In the below linked thread I transcribed a document that will require corrections. I created this thread, and linked it from the other, so that edit corrections can be suggested here, rather than in that thread. I will then go and edit the document in that post.

On 9/10/2017 at 2:53 PM, Terry Adams said:

Are there suggestions on where one may find Steve Jaffe on multiple interviews ( I mean over time).  This gentleman has so much information on The JFK assassination,  MLK  and even the Princess Diana death (not to mention Jonestown).  He is obviously elderly, based on his age when he was working with Jim Garrison.  It would be such an injustice to genuine history to have his massive vault of knowledge about all I've mentioned and probably so much more that will be missed out on, just because he was not recorded before we lose him forever!  I certainly hope, if that has not already been extensively done, that someone who has access to Mr. Jaffe will sit with him and get all that he wishes to reveal on record, for all time.

Quoting Terry Adams to ping him, if he has notifications on. Mr. Jaffe has replied to you, above.

Bernard Barker and Sturgis working together in Feb. of 65

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10221-10301.pdf

William R. Kopatish, died May, 9 2018

Chief - Personnel Security Division

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=26676#relPageId=2&tab=page

From his memorial page...

"Bill was a true friend and mentor to many. I am proud to count myself in that group. His wisdom and vision in the mid-1970's set the stage for the transformation of our Service following the tumult of the Church inquiries. In each of us who he personally engaged, Bill insured that we knew what was expected of us, both personally and professionally.  

Bill, I owe so much to you for the unique and challenging opportunities you entrusted to me as well as the Top Cover and confidence..."

------------

"On the eve of Mother's Day, in the year 2018, how happy Bill must be now reunited forever with his beloved Fran! Bill and I crossed paths at the CIA from the mid 1960's to the mid 1980's. They were busy and challenging years at the Agency, and we were fortunate to be a part of a young, vibrant organization. But Bill's first and most enduring love was his beautiful family. As I last chatted with him on 3 May-at Hospice, he beamed..."

Has the most clearances among 37 (McCord and Bruce Solie included) approved for BYECOM clearance.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10123-10404.pdf

12 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

 I have no interest in the commentary which, unlike Monty Python's 'Life of Brian', I find boring. Mervyn

But you find it useful as as a paradigm or fable. That is what is known as literary genius, but we know that such perception is not in your makeup.

3 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Mervyn - you’re frustrating me. You said your original attack on this forum was stirring up the hornets nest. But you keep doing it,  choosing to take sides as to who here is worthy and who isn’t. I keep trying to see what you have to say and contribute in good faith, knowing that your attitude towards the ‘fanboys’ doesn’t necessarily diminish you’re own field of knowledge. But I definitely agree with Jim and others that you get in your own way by diminishing others. You know so little about 55 years of JFK research, and because you cannot see past your own prejudice clearly enough to see the huge differences between JFK and LBJ and RMN you’re not even interested enough to dig a little. In good faith I’ve suggested several books to you. 

Yeah, authors quote themselves. Hancock does it too. Why is Jim your whipping boy? I object to the phrase ‘listen to James’ because that’s not what serious people do. This is not a church. We question authority here. But speaking for myself I also respect people that have dedicated their lives to fighting against the official silence and lies. Btw the way, that includes you Mervyn, which is why I’m trying to get through to you. 

Well-put Paul. I would applaud your efforts, but, like Ward and Trejo, Meervyn's affect is the denigration of the form, it's members, the community and it's aims; couching his quips within faux research and grade-school level essayisms. 

43 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Ron, that's what happens when you listen to James, everything becomes a distorted mess,  and he is the expert who even quotes himself. LOL

Mervyn, I just looked over your co-authored essay. I have to say that you would be an expert in the area of disjointed messes; that is what your essay looks like. Jim's work is actually quite the opposite of your characterization. I am guessing that you are trying to transfer the critical hurt which you suffered, in evaluations of your work, onto Jim. It doesn't stick.

Here is a link to Messy-Mervyn's Pile of Platitudes....

http://foundthreads.com/PDF FILES/02-LILBURNE-JEFFERSON.pdf

18 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul, let us know if our in-house platitudinist or the actual author of the essay shares anything interesting. 

Here is a link to Messy-Mervyn's Pile of Platitudes....

http://foundthreads.com/PDF FILES/02-LILBURNE-JEFFERSON.pdf

I find it largely incoherent.

32 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I can get to foundthreads.com. Which essay are you referring to?

Paul, let us know if our in-house platitudinist or the actual author of the essay shares anything interesting. 

Here is a link to Messy-Mervyn's Pile of Platitudes....

http://foundthreads.com/PDF FILES/02-LILBURNE-JEFFERSON.pdf

5 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

My point is that as a historian Jim has a responsibility to back up with statements with fact, not invective.

I feel like a solo rig from the opposite direction.

Proving conspiracy in the murder of JFK is no big deal.  Salandria said that debunking the SBT with the clothing evidence was no big deal -- he was most proud of pulling out of the Critical Research Community.

The Salandria School is a study of the obvious.

And no one owns the evidence.

Roger-that my friend. It's time for shut-eye on the Right Coast.

Good night.

18 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Tippit was hunting but drawn into a trap where he was the target. 

If Tippit did the Tit - tit, honk, he wasn't hunting. It was a signal to Oswald, the meaning to which Tippit may not have been privy. Things may have been falling apart, perhaps Tippit was supposed to give 3 tits, or 4, or two. In any event, it seems more like he screwed-up something, or became privy to something he didn't need to know, and had to be eliminated. Maybe Ozzie was supposed to grab an ID/ wallet and/or go to a location on the number of tits. Who knows.

2 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Who said anything about a responsibility to me?

No, he claims to make a good everything.

btw, here's a couple more reasons why people won't acknowledge the T3 back wound:

1) Their friends say the back wound was at T1 and that's good enough for them.

2)  To acknowledge the T3 back wound ends the "Question of Conspiracy" parlor game, and people want to keep playing in order to inflate the significance of their own work.

Who said anything about a responsibility to me?

I think you are pretending that you didn't get my point.

No, he claims to make a good everything.

I get where your coming from. He seldom admits fault or is willing to concede ground. That's not going to change.

btw, here's a couple more reasons why people won't acknowledge the T3 back wound:

1) Their friends say the back wound was at T1 and that's good enough for them.

I am sure that you have convinced some people otherwise, and that is good enough for them.

2)  To acknowledge the T3 back wound ends the "Question of Conspiracy" parlor game, and people want to keep playing in order to inflate the significance of their own work.

I understand that you have what you believe to be the weaponized fact of conspiracy. I think I have eight of them. I'll use my eight, you stick to your one; if Jim has 400, leave him to his 400. I'll privately wish you would take on 5 more, and wish Jim would pair his down to a dozen-or-so; and we'll all just keep trucking-on. Just remember that we're riding in a convoy; 10-4, good buddy?

15 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I feel T3 deniers need to be called out.

I push back on the notion researchers own the evidence they research, as Jim implies.

Unlike all those other people Jim claims to be a historian.

That's an elevated level of accountability, no?

Responisbily to History, yes; Responsibility to you, no.

He makes a good, Taco. You want a good burger. Lean on the guy who makes a good burger. Not all cooks are the same.

15 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

He said it was unknowable.

I make no claims.

I point out the obvious.

There is nothing to it.

Jim is denying the obvious.

When Salandria said conspiracy is obvious he's pointing to the clothing evidence.

There is a difference between "minutiae" and "root fact."

That JFK was shot in the back at T3 is as per Salandria a root fact.

He claims it's unknowable.

He claims it's unknowable and he basically doesn't give a xxxx.

Well, I have to say that you are choosing Jim as a target. You want him to say what you want him to say. That is probably part of the problem. If you made it your goal to get me to say that the earth is round, you would come up empty handed. There are plenty of people that will not say, at your behest or otherwise, that JFK was hit in the T3 Process, ether because they don't believe it, it is out of their area of expertise, it can't meet their desired level of evidentiary proof, they are L!ing, they are obfuscating, they want to get your goat, they are stubborn or are stupid. There is no reason to single-out Jim as your target as an individual whom you want to compel to say what you want them to say.

With deep respect,

Michael

57 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

But it does matter.  The T3 back wound proves the shot in the throat was from the front; it proves the Fox 5 BOH autopsy photo is a fraud as is the final autopsy report; proves JFK had two wounds of entrance with no  exits.

These are the root facts of the case.  Physical evidence is supreme.

Denying roots facts is obfuscatory.

 

 

I have heard this many times, that Jim denies a T3 entrance wound. I don't recall him ever saying that. I don't expect him to respond to this, probably because it has been hashed-out over and over through the years.

So, I'll ask Cliff for clarity, is it your contention that Jim denies the T3 entry, or that he does not support your claim; there is a difference. I can understand if it is the latter because, like Salandrai cautioned us about, it amounts to minutiae in the larger picture in as far as when one engages a person who is otherwise disinterested, the details won't make the case; the overview is what needs to be expressed, if the listener has confidence in you.

I can understand if Jim's gig is not in the arena of (and I don't mean to diminish the importance of physical evidence, but I have doubts as to what it will mean to the average person) minute details, but I would be surprised if he thought that the shot from the rear actually exited the throat. Is that what Jim claims?

The easiest point on which one can convince a disinterested party of the fact of conspiracy is that LHO did not act alone, by any number of arguments. The false claim of CE399 entering the back and exiting the throat is just one of them. Does Jim believe this scenario? I can understand if he does not want to enter that fray, as per Salandria, but has he stated that he believes this?

What is Mifgash (plural, Mifgashim)

On 4/11/2007 at 2:15 PM, Ron Ecker said:

Added question: Why did Rabin leave the entire second half of 1963 out of his autobiography? As if nothing of any consequence happened on either the Israeli or American side, or even in his personal life.

Reminds me of E. Howard Hunt leaving the entire year out of his autobiography Undercover. Again it was such an uneventful time. (Hunt made up for it in his last book, in which he fingered LBJ, in a plot which Hunt wanted nothing, I say nothing, to do with, because it involved that crazy Bill Harvey. But apparently they told Hunt all about it anyway. "Need to know" or compartmentalization is all a bunch of hooey.)

..."G. Gordon Liddy was in the FBI from 1957 until September 1962, and prior to resigning in September 1962 had been involved in COINTELPRO. In his autobiography, "Will," he leaps from 1962 to 1965 with hardly a nod to anything in between except Too Much Information about the rhythm method, birth control pills, the Catholic religion in relation to all of that, and his crisis of faith."

The above, from this thread....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9146-g-gordon-liddy-and-marathon-oil—1962-to-1963/

On 5/16/2018 at 2:14 PM, Paz Marverde said:

If, as we are told, Oswald was the lone assassin, where is the issue of national security?

It's a good rhetorical question, Paz; and good on you for raising it again. 

The answer is that at least there was negligence in protecting President; but that only goes so far if one even does believe in LHO as the lone assassin. Second place for an answer goes to the "benign cover-up" for a lone-nut scenario. But,  as most of us believe, the obvious answer is that there was a criminal conspiracy involving people in power who had the means to both kill JFK and managed the cover-up.

47 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Jeremy thanks for posting this as you actually beat me to it. That's one of the funniest posts I've ever read and the folks there hit it out of the park.

Since Towner is mentioned above here's another unintentionally funny post. It's now up to over 700 views and not a single person has replied to it...

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?16860-TOWNER-s-background-grows-as-the-foreground-recedes#.WwCFURkpA0M

It's absolutely amazing to me how the person who made that post is considered a "well respected" researcher on this kinder and gentler EF forum.

First of all, Although it was made clear by moderators that dissent, opposing opinions, and disinformation are necessily tolerated in an open debate, does that mean that mocking and ridiculing of the forum hosts and their wishes for a standard of etiquette needs to be tolerated? Does that toleration extend to a mocking and ridiculing of the members and content of this forum from off site parties, by means of links and URL' s to such mocking and ridicule need to be tolerated? 

----------------------------

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Eddy Bainbridge writes: "Would you be willing to provide a guide to the work of Chris (math rules) Davidson. I have asked him to explain his thread .... He doesn't however seem to have a desire to appeal to the masses."

For the benefit of Eddy and everyone else who is confused by that neverending parade of cryptic equations, there is a clear explanation here:

http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1744-skunk-smells-math-sucks .

-----------------------------

Secondly, To what webpage is Michael Walton trying to link us?

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?16860-TOWNER-s-background-grows-as-the-foreground-recedes#.WwCFURkpA0M

That is clearly not even close to the correct link....

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?16860-TOWNER-s-background-grows-as-the-foreground-recedes

What kind of junk URL is Michael Walton trying to create? Is it deliberately corrupted by him? Would trying to fix it to make a valid URL cause problems for a user? He often posts URL's that don't show-up in the valid blue text and format. What is he up to?

Are Jeremy's and Michael's links or attempts to link members to off site mock and ridicule, with no valid or relevant content, acceptable? Are the admins and moderators OK with Michael Walton persistently mocking your rules of etiquette?

Reported to moderators....

13 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Paul, did you watch the video?

Mervyn,

Now anyone who is interested is either wondering "what video?" or they are off looking for it. Can you post a link to it?

16 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Michael - did you watch the 50 second YouTube clip? The end of the paragraph above is from the interviewer. Skorzeny was for hire, and Mossad did hire him. I’ve read the stories at length and see little reason to doubt their veracity. If you google Skorzeny the Mossad story comes up quickly. Israel needed someone to infiltrate the Egyptian nuclear program, and the scientists that were assassinated were German, at least some. It as a moral dilemma for Mossad, but they decided stopping Egypt’s program was essential, and Skorzeny perfect for the job. But another, clearly untrue story pops up too about his death being faked.

As for KGB, I’ve never heard that before, and think it is weird to see that allegation inserted into this story. 

Yes, Paul, I did watch the video.

And as for the Quote on which you commented, that is a transcription of a paragraph on P.11 of the documented that you linked.

This from Wikipedia.... it seems hard to believe that Skorzeny would be used for assassination attempts against German Scientists and JFK; but I am just digging-in to this today.

Edit

In 1952 Egypt was taken over by General Mohammed Naguib. Skorzeny was sent to Egypt the following year by former General Reinhard Gehlen (who was now working for the CIA) to act as Naguib's military advisor. Skorzeny recruited a staff made up of former SS and Wehrmacht officers to train the Egyptian army. Among these officers were former Wehrmacht generals Wilhelm Fahrmbacher and Oskar Munzel; the head of the Gestapo Department for Jewish Affairs in Poland Leopold Gleim; and Joachim Daemling, former chief of the Gestapo in Düsseldorf. In addition to training the army, Skorzeny also trained Arab volunteers in commando tactics for possible use against British troops stationed in the Suez Canal zone. Several Palestinian refugees also received commando training, and Skorzeny planned their raids into Israel via the Gaza Strip in 1953-1954. One of these Palestinians was Yasser Arafat.[33]

He stayed on to serve as an adviser to Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser.[34] After, he traveled between Spain and Argentina, where he acted as an advisor to President Juan Perón[35][1] and as a bodyguard for Eva Perón,[34][1] while fostering an ambition for the "Fourth Reich" to be centered in Latin America.[36][37][38]

Recruitment by the MossadEdit

The Israeli security and intelligence magazine Matara published an article in 1989 claiming that Skorzeny had been recruited by Mossad in 1963, to obtain information on German scientists who were working on an Egyptian project to develop rockets to be used against Israel.[39]Reporting on the Matara story, the major Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronot said that they had confirmed the story from their own senior Mossad source.[39] Former Mossad head Isser Harel stated the story that former Nazis were recruited to provide intelligence on Arab countries.[40]

Ian Black and Benny Morris wrote in 1991 that Skorzeny may not have known who he was working for, but in 2010 Tom Segevpublished in his biography of Simon Wiesenthal that Skorzeny had offered to help only if Wiesenthal removed him from his list of wanted war criminals. Wiesenthal refused, but Skorzeny finally agreed to help anyway. Segev gave as his main source the senior Mossad agent Rafi Meidan, to whom Segev attributes the primary role in the recruitment of Skorzeny.

Further details of the story were published by Yossi Melman and Dan Raviv in 2016. According to their information, a Mossad team had started to develop a plan to kill Skorzeny, but chief Isser Harel decided to attempt to recruit him instead, as a man on the inside would greatly enhance their ability to target Nazis who were providing military assistance to Egypt. He allegedly was recruited and conducted operations for Mossad from 1962, where he worked with Avraham Ahituv and Rafi Eitan. Melman and Raviv noted that Eitan had agreed with Skorzeny's recruitment without commenting further, but other unnamed sources provided the details. They assert Skorzeny was recruited after Mossad visited his home in Spain, where he expected he would be assassinated. After undergoing instruction and training in the Mossad's facilities in Israel, the unconfirmed work for the Mossad included assassinating German rocket scientist Heinz Krug who was working with Egypt, and mailing a letter bomb which killed five Egyptians at the Egyptian military rocket site Factory 333. He also allegedly supplied the names and addresses of German scientists working for Egypt and the names of European front companies supplying military hardware to Egypt.

No confirmed source can give a reasons why Skorzeny participated in these allegations of helping Israel. It is speculated that Skorzeny's motives for working for the Mossad may have been a desire for adventure and intrigue, as well as to ensure he would not face assassination attempts from Mossad.

In an article featured in Der Spiegel on 22 January 2018, doubts as to the invovement of Skorzeny in Krug's death have come to light. Mossad boss Isser Harel ordered Krug's murder.

1 minute ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Oh goodness Paul, you don't know of McLendon's political side?

I am not discussing Weaver's allegations, but the well sourced connections to domestic politics and David Atlee Phillips.

Since I have explained myself on different threads so many times I guess you will either have to ignore me or wait for my book because I am not spending more time on this.

Mervyn

Mervyn, Please recall that Paul Trejo openly stated that he was adding you to his lengthy Forum ignore list.

9 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Apparently no one wants to consider Otto Skorzeny as a possible source for assassins at Dealey Plaza. 

Hi Paul,

After looking at P. 11 of your document it seems that if Otto Skorzeny was involved in the Dealy Plaza hit, then the hit would have been a KGB/Communist plot which I find unlikely. If one wishes to import other speculation abou Skorzeny, I.e. That he was connected with the Mossad, then we are on less solid ground. The CIA "interest" in Skorzeny, as documented in the passage to which you have directed us, is sparse on detail.

-----------------------

SUBJECT:  Jose Antonio CASAS Rodriguez 

"We asked subject whether or not he was acquainted with any individual belonging to the Cuban military. He could supply no significant name or information in this sphere. He did advise us that a potential source for this type of information was one Eloy Gutierrez Menoyo. According to subject Gutierrez was formerly a Cuban army officer and would have many contacts in this area. As an aside, subject stated that Gutierrez had supplied weapons to Fidel Castro during the 1958 to 1959 period through an individual who he knew only as Gonzales. Gonzalez, apparently, in turn obtained the weapons from a Sagaro, who was a resident of Santaiago de Cuba. Of even more interest, subject stated that Gonzalez was, during the same period, in contact with Otto Skorzeny in Madrid and Belgium. Subject could no longer remember where he had heard this information and could only add that, as he remembered, Gonzales had seen Scorzeny in Madrid and Brussels, Belgium, during this period. It is felt that this piece of information may be of more than normal significance in that we recall having been told several years ago that Skorzeny was of operational interest to KUBARK (CIA).  As we remember, Skorzeny was at that time suspected of or reported to be the key figure in a Communist KGB illegal funding apparatus. We will check with the CI staff, WE, and EE in order to determine whether further information on Skorzeny's alleged activities was ever developed."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Baviera