PLACING OUR OWN NEWSPAPER AD TO RAISE AWARENESS

[Herb White]

Dr. Fetzer began MIDP with 25 SMOKING GUNS, which touch most of the

major relevant proofs of conspiracy.

Jack

I believe most people respond to visual imagery much more readily and viscerally than they do to the written word, at least initially in getting their attention. I suggest getting some of the most damning/convincing photo evidence, along with a short narrative concerning it's genesis and featuring them in the ad as well as the printed word. A clear, large copy of the badgeman photo with a summation of Gordon Arnold's story, a sharp version of Groden's find in the uncropped Dillard photo of a man in the window just after the shots and a clear image of the dark complected man speaking into a radio, with the subsequent photo of him sitting with the large bulge under his jacket along with a quote about his activity prior and after the shooting would be very effective imo. We probably tend to forget how much these images effected us when we first saw them over the years. I don't know what % of the general public is familiar with them, but I bet it's a smal fraction, especially of younger people.

Herb

People love photos, but they take a great deal of space and more to explain the significance. As to the % of the publi of any age really familiar/conversant with much of what is discussed on this part of the Forum, I hazard low single digits. Part of the ''art" of doing what everyone is proposing is to get the MOST interesting, thought-provoking, suspicious, at-odds-with-official-version and understandable points - point the reader to where they can get more information; why they should; consequences of not; what they can do and how, etc. Not easy, but do-able!

Peter,

I agree with much of what you say, but so many folks won't read unless they are attracted by something visual or otherwise. People understand that the enhancement of the images have progressed exponentially over 40 years and may take the time to connect the story with the photo.

Isn't a picture still worth a thousand words?

[Tim Gratz]

I can see a twelve page insert in USA Today on Thursday, Nov 22. It would reach 2.2 million readers.

If we sell 1/4 page ads at $25,000 each, I think we would need 2.5 pages of ads (or 10 1/4 page ads) to cover the cost of printing and the cost of insertion in USA Today. That would give us 9.5 pages for editorial content. I assume the first (cover) page would be simply a photo of JFK and the caption 1917-1963. So that leaves 8.5 pages for actual editorial content. That's a lot of content.

Do you think it is possible to get 10 advertisers to pay $25,000 each for a 1/4 page ad? The price is far less than a 1/4 page ad in the actual paper. (Perhaps Ford Motor Company would buy an ad.)

Edited August 3, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

I agree that conservative businesses would probably be wary of financing a booklet re a conspiracy.

I would probably look toward "socially progressive" corporations like--maybe--Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream.

I would look to members for suggestions of possible advertisers. Perhaps Amazon? In part because of the plug for books in the booklet.

What if we built in a 10% incentive? Anyone who places a $25,000 ad gets a $2,500 fee, for instance.

Edited August 3, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Robert Howard]

This is only meant as a suggestion for a section of the aforementioned ad.....It might go something like this.....

"Many Americans who are aware, or agree, that there are even to this day, unresolved areas regarding the death of John F. Kennedy, may be aware of certain historical individuals who after the President's assassination later stated in sworn testimony before Congressional representatives, or to specific individuals, were alleged to have been contract employees, of intelligence agencies of the United States government, alleging conspiratorial associations with individuals other than Lee Harvey Oswald, only to have the agency in question respond by denying that the individual in question was "ever or at any time" associated with said agency.

In the phraseology of intelligence operations such a response is categorized as "plausible deniability," which, in turn has led to a impasse of sorts, in which the person in question could actually be telling the absolute truth regarding their statements, while, at the same time the Agency or agencies, to a degree are or were, also telling the truth but in a manner that is specifically designed to thwart the integrity or truthfulness of that persons statements. Such circumstances have repeatedly taken place with regards to

exploring the most compelling aspects of the circumstances surrounding the death not only of John F. Kennedy, but in the deaths of other political leaders in other countries besides the United States.

This dynamic lies at the heart of the unresolved areas of the death of John F. Kennedy itself, and until this situation is addressed to all American's satisfaction, there is not only the possibilty, but even the probability that such a situation could arguably, take place in the future.

In a democratic society, for circumstances such as the one described herein to be an accepted fact, are a threat not only to the foundation of democratic governance, but cast aspersions on the moral integrity of oversight intelligence operations as being an entity unto themselves, accountable to elected officials behind closed doors, but in truth, unaccountable to the American people themselves."

Obviously, editing for length is an obvious issue, but I believe it addresses fundamental issues in a general sense.

[Tim Gratz]

I think the new ad could be used to pressure Congress for a new investigation.

People could be asked to clip and mail a card which would then be delivered (by us) to their congressperson.

Or perhaps it could be done through an e-mail petition.

What do you think?

[Dawn Meredith]

I think the new ad could be used to pressure Congress for a new investigation.

People could be asked to clip and mail a card which would then be delivered (by us) to their congressperson.

Or perhaps it could be done through an e-mail petition.

What do you think?

Tim

We have already had Congress investigate and look what it got us. Other than the headline "probably conspiracy"

it was a re-run of the WC.

We need some very simple essays on the net. The Kennedy assassination for dummies. If people just knew the basics of say what the magic bullet theory really means, in a totally simplified manner, more people might begin to study this case. A problem is that the articles all begin by presupposing a certain amount of knowledge and then get so detailed that a beginner might lose interest.

An add would attract some initial momentary attention but I don't think it would lead anywhere. Nice thought though.

Dawn

[Tim Gratz]

Dawn, there have been a lot of developments in the case after the HSCA closed shop, have there not been?

I think it would be interesting if every member could determine if his or her congressperson would support a new investigation if persuaded there were no leads to be followed. Certainly the Joannides matter is one of them. So is the issue wherther Odio knew Oswald. And certainly the Paines ought to give testimony under oath.

Don't give up on a congressional investigation. A lot would depend on the quality of the staff, both investigators and counsel.

I also think a lot of the staff members who worked for the HSCA could help "jump start" a new investigation.

Don't you think a new investigation if properly led could resolve the Joannides issue? No more CIA stonewalling.

I think it would be wonderful in Fonzi would have to retitle his book "the Second to the Last Investigation" and if the last investigation provided some real answers!

[Greg Parker]

We have already had Congress investigate and look what it got us. Other than the headline "probably conspiracy"

it was a re-run of the WC.

Dawn, I have to agree with Tim on this. History isn't bound to repeat itself. It will only do that it if the circumstances allow for it. Tim suggests a lot would depend on the quality of the staff, both investigators and counsel. That's true, but that wasn't the entire problem with the HSCA - after all, they did come up with the right answer on conspiracy. It was Congress and the Justice Dept which then put the lid back on that particular box. With that in mind, the make-up of Congress and Senate would also have a major bearing. And I am not talking about parties, but individuals. There are also new modes of mass communication and a more cynical populace which come into play...

I think it would be interesting if every member could determine if his or her congressperson would support a new investigation if persuaded there were no leads to be followed. Certainly the Joannides matter is one of them. So is the issue wherther Odio knew Oswald. And certainly the Paines ought to give testimony under oath.

Presumably Tim means "new leads". I have provided a link on my website to the contact details of members of Congress asking that people do just as Tim suggests. If any one does take up the challenge, it would be great if you could post your reply here and/or at my site so others can judge the merits of the reply.

Tim, just to clarify... the idea I put forward earlier in this thread was not for a paid glossy insert. What I had in mind was a supplement. Newspapers often have them to commemorate special occasions To use a made up example, National Gardening Week may be coming up so the New York Daily Bugle decides to run a supplement to highlight the importance of this great and glorious occasion. So... they start contacting businesses, government departments and private organizations which deal with gardening or related endeavors to sell advertising for the supplement. This will often include deals where, by paying for an ad, the paper will also include an article in the supplement about that business or org, perhaps about what it is doing to celebrate Gardening Day, or whatever...

If the idea was put to a major newspaper to run a supplement on the anniversary of the assassination - I agree with others that selling advertising for it would be difficult, but perhaps given the subject matter, a newspaper could be found willing to take it on anyway. Types of things that could be included: a poll on the question: should there be another investigation? Articles on why a new investigation is needed/why previous ones failed. News on upcoming events and forums. Book reviews. Interviews with politicians/legal experts.

I mentioned advertising in my initial post here only as one means of making it an attractive idea to a newspaper. But maybe what needs to be sold to an editor is not the possibility of revenue, but the idea that this is important and of continuing public interest.

[Terry Mauro]

...

We ought to be able to complete an advertisement demonstrating (conservatively) why a conspiracy existed that can fit on a single page and run it in the US Today on November 22.

I'd like to see our members e.g. Michael Griffith, Larry Hancock and Pat Speer assist in writing the piece.

...

Now THAT is a freakin' brilliant idea.

I second the nomination of Larry Hancock.

How many thousands of dollars do we need?

(I'm sure we can't afford as much space as Kuntzler.)

Ok, so just brainstorming this... We need:

-To decide which newspaper we want to target and research prices.

-The copywriter; Larry is ideal (contingent on his agreement ).

-A treasurer or treasurers to collect and save the money and make sure this project is not somehow sabotaged.

A lot of thought needs to go into that...

-A coordinator.

-Legal input (Dawn?).

-A way to insure that if one person on the team flakes out the project goes forward without losing much time or work.

-A way to deal with the inevitable agitators and infiltrators.

-Stated goals, for example--insistence that all papers from the JFK act be released, that the murder FINALLY receive a proper investigation, that the documents that are sealed until 2013 or whatever be released, etc...

-A call to action--something we want the audience to do to move us towards our goals.

BK is very strategic and practical and could (if willing) help us come up with goals and calls to action.

-Ideally do this as a coalition of forums Education/John, Lancer/Debra, Research/Rich, etc.

-Then we might need a group name.

We should do this.

We really should do this.

*******************************************************************************

"-Ideally do this as a coalition of forums Education/John, Lancer/Debra, Research/Rich, etc."

Excellent proposal, Myra! And, don't forget Len Osanic from Prouty's. osanic@prouty.org. These forum admins need to coalesce and form a more united front. Hell, I've been begging for them to do that for years. We need to pool the best and the brightest of our human resources, here and now.

How about a triumvirate of coordinators consisting of B.K., T.G., and C.D., for starters. That seems like a pretty well-balanced-across-the-board swath of political and philosophical representation. The triumvirate could select P.R. representatives, John Geraghty, for one, and Nathaniel H., for another, come to mind. These reps could be counted on to be strategically placed, and would best serve in delegating to those selected as most qualified, based upon prior experience, to carry out the actual foot work. A small base of operations could be organized, even if only in cyber-space, with a staff of volunteers who could help set up fund raisers, or take contributions, no matter how large or small, to help with the overhead, and possibly defray some of the cost.

That's just one idea. I'm quite sure there are others out there in the research community with a whole lot more expertise at organizing something like this. But, in any event, you can count me in.

Edited August 13, 2007 by Terry Mauro

[Tim Gratz]

Thanks, Greg, thanks, Terry.

I think Greg has some great ideas.

It might be interesting to get someone with "credentials" e.g. a published author, to write to every member of congress to see if there are even a handful who are at the outset interested.

In order to convince Congess to put the resources (both time and money) into a new investigation, I think it will be important to identify areas of investigation needed because of developments since HSCA closed operations. I certainly think the Joannides matter is important because it appears that Joannides was actively working to obstruct the HSCA investigation. Despite what the courty might rule, I am sure the public would want the CIA to "come clean" on Joannides. The problem is that I suspect that at the current time only a very small percentage of Americans are even aware of the Joannides case and its potential significance.

I also think Congress would be a lot more inclined to re-open an investigation if there was a public outcry for one. That is one thing I hope the supplement, if done right, might be able to accomplish.

Interesting what Sen. Dodd (a presidential candidate) would think of a new investigation. As you know, he was a member of HSCA.

Does anyone know if there is truth to the story that HSCA had a number of investigative suggestions that it turned over to the DOJ?

[Terry Mauro]

Thanks, Greg, thanks, Terry.

I think Greg has some great ideas.

It might be interesting to get someone with "credentials" e.g. a published author, to write to every member of congress to see if there are even a handful who are at the outset interested.

In order to convince Congess to put the resources (both time and money) into a new investigation, I think it will be important to identify areas of investigation needed because of developments since HSCA closed operations. I certainly think the Joannides matter is important because it appears that Joannides was actively working to obstruct the HSCA investigation. Despite what the courty might rule, I am sure the public would want the CIA to "come clean" on Joannides. The problem is that I suspect that at the current time only a very small percentage of Americans are even aware of the Joannides case and its potential significance.

I also think Congress would be a lot more inclined to re-open an investigation if there was a public outcry for one. That is one thing I hope the supplement, if done right, might be able to accomplish.

Interesting what Sen. Dodd (a presidential candidate) would think of a new investigation. As you know, he was a member of HSCA.

Does anyone know if there is truth to the story that HSCA had a number of investigative suggestions that it turned over to the DOJ?

********************************************************************************

"It might be interesting to get someone with "credentials" e.g. a published author, to write to every member of congress to see if there are even a handful who are at the outset interested."

Exactly.

"In order to convince Congess to put the resources (both time and money) into a new investigation, I think it will be important to identify areas of investigation needed because of developments since HSCA closed operations. I certainly think the Joannides matter is important because it appears that Joannides was actively working to obstruct the HSCA investigation. Despite what the court might rule, I am sure the public would want the CIA to "come clean" on Joannides. The problem is that I suspect that at the current time only a very small percentage of Americans are even aware of the Joannides case and its potential significance."

And, that's why a project such as this one be undertaken, if for no other reason than to inform that larger percentage of the American population, of just these discrepancies, and how the positioning of someone such as a Johannides, served to obstruct and subsequently derail the HSCA investigation. The same may be said for Dulles' appointment to, and his coordination of, the Warren Commission. Secrets of the Secret Team in action.

Edited August 13, 2007 by Terry Mauro

[Tim Gratz]

I am pleased to state that a well known celebrity has agreed to render assistance in raising funds for an advertisement.

I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad.

I think it would be helpful to set up an organization that would allow tax deductibility of contributions for the ad.

There would also be an escrow fund established so contributions would be returned unless enough are received to pay for the ad.

The ad will be straightforward. It will detail why there are "fresh leads" to be investigated, e.g. the Joannides litigation, the new NAA studies, the Gene Wheaton allegations, the possible solution to the Odio incident and what it means, etc. The ad will be low key and not endorse any specific assassination theories since we will need a broad base of support.

Then it will request readers to get involved in a campaign to have a new investigation of these leads, preesumably through a special prosecutor.

A LOT of work needs to be accomplished to: 1) draft the correct ad; 2) raise funds for it; and 3) organize a lobbying campaign to get Congress to act. We might accomplish 1 and 2 but fail to accomplish 3. But IMO we will never accomplish 3 unless we generate a groundswell of public support through the ad.

This may be our last opportunity since witnesses, maybe even conspirators, will continue to die.

[Terry Mauro]

I am pleased to state that a well known celebrity has agreed to render assistance in raising funds for an advertisement.

I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad.

I think it would be helpful to set up an organization that would allow tax deductibility of contributions for the ad.

There would also be an escrow fund established so contributions would be returned unless enough are received to pay for the ad.

The ad will be straightforward. It will detail why there are "fresh leads" to be investigated, e.g. the Joannides litigation, the new NAA studies, the Gene Wheaton allegations, the possible solution to the Odio incident and what it means, etc. The ad will be low key and not endorse any specific assassination theories since we will need a broad base of support.

Then it will request readers to get involved in a campaign to have a new investigation of these leads, preesumably through a special prosecutor.

A LOT of work needs to be accomplished to: 1) draft the correct ad; 2) raise funds for it; and 3) organize a lobbying campaign to get Congress to act. We might accomplish 1 and 2 but fail to accomplish 3. But IMO we will never accomplish 3 unless we generate a groundswell of public support through the ad.

This may be our last opportunity since witnesses, maybe even conspirators, will continue to die.

****************************************************************************

"I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad."

From what I've observed over the years, the standard form in asking for donations usually reads, or asks in increments of: 5 dollars, 10 dollars, 15 dollars, or 25 dollars, with a box denoting "other," should the donation be for a larger amount [or smaller], depending upon the subscriber's means. I would think 25 dollars might be doable for some folks.

Ter

[Myra Bronstein]

I am pleased to state that a well known celebrity has agreed to render assistance in raising funds for an advertisement.

I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad.

I think it would be helpful to set up an organization that would allow tax deductibility of contributions for the ad.

There would also be an escrow fund established so contributions would be returned unless enough are received to pay for the ad.

The ad will be straightforward. It will detail why there are "fresh leads" to be investigated, e.g. the Joannides litigation, the new NAA studies, the Gene Wheaton allegations, the possible solution to the Odio incident and what it means, etc. The ad will be low key and not endorse any specific assassination theories since we will need a broad base of support.

Then it will request readers to get involved in a campaign to have a new investigation of these leads, preesumably through a special prosecutor.

A LOT of work needs to be accomplished to: 1) draft the correct ad; 2) raise funds for it; and 3) organize a lobbying campaign to get Congress to act. We might accomplish 1 and 2 but fail to accomplish 3. But IMO we will never accomplish 3 unless we generate a groundswell of public support through the ad.

This may be our last opportunity since witnesses, maybe even conspirators, will continue to die.

****************************************************************************

"I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad."

From what I've observed over the years, the standard form in asking for donations usually reads, or asks in increments of: 5 dollars, 10 dollars, 15 dollars, or 25 dollars, with a box denoting "other," should the donation be for a larger amount [or smaller], depending upon the subscriber's means. I would think 25 dollars might be doable for some folks.

Ter

I think it's close to time.

The willingness to donate might well depend on the content of the ad.

I think we should get an outline of the content nailed down, with our message and goals, then ask about donations.

I'll work on the outline and submit it for input.

[Myra Bronstein]

I am pleased to state that a well known celebrity has agreed to render assistance in raising funds for an advertisement.

I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad.

I think it would be helpful to set up an organization that would allow tax deductibility of contributions for the ad.

There would also be an escrow fund established so contributions would be returned unless enough are received to pay for the ad.

The ad will be straightforward. It will detail why there are "fresh leads" to be investigated, e.g. the Joannides litigation, the new NAA studies, the Gene Wheaton allegations, the possible solution to the Odio incident and what it means, etc. The ad will be low key and not endorse any specific assassination theories since we will need a broad base of support.

Then it will request readers to get involved in a campaign to have a new investigation of these leads, preesumably through a special prosecutor.

A LOT of work needs to be accomplished to: 1) draft the correct ad; 2) raise funds for it; and 3) organize a lobbying campaign to get Congress to act. We might accomplish 1 and 2 but fail to accomplish 3. But IMO we will never accomplish 3 unless we generate a groundswell of public support through the ad.

This may be our last opportunity since witnesses, maybe even conspirators, will continue to die.

****************************************************************************

"I think it is time to ask members how much they would be willing to contribute for the price of an ad."

From what I've observed over the years, the standard form in asking for donations usually reads, or asks in increments of: 5 dollars, 10 dollars, 15 dollars, or 25 dollars, with a box denoting "other," should the donation be for a larger amount [or smaller], depending upon the subscriber's means. I would think 25 dollars might be doable for some folks.

Ter

I think it's close to time.

The willingness to donate might well depend on the content of the ad.

I think we should get an outline of the content nailed down, with our message and goals, then ask about donations.

I'll work on the outline and submit it for input.

I think many of Tim's suggestions in his latest post are very good.