Joe Bauer

"He has also said that extraterrestrial beings would be welcomed, and that he would try to have them baptized. Guy Consolmagno (mentioned earlier) has expressed the same sentiment. (source)" Could you baptize a "robot?" Not to get too far away from our JFK truth seeking, but so many times it has been stated in the UFO literature that these alien "Greys" are simply cloned biological robots. I don't think robots have souls. And if these "Greys" controllers are 8 foot tall hissing Reptilians, good luck trying to baptize them.

Just watched the interview ( part 1 and 2 ) Bill Harvey. Have always felt a gut feeling he was a major player in the JFK killing. There is a video interview of Bill Harvey's widow in older age where she says of the Kennedy's ( John AND Jackie ) ... "They were scum." Those words say to me that she and her husband didn't just care less about JFK's brutal killing, they probably celebrated it. Dangerous, dangerous man Bill Harvey.

If anyone personally believes the UFO/ET-visiting-Earth story is true ( going back to Roswell or even before ) then they must also believe that JFK would have known much about it and would have had his own opinions regarding how to handle the information. JFK conflicted with all the other top power groups in so many areas, you can bet he probably did in this area as well. Has anyone here ever read or heard the story of a security officer on one of JFK's flights saying JFK noticed him reading an article on the UFO subject and spontaneously asked the officer if he believed that stuff? And that after the officer answered back ( not sure what his answer was ) that JFK said something back to him suggesting there is more to the subject than he ( the officer ) would think? And don't forget Reagan's speech to the UN where he spoke of a hypothetical scenario of an ET threat to the Earth...and how this could be a reason for all countries to forget their differences in the common bond of defense of such a threat? I've concluded that whoever owns and controls the full folder of our most important secrets is basically the final authority in running this country. And if the ET secret is our most important one, and the group that controls this particular secret is not of our "elected" government ... well?

Douglas Caddy, on 12 Oct 2016 - 07:56 AM, said: LOL. Banned? Well, that's one skewed way of looking at it. I'm pretty sure Robert was given more chances than any other member, with the possible exception of James Fetzer. Robert was unable to separate serious research from gossip about the sex lives of famous people. To him, they were one and the same. And the juicier the gossip the more likely it was true. I don't believe he ever questioned the veracity of a single source claiming so and so did such and such. It was actually quite unnerving. He would repeat every bit of garbage as fact, no matter the source. Even obvious liars like C. David Heymann, who filled his books with gossip, and then attributed this gossip to supposed phone calls with long-dead people like Truman Capote. Pretty sleazy. And pretty transparent. Except to Robert. After following this forum for a couple of years as a non-member and then finally overcoming my "uneducated therefor unworthy" insecurities and registering, I have only personally contacted two members. The first was Robert Morrow. He was the only member posting his personal contact address and my writing him was only in regards to his postings of LBJ,s alleged involvement in several murders of people who had a common thread of being threats to L.B.J.'s personal and political standings. I e-mailed Morrow 2 or 3 times total. His reply e-mails were always brief. His last e-mail response to me however, was of a somewhat rude and bothered tone and was something to the effect that he didn't have time to answer my questions and that I should get the answers on my own. I never contacted him again ( he would send me page link contacts after that ) and I also got totally turned off to his obsessive posting regarding the most lurid sexual activities of ...well...almost everyone of importance in our political world. Morrow would throw every sexual charge out there about so many people and common sense told you that even though much of it were probably true, that this was so over-doing it to a degree that was irrationally unnecessary. The other member I personally e-mailed when I first joined was Douglas Caddy. His postings inspired me greatly in several ways including his important "true insider" role in the Watergate affair. Mr. Caddy was "the opposite" of Robert Morrow in his response e-mail content and manner. Mr. Caddy and his e-mails back to me were polite, respectful, intelligently and personally thoughtful, patient, even kind and well ... just incredibly classy. I haven't contacted any other member since those few initial "first joining " e-mails to Morrow and Caddy, ( I now remember sending "one" e-mail to Joseph McBride however, which he never responded to ) and those were probably motivated in part because I just felt a need to have some initial personal connection to the forum. Speaking of Morrow's "unnerving" postings...I must say that watching this second Presidential election debate was equally unnerving. To see women who have claimed Bill Clinton personally abused them sexually right in the audience ( and before at that Trump news conference ) and to hear Trump dig into Clinton's sexual abuse of these women ( and Hillary's alleged ancillary role ) in the most lurid and even criminally charging way, right on stage in front of 60 million viewers, was as unnerving and bad as anything Robert Morrow has done. To me, Trump is the highest visibility version of Robert Morrow. Again, I am not saying these lurid charges against the Clinton's aren't true. But to see and hear them stated in such a hugely media covered forum and in such an animated and kind of turned on shouting way by Trump and worst of all right "in front of the children of both Clinton and Trump ?" ... well, you actually wanted to turn off the debate at that point. I was left feeling kind of sick about it all. But, still, It seems that so few ever try to keep the L.B.J. murder and other corruption truths out there to keep them from continued burying and ignoring. Too bad there aren't more besides Morrow and Barr McClellan ( who I have more respect for than most ) doing this.

All strip joints back in the 50's and 60's were fronts for prostitution. That was their main income. They sure didn't pay the bills - strippers and musicians and rent and other employees - on their beer income. The strip show is meant to get the guys in the audience so sexually worked up ( and with a few drinks to boot to lose their inhibitions ) they would be running to spend whatever they had to, to indulge their cravings. The hookers would line up outside of the lowest class strip joints, but in the classier places they might be sitting in the lounge or a pimp would make a call. I am sure that many of Dallas's highest society and wealthy ( and some police ) indulged themselves in this way through Ruby's clubs and the others too. Ruby would have had a lot of sex scandal dirt on these people. And therefor he ( and his bosses ) would have also had protection and influence with them as well.

Marina was very unhappy with LHO. It is obvious that once she got over here in the states and realized her husband was extremely incapable of providing her with anything more than a paupers life, she lost ( or turned off ) most of her affection towards him. She was much more drawn to and indulged by the white Russian friends they met in 1963. It sounds as if Marina became increasingly disaffected towards Lee, even cold and making fun of him to her new Russian friends. That's a sad thing. I am not making a judgement call regards Marina. But I have seen so many situations where very young American military men of little means in their end of military duty civilian lives, met and married foreign brides who were poor themselves and who naively thought they would be living the American good life when they came here. And when they realized the truth about the reality and humiliation of struggling poverty here, become very unhappy with their situations and young American husbands and looked to escape them And when they do, it is usually a heart breaking experience for the poorly providing young husbands to have these wives lose their feelings towards them and or leave them Especially if they have children. And In Marina Oswald's case, she also happened to be extremely attractive and had other men flirting with and wooing her, which surely just added to Oswald's personal pain and eventually anger of losing her. If Oswald was involved with any secret agencies, it sure didn't help him with his lowest wage poverty and inability to provide for his young family. You'd think he would feel so poorly compensated in this endeavor that this helped cost him his wife and family and that he would leave any such employment out of low wage grievance alone.

Haven't read "Mutual Contempt" but just read a New York Times review. Ms. Brown, what are some of the key parts of this book that has you "leaving the door open" regards LBJ being an encouraging factor if not behind the murder of Robert Kennedy? Regards Robert Morrow; I believe that as eccentric and socially incorrect as he is, sometimes it takes people like him to force others to look at, confront and deal with important truths (no matter how ugly and even scary) that they have previously and neglectfully ignored and have been hiding from. To tell Lucy Johnson in person that her father L.B.J. was a murderer is appalling on it's face, but perhaps it's a price and burden that she and other children of famous but questionably corrupt politicians must sometimes pay and bear. Imagine how Chelsea Clinton must feel hearing of her father's worst immoral and possibly illegal indiscretions or Donald Trump's children too. All of whom had to deal with hearing these things with national media cameras focusing on their faces at the same time last Sunday evening? I am sure these children all felt some embarrassment if not shame and may even experience some future PTSD from their sad experience. Yet, if their parents hadn't actually done these things, they wouldn't have to bear this burden Remember the old saying ... "sins of the father." But as uncomfortable as R.Morrow makes everyone feel ( like some animated odd ball showing graphic pictures of pornography or horrible bloody murder at a high society cocktail party ) sometimes it takes people like Morrow to counter the " purposeful burying, hiding and ignoring " of extremely ugly and even horrific yet important truths ( masked as political correctness - which in and of itself is more wrong by far than what Morrow is doing.) L.B.J.'s involvement with proven criminals such as Bobby Baker, Billy Sol Estes, Malcolm Wallace ( murderer ) and the testimonies of Estes and others who claim L.B.J. was personally involved with murder orders of political and crooked business dealing threats is the most important example of these ugly buried truths. When great royal court lies are so buried, entrenched and accepted for multiple generations that the so-called good and more socially correct people are afraid to bring them up, discuss and confront them, unfortunately this truth revealing is left only to the court jester.

The proposed scenario of certain members of the Dallas PD setting Oswald up for the Ruby hit makes more and more sense to me over the years. I recall seeing a You Tube video of a press interview of Dallas PD Sergeant Patrick Dean ( head of basement security ) immediately after Ruby shot Oswald. In this he stated that when he heard the shot he briefly wondered whether one of his own in the DPD had shot Oswald! That was a remarkable statement in its inference. Clearly ( at least in Dean's Mind ) some of Oswald's own police protection wanted him dead for his alleged killing of one of their own. Dallas PD detective Jim Leavelle mentioned many times in his later year interviews that his focus and concern with Oswald was as the killer of one of his own. Much more so than whether Oswald had killed JFK. You could see and feel Leavelle's level of hate for Oswald as a cop killer of one of his brothers. Obviously he felt Oswald got what he deserved. So, Oswald hating Leavelle is assigned as one of Oswald's only two personal security "escorts" into that light glaring and obviously loosely scanned basement crowd with Ruby in the front row? And wasn't Ruby standing right next to another Dallas Police person in the front row right up to the second he lurched and fired. And wasn't this side-by-side Dallas Police person a long time friendly acquaintance of Ruby? Oswald was practically paraded "in front of" his only two security handlers. I saw more and tighter protection of Howdy Doody and Uncle Bob during one of their promotional appearances when I was a kid in the 1950's. Oswald should have been taken to the County Jail at night unannounced and surrounded by a complete circle cordon of officers three men thick. The level of death threats to Oswald were probably greater than any other criminal in our history. Tens of thousands a day as reported on the national news. That is why it is literally sickening to look back and see Oswald's transfer handled as if he was a suspect in a common murder versus the one of the century. It all screamed " SET UP " ... and bi-polar wannabe or favor owing or threatened and coerced Jack Ruby was the fall guy picked to get rid of the other more dangerous fall guy. So, who was Jack Ruby? A pathologically insecure somebody wannabe who took care of dirty deed business for others who asked him ( or ordered him ) to do this.

Whenever I read Jack Ruby's testimony to the Warren Commission I have to stop and often re-read parts as it is hard to follow. It is so disjointed and scattered and meandering. It's so clear that Ruby was a mentally and emotionally imbalanced person. So many issues such as PTSD ( from a traumatic childhood ), anger control, deep insecurities, and on and on. And from everything I have read about Ruby in his Dallas days, he was always like this. Pounding an out-of-line Carousel Club patron's head into the ground and spontaneously raising up with a confused expression and saying to those watching him do this..."what am I doing?" Many other similar tales in the years people knew him. Still, Ruby was socially functional enough to run ( barely at times ) strip joints. However it sounds like the book keeping part was beyond him. He dealt mostly in cash. And one can be sure that most of his clubs profits were not declared to the IRS. So, with all of this long time crazy personal and business background, combined with his Warren Commission testimony that was so impulsively off-the-wall some members of the commission and their staff thought Ruby was brain damaged and then the ultimate insanity act of murdering a handcuffed man in front of millions to save Jackie Kennedy the ordeal of coming back to Dallas for a trial, one must ask ...WHY ??? Why on Earth would the Warren Commission take crazy Jack Ruby's word about his not being at Parkland versus totally mentally together and career accomplished Seth Kantor's word that Ruby was indeed at Parkland and had actually spoken to Kantor in person there? The Warren Commision's decision to believe mental and emotional basket case Jack Ruby over Seth Kantor in the very important Parkland Hospital part of the 11,22,1963 story and Ruby's part in this is just another loud ( and sad ) credibility ruining clarion call from that group and their investigative efforts and findings.

How much weight and consideration do any of you give to Carolyn Walthers claim that she saw "two" men, each with guns in an upper floor window of the TXSBD just before JFK's limo arrived? And her description of the other man ( from waist to shoulders ) as wearing a brown suit jacket and standing right next to another kneeling man with a rifle? Could this other man ( whether Wallace or not ) have been there to "make sure" the other shooter did as he was told?

That video was extremely interesting. Thanks for giving us the link. But, as you mentioned, this "Bob White" fellow doesn't look like someone one day away from a fatal heart attack.

Chris Newton, I have never seen this incredibly graphic photo of the seat in which JFK was shot. Is that actually JFK's brain matter scattered about in chunks? If so, Dear God ... how horrific!

Speaking of eye witnesses and the accuracy of their testimonies in Dealey Plaza 11,22,1963; I have never been in Texas let alone Dealey Plaza, but I have read many times that the whole area where everything took place is not as open and far apart as one would imagine. Such as the distance between an alleged shooter from the sixth floor window and JFK's limo during all the shots. I have always wondered about the Plaza crowd people who happened to look up at the Texas School Book depository before and right before JFK's limo drove under and saw a person with a gun or persons with guns in the upper windows. How right or wrong were they? Arnold Roland and Carolyn Walther seemed pretty clear on what they claim they saw, although Walther insisted the men with rifles she saw were on a floor lower than the sixth one. I believe both these witnesses saw someone with a gun in those upper windows. The fact that they saw this before JFK rove under the TXSBD is of course disturbing in that at least two untrained citizens with no training, no binoculars and no reason to scan those upper windows saw this...and all that security for JFK didn't even look? We have a fw buildings where I live that are 6 floors or more in height. They are downtown and overlook a few main streets. I have stood as close to these buildings 6th floor windows as the distance Rowland and Walther supposedly were from the 6th floor School Book Depository windows and let me tell you, if there was a gun sticking out even a foot from the windows I looked at, you could easily see this and any man or men behind the gun if they are that close to the window. How much weight should we give these two witnesses eye witness testimony? The two people seem of very good character and I am sure neither of them had any agenda other than wanting the authorities to know what they saw. They for sure never made any money from their testimonies. For those reasons and the one factual aspect of their testimonies regarding their closeness to the 6th floor windows, I give them much credence.

G. NALL; Your posting took me back to so many aspects of eye witness testimony from the very beginning in Dealey Plaza and how they varied. Jean Hill seemed most traumatized of all. Describing a small dog in the lap of Jackie Kennedy? Brehm, the Newmans, Altgens, etc. All with slight to noticeable differences. Julia Ann Mercer was not in a highly traumatic situation when she saw what she saw. I would give her testimony more weight because of that fact. Your listing of the different types evidence is appreciated because it helps one to better understand their values and purposes in seeking the truth in the most discriminating way possible.

Doug Caddy, What happened on COAST TO COAST last night regards their interview of John Barbour? I was listening to the interview when there was a cut off and then host George Noory calmly says he was ending the interview due to Barbour's overuse of inappropriate language. The rest of the show consisted of "open line" call-ins only. Since Noory cut out the offensive words of Barbour before they aired, I am sure many listeners were probably startled like I was at the shocking end of Barbour's interview. In all the years of listening to C2C, I have only seen this happen once before. That interview cut off happened because the interviewed guest was coming off as truly disturbed. Not sure about Barbour though. He did seem unable to stop sharing story after story of his life that didn't relate to the Oswald one and seemed bent on trying to coloring these in an overly comedic light. Sad to see precious nationally heard talk time wasted like that.

Bolden's comments and recollections about all the subjects Joseph McBride lists have always intrigued me. And I have always believed Bolden was telling the truth. When interviewed by Mark Lane, Bolden related some very heavy stuff regarding several agents in the White House SS Detail and their incredibly blatant and strong racism as expressed by statements such as these: Bolden's WH boss to Bolden: ( not exact quotes but very close ) Bolden, you were born a n++++r , you're still a n++++r now and you always will be a n++++r. And don't forget it. And Bolden says he overheard more than one agent saying ( again, not quotes but we all know close to what Bolden said ) that they wouldn't react quickly if someone were to initiate harmful actions toward JFK - inferring they hated JFK for his sympathetic views on blacks and their civil rights that much. I was born in 1951. Let me tell you. Most adult males in those times ( 50's and 60's and white like me ) were much more black hating racist and open about it than someone today can even imagine. I witnessed and heard black hating racist comments just like the one's that Bolden relates about his fellow SS WH Detail agents all the time. In the 50's and early 60's and back into the forties America was so much more a "white" society with almost all positions of authority, security and opportunity occupied by whites. And to see blacks given opportunities like Bolden was given was incredibly threatening to people of this mentality and their sense of white favoring control, values and destiny. I would "expect" at least some members of the WH SS Detail to be like this and to talk as Bolden describes. I have viewed JFK's and Nixon's presidential election debates from 1960 and in at least one of these , I couldn't believe how clear and committed JFK was in the area of improving the rights and opportunities of blacks in this country. JFK's comments on this issue even back then in those 57 year old nationally televised debates are no less sympathetic and encouraging and advocating for the advancement of civil rights than those said by liberal politicians today including Obama and Hillary! I've always said that I think the hatred of JFK, just for his sympathetic views on race and civil rights alone was so deep and widespread in this country that it equated into actual "wishing the man harm " rage toward him. My own stepfather used to call JFK a n++++r loving bastard every time he saw him on the news. And he was typical of many working class fellows back in those days much more than we want to admit today. The day JFK was slaughtered, this racist step-father only held back a little in gloating was simply because he didn't quite believe that someone would actually take JFK out like that. I apologize for my personal non-research comments on this top research board but sometimes I feel it doesn't hurt to include these in the JFK assassination discussion especially from those of us that were alive in that time and experienced the event first hand as individual citizens. And my own experience in this historical drama has always left me with a view that racism was a much greater part of the Kennedy hate rage and even efforts to kill him.

Just did a search for Tex-Italia Films / Marina Oswald. Was the $132,000 actually paid to her? And if so, did she keep this huge (at that time ) amount of money? Was this before or after her WC testimony? First link listed in my search was an essay by a George Bailey titled "Oops." Have read about these "Oops" points many times before but it's still unsettling to see them again even now.

Posted Today, 09:02 PM So let me ask you, Robert, based on your hunting experience or other knowledge of ballistics. Lipsey believes that one bullet entered the back of the head, blew out the back of the head, and in addition blew out the right side of the head including the right side of the face. Is that even conceivable? I too was always curious about how much damage the supposed "3rd" shot bullet actually did to JFK's head. It seemed to not just obliterate a third or more of his skull into many separate pieces but also "explode" it's inside brain matter into an outward trajectory spray so powerful it covered the back of the presidential limo and even went so high and far in back, it went into the faces and clothes of the following DPD motorcycle officer's ( at least one ) faces. I have never hunted in my life and have never even owned a gun in 65 years, so I am really uneducated in the area of guns, ballistics and bullet damage to bodies and heads. But have deer hunters with similar caliber rifles and bullets as the Carcano hit deer in their heads ( from 265 feet away ) and seen that much damage? Perhaps the answer is a simple yes. I don't have a clue. But is it possible that JFK's head was hit with a different type bullet than the ones used by the Italian Carcano? A bullet that had a more deadly and powerful make up? Could it be that the testimony of some Dealey Plaza witnesses ( I only know of two so far-Beverly Oliver- and a person in her presentation audience who was there that day ) that the last shot seemed different in sound and intensity from the other earlier shots - that it seemed louder and more powerful ( a "BOOM" versus a "BANG" ) add some weight of logic to the scenario of a different weapon firing the head shot? I don't know how many other Dealey Plaza witnesses ever described the three shots in the different sound way as I have described, but if it were true that the 3rd shot did sound different than the first two, how could the same rifle being fired make different sounds like that? Posted Today, 09:02 PM So let me ask you, Robert, based on your hunting experience or other knowledge of ballistics. Lipsey believes that one bullet entered the back of the head, blew out the back of the head, and in addition blew out the right side of the head including the right side of the face. Is that even conceivable?

Gorgeous. Like her. Lets see, if I sell my presidential elections political button collection and have a garage sale where I might make $50, I'd only need another $38,994,900 to swing that deal.

C. Newton; In the General Walker video you just posted the next door neighbor boy relates that within seconds of the shot sound and running to the fence ( overlooking the area that he apparently heard the shot emanate from ) that he saw a "black Ford" going down the driveway and little farther past the Ford he saw a 1958 Chevrolet ( he seemed very confident on that specific car ID point ) and a man in the 58 Chevy throwing a rifle in the back seat and then leaving. If this now grown neighbor boy's recollection is true, it would be so hard to accept the theory that Oswald did this alone and simply ran with the gun, ditched it, and then caught a late night bus home. Do you believe the neighbor boy's story? Personally, I believe ordinary people witnesses more than anyone tied to the government and military who have careers and retirement pensions to protect number one over the truth if the truth is not what the Government wants the public to know.

Oliver's description of the Dealey Plaza gun shot sounds and sequence did catch my attention. Multiple shots ( almost on top of each other ? ) ...bang,bang,bang...then BOOM! And when a member of Oliver's audience spoke in the question and answer part of the presentation, she repeated the same scenario Oliver described. This gun shot hearing woman wasn't in Dealey Plaza but apparently close by and she also said that she thought she heard multiple shots with the last fatal head shot of JFK was a lot louder - bang, bang, bang,...BOOM! I wonder how many other persons that day in Dealey Plaza ( and/or close by ) that could hear the DP shots, thought the last shot was much louder and more powerful sounding than the other earlier shots?

I just watched the entire video. The woman could hold an audience ( including me ) with her high energy, church revival experience, still attractive, big busty blond haired brassy/folksy Texas charm way. I loved her singing of Amazing Grace even without musical accompaniment. Sarah Palin has nothing on Beverly Oliver. Ms. Oliver could have been the biggest female star ever on national Christian television if she had been placed there at a younger age. One strong woman. Back to the serious business of Beverly Oliver's presentation/message; I sense she is telling the truth as she feels and knows it most of the time. She speculates a lot. She seems to know enough of the most commonly reported facts unearthed by some of the most well known JFK researchers and writers which she uses to frame and keep the context of her own story from wandering too far into total disbelief. She brings up some story subjects which I have also felt strong suspicion about such as Roscoe White, Regis Kennedy, etc. I am feeling somewhat more believing of Oliver being the Babushka lady after reading all the postings in this thread.

I've never studied the Dealey Plaza Babushka lady story much but these postings and their info and especially their photographs have pulled me in. Whoever this woman was, she was certainly right there close to the moment of head shot impact upon JFK. Just for that reason alone her observation story would be important. Because she was taking a photo or film and she was that close, you would think the investigative authorities that day would want to speak to her. Yet, there is no evidence she was ever identified and questioned outside of Oliver's tale? The older looking lady running up the grassy knoll to me is not the Babushka lady. Unless maybe her face was super-imposed onto that big coat wearing body? And that older angular face just doesn't seem to fit on a woman with thicker ankles as the pictured BL has. The photo of the much younger and full, roundish face woman does resemble Oliver to a point ( and her dark hair does look weird like it could be a wig ) but her nose and lips don't match up to my sense of similarity to Oliver. There is a photo that when enlarged shows a different, box like single shot camera in the hands of the Babushka lady other than a moving film one. Someone mentioned that that big coat the BL wore didn't seem like the kind a 17 year old would wear. But, who knows what someone would find and put on, maybe what's handy even it isn't teen stylish? I wonder what Beverly Oliver's ankles looked like at 17. Were they larger than most women? Was she always big boned? Is Beverly Oliver lying about it all? Hard to tell. The story that she didn't come out on her own looking for press attention but was kind of outed by a friend after sharing with him that it was her in that BL photo just adds to the question of truth and reality. But, even if Oliver isn't the BL, I have always found the commentaries and stories of the young Dallas strippers who worked for and or knew Jack Ruby as Oliver did a truly interesting part of the whole JFK/Oswald/Ruby 11,22-24,1963 history. Their characters and lives ( interesting how and why they all got into stripping - usually abused as girls from poor families and desperate for money - and most were just above teen years and were as innocent and vulnerable and taken advantage of in that vice industry. Several of these girls wanted to tell more of what they had seen and heard around Jack Ruby, but were terrified to do so. Yet, a few did despite the danger. That took courage. Little Lynn seemed traumatized. The girl was still just a teenager when she got pulled into that strip joint world. Like so many of Ruby's girls she was very poor and even had to ask Jack Ruby to wire her $25 bucks ( which he did just before he shot Oswald ) just to buy groceries for a few days. Dallas in 1963 was like so many other larger American cities. Full of vice which centered around vulnerable young women coming from poverty stricken families and poor small towns. I remember San Francisco back in the fifties and sixties. More vice joints than Dallas ever had. Stripper Carol Doda was the face of that town in her hey-day. Prostitution was huge and tolerated in the city most of that time. Strip joints were where you went to connect to that type of business. The Ruby and his Carousel Club perfectly reflected that part of American big city life. And all centered around poor and usually uneducated girls and young women like Little Lynn. Beverly Oliver seemed stronger than most the way she came out of that world and has had a good and seemingly healthier life in her middle and older age years. Excuse my off-point rambling. Reading about Beverly Oliver just brought out thoughts I have pondered about her and her sister strippers and their lives and parts in this tragic yet fascinating historical event.

Stone's film "Snowden" will be a challenge to review and critique for many reasons. After the film was shown Oliver Stone was interviewed on stage and was presented with a question from the audience there. It was a typical one asking Stone what was the one main thing ( or message? ) he hoped his film would convey. Stone seemed slightly irritated and said his film wasn't ( or wasn't like ) a "fast food restaurant" and that there were not quick and simple things he could say about it like that. Stone said he just wanted to tell this story, and those that see it can decide what they want to take from it. I do recommend everyone here to see the film. It's very different in style and story than Stone's JFK ( JFK was more powerful in actually showing JFK's brutal slaughter ) yet there are connective moral and social issues to JFK and 11,22,1963 which anyone informed about that event ( everyone here ) will so clearly, easily and immediately recognize. I would hope that our own Jim DiEugenio sees this film and reviews it soon for the forum. I feel this film deserves insightful and interesting commentary much more well spoken than what I am capable of.

Just viewed the film. Late here and I was hospitalized last night until 7:am this morning for various reasons so wiped out about now. Will comment more on the film tomorrow. But, of course the film is extremely thought provoking in many ominous ways. Much like Stone's JFK in this way. But very different in style.