Joe Bauer

Amazing documentation info on Cain. Much to ponder here. One thing that always strikes me when reading about the backgrounds of so many of these JFK/RFK era covert operation characters (in this case Cain ) is the reality of how extensive and widespread corruption was in our entire country in the 20th century and specifically on 11,22,1963. I have always maintained that to this day, we have never come to grips with this fact. Not even close. When one reads about how extensive and long term the Mafia payoff/bribery system was regards just the Chicago PD ( including many higher level positions) and we all know that this same system included judges, politicians ( all the way to the governor's office ) and who knows who else that the entire political and policing system in that city and state was more singularly influenced by the Mafia than any other separate entity including the voting citizens. And just multiply this corruption by 50 or even 100 when you accept that almost every major city in this country was corrupted in the same Mafia way. New York, Philadelphia, Newark, Detroit, Kansas City, Miami, Tampa, New Orleans, Cleveland and on and on ... and throw in Dallas in 1963. Not hard to come to the conclusion that the payoff system had to be in place in Dallas in 1963 due to the proliferation of organized crime controlled gambling and prostitution there. Tying this all into the JFK event - During WWII we allowed ourselves to become bedmates with Italian organized crime. This legitimized them to a degree and we never really let go of this devil's pact alliance. And it was never stronger than during the late 50's and early sixties with our mutually beneficial "Get Castro" thing. William Harvey's ties to the higher echelons of organized crime was so tight he and his wife considered Mafioso Johnny Rosselli a better and more worthy person and patriot than JFK! Doesn't that say it all? How pervasive and perverse this organized crime influence was? And throw in J.Edgar Hoover's downplaying organized crime and it's influence and not dealing with it and no wonder they proliferated to be one of the top three influential power groups in this country for decades. Colonel Dan Marvin mentioned in the documentary "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" that when our agencies wanted to get rid of someone here in the states, on our own soil ( which was against their initial charter granted authority ) they would simply contract this out to organized crime. That is a mind blowing, reality altering statement. If Marvin's claim is true, and that doesn't shake one's sense of corrupt government bedmates reality to the bone, what would? I believe Nixon and LBJ were beholden parties to this massive organized crime network as both never made serious attempts to confront it. And who can forget sitting Vice President and former Maryland governor Spiro Agnew being run out of that office for his corrupt doings and ties to "guess who?" The man was one succession step away from being our president! I believe it wasn't until Jimmy Carter that there was ever any real effort to confront organized crime and hugely corrupted major city police departments. Carter made New York police corruption ( and Las Vegas ) a priority in his term. One could easily see organized crime being pulled into the JFK event in several capacities. In the least getting rid of inconvenient witnesses or investigators? Like Dorothy Kilgallen? Lastly, can you imagine how much less of a perfect patsy Lee Harvey Oswald would have been without his NO Fair Play For Cuba activities just months before 11,22,1963? To have many clear shot still photos and minutes of focused film footage of Oswald passing out his Castro defending literature in busy downtown NEW ORLEANS and getting into it with Bringuier and then being arrested so all this could be published and broadcast in the press and then have Oswald actually on radio and even TV defending this phony political ideology ...what a great indicting image creation this all was! Like it was put together by experienced film makers. Certainly Oswald alone could not have come up with and created this perfectly indicting almost documentary like production.

I don't think the radial right could have done the deed themselves. However, Milteer could have easily been informed of something "in the workings" regards JFK by any number of people. Wasn't Guy Bannister a person who crossed-over into many different areas of political intrigue from radical right to the lettered agencies? I could see Bannister being in radical racist circles where Milteer may have been a player, and who may have had dialogue with Bannister. When it came to killing Kennedy, talk about strange bedfellows. But regardless, I agree with Steve Thomas. This was a cold, impersonal killing. Military precision and planning.

Predictions of Joseph Milteer Right-wing extremist Joseph Milteer. Thirteen days before Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, a man named Joseph Milteer was tape recorded telling Miami police informant William Somersett that the murder of Kennedy was "in the working," that the best means of killing Kennedy was "from an office building with a high-powered rifle," and that "they will pick up somebody within hours afterwards, if anything like that would happen just to throw the public off." Foreknowledge of the assassination, or just a lucky guess coupled with an uncanny understanding of how such things work? Miami Police notified the Secret Service, and there are indications that an unannounced motorcade in Miami scheduled for later that month was cancelled. After the Kennedy assassination, informant Somersett spoke to Milteer on the phone. Police and FBI interviews with Somersett revealed that Milteer was jubilant, and said that "everything ran true to form. I guess you thought I was kidding when I said he would be killed from a window with a high-powered rifle." The Warren Commission never learned the full truth of Milteer's statements, receiving just a cursory interview report in December 1963 and a somewhat more detailed one in July 1964, late in the Commission's term. But even the later report failed to discuss the recorded statements which the Secret Service received. A more complete version of the story finally reached the public in 1967 in a newspaper article. The HSCA investiged whether a man photographed standing in the crowd in Dealey Plaza was Milteer - the resemblance is certainly strong. the HSCA's photographic panel determined, based on height calculations, that the man was not Milteer. Who was Joseph Milteer? He was an organizer for the racist National States Rights Party and the Constitution Party. The latter organization's membership included retired Marine General Pedro del Valle, about whom Drew Pearson wrote in 1961 that del Valle came close to "urging armed insurrection." If Milteer's predictions were indeed based on foreknowledge, then the path to Kennedy's real killers would lead to right-wing segregationists and military extremists, categories which included some very powerful people. Just 13 days before JFK is taken out in Dealey Plaza, Joseph MiIteer is on secretly hidden tape describing to Miami Police informant Willie Somersett "exact specifics" as to the weapon-used-and-shooting-location and how a single patsy would be caught, arrested and blamed ( within hours) in regards to the JFK ass. And when Somersett presents this question to Milteer ... "are they really gonna try and kill him?(JFK ) ", Milteer responds "Oh yeah - it's in the workings." How can anyone hear this Joseph Milteer exact details JFK killing prediction tape ( especially so close in dates to the actual event ) and not take it more seriously than meaningless or just an incredible coincidence? For the Miami police to commit that amount of serious covert surveillance activity to get Milteer on tape with Somersett directing the conversation between Milteer and himself to the JFK threat subject...just shouts the obvious. They considered this man that dangerous in regards to JFK's personal security. Just read about Milteer. Well off financially. A racist obsessed with hate of JFK primarily because of JFK's stance on that issue. Below is the entire tape transcript. Fascinating read. Transcript of Milteer-Somersett Tape Note: This is a transcript of a tape recorded on 9 Nov 1963 by Miami Police informant William Somersett, recording a conversion with right-wing extremist Joseph Milteer. The transcript is taken from Harold Weisberg's essay The Milteer Documents in the book The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond (in this version, INFORMANT has been replaced with SOMERSETT, and SUBJECT with MILTEER). Portions referring to Kennedy are in bold. SOMERSETT: Now we are going to, you are going to have to take, Kenney, what do you call his last name? MILTEER: Kenneth Adams. SOMERSETT: Yeah, you are going to take him in, he is supposed to be one of the hard-core of the underground, are you going to invite him into that, too? What about Brown, now, are you going to invite Brown in? You are going to have Brown in it? MILTEER: Yeah. SOMERSETT: Now, I will tell you between me and you, because we are talking, we aren't going to talk to everybody like we are talking here. Now, you know this, I like Brown, he is a good fellow, you know him, now here is something, when we was in his house, now, he knows me and you, but he didn't know Lee McCloud, well I think he done too much talking in front of a man he didn't know. Brown trusts a lot of people, he figures everybody is good. MILTEER: Yeah. SOMERSETT: And you know when he was telling her [or him, not legible] about blowing up all those churches and, you know, I don't think he should have said all that in front of McCloud. MILTEER: That is exactly the way I feel about it, too. And I didn't talk about it any more after we left there. SOMERSETT: No, I see you didn't, you see, these things come to my mind, I don't know McCloud well, and Brown never seen him before in his life, that I know of, now you seen this boy, Jackie, didn't open his mouth, he just sit there and listened. Jack Caulk [phonetic] he is a very quiet boy, Brown it just seems, well, he, I guess he has gotten by with so much he just don't care. He come out with all that about going over to Atlanta carrying that stuff, and showing them how to operate, I didn't want to say anything to him, but I don't think it is a good idea for people to discuss things like that in front of strangers. What do you think about it? MILTEER: No, I - He should operate that, the same as he does the rest of it. SOMERSETT: That's right, damn right that is right. Now you take like the Birmingham ... [Milteer breaks in] MILTEER: Any conclusion they come up with, that's them, not him. SOMERSETT: That is true. MILTEER: He didn't give them anything. SOMERSETT: Well, he didn't give them nothing. MILTEER: Just like me at home there folks want to know, "Joe, where do you get all of your information?" "Well, I get it, that is all you are interested in," and that is as far as it goes, see. And the same guy will turn around and give me some information, but he doesn't know where I am getting my information. The same guy who asks me where I get my information, will turn around and give me information. SOMERSETT: Well, sure, of course, I realize that. MILTEER: That is the way you have got to operate. SOMERSETT: Well, that is what I say, if you are going to take Brown in, and Brown is going to be one of the head men, the man behind you, then you have got to talk to Brown a little bit, and tell him, you know, "You have got to be a little more conscientious, especially on these bombings, and killings," after all he comes right out with it. MILTEER: We have got to let him understand, that, that is his operation, and not ours. SOMERSETT: Yeah, that is true. We don't care, if he wants to go to Birmingham and blow up a church, let him. MILTEER: If he wants to blow up the National Capital, that is alright with me. I will go with him, but not as a party though, as an individual. SOMERSETT: Well, if you want to go with him and help him blow it up, that is not the party, it is an individual, you are going to have to make him understand that. MILTEER: There is a party movement, and there is also an individual movement. SOMERSETT: Yeah, that is right. MILTEER: And they are distinct and separate. SOMERSETT: Well, you are going to have to make him understand that, right there, he didn't exactly admit it, but Jesus Christ, he intimated, he indicated right there, he backed the bombings of killing the negroes in Birmingham, well, you know damn well we don't want anybody talking like that. MILTEER: Can't afford it. SOMERSETT: Well, you damn well that is bad talk especially to somebody he don't know. He could have said that to me, and you would have been alright, it would have been between you and me then. MILTEER: That is true. SOMERSETT: But to go ahead and say it in front of Lee McCloud, what that [sic] hell ... [Milteer breaks in] MILTEER: Well, I think he thought that he would [not] have been with us, if he had not been alright. But that is still not enough. SOMERSETT: No, hell no, that is no good, at least before he made all those statements, he should have called you outside, or consulted about this man a little bit. MILTEER: You have to have reservations, you know. SOMERSETT: That is right. Hell, he didn't say these things in any way to try to get us into trouble, because the only one who could be in trouble would be him, he was confessing on his damn self, he wasn't confessing on us, because we hadn't done a damn thing. MILTEER: You and I would not get up there on the stand and say that he told us a cotton picking thing either. SOMERSETT: Well, he knows that, but how about the other man. MILTEER: Well, that is what I say. SOMERSETT: Yeah, hell yes. I tell you something, you take Kenneth Adams over there, he is a mean damn man, like Brown was saying, the guy he was sending him to, well Kenneth is real mean, and the way Brown indicated they [not legible] the negroes, well, we don't care anything about that. I would rather he wouldn't tell us those stories. MILTEER: You sure can't repeat them. SOMERSETT: Yeah. That is the set-up we are in now, I mean, we have to work with them, but let them operate their grollings [phonetic], like you say, if you want to go with them, that is your opinion, you go with him up to Washington and blow with him, if you want to go ... [Milteer breaks in] MILTEER: I have a man who is the head of his underground of his own up there in Delaware, and since I worked on the Supreme Court, he wanted me to give him the lay-out there so they could go over there and do some things there, you know. But he called it off, I don't know why, I didn't even ask him why. That was his affair, but he called it off. But I was ready to go with him. I gave him the damn information he wanted. SOMERSETT: You worked on the Supreme Court. MILTEER: Yeah, three and a half years. SOMERSETT: Well, that is why he wanted you to go, then, well, them things have got to be done, but outside the Party, we have got to be mighty careful who the hell we let know anything. Now, here is one thing you have got to realize, transporting dynamite across the state line is a federal offense, well you better let them know that. MILTEER: Well, there is a way to beat that, you know. All you have to do is pull up to the state line, unload it there, slide it across the line, get in the car and load it again, and they can't accuse you of transporting it then, because you didn't do it. I have done the same thing with a woman. I had one, then I had a woman frame me on it. I got to the state line, and I said, "Listen, Toots, this is the state line, get out, and I will meet you over there," she got out, walked across the line, got in my car in the other state, I didn't transport her, there wasn't a xxxxing thing she could do about it, I had her ass for a long time. SOMERSETT: I was talking to a boy yesterday, and he was in Athens, Georgia, and he told me, that they had two colored people working in that drug store, and that them, uh, they went into the basement, and tapped them small pipes, I guess that they are copper together, and let that thing accumulate, and blowed the drug store up. He told me that yesterday, do you think that is right? MILTEER: It could have happened that way. SOMERSETT: Well, that is what he told me, and he is in town right now. MILTEER: Does he know who did it? Do they think these negroes did it? SOMERSETT: Oh, no, they killed the negroes, because they had two negroes working in the place, that is what he told me. He is in town now, he is from Chattanooga. He knows Brown, he knows all of them, his uncle is in the Klan there. He is a young boy, he has been in the Marines, and he really knows his business. He went there, he went down and looked, and he told me that is what happened. So he has been involved in quite a little bit of stuff, according to his story about Nashville, Chattanooga, and Georgia. I have no reason not to believe him, because he told me too much about Brown's operation, that is the reason I [not legible]. MILTEER: Yeah. You take this boy, Connor McGintis [phonetic], boy up there in Union, N.J., of course he doesn't go to anything like that, but he is on our side, he is the one that puts out that Common Sense. He is an ex-Marine. He is all man, too. SOMERSETT: Now, you see, we will talk to these other people, you have made up your mind that you are going to use the Constitutional Party as a front. MILTEER: Yeah, Constitutional Party States Rights. SOMERSETT: Yeah, and it will be strictly secret, and nobody will be exposed except you. MILTEER: Yeah. SOMERSETT: Because when we talk to them today, you want to know exactly what to tell them, how it operates. MILTEER: Yeah, and we have got to set up a little fund there to get it operating. SOMERSETT: Oh, yeah, sure. MILTEER: And I am going to devote my time to it, I don't have any idea of getting elected to that City Commission, but I am just making it cost them bastards it cost them as it is, cost them between $1,500 and $2,000 to beat me before, so I want to make it cost them another couple of thousand dollars. If they want to get rid of me, they can buy my xxxxing property, and I will get out of the damn town. In other words, they will save me money. I am going to put that out in one of the damn bulletins there, see. We put, the way I operate, put out these little bulletins, like a typewriter page, eight and a half by eleven, and brother don't you think they ain't waiting for them, when I don't put them out, "Joe, where is the bulletin?" Bill, that could go all over the country the same way. That was just a trial proposition, if it will work in a little stinking town like that, it will work anywhere. SOMERSETT: I don't know, I think Kennedy is coming here on the 18th, or something like that to make some kind of speech, I don't know what it is, but I imagine it will be on the TV, and you can be on the look for that, I think it is the 18th that he is suppose to be here. I don't know what it is suppose to be about. MILTEER: You can bet your bottom dollar he is going to have a lot to say about the Cubans, there are so many of them here. SOMERSETT: Yeah, well he will have a thousand bodyguards, don't worry about that. MILTEER: The more bodyguards he has, the easier it is to get him. SOMERSETT: What? MILTEER: The more bodyguards he has the more easier it is to get him. SOMERSETT: Well how in the hell do you figure would be the best way to get him? MILTEER: From an office building with a high-powered rifle, how many people [room noise--tape not legible] does he have going around who look just like him? Do you know about that? SOMERSETT: No, I never heard that he had anybody. MILTEER: He has got them. SOMERSETT: He has? MILTEER: He has about fifteen. Whenever he goes any place they [not legible] he knows he is a marked man. SOMERSETT: You think he knows he is a marked man? MILTEER: Sure he does. SOMERSETT: They are really going to try to kill him? MILTEER: Oh, yeah, it is in the working, Brown himself, Brown is just as likely to get him as anybody. He hasn't said so, but he tried to get Martin Luther King. SOMERSETT: He did. MILTEER: Oh yes, he followed him for miles and miles, and couldn't get close enough to him. SOMERSETT: You know exactly where he is in Atlanta don't you. MILTEER: Martin Luther King, yeah. SOMERSETT: Bustus Street [phonetic]. MILTEER: Yeah 530. SOMERSETT: Oh Brown tried to get him huh? MILTEER: Yeah. SOMERSETT: Well, he will damn sure do it, I will tell you that. Well, that is why, look, you see, well, that is why we have to be so careful, you know that Brown is operating strong. MILTEER: He ain't going to play you know. SOMERSETT: That is right. MILTEER: He is going for broke. SOMERSETT: I never asked Brown about his business or anything, you know just what he told me, told us, you know. But after the conversation, and the way he talked to us, there is no question in my mind about who knocked the church off in Birmingham, you can believe that, that is the way I figured it. MILTEER: That is right, it is about the ony way you can figure it. SOMERSETT: That is right. MILTEER: Not being there, not knowing anything. SOMERSETT: But just from his conversation, as you and me know him, but if they did, it is their business, like you say [Milteer breaks in]. MILTEER: It is up to the individual. SOMERSETT: That is right. They are individual operators, we don't want that within the party. Hitting this Kennedy is going to be a hard proposition, I tell you, I believe, you may have figured out a way to get him, you may have figured out the office building, and all that. I don't know how them Secret Service agents cover all them office buildings, or anywhere he is going, do you know whether they do that or not? MILTEER: Well, if they have any suspicion they do that of course. But without suspicion chances are that they wouldn't. You take there in Washington, of course it is the wrong time of the year, but you take pleasant weather, he comes out on the veranda, and somebody could be in a hotel room across the way there, and pick him off just like [fades out]. SOMERSETT: Is that right? MILTEER: Sure, disassemble a gun, you don't have to take a gun up there, you can take it up in pieces, all those guns come knock down, you can take them apart. SOMERSETT: They have got a damn, this boy was telling me yesterday about, they have got an explosive that you get out of the army, it is suppose to be like putty or something, you stick it up, and use a small fuse, you just stick it like that, he told me, and I think that is what happened in the church in Birmingham, they stuck this stuff, somebody stuck it under the steps with a short fuse, and went on home. This boy is pretty smart, demolition is that what you call it? MILTEER: Demolition, that is right. SOMERSETT: I am going to talk with him some more. MILTEER: Yeah I would. SOMERSETT: I am going to talk with him some more, and find out a lot more about his operation, because he knows a hell of a lot. MILTEER: You need a guy like that around, too. Where we can put our finger on him, when we want him. SOMERSETT: Yeah. Well, you have got somebody up there in that country now, if you need him. MILTEER: Well, we are going to have to get nasty first [not legible]. SOMERSETT: Yeah, get nasty. MILTEER: We have got to be ready, we have got to be sitting on go, too. SOMERSETT: Yeah, that is right. MILTEER: There ain't any count down to it, we have just got to be sitting on go. Count down they can move in on you, and on go they can't. Count down is alright for a slow prepared operation, but in an emergency operation, you have got to be sitting on go. SOMERSETT: Boy, if that Kennedy gets shot, we have got to know where we are at. Because you know that will be a real shake, if they do that. MILTEER: They wouldn't leave any stone unturned there no way. They will pick up somebody within hours afterwards, if anything like that would happen just to throw the public off. SOMERSETT: Oh, somebody is going to have to go to jail, if he gets killed. MILTEER: Just like that Bruno Hauptmann in the Lindbergh case you know [Dials telephone]. SOMERSETT: "Hello, is Jim there?" "Has he gone to the office?" "Uh, huh, well, is he coming back home?" "Alright, I will do that, thank you." He has gone out to one of those apartment houses, and he will be back later. We will go see whatamacallit, he closes at 1:00 o'clock. We will go up and see Andrew, and we will double back to Jim's [room noise]. MILTEER: Actually the only man we are interested in up at that place [room noise - not legible - door closes].

Looking back, it was clearly the poorest kids from our middle California area that made up the huge majority of ones that couldn't get out of the Viet Nam war draft or went in the military voluntarily because they knew they couldn't get deferments - for post secondary schooling or otherwise. Conversely, almost every better off kid I knew in school never had to go into the military, especially during Viet Nam times...for various reasons, most of which seemed very vague to me. But I felt back then and still to this day that the Viet Nam war was a blatant exercise in economic discrimination in this way. Just another of it's tragic flaws.

Thank you Doug.

I watched last night's installment. Much history going back to the 40's. Interesting. Several photo's of Ed Lansdale standing with Diem.

Michael, when I first discovered this forum Mark Lane himself was posting here. Many other famous research writers of the JFK event as well. I could read every JFK assassination book and news and opinion articles known and see every well known interview and conference videos there are on this subject, but this forum is by far the most compelling and comprehensive comparative analysis and debate one regards all those books, articles, interviews and the entire history and body of JFK assassination research. Is there any other internet site you go to Michael that satisfies your JFK assassination research debate and analysis interests more than this one? And where you can debate one-on-one with the heaviest hitting researchers of this realm? This is the best we have. It needs to be acknowledged and cared for.

Members 481 posts Gender:Male Report post I simply forgot about this thread after seeing the Baer series last night. Reposting my latest message on this. Where do these guys like Baer get the huge financial backing to fund these projects? Who funded this? While watching Baer and his Bill Gannon ( Dragnet ) like sidekick - whose main function seems mostly to give head nodding approval to Bear's speculations - fly all over the world and hire advisers and experts ( sound experts in Dealey Plaza- helicopters and pilots- marksmen recreating the kill shot using plastic skulls and watermelons as targets - and high tech equipment that looks like the average person could never afford let alone know exists ( wall scanners? ) I kept thinking of what all this cost? Who green-lighted this project? How does something like this get on the national airways with incredible exposure, when several research/writers on this very forum could create something way more hard research evidence thorough and enlightening? The format of this series was clearly thought out by experienced reality show producers and creators. Controversial subject related shows centered around one main authority "expert" in various subject related fields ( like Bigfoot-UFO's, etc. ) and provide them with an easy going soundboard sidekick or two to parrot the expert's questions and answers ... that relieves the viewing audience from the mental effort it might take to think of or about these on their own. The viewers most unsettling ponderings and questions about these worrisome topics are brought up and subtly answered ( in a broad, reassuring, "everything's not as bad as the conspiracy nuts say it is folks!" way by the expert. Is it just another coincidence that this nationally distributed documentary series was placed on the airwaves just at the same time the new JFK files were released, which of course would bring the JFK event topic and it's debate and discussion back into the national media spotlight for millions of Americans to see, read, hear and think about?

Oh, of course. Didn't know of that thread. Will do.

So much to say, but due to Sunday morning obligations I will just make a few points now and come back later. An reposting under the "Tracking Oswald" thread.

Kirk, If someone like Jesse Ventura somehow got elected president...and he "really" started to shake things up too much - including the secret government - I think you might see something occur.

Ron, the assassination of JFK, RFK AND MLK combined - all 3 clearly gaining more attraction, support and influence over our society than the old guard power groups of the MIC and individuals like Hoover, LBJ, agency heads, etc. and don't forget the Mafia - in just a brief 5 year period... Now THERE'S a powerful statement to our society and future Presidents in particular.

Perhaps the Umbrella Man became instantly self-consciously fearful as soon as he witnessed JFK's head explode into a bright pink spray of blood, brains and bone ( he had to have seen this as he was that close and looking straight at JFK ) because he knew his animated umbrella pumping action right at the killing spot may have been noticed and of course in it's illogical weirdness make him stand out as a highly suspicious looking and acting character? His extreme precaution reaction was obviously to fold up his prop as fast as he could and simply sit down and try to look as inconspicuous as possible. Animated arm and hand thrusting "Dark Complexion Man" was 6 to 8 feet closer to JFK than even the UM at the head shot time. He sees this, drops his arm, looks around a little...and of all the reactions he could have had and all the shock walk directions he could have chosen to take in a 360 radius, he heads right back toward one individual ( the Umbrella Man ) versus several others around, and plops right down within "two feet" of him. That's closer than I would have ever positioned myself to someone I didn't know at all and like taking a movie theater seat "right next" to a stranger when there are plenty of open ones on either side available. And they do have some conversation while they are sitting together. Witt testified later the conversation consisted simply of the colored man saying something innocuous like ( paraphrasing ) "They done shot that man."

Jim, I can't adequately debate the true depth of LBJ's corruption on the same research level you and others here are on. I base my much darker view of LBJ on more of a general lifelong learned sense that the abuse of power, especially in our higher echelons of government and business, most always turns out to be much deeper and involved and sinister ( with ordered killings ) than we initially are aware of. Much more Machiavellian than we tend to want to believe. I could easily cite HUNDREDS of examples of these highest level abuses that are so obvious in this way ( including murders ) in our own country over decades. The triad of the murders of our highest level political figures JFK, RFK and MLK in just a brief 5 year period alone highlights in spades my darker view premise and should wake up even the most naive and uneducated citizens that these were not random events. These three men all had one strong common trait. They were all attempting to challenge and change the true deep power structure and status quo of this country. LBJ was the highest elective political office figure head during this time and who represented the opposite agenda. With crooked Nixon following LBJ. LBJ was no somewhat sympathetic and at times well meaning Shakespearean victim of tragic flaws or fate. He was a Machiavellian monster strictly motivated by a consuming obsession with power, wealth and control. IMO.

I believe I understand what Jim D is saying. This highest regarded JFK assassination forum has achieved it's standing through a deep and thorough hard evidence research foundation built by some of the most credentialed researchers in the land. Jim D is one of these foundation builders and his sense of what constitutes too much veering and dissipation from that tenet and focus and his statement of concern in this regards to protect the forum's integrity is worthy of respectful consideration. Although I feel a little embarrassment in sensing Jim D. mentioned my name specifically in his above request to members to stay more on track of the forums basic foundation context, I consider his message as reasonable and important with no personal slight taken on my part. It seems to me that there is much more posting activity on the forum now versus when John Simpkin pulled away and the forum itself was seriously in jeopardy of being ended. In this influx are new members like myself ( but speaking only of me ) who, although as passionate in seeking the same JFK assassination truth Mr. D has been seeking most of adult life may be posting more personal anecdotal and less hard research focused messages. On my part, I know this to be true. However, regards Doug Caddy, I feel a high respect not just for his unique insider place in such an important part of our political history, but also for what he is contributing in so many areas of deep state truth seeking ( including JFK ) in every media venue that will allow him to do so. I look for every broadcast he is engaged in such as "Coast To Coast AM" and his internet sharings as well. He reminds me of Mae Magnin Brussell in his dogged and hugely committed effort to look at and bring to light all aspects of deep state government doings that could perhaps threaten our Democracy, along with singular ones, which Brussell often stated was so important as they were mostly all related and only through connecting together as many of these purposely scattered and hidden puzzle pieces would we ever come close to truly informed knowing and understanding the whole picture truth.

My wife and I are movie buffs. She is a pretty educated one in my opinion. She has books on cinema history. She's quite discriminating about what she chooses to see in theaters, what she rents from Netflix and what she pulls up from all the movie venues on our cable. She reads a lot of reviews before deciding what to see. Of course, we like and trust our own well known San Francisco Chronicle reviewer Mick LaSalle's takes on the latest films to different degrees most of the time. We subscribe to Entertainment Weekly and peruse all the ratings there as well. We lived for Ebert & Siskel's "At The Movies" back in the day as one of our top three favorite TV shows. We have a small independent movie theater here in town that shows foreign films, documentaries, etc. We go see films there more than our Multiplex where the wall shaking, ear drum bursting Transformers and Comic Book Super Heroes type movies dominate and the patrons need help carrying 5 gallon sized tubs of popcorn and giant sodas to their seats and where even 1/2 dozen seats away from you, the crunching and straw slurping is so loud it drowns out the trailer dialogue. With that personal background story in mind, my wife was not at all interested in seeing the JFK film "Parkland" a few years ago. The reviews were awful to an embarrassing degree for the producers and distributors. My wife also is not interested in the JFK assassination subject beyond the general suspicion of the Warren Report finding although she really liked Oliver Stone's JFK. "Parkland" lasted maybe one week before it simply disappeared. I talked my wife into seeing this with me. The audience consisted of myself, my wife and one other gentleman. A hugely obese and swarthy looking fellow wearing only a dirty T-shirt that didn't cover his entire stomach from his belly button on down. Within 20 minutes this bushy bearded behemoth had fallen asleep and his snoring was so loud we missed half the dialogue the rest of the film. I had to touch my squirming wife's arm a couple of times and plead with her not to walk out before the film concluded. She stayed for me. I am curious regards what my wife will read, interpret and decide on her desire to see or not to see this new film on LBJ. Maybe the right critics will give it a decent rating, if for nothing more than to praise quirky Woody Harrelson's portrayal of LBJ and his outrageous Texas drawl eccentricities. Personally, I think I will pass as I am sensing a false image seeding, waste-of-time whitewash of what LBJ "truly was" ... a totally corrupted, murder ordering, psychopathic monster. An "animal " as Robert Kennedy describes LBJ on a documented well known tape recording. Now I "would" like to see what Oliver Stone could do with LBJ in a major film. And I will be seeing Tom Cruise's new film on Barry Seal.

Is that quote from Minister Jack Shaw verified? I am reading that this Shaw claims he never said such things about Roscoe White and his confessions to him and or Geneva. And others that show he did. Which is it? Is Shaw recounting what Geneva related to him...or Roscoe White directly? Why can't we read what was on those tapes? Is this Shaw guy still alive?

I've seen the Josiah Thompson "Umbrella Man" video several times. I don't know if the version posted here is an abbreviated one from a longer one. However, in contemplating what I think is Thompson's message that the Umbrella Man and his umbrella act and his position right at the "exact" motorcade route spot and time when JFK's head was blown apart is of no more importance beyond weird coincidence, I sense and see other things in this scene that suggest to me otherwise. Thompson recounts the Umbrella Man's stated motivation for his umbrella act ( Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler ) and chuckles that it is so singularly out-there and ridiculous ... it must be true! But there are other things going on with the Umbrella Man ( including his shared post shooting closeness to the Dark Complexion man ) that deserve some thought. Okay, so Umbrella Man's position on Elm Street is at the exact spot where JFK is getting shot twice. His umbrella is the only one present along the entire motorcade route. And it isn't enough to just open the black umbrella. The man has to pump this up and down for more effect. But add on these other suspicious actions. In the seconds following the slaughter, as everyone around the Umbrella Man and the Dark Complexion Man remaing standing in shock and/or running to and fro ( with half a dozen falling to the ground out of personal safety fear ) The DC man and Umbrella Man get close together and both decide at the same time that the most rational thing for them to do was to sit down on the curb and grass beneath them at the same exact time two feet apart? Something not "one" of the hundreds of other Dealey Plaza gathered crowd people did. They stay there for awhile in the midst of all the running chaos. They eventually get up and walk their separate ways. No one ever approaches them for questioning even though they are as close to the shooting as anyone. What kind of explanation does Thompson give to these two men's mutually shared and uniquely different actions at this super high energy, emotion and chaotic time? Just more of the laughable weird coincidences that happen all around us all the time that have no mysteriously important explanation other than random chance? We see what looks like a walkie-talkie in the DC man's back pocket when he does start walking away and while he is sitting, perhaps a larger than normal looking bulge in the lower right back of his coat. In one photo of the DC man, when he first walks away from his curb sitting, we see him clearly moving his left arm and hand directly to his left buttock pocket area. Now what innocuous reason could anyone ( including Josiah Thompson) come up with to explain that specifically unusual physical action by DC man? If I did that it would be to scratch an itch. Now, maybe sitting on the curb caused an itch or perhaps DC man's bottom got wet ( it did rain the night before ) and he was unconsciously reaching down to feel and verify this? Maybe he was checking to see if his wallet was still in his back pocket? But, even considering these explanations it is still a suspicious action if for any reason other than it's timing. Notice also that the Umbrella Man wore a hat? As soon as JFK was hit and right after, he took off his hat. He placed it at his feet while he sat on the curb. Photos show this clearly AND a later photo after the DC man and the Umbrella man left the scene, the Umbrella Man's hat has been left on the sidewalk next to where the Umbrella Man had been sitting on the curb. He left his hat. Of course the whole scene was so shocking one could forget a discarded item not directly on their person. None-the-less it is the closeness of the black man and the Umbrella man ( an odd pairing, especially in a racially conscious place like Dallas ) and their mutually shared and uniquely different actions just before, during and right after JFK was hit within feet of them that begs logical suspicion beyond mere weird coincidences that just happen ... IMO.

I would like to see this new film. I like the idea of veering into any JFK assassination conspiracy story from a side angle off of a literary or film main story line that is of a more personal everyday life human experience. In the least to generate enough interest to spur book and film tickets sales to adequately fund such, but also beyond that to keep interest in this event alive. Most people are not inclined to buy, get into and stay with books or films whose main story lines are strictly about historical events from decades ago ( even the JFK in Dallas one ) even if some of these events are of monumental importance beyond their general comprehension that they really should be made more aware of ( especially the truths versus non-truths involved ) because of how greatly these events affected these people's older generations then and still themselves now in their current daily lives. Every year since the 1960's there are at least one or two A-List films made by major American film production companies that center around the Jewish holocaust of over 70 years ago. There is a reason for this. To keep that event story constantly refreshed in the minds of future generations. So people don't forget something the survivors feel should never be forgotten or allowed to drift out of mind and sight awareness and contemplation. It would be great if that kind of money, clout and commitment were made available to keep the JFK event and even the RFK and MLK ones alive in the collective minds of today's and tomorrow's generations.

Jason ... exactly. Thank you for adding a super important aspect ( perhaps even more important and elucidating than everything I posted ) that I should have included in my post.

Is this a "made for TV" production? Because if it is supposed to be distributed into the movie theater venue it will end up in "Parkland" bombsville. No people younger than us Baby Boomers care about stories like this anymore. From the review this film seems to have that same "demean the Kennedy image " feel and agenda to it. It will be interesting to read what your friend Rothstein has to say about the incident verses the film script.

Questions. Did Roscoe White's pastor actually deny any confession made to him by White where White stated to the pastor he had killed men on foreign soil as well as here in America? Did this conversation between White and his pastor ever take place? If the pastor denies this confessional conversation between he and White ever took place, who then created this tale and how did it get so widely reported and shared? Why would anyone supposedly involved in government ordered hits on other men even keep a dairy that would discuss such things? To me the only reason that might make sense is using such a record as protection against being turned on by one's own handlers should they ever hang him out to dry? White's dairy illegally stolen by agents? Mary Meyer's dairy was stolen in this exact way, so Ricky White's claim of this isn't beyond belief. There are enough coincidences connecting Oswald and White regards military branch and serving times and locations, both living in Dallas at the same time and White's reported social connection to Jack Ruby, if even occasional, including Ruby hiring Geneva White if only for a brief time to consider White with some interest in the whole affair. Did White and Ruby ever interact on a social level? Is there any proof of this beyond what White's wife Geneva shared in interviews? And how did White come into some very good money after Dallas to provide for his family as well as they reported? Nice home, new cars, etc. White didn't seem educated enough or trained in any occupation that would lift him that high after Dallas. White apparently did cheat on his wife. You don't do this without lying occasionally. So, we can surmise White's basic character would be considered at least amoral to certain degrees. A man capable of doing other nefarious things? I believe so.