John Geraghty

Its in the post Steve

I started to watch the documentary in question again today but had to turn it off after 45 minutes due to my utter revoltion at the material and reasoning presented in it. Jack Rubys Rabbi described John Kennedy as Rubys god! For heavens sake! There is far too much suggestion and innuendo, placing Oswalds photo alongside the Rosenbergs and saying how he admired them. The approach to this documentary is quite sickening. They display Dale Myers impressive simulation as supposedly concrete proof evidence and describe the shooting as the single bullet fact. Posner says that the proof that Oswald killed Tippit is iron clad. I have often wondered what would happen if Gerald posner took part in these forums, and I have now come to the 'iron clad' conclusion that he would be shredded to pieces. Great work Tony, your article calms me down after watching such tripe. John

Thats true Lee, one wonders what his sources are.

I just came accross someone on Webermans website called John Geraghty! Anybody know this guy, it says he was a freelance journalist. On June 6, 1966, Robert Maheu told Director of Assistant Deputy Director of Security, (IOS) James P. O'Connell, that he got "the impression from Morgan, who is still dealing with the Saint Louis attorney, a personal friend of Senator Long, that the Committee has done some additional checking, and earlier information regarding Maheu's activities may not be as solid as earlier believed. I next asked Robert Maheu if Bernard Fensterwald had actually identified Sam Giancana, Onassis, Niarchus etc. by name as he had previously indicated to Colonel Sheffield Edwards and myself. He replied in the affirmative, and speculated that this convinced him someone has been 'talking.' He conjectured that several people knew about the bug on Onassis's New York office, including Taggart who, to date, has not contacted him. (Deleted) former CIA employee, and a John Geraghty (phonetic), a free lance newspaperman who was employed by him at the time

I assume that you have tried to contact him John. Any success? John

Michael, Thanks very much. I ordered a copy for about $27, not a bad deal. Its the illustrated version that I've ordered i believe. Thanks for your help John

I found this article, which gives some hope that the King assassination may be re-opened. The columnist takes the stance that Ray was involved, but the government was complicit. John Judge of the Office of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney respnds online to the article. http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/32964/ John

According to this (written apparently by Gary Revel, a "Special Investigator"), Tracy Barnes's Domestic Operations Division at the CIA was actually run from the White House by LBJ (who was only vice president when the division at the CIA was set up). This is big news to me if true. Who exactly is Gary Revel, and what would his source be on this? As chance would have it I just came accross this a few minutes ago while searching for more information on percy Foreman. This is about Gary Revel, apparently he wrote the 1977 song 'they slew the dreamer', which was about Martin Luther King THEY SLEW THE DREAMER Let a dreamer take the fall They turned the courtroom Into a costume ball THEY SLEW THE DREAMER Made another sing their song THEY SLEW THE DREAMER But the dream lives on Lyrics by Gary Revel-Mary Noel Published by Sony/ATV Music John

Has anybody heard of the writer/journalist Michael Dorman, he has written books on both Percy Foreman and Martin Luther King. If anybody has contact details for him i would be most appreciative. My email address is wereallgointaheavenlads@hotmail.com (its best just to copy and paste!) Thanks John I have just noticed that John has referenced Michael Dorman in his biography of Carlos Marcello. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmarcello.htm It appears near the bottom.

Hello all, I am looking for a book named 'King of the courtroom: Percy Foreman for the defence' by Michael Dorman Does anybody have a copy or had anybody seen it in a bookshop? If so please let me know. Cheers John

The full complement of episodes of Nigel Turners 'The men who killed Kennedy' are available on ebay for about £15. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/JFK-THE-MEN-WHO-KILL...1QQcmdZViewItem I assume they are breaking the law in some way, not that I'm complaining! John

I want to know if everyone is as disgusted as I was after reading this article in yesterdays irish Times. This is a daily section in the paper, in which the writer may write upon any topic they see fit. An Irishman's Diary Kevin Myers We are all familiar with the McCarthyite witch-hunts behind the George Clooney film, Good Night and Good Luck. They are a salutary tale of how one evil man, Senator Joe McCarthy, set about the destruction of liberalism in the US in an insane search for wholly imaginary communist subversives, using the hilariously named House Un-American Activities Committee. His hysterical campaign - amongst other things - ruined the careers of 10 innocent Hollywood screenwriters, and the lunacy was finally brought to an end by the one man who was brave enough to stand up to McCarthy: the broadcaster Ed Murrow. I guess we could all pass an exam on that one - but what we'd be passing would not be a test of our knowledge of history but of liberal mythology. For Senator McCarthy had nothing to do with the House Un-American Activities Committee. He was a senator, not a member of the House of Representatives, and the HUAC was first formed in 1938, when he was still an unsuccessful lawyer. And he was right. There was a major communist conspiracy to overthrow the US government, with the Hollywood Ten being an extended part of that conspiracy. And the man really responsible for ending McCarthy's campaign wasn't a journalist, but President Eisenhower. In 1943, a far-sighted soldier, Colonel Carter Clarke, head of army special branch, hearing reports of a possible separate peace between the USSR and Nazi Germany, ordered an analysis of Soviet diplomatic signals between the US and Moscow to check for such a possibility. Soviet codes depended on a complex ciphering system, involving a "one-time pad", which their authors thought impenetrable. However, US codebreakers managed finally to break it, and the resulting product was known as "Venona". It caused a sensation within American intelligence circles. Far from diplomats sending coded traffic to the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs in Moscow over any Nazi-USSR détente, they were actually sending vast amounts of intelligence material from trained field officers to General Pavel Finn, head of the KGB foreign desk. In 1944, one of the first telegrams to be broken revealed, terrifyingly, that Soviet spies had even penetrated Project Manhattan, the programme to make an atom bomb. By 1948, and just from the small proportion of Soviet material which cryptanalysts had been able to break, US intelligence had identified 349 US spies working for the Soviet Union. They were everywhere. Harry White, the second most powerful figure in the US Treasury, architect of the Bretton Woods Agreement, and founder-member of the US delegation at the UN, was one. Lauchlin Currie, a trusted aide to President Roosevelt, was one. Maurice Halpern, head of project-research at the Office of Strategic Studies (forerunner to the CIA) was one. William Perle, running the main US jet-engine development project, was one. Laurence Duggan, a top man at State and the main foreign policy adviser to the vice-president, was one. David Greenglass, Klaus Fuchs and Julius Rosenberg, all nuclear scientists at Los Alamos, were ones. Judith Coplon, senior FBI admin officer controlling the bureau's counter-espionage files, was one. And Gregory Silvermaster was both senior government economist and a spymaster running an entire network of communist agents at every level of government. That was bad. Worse, how many more were there? For it was true. There really were reds under the beds - and not nice reds who thought we should all live in peace and harmony, but loyal servants of Stalin, eager to impose his state terrorism around the world. With them installed in the heart of US government and of defence, the Soviet Union had been confident enough to go on the global offensive. Post-1945, and Eastern European countries fell one by one to communist parties, communist insurgents began wars in Vietnam and Malaya, and by 1949 were victorious in China, the same year the Soviet Union detonated an exact copy of the US Fat Boy atom bomb. The next year, North Korea attacked South Korea, nearly consuming it, and the US nuclear threat, which might have deterred that invasion, had been neutralised by the Los Alamos spies. In other words, in essence, Joe McCarthy was right. He brought the appalling truth to the attention of the people of the US. However, he was also a drunken demagogue and a xxxx, and often and easily ran out of control. Nonetheless, utterly unlike Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs or the Hollywood Ten, he was, roughly, on the side of democracy. And in the end he was defeated by democratic means which he had himself defended - the institutions of the USA. Three months before Ed Murrow had even begun his television criticism of McCarthy, President Eisenhower authorised the US army (which of course 10 years before, had first discovered the level of the internal communist threat) to start its own major criticisms of McCarthy and his campaign. But of course, "liberal" Hollywood today would never make a film in which Eisenhower and the US army are seen to defend democracy, so the hero of Goodnight has to belong to the golden media classes. Meanwhile, the knife in McCarthy's reputation is twisted by calling him an anti-Semite - though this disingenuously conceals the unhappy truth that the vast majority of Soviet agents in the US were Jewish. Moreover, we know this. Had the Hollywood Ten been stooges of that infinitely less chic (and, as it happens, considerably less murderous) school of totalitarianism, fascism, liberal America at the time would have been shrilly demanding their eviction from Hollywood. And equally, they would not be martyrs of the silver screen today.

I also enjoyed myself immensly. Having the opportunity to speak to so many pleasant and knowledgeable people made it one my most enjoyable trips abroad. It was well worth the few quid i spent to attend. It was great to put a face to so many members whom I had never met before including John Simkin, Mark Bridger, John Gill, Mark Rowe and many others. Sherry Gutierrez's presentation was a rveelation and really do encourage people to buy her cd rom when it becomes available on the lancer site, it will blow you away. I also had the opportunity to pick up Ian Griggs bok 'no case to answer', which I am swiftly making my way through (thanks in part to a 7 hour wait in Gatwick on Monday!). I would really encourage anybody who has an interest in the Kennedy Assassination to join DPUK, you don't pay much, but you get a hell of a lot in return. See www.dealeyplazauk.co.uk for details, I am especially looking in the directions of both Steve Turner and Adam Wilkinson as I am positive they would love the group and find several like minded individuals. I not only learned a great deal about the assassination, but also about blues music (with thanks to Allan Johnston, Ian, Barry Keane and Mark Bridger) , English beer and the various collections of Mark Rowe. A large pat on the back should be given to Barry Keane, who not only organised the seminar, but also gave a presentation, Well done Barry. A very successful trip from my point of view, and a significant ste forward for the group. Cheers John Geraghty

While the topic of the canterbury conference is up I may as well say that this years seminar is upon us again, running on the 18th and 19th of March. I am glad to say that I will be in attendance. For further info check out www.dealeyplazauk.co.uk . I look forward to talking to everyone I met in London a few months ago and those who I am yet to meet. I'm sure either John Simkin or Barry Keane will post a reminder as the date grows closer. All the best to you all. John

Well said Ron, Lecturers are supposed to present historical evidence to a class and allow the students to draw thier own conclusions based upon the information given to them. I had an elective in American History this year and we briefly covered the assassinations, but only the political impact of them and no specifics, although I was pleased to see that in the core text given to us by our lecturer mention was made of a possible conspiracy in the JFK murder. I emailed my lecturer on the topic of the assassination and she had no definite idea on the case and conceded that I probably knew more about it thatn she did. Lecturers may have opinions, but to force it upon students is to be an irresponsible historian. Even a quick view of the syllabus which Mcadams presents tells you that the course is biased. The placing of certain words in inverted commas gives the impression that this evidence is about to be debunked or is worthless. e.g. Confessed conspirators "but we dont know which one", people with "inside knowledge" . Extremely irresponsible work. I would like to take a closer look at this course and possiblt find a person who has taken this course. I must say, for me it would be worth taking a year out to study at Marquette just to debate Prof. Mcadams for half a year, Oh what fun! John

Just some light entertainment that I thought you all might enjoy. Apparently I am most similar to JFK! http://similarminds.com/leader.html john

Barry Keane has written an excellent article on skip rydberg, named 'For the sake of historical accuracy' which details conversations with Harold Rydberg. Barry has generously agreed to let me display his article, complete with photographs on my website. I am currently having difficulties uploading the articles properly, though it should be up in the next 2 days. I shall notify you when it is ready as it is definitely worth a read. All the best John http://thepresidenthasbeenshot.4t.com

I recorded the documentary as I was in work when it was aired. I turned it off about 15 minutes through when the host began to interview a psychic who claimed to have a link to Marilyn Monroes body. Sky documentaries are abominable. They stated as fact that JFK had VD. The documentary pretty much went in the same direction as Matthew Smiths book that Ron has already mentioned, which is a good read. All in all it was a documentary worthy of the sun newspaper and was suitably dumbed down for all zombies to understand. John

I recently saw this in a documentary. Who is this guy runnig out of the line of fire, visible above the bonnet of the lincoln? http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z410.jpg john

Eugene Thane Cesar, according to Dan Moldea now lives in the Phillippines. Just for the record if anyone were to contact him. John Geraghty

I recently saw pieces of a series on the discovery channel called Unsolved History. Included were shows on both the JFK and RFK assassinations. The RFK documentary uses laser technology to match wounds from sirhans gun and the possibility of shots having come from eugene thane cesar. They reconstructed the scene in the hotel in the kitchen where RFK was shot, they used unsuspecting extras and asked them who had shot and how many bullets were fired. In this scenario Sirhan shot eight shots and cesar shot kennedy four times. The extras mostly said 2-4 shots were fired and a lot of them could not see a gun. Nobody noticed the actor playing cesar firing blanks at point blank range. Tests were also done to prove that Thomas Naguchi was right in saying that Kennedy had been shot in the head between 1-3 cm's away. Dan Moldea put forward his theory that RFK was pushed forward by the crowd into Sirhan, which allowed him to shoot ar point blank range. The documentary gives an excellent account of exactly what happened in the kitchen and who bore witness to it. The documentary is replayed fairly regularly on discovery channel(in the uk and ireland at least) Has anyone seen this documentary or do they know the peoplt that produced the show or the computer analysis? John Geraghty

Not familiar with it Jim, but it does seem like a similar scenario that was used against Kennedy. This could presumably be a popular way of going about assassination, it doesn't necessarily mean that Taylor was in on JFK's assassination, but he has always been on my list of possible conspirators in the early planning stage. John

Hi Mark, If Johns emails are to a person in the US you are completely right. John mentioned that one of his emails that may have been read was to Cuba so that would mean they have no right to do so. You are completely right my friend. John I am Irish and my country has never been 'bailed out' by the united States. My point is that it is all well and good to monitor the correspondence of a suspected terror target (as long as there is sufficient evidence to make one suspicious), but that it is not in the interest of the general populace to have their rights eroded. I can quite confidently assume Thomas that you are definitely not a security threat to the United States government so they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make. John suspected that it was possible that some of his emails wer intercepted, he is not a united States citizen, nor is he a threat to that government or its people, that is a major violation of his rights to freedom of speech. John The President and the Congress of the United States are entrusted with the "right", as well as the "responsibility" of insuring the safety of American citizens who are abroad, or located on our own soil. When either "home grown" threats (aka citizens) within a host country, or immigrated elements within these countries pose any threat to American citizens located anywhere in the world, then our Government has the right and responsibility to take whatever actions it deems legal and necessary to protect those citizens. We do not, and will not respect the soverignty of either a nation, or of the rights of individuals, who by virtue of their activities, pose a threat to US citizens, whether located at home or abroad. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I can quite confidently assume Thomas that you are definitely not a security threat to the United States government so they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To the government as it currently exists, you are of course quite correct. However, to crooked governments such as that of LBJ, RMN, Gerald Ford, etc; then americans such as myself pose the greatest threat of all. And, with a new generation of combatants who are truly civillians but now have the experience of foreign service under their belt, the government of the US will be far more reluctant to continue along the various pathways in which it has gone astray. We are a "civillian" army, and we will not tolerate a government that stands by with blinders on while other governments and/or persons plot and carry out their activities which randomly kill american citizens. And, if at any time the Government of the United States allows such to happen, then it is time for the "civillian army" to exercise those rights as given to us within the constitution of the United States. In event that this government ceases to represent the "will of the people", then it is time for a new direction and new government. Thankfully, our nation has recognized that the sensible and peaceful means to such change lies in the electoral process. Nevertheless, we, as american citizens, have the constitutional right to dispose of this government, by whatever means necessary, if and when it ever ceases to look after the will and interests of the people. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Direct and/or indirect contact with and/or through any element which is deemed a threat to national security is adequate reason for monitoring. Kind of like following that "family tree" of certain individuals. One never knows exactly what will be found until all of the branches and leaves have been inspected. Then, if "barking up the wrong tree", one has many other trees in the forest which need to be checked. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Violation of my personal "civil liberties" is completely irrelevant to me, and if the government of this country feels that such actions are necessary to bring home alive even one more of those young men and/or women who are currently serving in the armed forces, then I am willing to sign a notarized waiver of any and/or all of these rights if necessary. In the event a complete violation of my personal civil liberties, to include incarceration without due process, would have brought home the young Sean Cooley from my old MS National Guard unit, then lock me up, as I am too old to count, and those like Sean are the future of this nation. Honor the fallen: Army Sgt. 1st Class Sean M. Cooley Sean Cooley is the fifth Mississippi National Guard soldier to die in Iraq. ... KALSU, IRAQ — Sgt. 1st Class Sean Cooley was remembered as a hero this week ... http://www.militarycity.com/valor/643612.html Personally, I have absolutely no rights to whine and cry about potential and/or supposedly "violations" of my civil liberties, so long as persons such as Sean are still out there. They will insure that this country and it's government do not abuse the rights of it's "people". Well Thomas, Thats your view on things and i will have to respect it. I'm not going to change your mind and its your country, not mine. All the best John

I am Irish and my country has never been 'bailed out' by the united States. My point is that it is all well and good to monitor the correspondence of a suspected terror target (as long as there is sufficient evidence to make one suspicious), but that it is not in the interest of the general populace to have their rights eroded. I can quite confidently assume Thomas that you are definitely not a security threat to the United States government so they should have no reason to read your emails or any other communications you might make. John suspected that it was possible that some of his emails wer intercepted, he is not a united States citizen, nor is he a threat to that government or its people, that is a major violation of his rights to freedom of speech. John

Of course. But it is important for us to know that our emails are being read. The idea is to intimidate those who seek to expose the CIA. During the 1980s a story was leaked that MI5 had constructed a list of people who were members of dangerous political groups (CND, Anti-Apartheid Movement, Amnesty International, Greenpeace, etc.). This blacklist would then be used to stop these people from making progress in their chosen careers. I am not sure this story is true but a lot of people believed it. Especially with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. With high unemployment in the 1980s, people began to leave these organizations. At the same time students refused to join these left-wing political groups. They did not want to ruin their careers before they started. The left was virtually destroyed during the 1980s. Although I am not sure this blacklist actually existed, a belief in it played its part in reducing the opposition to this right-wing government. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of course. But it is important for us to know that our emails are being read. The idea is to intimidate those who seek to expose the CIA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not likely! It would appear that you really do have it in for the American Intelligence System. Personally, the CIA can moniter whatever of my transmissions they like, so long as I, as a "free" american, can walk around in a "free" nation, and have the luxeries and "Freedoms" which we as American Citizens enjoy. It happens to be one of those small prices one must pay for "FREEDOM" and the rights to enjoy it. Now, in the case of the "Disneyland/Fantasyland" theater of operations in which some persons brain seems to operate, there is of course little necessity for such activities and it is in their opinions an "invasion" of their privacy. However, since Snow White and the seven dwarfs is make believe, and I for one live in the reality of the surrounding world. Have at it CIA! Thomas, You may wish to read your constitution, free speech and all that. For another individual to read your personal material is unconstitutional and illegal. If this is taken away your 'freedom' isn't worth a damn. John