Michaleen Kilroy

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

That is some first-rate writing and reporting you did for Medium. Easy to read, yet in-depth---not something that just happens (well, for most of us). 

Appreciate your comments, Ben. I write all day everyday for tech (now for quantum computing).  So applying it to a passion like JFKA comes naturally. Just not sure what’s more complicated - quantum physics or JFKA

5 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Michaleen K--

 

Congrats on trying, peacefully, which is all any of us can do. 

I have pitched my "small bullet hole in Connally's shirt" story w/o success. 

But I think we have a shot at a Blakely op-ed in the NYT or WaPo. 

Yes, the JFKA community was always at a great disadvantage to the national security state, for many reasons. 

Being a herd of cats (with plenty of intel felines in the mix), the JFKA community never mounted a unified platform. Some might uncharitably say a shrill contentiousness is a characteristic of the community.

 

Hahaha. 

7 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Great shout. 
Realistically, if we want any chance of these records being released, we should be hitting as many sources of exposure as possible. Kennedy family members would be of great use too. 

If Caroline ever made a statement in support of full release, Biden would do it. Period.

Great work on getting Blakey involved, Ben and Lawrence.

I honestly believe the reason this case hasn’t been solved is because of not doing the necessary PR best practices on the conspiracy research side. CIA played it better than us. And tbh, we’re starting late on this considering the decision is in October. Guarantee you CIA and FBI have already been lobbying Biden admin for continued obstruction.

FYI, I reached out to Blakey a couple of years ago regarding this Medium post I wrote below and he wrote back:

“I read your piece with great interest. Sadly, I don’t think anything will come of it in our lifetime.“

I included his reaction in the piece.
https://medium.com/@macgiollarua/a-jfk-assassination-question-that-still-requires-an-answer-377267b73309

Saw part 4 and part 1. Can’t say the truth isn’t out there when Jeff Morley gets the majority of airtime.

I think Fox sees this as a way to hurt Biden. There’s a general consensus he won’t do the right thing in releasing the files.

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

I am really surprised.

Someone just emailed me and said that in Part 4 they actually showed the documents I brought and let me explain them to the audience. I really did not think they were going to do that.

Somehow ended up watching Part 4 and then Part 1. Very well done. You and Oliver are heavily featured in Part 4. Pretty damning stuff with no real attempt by Fox to sugarcoat or downplay it.

Jefferson Morley was the most prominent in the two episodes I watched. I’m amazed they gave him that much airtime. His take is also extremely damning against the government.

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

There is actually some truth to this.  Many years ago, I think at the anniversary, Fox did a show in which I think they had on Dave Mantik.  It was a short 15 minute segment that got lost in the sea of crapola that was engulfing America at the time.

Yes even a broken clock is right twice a day. They were the only major cable network I’ve seen cover Jefferson Morley’s damning revelations on Joannides, for instance.
 

Doesn’t excuse their irresponsible programming on other fronts, but they seem to present JFKA in a more open way than CNN. 
 

When you look at JFKA media history, it was really the bastions of ‘liberal media’ in their day - NY Times and CBS - that immediately shutdown any speculation the official story could be wrong.

As an aside, Oliver is really doing one helluva job out there regarding JFKA. He’s on fire. And the great/sad part is, I suspect he’s absolutely correct. 

9 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Michaleen: 

Or “Can a Tiny Hole in a Coat Unravel the Mystery of JFKA?” 

Great hook! I see you have your thinking cap on. 

Well, I will give it a spin. Maybe I will try Salon, Slate etc. 

I wanted to peg the story to the the release of the JFKA docs. 

 

 

 

Good luck!

Compared to the other cable news outlets, Fox has done more to cover a possible conspiracy than the others.

I have found that liberals (of which I consider myself one) tend to be more hostile regarding a JFKA conspiracy than conservatives. And liberals tend to misrepresent and discount JFK’s progressive leadership as well.  

Looking forward to seeing the interview.
 

17 minutes ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

Thanks, Ben.

 

Have you approached media before with a JFKA story?  Other than Salon, it's almost in granite that they will either fear it or not believe it.  Remember, the media need to protect their reputations.  They can't look foolish or gullible or publish something someone else proves is a fabrication. 

 

Always good to offer someone with official credentials of some kind - either you or someone you quote - that can provide credibility.  Could be someone in forensics, law enforcement or a former federal JFKA investigator who agrees with you.  TBH, that didn't help either when HSCA Chief Counsel Robert Blakey posted his letter saying how he couldn't trust the CIA on anything they provided him during the investigation.  That should've got major news across the land but it didn’t. 

 

I actually had some good convos with this USA Today writer who I thought did a great job with this story:

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/11/21/jfk-spy-cuba-new-york-times-crozier/2425360001/

 

But he never moved on an update.  

 

I think the keys to generate interest are:

• Don't overreach.  Just state what you can prove.  To me, you don't have to prove who did it.  But I think your article proves a conspiracy did happen, according to the framework created by the WC itself.  No magic bullet = conspiracy.
• Have a hook.  Putting a compelling angle on the research might be of interest.  Always good to ask it in a question, e.g. "Was the answer to the JFKA conspiracy question always right in front of us?"  Or “Can a Tiny Hole in a Coat Unravel the Mystery of JFKA?” That means the media's not responsible for proving anything - you're just raising the question.

Not sure if any of this helps or even if you wanted it but thought I’d share some ideas.

Just saw in your bio you are journalist, so not sure you needed any of my advice above.

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Michaleen K-

Hey, no bias here against PR guys, or any other profession. 

Many thanks for noting the story. People like you make the effort worthwhile. 

And you are right: The JFKA long ago and still needs PR advice on how to advance a solid and irrefutable story. Particularly now, in front of Biden's decision to release the JFKA docs or not. 

I do not discount anyone's observations, for internal consumption, so to speak. 

My next bid will be to clean the story up some more, and try to hustle it to a so-called "major" publication, although the battle seems lost before it has begun.

The Atlantic? NYT weekend magazine? I can't imagine a publication....

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Another very powerful thing is that the focus is always about who fired the gun and from where (if not Ozzie). As opposed to what were the circumstances that led to him being killed and who was behind it. That serves as a distraction too, it prevents most of us from looking for a bigger picture. Most of us see things in isolation, we have a macro focus on traumatic events and a small proportion are deep analytical thinkers who see patterns easily. I do like the ‘cui bono’ logic espoused by some JFK authors. 

Yeah, like many before me I’d like to know who the ‘intellectual author’ was behind the assassination. But the key to getting there I think is to truly convince the public there was a conspiracy. The govt avoided that at all costs because there would’ve been mobs with torches at their doors.  That’s the best explanation I can think of for the massive, deliberate coverup.

3 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

Hi Michaleen,

I am also a PR guy. To me, the power of the government narrative has always been significantly more powerful than the chaps alleging conspiracy, the government had the natural proclivity of the public to conform on their side. But, those alleging conspiracy were much more compelling and had much more conviction. Hence why, the media deflection changed from lone nut, to a wash of other irrelevance, Mafia, Cuban’s, John Birch, etc etc. Anything but, at the military or CIA. Then it became about discrediting JFK, his achievements, his romantic attachments, his family’s behaviour, all of which made people care less about their slain leader. I think this was built into the strategy, layers of blame which took the heat off the actual planners or perpetrators. The truth was lost to the public in that sea of irrelevance and was powerful enough to create self doubt, too many options. An impartial media could have made a mockery of the magic bullet and opened everyones eyes, instead they pushed Arlene Spector and theoretical physics which was a fantasy. The CIA would have been very well versed by 1963 in psychological warfare, with sophisticated propaganda campaigns to mislead the public before and after their regime change operations abroad. 
 

Just my thoughts anyway. Thanks for sharing this. 
 

Cheers

Chris

 

 

Thanks, Chris.

Yes, it does show what masters the CIA were/are at propaganda. It took me a good 40 years to see the irrefutable evidence that was right in front of me the entire time.

I’m a PR guy (I know, people hate us worse than lawyers) and I’ve always felt the debate over the assassination was a war of PR tactics.

IMO, the conspiracy side hasn’t communicated its point in a simple, accessible fashion to cause a tipping point in public agitation that the federal govt could not ignore. 
 

I’ve been looking for that simple story for years and this article by Benjamin Cole for K&K finally made it clear to me.

The crux of the WR falls on the magic bullet obviously - the theory that JFK and Connally were hit by the same bullet.

But….

1) Both Connally and his wife testified to the WC that he turned to look at the state of the president after hearing what he thought was a shot. He saw that the president had slumped. Then as he was turning back around, Connally said he was hit.

2) This is verified by the Z-film. If you look at the effort it took Connally to turn around in that jump seat, and the look on his face, and the reaction of his wife, it’s obvious he has not been hit yet.

3) The majority of witnesses said the last two shots occurred almost on top of each other. There was approximately .8 seconds between Connally’s reaction to a shot and the JFK head shot. The Z-film and the Connally testimony all agree with that shot sequence.

4) The images of Connally’s jacket and shirt in Ben’s article looks like a first hit, not a tumbling bullet after hitting JFK.

Not sure why this was never clear to me before. Two bullets not a single magic one, last two shots nearly on top of each other - the Carcano could not possibly achieve that scenario.

This is the simple story with the simple image below to tell the world: 58 years ago one November day in Dallas, somebody got away with assassinating the president. And maybe worse, the US govt let them. 

Not to mention that the Carcano had to be broken down in nine distinct parts with several screws rolling all around. One tiny mistake in the bag construction, and a screw goes missing and there’s no assassination by a lone nut.

Frazier never mentions any clinking metal as LHO removes the bag from the back of his car. And in fact Frazier and his sister never saw a bag like this as shown to them, despite the immense pressure of the police and WC prosecutors.

Well done. Case closed on the Magic Bag Theory (MBT).

Personally, I believe there is still a very cozy relationship between the media and CIA as well as with Hollywood. I’ve seen too much pro-CIA propaganda in the press and TV/movies not to believe that.

(Classic example - Wapo ran a story on the Starbucks inside Langley near the 50th anniversary of Warren Report release.  It was reposted everywhere:   https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/at-cia-starbucks-even-the-baristas-are-covert/2014/09/27/5a04cd28-43f5-11e4-9a15-137aa0153527_story.html )

If we agree that the CIA’s unaccountable power and influence on  American society was solidified in the years following the JFK assassination, then it would only make sense that it continues.

And while the conspirators are long dead, I do believe the CIA is actively involved in preserving its power and existence by suppressing the final JFK documents, changing the topic or confusing the public on the assassination whenever it can, and constantly promoting itself as an essential American institution no matter how much undemocratic mayhem it has caused throughout its history.

From Wesley Buell Frazier to Mary Moorman to Robert MacNeil, the shot sequence is exactly as described by Dallas Sheriff Seymour Weitzman at the end of the article:

(WC Attorney) Joe Ball: How many shots did you hear?

Seymour Weitzman: Three distinct shots.

Joe Ball: How were they spaced?

Seymour Weitzman: First one, then the second two seemed to be simultaneously.

I could never figure out how that jibed with the Zapruder film but this article explains how Connally was hit right before the final shot.

I still believe there was an earlier missed shot that caused James Tague’s wound. I think it’s clear from ZF that JFK stops waving for a moment, a little girl in a white sweater stops running toward the president and looks toward the TSBD, and Connally looks grim and to his left.

Not sure why Connally never mentions this because it’s clear to me he’s heard something out of the ordinary.

But that also messes up the 3-shot sequence that so many seemed to have heard.

Either way, this is case closed on the MBT. Nice job!

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Joe, can you reply to my question?  Where did you find this review and who wrote it?

Jim - the review is by this smart Irish lady from Screen Daily:

https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/jfk-revisited-through-the-looking-glass-cannes-review/5161529.article

Wondering if anyone else has ever noticed this.

Everyone from Robert MacNeil to Wesley Frazier to Mary Ann Moorman (all in different parts of the plaza) say there was a 3-shot sequence: BOOM!.......................BOOM! BOOM! The last two shots were right on top of each other, eliminating the possibility of a single Carcano weapon that requires at least 2.5 seconds to recycle.

Railroad man S.M. Holland was on the bridge where the motorcade was heading with arguably the best view of the assassination. He heard four shots but also said the last two were nearly on top of each other, again eliminating a single Carcano rifle.

I saw Frazier and Moorman give this sequence in person. I tend to favor Holland’s more complete account but the final two shots gels with the others.

And check out how MacNeil describes the shots at 8:10 in below.

IMO, you don’t need much else to prove there was a conspiracy that day.

A possible tipping point for all the 1960s political assassinations?

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/2/21/2017338/-FBI-and-NYPD-conspired-to-assassinate-Malcolm-X-late-cop-alleges-in-shocking-letter

22 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks for that Mike.  I knew about the missing volume but I was not aware that Betsy had access to it.  And Morley was looking for her?  I will have to ask him if he found her.

As per your second comment, such might be the case.  But why would it take 13 months to do so?  But then, maybe it was supposed to be a secret.  Whichever, the idea that the CIA had little or no interest in Oswald is exploded by what Wolf found out about his file.

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.

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:

Quote

 

The OS prepares and executes the Agency security program and performs inspection functions.

The OS recommends Agency policies relating to security, and establishes procedures for implementation; obtains and evaluates pertinent information regarding the security acceptability of personnel for employment, assignment or association with the agency; develops and conducts internal counterintelligence programs...

 

My question:  What if Oswald was being considered for "employment, assignment or association with the agency?"

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 to lie to anyone about it to keep that a secret.  That to me is evidence of conspiracy.

And he's not very convincing at denying the agency's role in the assassination either:

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.