Jump to content
The Education Forum

Michaleen Kilroy

Members
  • Content Count

    174
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Michaleen Kilroy

  1. Yes, the fact that other defectors' files were NOT treated like LHO's should tell us something. Wherever the CIA lies or hides information, that's obviously where the truth can be found.
  2. A couple of things: It appears Morley wrote about Betsy Wolf a bit, noting that Volume 5 of 7 volumes held by the agency's Office of Security, went missing after the HSCA closed shop and Betsy Wolf had accessed them. Morley notes that Blount originally discovered the volume was missing. On a related front, here is an excerpt from CIA's description of the purpose and responsibilities of the Office of Security apparently from the 1960s: My question: What if Oswald was being considered for "employment, assignment or association with the agency?"
  3. Helms has been my No. 1 suspect in this case for some time. The evidence is clear he was up to his eyeballs in secretly directing the DRE during the time of LHO and lying his ass off to WC and HSCA about it after: https://kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/PRandJFKcase.pdf https://medium.com/@macgiollarua/a-jfk-assassination-question-that-still-requires-an-answer-377267b73309 For me, this evidence is more compelling and fruitful than debating murky photos from Dealey Plaza: a top intel official directed a key CIA front group involved with the presidential assassin and is willing t
  4. Nothing ever seems to be a coincidence with Mr. Dylan. My guess is he knows the book. Great article. Marks should get a posthumous Congressional Medal of Freedom award. He was eerily prescient.
  5. Yeah, who wants to be the guy who let's everyone know he was involved in the JFK assassination? Broken codes with dead compatriots, humiliation and hatred for the family, historical legacy of infamy forever... There's no real upside. The only guy who would publicly confess to rectify the historical record would, in the end, be a real man of courage. But that's not ever going to be some chickensh!t who ambushes a guy riding in a car with his wife.
  6. Thanks, Larry, for the additional info. I suppose I shouldn't be accusing anyone of the crime who's still alive but if anyone saw what actually happened, it sure seems like Jenkins would be the guy.
  7. I've read through the Wheaton interview and am getting through the rest. This seems like one of the most substantial finds in JFK research to me. Wheaton's bona fides seem beyond reproach, and Carl Jenkins seems like he was perfectly positioned to accomplish the assassination he boasted about. Quintero was just another in a long line of bitter anti-Castro fighters except is more likely a participant because he was being trained by the CIA to assassinate Castro. A few thoughts: It's strange Wheaton didn't talk to authorities sooner as a self-described lawman for life.
  8. I'm friends with Abraham Bolden on Facebook and felt compelled to ask him what he thought of Dylan's song. I got a great response: Just curious what James DiEugenio and Vince Palamara think of Bolden's story and if you've ever spoken with him. He seems to be the only reliable third-party witness still alive who saw the machinations of the conspirators up close before and after the assassination.
  9. Great job, Jim. I especially like the intro where you say it looks like Dylan wrote this specifically for people informed about the case. It sure does seem like that. As an aside, I do think Dylan wouldn't go to all this trouble without at least pointing to who he thinks the perps were. Here's where I think that is in the song/poem: ”Where we ask no quarter, and no quarter do we giveWe're right down the street, from the street where you live” This is when Dylan has taken on the voice of the conspirators in the song. They're talking to JFK - the street where he lives is Pennsy
  10. Anyone else feeling like the MSM is once again missing the point? The Nobel Prize-winning songwriter/poet and seminal figure of the 60s believes JFK was done in by a domestic conspiracy. And that fact has negatively affected American life ever since. ”Where we ask no quarter, and no quarter do we giveWe're right down the street, from the street where you live”
  11. Great find, Vince. If the document is accurate, it would appear to make Helms full of doo-doo yet again when he told CBS in the 80s he "personally checked" to see if there were any agents in the field in Dallas that day. Of course, he said no. If you had to cast someone from CIA being in the middle of things in Dallas, this guy would fit the bill. And he couldn't have been Secret Service because they said no agent was hanging around Dealey at anytime during or following the assassination. I think you're onto something.
  12. Thanks, Gene. To answer your questions: He's the subject of the recent USA Today story in the second to final slide: Ross Lester Crozier It was Ed Butler of INCA who facilitated the radio 'debate' (ambush?) between LHO and Carlos Bringuier. I meant that any anomalies citizen researchers found were not pursued by media because of the complexity of the case but more importantly journos were afraid of losing their jobs if they even tried to tackle it, I believe. Sylvan Fox, a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter for the for NY World-Telegram wrote the book in 1964 called 'Th
  13. No attack but a clarification: the preso wasn't meant to be a comprehensive theory of who killed JFK. It was a brief overview of the PR and propaganda tactics that have been used over the years to influence public opinion about the case.
  14. I added a bit more context here and there but mostly focused on the PR tactics that were used since that was my audience and topic. I got a few questions mostly for confirmation, such as "Butler did a media drop?" referring to the WDSU-TV film, and "The DRE release came out before the assassination?" Also, someone asked how COINTELPRO hurt citizen's movements. I said they would often try to associate them with communism. My impressions were a) the younger crowd was not emotionally tied to the assassination like older generations and b) they expressed no real shock in seeing governme
  15. This is great stuff, Pat. Thanks for sharing. I'm fascinated by the way the CIA attempted to manipulate public opinion from the get-go in this case, while also covering up material evidence for decades with top officials lying under oath. Following that path of public deception and what they're protecting to me is the path to real answers. And whatever Newman says about Veciana, no one's gonna convince me key agency players weren't involved or enablers. There's a reason top prosecutors Sprague and Tanenbaum immediately smelled a rat with David Atlee Phillips but the CIA again manag
  16. Thanks for posting this, Andrew. For this longtime PR professional and student of the assassination, I personally thought this article was a major breakthrough for MSM after 56 years of dodging the case. It addressed a relevant story from the case on its own terms - no reliance on conclusions from the WC or HSCA It used the factual discoveries of researchers when appropriate The story originated with the paper's own research - not just reporting what Jefferson Morley or other independent journalist found or announced It sets the context for what was to follow with th
  17. I don't what took me so long to see this documentary, but I finally rented it on Vimeo and was incredibly impressed. Yes, it has it's flaws like anything else, but for me it's the best single piece of evidence that a conspiracy was afoot in the lead-up to Dallas. The best JFK documentaries for me feature as much footage of real sites and real people as possible. I get tired of theorizing and want to see who was involved. This doc delivers, featuring rare if never-before-seen archival footage including a video of one helluva suspicious character in the case - Ed Butler https://spart
  18. I don't find Helms funny or innocuous. In fact, I find him culpable:
  19. The strange thing is Holland is absolutely clear on the details on what he heard and saw, and his testimony perfectly matches what everyone can see in the Z film, IMO. And about six guys went with him to the picket fence so they must have heard and saw the same thing. I can't believe he was wrong about the foot. Why would he even say it if he didn't see it? Then it shows up in a photo of the limo on the way to Parkland? That's quite a coincidence if Holland got it wrong. My guess is JFK was in his death throes as the limo came out from the under bridge and that's when Holland saw
  20. I was watching the SM Holland interview with Mark Lane recently (who IMO offers the most damning evidence of a shot from the front) and noticed this photo at the end. I had never seen it before but it was included after Holland said JFK was hit so hard by the shot from the knoll that it "flipped him over" and his foot was hanging over the car door. You don't really see this in the Zapruder film but is this true?
  21. Would be great to try the lie detector test on this interview:
  22. Sure would love to see that test on certain CIA officials testifying to Congress during the HSCA, namely Helms, Phillips and Angleton.
  23. It’s all of a piece, isn’t it? Don’t think I have anything new but I like to try to point out issues that maybe the uninitiated may understand. The CIA’s obvious malfeasance means the case is never closed until they come clean on what the hell they were doing with LHO.
  24. FYI, I spent time looking at live coverage following the assassination. The film of Oswald handing out fliers in NO is broadcasted in the early evening of Nov. 22 by Cronkite and others. At that moment, if they didn’t know already, Helms and others at Langley knew the accused assassin had interfaced with their secretly funded propaganda group, the DRE. And they never said a word about it to anyone. Lone nut. Right. Sure seems obvious to me the highest echelon of the CIA was overseeing an operation to tie LHO to Castro in the public’s mind ASAP. That’s the ONLY reaso
×
×
  • Create New...