the very well known photo showing the back of the man walking close to and right by the tramps and the officers next to the TXSBD is indeed Edward Lansdale?

Just a guess, but the uniformed police officer holding the shotgun seems familiar to me as one of the shotgun toting police officers seen in photos depicting the escorting of the three tramps later on after the immediate post assassination time.

The square jawed face, slightly protruding ears, the ear shape, the sharp hair cut, etc.

Were those tramp escorting officers identified?

I'll give almost every immediately deceased person a period of silent spiritually minded respect ( and their families ) just out of my belief that the process of passing from this living realm as we perceive it and where it takes them is a journey beyond our concepts of Earthly meaning and personal judgement.

Exceptions abound as we all know; Hitler, Stalin, whoever initiated and organized the killings of JFK, RFK, MLK, mass murderers, etc.

For me, I would think a week might be an appropriate time to wait before I share my personal thoughts on the Bush's which are closely aligned to the takes on them by Russ Baker and Kitty Kelley.

Barbara Bush's grand kids did seem to have a loving relationship with her.

Editing this posting after seeing another photo of Oswald with Marina in Minsk.

First photo of Oswald and Marina shows them in heavy Winter coats.

Oswald in this Minsk photo with the 5'3" Marina is no more than two ( possibly 2 1/2? ) inches taller than her. 

In another Minsk photo ( maybe someone could post this? ) we see a shirt sleeved Oswald holding Marina ( again they are both standing I assume ) and he is much taller than Marina than 2 inches.

I assume this shirt sleeve Oswald pic is taken around the same time as the first photo excepting a different time of year?

The Oswald picture business has always been so conflicting.

Larry, what part of the country is your accent?

Good job Larry. 

The C2C listening audience numbers in the millions.

Does anyone think for one second that J.Edgar Hoover ( MLK hater ) really wanted a serious investigation and the truth about who organized and funded the MLK's assassination to come out?

The excuse that the truth would cause too much disruption to our society is absurd, perverse and outrageous.

The opposite is true.

The hiding of the truth about MLK, RFK and JFK has damaged this country and our society so much more...to unprecedented democracy threatening levels.  Mistrust, division, doubt, lost moral compass direction, false histories, corruption at the highest levels, continued control by the bad guys, major compromising and weakening of our fourth estate,  etc., etc., etc.

I'll be listening...California time.

Bill Harvey resembles Oliver Hardy more than anyone I can ever remember seeing ... right down to the pronounced double chin and very similar mustache.

If any of us looked at Bill Harvey for the first time and for more than a second and with more awareness of his presence than happenstance because of an ominous phone call pointing him out and in a super high energy crisis situation, I would think it would be easy to remember this viewing for a much longer time versus normal circumstances.

Also, just listen to the personal interview of Bill Harvey's wife when she was living in retirement well after her husband's death...and listen well.

Obviously she shared her husband's views of John F. Kennedy and Jackie Kennedy and Robert Kennedy.  And her vitriol towards all three of them is ominous.

They ( JFK & Jackie ) were scum.  Bill loved Johnny Roselli. If he ( her husband Bill ) had to have someone watch his back...it would be Johnny.

I am sure this take on JFK and RFK was exactly the same as Bill Harvey's.  I'll guess that Bill Harvey and his wife "celebrated" JFK's assassination. Maybe a fine dinner with good wine in Rome?

So perverse, so hateful.

Mike, what were the other two?

Our huge technological leap. Mind boggling in it's speeding strides. In just one hundred years we advanced more in this area than the previous one thousand years.

Our role in the world after World War II and our evolving ever since into a permanent and massive high alert military state with a military more powerful and costly than any other in history.

??? Your thoughts?

JFK was something better. We didn't know how much better until he had the chance to lead us.

There was, up until JFK's murder, a naivete about many things in our USA world.

I have always proposed that this naivete was mostly about corruption in our system of government on almost every level - city, county, state and federal. 

It was this massive matrix of corruption, in it's combined power, that killed JFK IMO.

This corruption was so hugely pervasive and entrenched yet accepted and unaddressed in a perverse and deliberately controlled silence and downplaying. 

The national media ( our expected clarion of surreptitious threats to our freedoms and rights ) never really confronted, investigated and reported this reality in any truly adequate and meaningful way.

RFK tried to confront organized crime in this country. He seriously tried to bring it's nefarious and massive influence to the full conscious awareness of the American people. He wrote a book with the same purpose -"The Enemy Within."

RFK and his work on the McClellan and Kefauver committee hearings were given national coverage, but again the sleeping pill of apathy kept being pushed and taken.

As negatively influencing on our society as organized crime was, it was just a part of an even larger Goliath of corruption.

We had corruption in the mix of the wealthy class ( the corporate structure ) with our military and secret agency government which, by the time of JFK had gained so much power JFK was concerned enough to try to reign it in.

This corrupt mix was defined in Eisenhower's Military Industrial Complex warning speech in 1961.

Then you had the corruption of fanatical right wing political groups. Financed by the wealthiest men on Earth...Texas oil. You had extreme racial hatred groups.

You had corrupt politicians in the pockets of these wealthy. LBJ being the epitome of this. Nixon later. Hoover was in a class of civil rights violating corruption all by himself. Wiretapping and black mailing anyone he felt threatened by.

You had hugely corrupt major city police forces. Most of whom also harbored extreme racial bias views and values and hatred of JFK  for his perceived tolerance in this area.

You had corrupt agency people who gave more respect and loyalty to mobsters than their own president.

There was probably loyalty corruption in JFK's own Secret Service by those who disliked and had no respect for JFK for whatever reasons...his racial tolerance, philandering?

What the JFK assassination and immediate whacking of the chosen patsy Lee Harvey Oswald did was to shock average Americans and force them to consider and contemplate the true reality of what was really going on all around them, especially with this massive corruption of power in the highest levels of our government, just as Eisenhower had stated and warned us about in his farewell address speech.  

The truth and reality of all this corruption was finally being exposed by many impassioned JFK citizen researchers working on their own independent of and beyond the timid scope of our national media - a media corrupt in their refusal to adequately investigate this subject and the JFK and Oswald's assassinations as well.  

These independent researcher investigative discoveries of this corruption were more convincing than the official debunking and downplaying line and have the stood the test of time in this regards.

Will Ruha's essay (as well as Ralph Rosenblum's above posted article)  on grief being a prime motivating feeling and weight for people like Penn Jones and other researchers like him in the JFK event was eloquently stated and thoughtful.

But I would add that the loss of "ignorance is bliss" naivete regards the "massive corruption of power" in this country the JFK researchers uncovered in their years of serious and solid digging is what hit them in the gut, heart and mind as hard as anything.  They soon enough were made aware of the real world of power and control in this country and the corruption involved...and that reality was and still is a very heavy thing to have to think about, accept and deal with.

It all equated into a "loss of trust" in almost all our governmental institutions and which was only enhanced with Viet Nam, Watergate, the vote count stopped presidential election of 2,000. 911,  etc. 

This loss of trust has since 11, 22, 1963 become the norm for the last 55 years in the minds of at least half of all Americans who care about such things. That is the accepted sad truth and an extremely damaging one for our society for a very long duration.

Last thought: Corruption was one of America's top 3 greatest legacies in the twentieth century.

Thank you for tolerating such an ineloquent rant.

Well, I repeat a quote ( admittedly 6th,7th,or even higher hand shared ) that someone in high security supposedly uttered about the reality of the true power world around us:

"If the average person knew HALF of what is really going on in the world...they would go into their backyard and shoot themselves."

About one year ago I also saw and heard a claimed high security person in our government on a national TV Sunday political interview show say something very similar. He spontaneously stated ( without any prompting from the interviewer ) that if the average American citizen knew anything close to what he knew about the true state of our security threats, he or she would not open their door and leave their house in the morning.

The interviewer was caught off guard and this person immediately changed the subject and the show's host simply went along and didn't ask the most rationally expected question to this super ominous blurb.   "You mean we are all being kept in the dark about the true realities of our homeland security as you know it?"

Just stuff to contemplate regards the true extent of how much American citizens are purposely kept in the dark about hugely effecting and important realities all around us.

17 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Interesting thought Michael....  doubtful to get a true course answer though - if you are indeed correct.... or even if not.

As to Aliens....  Can anyone name an organism that have ever arrived at the shores of a hospitable environment AND allowed the indigenous to remain and flourish?

Is there anyone who can believe that a species advanced enough to travel the vast galactic distances would become so incredibly lame the instant they hit our Solar system?

And then there's pure common sense...  Send a probe first.  That's what intelligent beings would do...

Do you honestly believe that a species with the ability to first find us, yet not send a signal?  Just show up and proceed to crash into everything? 

Anyway...  while we'd like to believe, some simple common sense makes it extremely difficult.

Do you honestly believe that a species with the ability to first find us, yet not send a signal?  Just show up and proceed to crash into everything? 

David, when the native peoples of Central and South America first encountered European visitors ( military at first ) who were so obviously much more highly advanced technologically with guns, big ships, cannons and telescopes and navigation inventions etc, they too must have been almost disbelieving, awe struck and even fearful of such differences.

Soon enough however, these highly advanced visitors revealed their own vulnerabilities with catching diseases, their great ships sinking in storms, etc.

The fact that sometimes ( very rarely ) a possible ET craft might be damaged due to Earthly forces of nature ( like lightning?) or a new human made weapon is not beyond logic. Especially if they are controlled by some robotic creation which as a machine would have obvious limitations.

One of my main points of reference in believing the ET reality is what immediate family relatives ,who I trust more than most others, have shared with me in their first hand observations regarding such things.

I can't say I have personally seen UFO craft although my two experiences of seeing something close to the standard description of these left me sensing these were not traditional man made machines.

There is so much multi-tentacled information in Mr. Haggar's post I will have to go back and reread it several times to absorb it all.

It's clear however, even in the first read, how massively involved our secret and wealthy power structure has always been in the broadcast information field. And there is such incredible complexity in these operations.

Ominous how often the name "Clint Murchison" ( and there are other familiar ones as well ) pops up in background research of who finances these operations. 

The subject of James Bond does have some ( if only society party talk)  connection to JFK in his apparent attraction to Ian Fleming's Bond books. As well as E.Howard Hunt and maybe even David Phillips?  Both of whom later tried to make money writing their own "secret agent" spy books.

As far as George Lazenby...I am a life time James Bond film afficionado.

The Bond producers (obviously desperate after losing Sean Connery ) found Lazenby and wooed him and cast him as Bond more for his looks and body type versus any real acting training and experience. They made a huge mistake in this regard. Lazenby was a male model...and any portrayal of a Connery Bond image using him should have been kept strictly in that role...advertising pictures.

Lazenby was in the worst possible position as a Sean Connery Bond acting replacement.

He knew he didn't have adequate training and was extremely unsure and unconfident and even insecure the whole time the producers tried to make him another Sean Connery.

And to make matters worse, Lazenby's lead female co-star Diana Rigg "reportedly " disliked Lazenby personally from the very start of filming so much she actually made things as hard as she could in any supportive way to help Lazenby get along in his role.

Even through all this background hindrances for Lazenby, I must say that I have always liked this OHMSS Bond film and even Lazenby's role.  Especially knowing how hard it all was for him.

Yes, Lazenby was stiff as a board at times in his delivery and facial expressions, but he did have that extraordinary "manliness" good looks and and athleticism quite identical to and almost as much as Connery and I believe he was confident about this aspect of his natural abilities and gifts in a very physical movie role as this was. This played well in OHMSS.

Diana Rigg, as difficult as she may have been toward Lazenby, was one of the best "Bond women" in my opinion.  She would have been extremely well cast alongside Connery as Bond.

Roger Moore had tons of acting experience so walking into the Bond role was probably easy for him. But he was at times as wooden as Lazenby...as if he was totally bored with this role and lines.

Moore's Bond portrayal crossed over into a comedic even farcical one.

Now back to the more serious subjects at hand.

25 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Joe: The possibility exists that if Nixon's Message to the American People is found in the White House and Trump becomes aware of this, he will use its discovery in ways to save his presidency that now is doomed because of his treason and corruption.

Nixon's Message does not contains the all important formula or code. Only his letter to Kissinger contained that. Nixon's Message is the formal announcement of the Alien Presence and our planet's interaction with it.

If the formula or code were to somehow fall into Trump's hands or into the hands of someone as evil as he is, then it would be used for the enslavement of every inhabitant on Earth and not for the good of mankind. Nixon warned Kissinger about this in his letter to him.

If this story is even half-way true... it could change everything.

I listened to the Don Jeffries interview on C2C last night.

I wonder how many other forum members did also.

Since the C2C listening audience numbers into the millions, I am always curious to hear what one of our own members has to say to such a massive group. 

I enjoy Jeffries and his C2C presentations. As well Jim Di's and Doug Caddy's.

It's important in a very good way that at least one huge listening audience media venue still includes JFK truth seekers into it's content fairly regularly, even 55 years after the "Big Event."

Jeffries didn't get into the JFK story last night as his appearance was about Huey Long.

However, I learned some interesting things about Long that once again reveal how much we citizens have so often been kept from knowing regards the fuller truths of power in this country and it's history.

One call-in person after the main Jeffries interview really intrigued me. His name was given as "Steve." His brief commentary was much beyond average call-in interesting and reflective of someone extremely knowledgeable in the secret power contemplation area and so well spoken that I wanted to hear more of his sharing as much as Jeffries.

I think I would have had this caller get back to C2C to know more about who he was and whether he might warrant his own full interview.

But a word of compliment is due to Don Jeffries regards his C2C interview. 

His sharings on Long were interesting, informative and truth revealing important.