Joe Bauer

I turned on NPR on my way to work early this evening and who did they choose to do commentary on the release...Phil Shenon!

National Public Radio! 

What is going on here?

Are there no research experts in America besides this guy?

How has this guy managed to be on everything!

Couldn't they have asked Jim Di and so many others on this forum?

One reason for ordering Trump to delay...assets to protect because they are still alive?

They sure didn't mind stripping that protection from Valerie Plame when Robert Novak was allowed to out her in 2003.

David Talbot's posted Facebook comments regards Trump and who's telling who what they can or cannot do regards this lawfully mandated release is simply totally disturbing.

Could you imagine JFK's response to someone superceding his constitutional authority like that?

Kind of obvious who really runs this country.

Absurd. 

Like Ty Carpenter said...they've had 25 years to edit, redact, blur, shred and lose everything already, and after all that time and effort to do so, now this?

What, are they paranoid still that somehow they missed something?

Just adds to the incredible suspicion they have created since JFK.

13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Rachel Maddow had Shenon on?

What a disgrace.

This is what I mean about the broken promise of the New Media. Cable TV has turned out to be as big of a vast wasteland as the networks.  Except instead of the Beverly Hillbillies we get a clown like Shenon.

The national audience broadcast media just will not allow the presentation of any view of the JFK assassination other than the Warren Commission one. Even after 54 YEARS, mountains more evidence of a conspiracy versus lone gunman and three generations of a strong and constant majority of Americans not believing or trusting the WC finding.

The national broadcast media through selective one-sided presentation coverage, has tried for 54 YEARS to convince America otherwise... and have failed to do so.

Now THAT is failure...on an epic scale.

But, they still continue this perverse, illogical pursuit...to the point of irrationality.

Even though it erodes their integrity, honesty and ethical standards.

Here you are America - the real truthsayers...Phil Shenon, Vince Bugliosi, Gerald Posner, etal.

Those others are just loony conspiracy theorists.

What a sad state our fourth estate is in.

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Ron just hit on something key.

I did a show today with Moscow TV and i noted just one page of one spreadsheet with 35 documents listed:  22 of them were described as illegible.  And when it says illegible, it is really illegible, that is you cannot see anything on it, just a blur.  You could not even put it back together with optical recognition since there is nothing to recognize.  Now two of those deal with ZR Rifle and one with JM Wave.  

Question:  What is the point of declassifying something you cannot read?  It might as well stay declassified.  Have any of our pundits like Dallek or Shenon or Posner noted this on TV? Not as far as I know.  This is why the MSM has become such a joke.  

Shenon's on everything! Tonight it was Rachel Maddow! 

You'd think MSNBC at least would try to find someone besides this well known dis-information agent to inform their viewers regards anything JFK related.

 

The tape does make it clear what RFK actually said.

But what would one expect regards RFK's rather weak handshake endorsement of the WC at that time?

Could you imagine if RFK publicly proclaimed he didn't accept the WC report?

By doing so, RFK would have given the highest political level stamp of approval and credibility ( from someone who most expected to be President in another 6 months) to the idea that his brother's murder was the result of a conspiracy.

The guilty parties clearly knew what could take place if RFK actually became president with that mind set and following through in creating a new investigation with his presidential powers.

In the devious, dangerous, highest stakes game of political poker, you don't reveal your cards before the final bet, hence RFK keeping his true JFK assassination belief hand close to his chest.

Jim D.

Did Jack Paar ever express his thoughts regards the JFK assassination including the Warren Commission conclusion?

Publicly or even privately?

7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I will be on November 18th, from ten to Midnight.

GREAT!

Does anyone really think that Robert F. Kennedy didn't believe there was more to his brother's murder than minimum wage earning, cheapest most inaccurate firing rifle using Lee Oswald defeating hundreds of security personnel and with 5 untrained Dealey Plaza bystanders seeing a man with a rifle  ( or two men) in the 6th floor window ( but not one trained security person seeing this ) up to 5 minutes before JFK's limo passes directly below?

29 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Two other points about Mort Sahl.

 

I don't know if you saw my interview with David Giglio at Our Hidden History about the Press and the JFK assassination, but it was Mort who got Garrison his spot on The Tonight Show.  The Sarnoffs were not about to let that be any kind of a real, exploratory, informational kind of interview. So, they prepped Carson and the NBC lawyers also interviewed Garrison.  Carson then had cards he was supposed to follow in his--I won't even call it an interview--inquisition.  Well, the audience saw through this fairly soon, and when Garrison accused LBJ of fomenting a cover up, Carson asked, "But why would he do that?"  Garrison replied, "I don't know, why don't you ask him John?"

That brought down the house and Carson was humiliated.  After the show, Mort was in the wings.  When Carson walked off he pointed at him and said, "You will never be on this program again!"  And he was not, not until Jay Leno took over was Mort back on the Tonight Show.  And that hurt his career.

Secondly, at a conference I was at last summer, a former government investigator said that McGovern told him that somehow Kennedy was in on the Castro plots.  Which today is  ridiculous and I don't know why McGovern would say something like that.  Because in addition to the IG report, we now have the declassified  interview of the co author with the Church Committee.  And Bill Davy used this in his VMI talk.  He says in all the months he worked on the report, there was never any hint that the plots had presidential approval.  Helms did not like the result and he did not allow any copies to be made.  He kept the original in his safe so no one could see it.

That is the kind of stuff Mort really got disenchanted with.  And that is why he ended up concluding the liberals were really not much good for anything. 

So interesting.

I watched the Carson interview of Garrison. I think I remember giving a "RIGHT ON" shout with a celebratory fist pump when Garrison made Carson look like a fool with the perfect answer to Carson's stupid question asking  "why would he do that?" regards the assertion of LBJ's complicity in the JFK event cover-up.

Carson finally revealed his often reported true reality mean spirited tone and demeanor while losing his cool and his audience's blind trust, respect and belief of him as a higher authority of the truth versus Jim Garrison.

I never trusted Carson again after that Garrison hatchet job interview. There was truly something bad about Johnny Carson and his character beyond even the exposes written about him...IMO.

Such obvious distraction dis-information with some truths mixed in with absurd phony angles and suggestions.

The Boston University college professor quoted in the 2nd post just has to say Oswald did it and the main problem with the release is how it shows the FBI  were embarrassed because they didn't monitor Oswald closer on 11,22,1963 is insulting to anyone who has researched the JFK assassination beyond reading the tabloids.

The dis-information boys sure have as much power and clout as they ever had. All the way up to the highest main stream media levels.

10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

He ended up really resenting the liberals for abandoning Kennedy's assassination.

Especially McGovern who said words to the effect to him that JFK really wasn't that good of a president anyway.  

Wow...didn't know this about McGovern ( whom I always respected in so many ways ) but it makes sense in regards to Sahl who to this day

still embraces with all his passion the JFK assassination as the most important and injurious crime against America and it's constitutional soul ...  ever  

Regards Chris Mathews:

Expecting any of our highest paid main stream media political news and commentary figures, who have acquired or who are looking to acquire these super coveted career positions, to ever publicly endorse ( substantially ) the JFK assassination as a result of a conspiracy versus the WC "Lone Nut" conclusion ...

is as irrational as expecting them to say they believe in UFO's and an ET presence on our planet.

Those two subjects and an acknowledgement stance other than jokingly dismissing them are the biggest no-nos in that career field.

I remember a Republican presidential primary debate in 2007 where the first question asked to the first candidate was from moderator Tim Russert to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Russert asked Kucinich ( paraphrasing) if he still believed in UFOs.

Instead of calling out Russert for asking such an inane and irresponsible question relative to the issue importance of the debate, Kucinich tried to joke about his UFO beliefs. From that one question and Kucinich's response to it, Kucinich was instantly categorized and labeled as a laughable loon and was ruined as a serious presidential candidate...forever!

That's how destructively powerful the subjects of JFK conspiracy and UFO/ET belief are in the real world of political and main stream media career ambition and advancement.

Any of our members invited on COAST TO COAST AM to speak about the release of the files yet?

If Noory and his team want a truly credible research and historically accurate assessment for their audience, versus Phil Shenon, they should do the right thing and contact these members.

I'm not trying to be a Eugene Dinkin...but has anyone else here noticed the huge MSM news story buildup of a conflict with North Korea with a massive increase in just the last week?

Almost as if it is a given?

Trump gives okay to "recall" 1,000 retired Air Force pilots?

What a perfect event ( war ) to block out and perhaps even close the Trump/Russia investigation story.

We are at WAR people!

Sorry, but we will have to shelve the Meuller investigation for now... highest alert National Security TRUMPS political investigations any day.

God help us all if this turns out to be true.

I accessed the You Tube link Doug provided and listened to the entire interview of Mort Sahl.

Sahl is a very interesting and intelligent fellow, obviously well read, quick witted funny and refreshingly opposite of politically correct in his disposition for seeking and telling the truth as he sees and feels it, no matter how much heat, criticism and career damage he suffered for doing so.

Sahl's take on Bill Cosby 47 years ago ( relative to what we now know about Cosby's true character ) was amazingly prescient.

And I also appreciated Sahl's sharing about Herb Caen the San Francisco journalist revealing a clearer picture of this man's true character and political bent.

Highly recommend others listen to the Mort Sahl interview via the link Doug provides.

Is there anyone on this forum that has credible training and education in dentistry?

Who could perhaps share their missing or not missing tooth take regards the adolescent Oswald photo. 

My guess is "Mr. Art Of The Deal" is trying to figure out a way to work another one with these files.

Something like ... Okay JFK people, I'll trade you the release of these files...and you back me in the "non-release" of my tax returns battle with Meuller? 

As emotionally unfit for the presidency as I believe he is, I do think that Trump was always interested in the JFK event and was of the mind that it was the result of a conspiracy.

Trump was 17 on 11,22,1963 and probably an admirer of JFK and like all of us close to his age ( I was 12 ) extremely shocked and highly suspicious after seeing Jack Ruby whack Oswald live on national television, right in the Dallas PD  building.

Who knows what agency pressure Trump may or may not experience regards anything he may say or do concerning the JFK event and files, but I would assume he has been advised not to go into the matter too much publicly. 

During the 2016 presidential primaries, Trump made many comments about Raphael Cruz's father ( Raphael Cruz Sr.) perhaps being in photos with Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans for reasons I assume were to hurt Cruz Jr.'s primary candidacy.  I believe however, there are some interesting questions about Raphael Cruz Sr. regards New Orleans and Oswald.

If you read Raphael Cruz Sr.'s Wiki bio, you will see that he was very politically involved in anti-Castro activities, giving talks to groups in the Austin, Texas area about this specific political situation. You then read that he did indeed move to New Orleans right after his Austin residency ( 1962 or early 1963 ) with his wife and he was there during Oswald's 1963 NO activity period.

But there is a huge black hole in this Wiki bio ( not one word ) about anything Cruz Sr. may have done in New Orleans, different from his stated and reported political activism in Texas right before and up to his NO move.

One can reasonably assume that Cruz Sr. didn't just stop his fervor political interests when he moved to NO ( hot headed anti-Castro central ) despite Wiki's total blackout of any mention of this.

You can be sure that politically active Cruz Sr. ( born the same year as Oswald )  knew Carlos Bringuer and he must have known about Oswald and Oswald's political activities especially the fight between Bringuer and Oswald as this event was so widely reported in the NO newspapers, radio and even on television news broadcasts.

To me, Cruz Sr.'s high energy political involvement in his early twenties and proven presence in New Orleans while Oswald was there raises many intriguing questions about Cruz Sr.'s true political connections and activities there during that time and it the black out of any mention of this in any of his bio's.

One cannot totally dismiss someone going to as much personal risk effort ( some documented ) and with such a specific, high level important and almost unbelievable warning message as Dinkins did, and that actually came to happen and so close to the time frame he stated.

The nutcase framing scenario is lazily easy to accept with Dinkins...but is dissipated by the real event occurring as he so clearly and widely reported to so many. Similarly with Rose Cheramie.

And the disinfo angle is preposterously illogical.  Too many suspicion creating and arousing doorways opened there.

Jim, I just read your review of Joan Mellon's book.

I have read this once and probably even twice before.

I may comment on the subject again later,  but I need to think out what I want to say more thoroughly than I have time for now.

Whenever anything brings the JFK assassination back into the national spotlight or discussion realm we see the appearance of people like P. Shenon who are given instant and way higher than normal visibility and coverage in the MSM versus JFK researchers and writers who are clearly much more qualified in the subject, but who may see the event as a conspiracy.

You can clearly see a collusion here of the greater MSM and those who still feel the need to confront anything that may create more national discourse and contemplation regards the Warren Commission finding as being a false conclusion.

Our top researchers here, as qualified and credentialed as any Phil Shenon, aren't mentioned and they are not asked to provide editorial pieces to be shown on national media news pages like AOL ( and others ) who recently did this with Shenon's ridiculous one warning that this file release may cause panic in the streets. 

It was so disturbing to see how much high production cost JFK assassination rubbish the MSM pumped out during the JFK 50th anniversary period to cloud out any truly credible research discussion that reflected a conspiracy.  

Our MSM is still controlled over 50 years after 11,22,1963 ... how sad and even tragic.

8 hours ago, Stephanie Goldberg said:

I have always assumed there were 4-6 shots, but the initial descriptions that the shots sounded like firecrackers always confused me.  I do not know what firecrackers sound like to you.  When I have heard them, they always sound like rapid little bang-bang-bangs to me.

So if that is the case, how many initial bang bang bangs were there really?   What made these people describe the initial shots as firecrackers?

Stephanie, I also contemplated these same questions.

The sound of "firecrackers" is a very subjective thing. I also remember hearing them go off and sound as you describe ..."little bang-bang-bangs."

Back in the 50's and 60's, those strings of firecrackers you could buy in San Francisco's China Town definitely sounded like that.

But, there are different types of firecrackers that may be louder and more powerful sounding. And then there are "cherry bomb" type ordinances which are very powerful sounding. 

Backfiring can also range from somewhat loud to very loud and powerful sounding. Often as loud and powerful as a higher than 22 caliber rifle shot.

The first shot ( and maybe the second ) was so often described with these two subjective terms which makes it all somewhat confusing. 

However, it is the testimony of some in Dealey Plaza of the 3rd shot being louder and stronger ( BOOM versus Bang ) that has always intrigued me.

Same old same old.

Everyone knows that so much has been shredded over the years we will never know anything close to the truth, even if what's left is released.

On 10/17/2017 at 8:06 AM, Dan Doyle said:

Bit of a late comer to this thread,  but having just watched a Morning Joe interview with Rob Reiner and Woody Harrelson about their new movie LBJ, I was struck by the irony that Woody Harrelson is in a movie that in part replays the JFK assassination.  Woody is one the sons of convicted killer  Charles Harrelson.  Jim Marrs fingered Charles Harrelson as one of tramps caught near Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 .  Charles Harrleson claimed, in 1980, when he was being arrested for assassinating a federal judge( the first time a federal judge had been killed in the 20th century), to have been one of the 3 shooters in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 .  And to add to the irony here, Charles Harrelson, who was married numerous times, had a wife at one point  with the maiden name of Diane Lou Oswald.  Go figure that one? ......nu nu nu nu. 

I'm no big fan of LBJ.  Although he did enact major domestic legislation, probably way more than JFK could have achieved, but his disastrous Vietnam policy is his rightful legacy.  He mislead the American public over and over about the real nature of the Vietnam conflict, only to be exposed by the Tet Offensive of 1968....and later by the Pentagon Papers. 

As for suspicions of LBJ's involvement in JFK's killing, there's a lot of smoke there.  If JFK hadn't met his maker in Dallas, LBJ would have surely been disgraced by the Bobby Baker/Billy Sol Estes scandal and off the ticket  in '64.  And I've read that RFK was orchestrating the whole thing.  In fact, Life magazine had the LBJ Scandal scheduled to run as its headline issue in the first week in December 1963. JFK's demise upstaged all of that and the scandal never really got legs after 11/22/63  And let's not forget, LBJ and Hoover were neighbors in DC and long time good friends. Hmmm?  Roger Stone, yes that Roger Stone, wrote a recent book fingering LBJ as the mastermind of 11/22/63.  

Do I think LBJ was behind 11/22/63...not really....but he sure had the cui bono.....like his political career.

A totally valid question for me is...how far would LBJ and his long time "like brothers" buddy J. Edgar Hoover go to protect their careers, reputations and maybe even jail time for LBJ and maybe an exposure of Hoover as a Mafia protecting cross-dresser?

Both LBJ and Hoover had "everything" to gain and lose with JFK's continued survival...or his death.

Both men had histories of extreme limit crossing when their personal interests were threatened. Does anyone here really think LBJ didn't have some decision making hand in Malcolm Wallace's doings and Wallace's outrageous walk away from his murder conviction or his own sister's suspicious death or perhaps even the disappearance or Madeline Brown's nanny? How about those other deaths of LBJ career threatening characters?

I fairly assume that Billy Sol Estes wasn't whacked only because a guy as devious as Estes would have certainly created a "Fail Safe" booby trap for the big boys to protect him in this way.