W. Niederhut

Will it be Vice President Ventura?

Geez...creepy stuff, Doug. Perhaps an attempted character assassination? Meanwhile, our good friend, Chuck Schumer-- a strong advocate of Israel-- is now calling for Netanyahu and his right wing Likud Party militants to step down. Professor Jeffrey Sachs said the same thing several weeks ago. The Likud Party charter expressly opposes a two-state solution. Incidentally, Sandy, did you ever read up on the Talmudic teachings-- and the writings of Israel Shahak-- about ethnic cleansing on behalf of Israel? You have unique, firsthand knowledge of Iranian culture, but my sense is that you have never accurately understood the tribal and Talmudic origins of Netayahu's brutal ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Albert Einstein, Israel Shahak, and others, were always concerned about the dark side of militant Zionism.

I greatly admire Oliver Stone's films, but... Putin embarrassed Stone by seizing Crimea shortly before Stone's final Putin interview. That final interview was painful to watch. Vlad played Oliver for a fool. And now this! Did Oliver Stone not watch the shocking 2022 Congressional J6 hearings? How can any rational, intelligent, informed person not know that Trump actively conspired to illegally overturn the 2020 U.S. election? When Trump was informed, on the morning of January 6th, that his MAGA mob was armed with guns, he said, "Take down the magnetometers! They aren't here to harm me!" Oliver Stone: Charges against Trump are 'ridiculous' - Raw Story Oliver Stone: Charges against Trump are 'ridiculous' Agence France-Presse March 13, 2024 2:13PM ET Director Oliver Stone (AFP Photo/Geoff Robins) Maverick American director Oliver Stone told AFP that the legal proceedings against Donald Trump are "all political" and that the ex-president was a victim of "lawfare" -- when prosecutions are used to silence political figures. "Almost 100 indictments against the guy... it's ridiculous," said Stone. "This is all political. They want to put him behind bars, but they're not going to be able to," he added. However, the 77-year-old director of "JFK", "Platoon" and "Snowden" said that he would not vote for Trump in this November's US presidential election. "Everyone's corrupt. Russia runs on corruption, so does Turkey. So does the United States. Corruption is a way of life, but they make it into a political issue now," Stone insisted. But he said he would not be voting for incumbent President Joe Biden either. ADVERTISEMENT"Never for Biden, because Biden is a warmonger," said the Vietnam veteran. Stone spoke to AFP Tuesday during a trip to Paris to promote his documentary about nuclear energy, "Nuclear Now". He said he has been thinking a lot about "lawfare" as he has recently completed a film about Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. 'Freethinker' Lula, as he is widely known, was imprisoned in 2018 on corruption and money-laundering charges after several years in power. The charges were overthrown after an investigation found the judge was biased, and Lula was re-elected president last year. "The concept of lawfare is all over the world, and it's been used for political reasons, weaponised," said Stone. "And so that's what they did with Lula. They put him in jail and he got out and he won the election. It was a hell of a story... but people don't know it, except in Brazil." Stone has often focused on Latin American leftist leaders, with no less than three documentaries about the late Cuban leader Fidel Castro, and one about his friend the Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, who died in 2013. Lula, Castro and Chavez were all "humanists", he said. "They're all great. They're all original, doing the best they can for their country. I think Chavez was motivated by love of country. So it was Castro." There is not yet a release date for his Lula film, though he has launched previous films at the Cannes Film Festival, which takes place in May. Stone has often been denounced as a conspiracy theorist for his views on U.S. foreign policy and the assassination of John F. Kennedy, laid out in "JFK" and a follow-up documentary. He has a simple response for his detractors. "I'm a freethinker."

I'd be interested in legal opinions on this case, Doug. McAfee dropping charges doesn't seem to pass the sniff test. For one thing, isn't it the prerogative of the DA to press or drop charges?

"Bombing" Bibi Netanyahu has, evidently, crossed Biden's red line in Rafah. Several reported killed, injured in Israeli strike on UNRWA warehouse in Rafah City Palestinian journalists have shared footage documenting people bringing in victims of an Israeli bombing on central Rafah to the Kuwaiti Hospital. The journalists say an UNRWA aid distribution centre was shelled in Rafah City. The footage, which has been verified by Al Jazeera, shows people being evacuated in vehicles bearing the UNRWA logo. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/3/13/israels-war-on-gaza-live-netanyahu-vows-to-finish-the-job-in-rafah

6 charges gone, and only 35 charges remaining. But, why on earth is Trump now, apparently, getting away with his "perfect phone call" to Brad Raffensperger? What does Fani Willis's private life have to do with Trump's extortionist phone call demanding 12,000 votes?

Sandy, Denver has been swamped with busloads of Venezuelan refugees (from Texas) this year. These poor guys are out on the street corners here trying to make a few bucks washing windshields. And the city is cutting back on Parks & Rec services to try to fund emergency shelter and food for the refugees. I spoke to a grounds keeper at a local golf course this week who told me that his hours have been redued by the city, because of the budget cuts. So, some locals are, unfortunately, angry at Biden because of Greg Abbot and Trump's sabotage of the recent bipartisan Senate border bill. It's merely one aspect of the Trump/MAGA strategy of sabotaging rational governance to engender hostility to Biden.

Aaron Rodgers and Jesse Ventura Top R.F.K. Jr.’s List for Running Mate – DNyuz

Dr. Michael Chesser's superb, scientific analysis of the frontal head shot X-ray evidence is definitive, IMO. Dr. Chesser is a board-certified neurologist who has taken the time to carefully analyze the X-ray evidence, and to demonstrate that the distribution of the bullet fragments-- based on their relative mass-- confirms that the fatal bullet struck JFK in the right forehead. That much is also obvious from the Zapruder fllm, and Newtonian laws of physics. To claim that the fatal head shot could have come from the TSBD is scientifically absurd-- anti-Newtonian.

I should say a few words about Ken and Barbie here. One of my older sisters had a Barbie and a Ken doll-- and an orange Barbie & Ken convertible sports car-- back in the early 60s, when I was a lad. So, I knew all about them, despite the fact that they never talked. And, IMO, the Barbie movie illustrated some profound truths about male and female psychology-- some of which was originally identified by Dr. Carol Gilligan and the women's psychology movement (at the Stone Center in Wellesley, Massachusetts) in the 1980s. Gilligan's book, In A Different Voice, was a landmark description of developmental differences between boys and girls, and it helped me understand why men tend to be fundamentally more narcissistic, and dependent, than women. The archetype of the roving cowboy who doesn't need a woman is, in fact, a counter-dependent myth. We men, like Ken, are, generally, more needy and dependent than women. The essence of Gilligan's theory is that little boys tend to experience an earlier, traumatic separation/break with their mothers than little girls, due to a lack of gender identification with their mothers. We respond to the narcissistic injury with grandiosity and counter-dependence. So, for example, in the Barbie movie, Ken desperately wants Barbie to love him, but Barbie is, basically, content to live her life without Ken encroaching on her autonomy. Speaks volumes about core issues between men and women. Amazon.com: In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development: 8583210654338: Gilligan, Carol: Books

Jimmy Kimmel brought the house down at the Oscars tonight by reading a derogatory, rambling Truth Social post by Trump, then asking Trump, "Isn't it past your jail time?" Someone posted a copy of Trump's alleged tweet at DU, but I don't know if it's authentic.

BREAKING.... Margot Robbie at the Oscars tonight... a bit of history. BTW, I watched the Barbie movie with my wife on our recent cruise. Not really my thing, but I thought it was clever, and Robbie was great. (I think she was snubbed by the Academy.)

Robert, On the contrary, most of these murdered witnesses had apparent knowledge that debunked various aspects of the Warren Commission "Lone Nut" narrative. In fact, that seems to be the sine qua non for their murders-- in line with the CIA Executive Order instructing agency personnel to do "whatever is necessary to promote public acceptance of the Warren Commission Report. In some cases, like those of Koethe, Hunter, Mary Meyer, and Killgallen, we don't know precisely what they knew, because their manuscripts, notes, and diaries were confiscated by their killers. Dorothy Killgallen claimed that her interview with Jack Ruby would "break the JFK case wide open." Mary Meyer had purchased the newly published Warren Commission Report shortly before her murder, and was, allegedly, indignant about it. What did she know? She had been a close friend of JFK and her ex-husband was in charge of CIA propaganda (Mockingbird) ops. Why was James Angleton so eager to confiscate her diary? Other murdered witnesses knew things about Oswald, Ruby, Dealey Plaza, forensic evidence, Tippitt's murder, etc., that debunked the WCR.

Robert, There are so many highly suspicious murder cases documented in the book that it would be a long post, indeed, to review all 50 of them. My advice is to forget the inaccurate negative spin on this thread-- by Pat Speer, Ulrik, et.al.-- and study the book. I'll ask you a few brief questions to stimulate your intellectual curiosity. 1) Why was mobster Jack Zangetty found floating dead in a swimming pool with multiple gunshots to the chest, after he told people that Ruby was going to kill Oswald, and Frank Sinatra's son was going to be kidnapped? 2) How did a cop in L.A. manage to shoot journalist Bill Hunter in the heart by dropping his gun on the floor? 3) Why did the karate expert burglar who killed journalist, Jim Koethe, steal Koethe's notes about Ruby and the JFK assassination? 4) Why was Dorothy Killgallen's manuscript about her blockbuster interview with Jack Ruby stolen, after she and her friend, Florence Pritchett Smith, were both murdered? Killgallen was accidentally placed by the killer(s) in her guest bedroom, with her make up on. She never slept in her guest bedroom, and never went to bed with make up on. 5) How did Wistar Janney and Ben Bradlee know "shortly after noon" that Mary Pinchot Meyer had been murdered, (by an expert assassin) when the police never identifed her body or announced her murder until 6 PM? 6) Why was James Angleton in Meyer's apartment, reading (and stealing) her diary after she was murdered?

Well, Robert, nobody's perfect. Have you read the book? The data speaks for itself. One formula for getting murdered 60 years ago was to have contact with, or knowledge about, Jack Ruby. As a Texas guy, you should know that better than anyone. Jack Ruby was like plutonium. The cases are legion-- and not only those of Rose Cheramie, Dorothy Killgallen, Koethe, Hunter, Zengatty, and the Carousel Club murder victims.

Ron, This is a horrifying story, in more ways than one. I think Dr. James P. Cattell was either the uncle or brother of my former psychoanalyst, one of the founders of the Denver Psychoanalytic Institute. I should mention that there are a number of distinguished physicians in the Cattell family, including the famous Harvard surgeon, Dr. Richard B. Cattell, who once operated on British Prime Minister Anthony Eden. But it sounds like Dr. James P. Cattell was an MK-Ultra man... 😬

Pat, I'm responding in red (below.) Pat Speer wrote: I actually have the Belzer book...somewhere. I think he even quotes me in there somewhere, although I don't remember the context. My complaint was that he included too many people, many of whom were only loosely affiliated with the case. Too many? All 50 cases in Belzer's book are linked in some fashion to the JFK assassination, as he cogently explains. For some cases, there were one or two degrees of separation from primary actors -- as in the case of Karyn Kupcinet, whose father, columnist Irv Kupcinet, knew Jack Ruby and some Chicago mobsters, and became silent about the JFK assassination and Ruby after his daughter's shocking murder. As far as the actuarial stuff...I assume you know about the end of the film Executive Action and what happened afterwards. At the end of the movie it quoted a London paper claiming that the odds of the suspicious deaths being a coincidence were billions to one or some such thing. But that this was later debunked. It turned out that the numbers were cooked, essentially. Belzer's opening discussion of the actuarial statistics begins with correcting the erroneous Executive Action probability. (He gives an appropriately sarcastic nod to the newspaper that eagerly debunked the math error. We all know how reliable the mainstream media has been when it comes to debunking the Warren Commission narrative.) But he and Wade then demonstrate that the probability of an estimated 70 unnatural witness deaths occurring in a sample of 1,400 JFK witnesses (from 1963 to 1977) is still infinitesimally small -- in the trillions-to-1 range. As I recall, the original number was created by taking the number of witnesses to testify before the commission, and then adding on a few who died. But this was bad math. The actual number should have been created by the number of witnesses to testify before the commission, and then adding on the thousands of people who were tangentially related to the assassination, who both died and did not die. What are the actuarial probabilities of these unnatural deaths occurring from 1963 to 1977 in a 1,400 person sample? The deaths of those reporters comes to mind. There were literally hundreds of reporters in Dallas on the day of the assassination, and its aftermath. The accidental deaths of a few of them, who never claimed to have top secret knowledge, is not surprising. Jim Koethe and Bill Hunter were two reporters who had actually been in Jack Ruby's apartment that week. They were both murdered shortly afterwards. Koethe was killed by a burglar (and karate expert) who just happened to steal his notes for material he wanted to publish about the JFK assassination. Hunter was shot in the heart by a cop in an L.A. police station who said he accidentally dropped his gun! (Then he changed his story and said he was just horsing around with his gun when it fired, killing Hunter instantly.) Nothing to see here. Move along now. Now, to be clear, the crop of deaths in the mid-70's is a lot harder to dismiss. I remember when I first started researching, and discovering that heck this guy died just before the HSCA and heck that guy died just before the HSCA and so on. The same spike in JFK witness murders occurred during the Warren Commission investigation and during the Garrison investigation. David Ferrie is the most famous example from 1967. And we all know that the CIA and FBI were aggressively sabotaging Garrison's investigation at the time. So I don't dismiss the premise of the book. I just think it was too broad. Too broad for what? We're looking at 14 years of systematic murders of people who knew too much. That's a broad time period involving a broad array of witnesses capable of debunking the Warren Commission narrative. P.S. One of the guys who died surprisingly and prematurely during the HSCA was Manuel Artime. He was only 45 at the time, and was likely to have knowledge about the CIA's attempts on Castro and the possible re-routing of these attempts onto Kennedy. I don't recall. Is he in the Belzer book? Artime is mentioned in the conclusion of Hit List, but he doesn't have his own chapter.

Katie Britt’s false linkage of a sex-trafficking case to Joe Biden www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/09/fact-check-katie-britt-sex-trafficking/ by Glenn Kessler March 9, 2024 *** The Facts Britt’s account of Romero’s experience was a centerpiece of her rebuttal to Biden’s address. The way Britt sets up the story, there is no indication that she is talking about a woman who was working in brothels in Mexico during the George W. Bush administration. This is how the passage unfolds. She first blames Biden for the surge of migrants at the border. Then she says she visited the border shortly after she took office. That would be 2023. At length, she details the story of an unnamed victim that she says she met on her trip. The implication is that the woman recently crossed the border — because of “sex trafficking by the cartels.” She strongly suggests that her abuse took place in the United States: “We wouldn’t be okay with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it.” She ends by reinforcing that such alleged trafficking is Biden’s fault: “President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.” But Biden has nothing to do with Romero’s story. As she testified nine years ago, her mother threw her out of her house at age 12 and she “fell prey to a professional pimp.” She says she then spent the next four years in brothels before a regular client helped her escape when she was 16 years old. There is no indication in her story that drug cartels were involved, though Britt said that in the State of the Union response and has made a similar claim on at least one other occasion. Romero was never trafficked to the United States; instead, she says many men who paid to have sex with her were “foreigners visiting my city looking to have sexual interactions with minors like me.” The Pinocchio Test In a high-profile speech like this, a politician should not mislead voters with emotionally charged language. Romero’s story is tragic and may be evocative of other Mexican girls trapped in the sex trade in that country. But she was not trafficked across the border — and her story has nothing to do with Biden. Britt’s failure to make that clear earns her Four Pinocchios. Four Pinocchios Last Edit: less than a minute ago by DrSchadenfreude Reply Quick Reply

Pat, I've been to a lot of lectures in the Ivy League (Brown and Harvard) during my eight years back East, but I've never been to a JFK conference. What so-and-so said at a conference carries little weight with me, unless I know that the speaker is a knowledgeable, honest expert who isn't selling something. (Perhaps I've attended too many Big Pharma-funded medical lectures during the past 40 years.) This skepticism seems all the more justified in the case of the JFK assassination-- given the plethora of CIA-funded disinformation in our media (including social media.) Honestly, I prefer reading books and articles. It's easier to analyze written arguments and data with precision. IMO, Belzer's book, Hit List, is fairly well written and strictly evidence-based. I'd give it an "A" as an interesting JFKA reference book about the forensic details of 50 JFKA witnesses who died under suspicious circumstances. The authors also include actuarial stats about the astronomical improbability that these clusters of witness deaths occurred by chance. Belzer & Wayne point out that most of these improbable JFKA witness deaths cluster, temporally, around four basic periods; 1) shortly after JFK's assassination, 2) during the Warren Commission investigation, 3) during the Garrison investigation, and 4) during the HSCA investigation. So, withal, I'm somewhat puzzled by the negative opinions of Hit List on the forum, by people who have, apparently, never read the book. It reminds me of the negative spin about Col. Fletcher Prouty's books by several forum members who never read them. Speaking of which, did Belzer's book, Hit List, get Prouty'd by the CIA propaganda people in 2013, possibly on the grounds that he was merely a comedian and actor? We could use similar criteria to dismiss Bob Dylan's song, Murder Most Foul. The fact that Belzer was a popular television actor, if anything, seems like a positive for the JFKA community, in that he had the potential to publicize damning facts about the cover up of the JFK assassination. But, instead of celebrating Belzer's evidence-based contribution to increasing public awareness about the cover up of the JFK assassination, some people around here are erroneously smearing him.

In the few years that I have been a member of this forum, I have always been surprised by the posts of several forum members who consistently deny the obvious evidence about the frontal head shot that killed JFK and blew the back of his skull backward, behind the limo-- and the intimidation and murders of witnesses who had information refuting the Warren Commission's Lone Nut narrative. It's, frankly, bizarre. And I noticed that Mark Ulrik, Bill Brown, et.al. have been silent about the evidence that high level CIA officials had foreknowledge of the assassination of Mary Pinchot Meyer-- several hours before the police identified the body or issued any public announcements about her murder. Can Ulrik and Bill Brown explain how Wistar Janney and Ben Bradlee knew that Mary Meyer was dead "shortly after noon?"

Is it o.k. to post Kafkaesque fiction here? Does it contribute in any meaningful way to our understanding of political reality? My Golf Outing With Donald Trump I was so angry about Donald Trump securing the 2024 GOP nomination for the Presidency on Super Tuesday, March 5, 2024, that I was experiencing chest pain for several hours on Wednesday, and wondered if it might be angina pectoris. (My uncle died of a heart attack when he was three years younger than I am at present.) In any event, I fell into a fitful sleep Wednesday night, then woke this morning from a dream that was so funny I couldn't stop laughing. Carl Jung wrote about “integrative” dreams that tend to facilitate psychic healing. Oddly, I rarely remember my dreams nowadays and, when I do, they are usually some veiled foreshadowing of senility-- I'm lost in a strange neighborhood or haven't completed forms required for some important task, etc. I should mention that I recently read Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis and The Trial for a Great Courses series called, Meeting the Challenge of Great Literature. The "great" course is taught by an old, white-haired professor at Brown University whom I knew about 50 years ago, when he had curly brown hair. So, here is my Kafkaesque tale. I flew from New York to Michigan with Donald Trump, to play golf, on a dark stormy night. I was wearing my expensive blue, worsted wool suit, similar to the one Trump always wears. We both got soaked by the rain while walking to the pro shop to check in for our round of golf. (In reality, my blue worsted wool suit was eaten by moths a few years ago, and I had to throw it out.) As it turned out, the pro shop for the golf course was located in a K-Mart. It took a while for Donald Trump and I to find the kiosk in the K-Mart where we could check in for the golf course. It was late at night and they were short staffed. Trump and I had to rent golf clubs, and the only sets available were used, out-dated clubs, including cheap aluminum drivers and putters. Trump also insisted on renting or buying some dry golf attire, but I decided to save some money and wear my damp suit. Shortly afterward, Trump and I rendezvoused outside of the K-Mart, at a helipad, where we were going to board and ride a helicopter to the Michigan island where the golf course was located. He was dressed in a checkered, 1970s-style polyester leisure suit and a large, black-and-white checkered hat similar to the Australian military hats worn at Gallipoli-- the ones that fold up on one side and have a chin strap. His polyester golf pants were far too tight around his waist and legs, and they were also too short. He looked absolutely ridiculous, and he was very cross about the ridiculous hat and the ill-fitting, polyester golf clothes. I struggled to suppress a laugh. We finally boarded a helicopter and flew, in the dark, to the island where the golf course was located. But, when we arrived at the island, rather than landing at the golf course, or being greeted by a limo, we had to board a crowded, public shuttle bus-- like a large van. Trump and I had to sit in the back row, and we had very little leg room. The van kept stopping at intersections in a working-class neighborhood, and people were exiting and boarding the van near strip malls and run down houses. It looked suspiciously like my childhood neighborhood. Trump was visibly annoyed by the plebians and poverty, and he looked so utterly ridiculous in his Australian hat and leisure suit that I finally couldn't help laughing out loud. My laughter infuriated him, but I couldn't stifle it. His grumpiness only increased my mirth. I finally said, “Hey, don't worry so much about how you look! It's not that important! No one is going to see you out here anyway!” Then he became sullen and silent, refusing to talk or look at me. As we drove on silently through the rainy night, I suddenly wondered how in the hell we were supposed to play golf in the dark. Then I woke up. I felt good. No chest pain. W.N. Denver, Colorado March 7, 2024 e Reply Quick Reply

Mark, Thanks for deflecting attention away from the crucial details about the Domingo Benavides case with your trivial straw man argument about the conflicting dates of his brother's murder. Do you have an idiom about "red herrings" in Denmark? 🤥 Belzer, et.al., have a brief chapter on the Benavides case on pgs. 97-99 of the 2013 edition of Hit List. The gist of the case is that Domingo Benavides clearly identified Tippt's killer as someone other than Oswald. He subsequently received multiple threats about his witness testimony, and he changed his story after his brother was shot in the head. Belzer's conclusion was that the murder of Eddy Benavides could not be definitively linked to the JFK assassination, but that Domingo Benavides had, obviously, been a victim of repeated witness intimidation. Thanks, again, for sharing your invaluable insights about the case.

Robert, I'm glad that you brought up the case of Mary Pinchot Meyer in the context of Hit List. CIA man, Wistar Janney, (Peter Janney's father) called his friend, Ben Bradlee, (Mary Meyer's brother-in-law) "shortly after lunch" to tell him that Mary Meyer was dead. James Angleton, a close friend of Janney, also knew around noon that Meyer had been killed. But the police didn't identify Meyer's body, or issue an APB or announcement about Meyer's death until about 6:00 PM. It was an expert assassination-- a shot to the back of the head at point-blank range, followed by a point-blank shot to the heart-- by an assassin using the alias, "William Mitchell." When Ben Bradlee and his wife, Toni, (Mary's sister) later went to Mary Meyer's apartment, James Angleton was already in the apartment, reading Meyer's diary-- which he confiscated.

I watched Biden's SOTU address but had no stomach for the GOP response. Biden came out swinging, and I was especially gratified by his opening condemnation of the MAGA betrayal of Ukraine and dishonesty about J6. Nor did he pull any punches in denouncing the Republican SCOTUS judges for overturning Roe v. Wade. I noticed that MAGA Mike Johnson and the Congressional Republicans sat like statues for most the address. Frankly, I can hardly stand the sight of those SOBs.

This is sad news, indeed. My heart goes out to Oliver Stone and his family.