Joe Bauer

Robert, I was always drawn to watching WFB's TV program "Firing Line." Even as a teenager. I still regularly and quite often re-watch many of these interview/debates via You Tube. It's fascinating to me to see and hear E.Howard Hunt, G. Gordon Liddy, Mark Lane and others connected to the JFK assassination,Watergate and other related nefarious historical events interviewed on Buckley's show in the context of 40 to 50 years of later revealed facts that weren't revealed back then. Many facts that were purposely kept secret by those that knew of them at the time, including WFB, and that now exposed shed more light on the lies and or truths of these show's interviewees and their statements on the program. I am not a serious student of WFB's greater life story and his books and other writings. Any reflections on my part on WFB in this regard would be unworthy. However, I have always wanted to see a thread here specific to Buckley's TV show Firing Line and the interview/debates presented there with JFK/Watergate related guests. I do feel informed enough in this specific subject area to add something of interest I believe. For example, when watching Buckley trying to undermine Mark Lane and his critical review of the Warren Commission and their lone gunman finding as significantly based on Lane's extreme leftist political ideology and championing socialist causes as much as any non-biased objective analysis, what would Buckley have said if Mark Lane (in defense of the bias Buckley was inferring upon him as a champion of socialist / commie causes ) had exposed to the national TV audience Buckley's own 3 letter agency employment in Mexico City and who worked so closely and directly with someone of E.Howard Hunt's high covert status and whose personal friendship with Hunt was so strong that he ( Buckley) was chosen to be Hunt's son's Godfather? Lane could have justifiably stated that WFB was in a no less biased political ideology and highly placed covert activity associations to defend his debate view than Lane himself was.

My take also Robert. I've read many of DiEugenio's critiques, reviews and essays via links here on the forum. I appreciate his ability to condense much information ( well researched, documented and fact checked ) about whatever subject he tackles and at the same time efficiently fine tune the main focus and points of his presentations into what seems to me to be the most sensibly and logically important, prioritized and more clearly and easily understood context. He makes it easier to see and understand "the most logically important" contradictions, flaws, improbabilities, lies, and/or truths and worthy points in his chosen subject expositions. Much more so than many other researchers imo. I've become a lot more informed about many areas of JFK research through reading and listening to his generous sharings. Do I agree with "everything" Jim Di concludes? Of course not. But much, much more so than not. As I do with the giants Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, etc.

His WC/Parkland/Bugliosi debunking points in this interview are so clearly and logically presented, revealing and sensibly prioritized. Worth reviewing again imo. 18:27 Dieugenio's book "Reclaim Parkland." Debunking Bugliosi. MrChrillemannen • 17K views4 years ago This is an edited version of the full interview. I have taken out some material which concerns matters not linked to the JFK

The above postings certainly reveal Texas in general and Dallas in particular in 1963 as clearly "the capital" of the most wealthy, powerful, extreme right wing crazies and their secret organizations with their secret doings, all of whom viewed JFK as a true threat to their beliefs and agendas. Sounds as if everyone in any position of authority there at that time was part of or connected to one or more of these many secret JFK hating intelligence or race conflict groups that permeated and defined it's political make up. What a horrible place for JFK to visit and with inadequate security. The ominous and threatening JFK "Wanted For Treason" newspaper ad and flyers in Dallas the day before JFK arrived there said it all.

Good interview as always.

I'll be listening.

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.

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.