Walt Brown

[Kathleen Collins]

Probably many of you know this, but I was searching the Internet and I came across Walt Brown's belief that Noah's Ark exists and is either on Mount Ararat or in the Zagros Mountains in Iran. I wonder if he is the one who came up with the theory that Noah was given the DNA of all creatures, male and female, and that's how they fit in the Ark.

Walt Brown is a highly educated man, but he's had a change of heart concerning LBJ. He denounces Barr McLellan's book and no longer believes that it was Mac Wallace's fingerprint found on a box in the TSBD.

I read somewhere that Prof. Brown taught History at Ramapo College, NJ near where I once lived. He no longer stands behind the episode called "The Guilty Men" in the Men Who Killed Kennedy.

I was surprised by this 180 degree turn in events. Can anyone comment on this? It also seems that he's become an evangelist.

Kathy C

[Greg Burnham]

And Ed Tatro is now a "Paint Gun Weekend Warrior" I suppose? (No offense Ed).

I think your source might be mistaken, Kathy. It's almost as hard to imagine as Palamara agreeing with The Bug! If true...wow.

[Greg Parker]

And Ed Tatro is now a "Paint Gun Weekend Warrior" I suppose? (No offense Ed).

I think your source might be mistaken, Kathy. It's almost as hard to imagine as Palamara agreeing with The Bug! If true...wow.

I have no idea what "our" Walt Brown looks like, or what his personal beliefs are -- but I strongly suspect this isn't him.

http://conservapedia.com/Creation_science

A case of mistaken identity? How unusual in this case!

[William Kelly]

And Ed Tatro is now a "Paint Gun Weekend Warrior" I suppose? (No offense Ed).

I think your source might be mistaken, Kathy. It's almost as hard to imagine as Palamara agreeing with The Bug! If true...wow.

I have no idea what "our" Walt Brown looks like, or what his personal beliefs are -- but I strongly suspect this isn't him.

http://conservapedia...reation_science

A case of mistaken identity? How unusual in this case!

Your suspicions are correct, Greg. That is not "our" Walt Brown. I wonder how the biblical beliefs and the JFK beliefs have been intertwined here seeing as how it is two different people involved?

Yea, that's definitely not our Walt.

You know, I think its almost automatic that there is two of everybody.

BK

[John Simkin]

Where did you read this stuff about him not standing behind the LBj did it thesis and Mac Wallace?

Kathy Collins might be confused by Walt Brown's attack on Barr McClellan's book, Blood, Money and Power. See this extract on my webpage on Walt Brown:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbrownW.htm

Walt Brown, Barr McClellan’s Blood, Money, and Power (November 1, 2003)

On September 30, I mailed out the October, 2003 issue of the JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly, which contained positive, “endorsement” references to Barr McClellan’s “upcoming” work, Blood, Money, and Power: How L.B.J. Killed JFK. (That work also contains a jacket “blurb,” by me, which is valid in the sense that it reflected my opinions on the“to be corrected” “galley proofs” of the book that I read in July.) Several days later, I received the publisher’s edition of the book, and I have been deeply troubled by inconsistencies between what I read (and editorially corrected) in the page proofs and that which appears in the publisher’s edition, available for sale.

To readers of the journal, as well as to readers of my own works, I must issue an apology in that I would not have so eagerly endorsed this work had I known what the publisher’s edition would look like. I have known Barr McClellan for almost six years, and although we’ve never actually met, we have spent many hours together in the search for truth in the events of November 22, 1963. I have no reason to think that his work is in any way an attempt at deceit, but at the same time, I have no answers to the “why?” of how it went from a solid, stand-on-its-own-legs work in July to an almost fictionalized account in October. If anyone reading this found as much disappointment in the book as I did, I apologize if you made this reading selection based on my endorsement. For those who have read the JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly at any time in the past nine years, you know that when I review a published work, I tend to be critical, not laudatory. Had I not known Barr (from the proverbial “Adam”), and this book crossed my desk, I would have had no choice BUT TO BE CRITICAL of it, as it contains egregious errors of a factual nature and it takes literary license beyond bounds in its attempts to “factionalize” events not actually known, but highly suspected, by the author. I should also add that if the premise of this book was “Oswald only,” and it had such errors and “faction,” any reviewer who has had material published in the journal would have had a field day.

Chronology: Barr McClellan initially sent me his manuscript in 1998. It was an interesting read with respect to what he called “Bubba Justice,” a parochial nickname for the ol’ boy legal network in Texas. The vast majority of that manuscript dealt with that topic and devoted very little space to McClellan’s close working ties with Ed Clark, portrayed as LBJ’s “cover-up” lawyer in matters dealing with the JFK assassination.

There the matter rested until I became aware that the book was to be published, with the original publication date set for late 2002, and then moved to early 2003. Since I had not been privy to that process, I assumed the author was moving ahead, on his own, and I wished him well.

He sent me the “new” manuscript early in 2003, and I edited it thoroughly, both for mechanics (grammar, usage, spelling), and, more importantly to me, for factual accuracy. I rewrote parts of it for greater clarity in matters pertaining to events in Dealey Plaza. The edited manuscript was then Fed-Ex’d back to Mississippi in the depths of winter.

In June, I was asked to “take a peek at the galleys,” and another researcher, who had also worked extensively with Barr, was asked to do likewise. When the galleys arrived, in page-proof form, it was immediately obvious that the manuscript I had returned in February had been massively altered, and, in particular, there were glaring errors of fact in the galleys that had been added following the February edit. One case in point was a notation regarding Will Fritz, cited as the Dallas Police Chief. I was wholly at a loss to explain how that, and other, similarly obvious errors had made their way into the manuscript, but I had to remind myself that I had only been the editor, not the author.

I faxed the first 154 galley pages back to Barr in early July, but then literally hit a wall as I found error after error in the part(s) covering events from Love Field to Bethesda. These concerns were ALL directly addressed in a lengthy conference call held on July 11, 2003, involving Barr, the Texas-based researcher who also had great input into the work, and me. At the end of that phone call, both “editors” were assured that the provable corrections of fact that had to be made would ALL be made.

With that in mind, and with the long-held belief that John Kennedy’s murder could not have been accomplished without LBJ, and mindful that it had been LBJ who had created the Warren Commission, I wrote the blurb (along with the “rectangle” below it) for attribution on the back dust flap of a book that, as of July 11, I believed to be factually accurate, although it was always understood that I was taking Barr’s knowledge of the inner workings of the legal system as truth.

I still believe that Barr’s knowledge of the Clark-LBJ tie is accurate. Beyond that, however, both editors BEGGED Barr not to use “faction,” the name he gave to the blending of fact and fiction as a way of connecting the dots. I wrote “source?” so many times in the margin I grew weary of the task. If Barr could not be dissuaded from leaving out his educated guesses, both editors again implored him to italicize them, so the reader would know where documented material parted company with “faction.”

[Greg Burnham]

And Ed Tatro is now a "Paint Gun Weekend Warrior" I suppose? (No offense Ed).

I think your source might be mistaken, Kathy. It's almost as hard to imagine as Palamara agreeing with The Bug! If true...wow.

I have no idea what "our" Walt Brown looks like, or what his personal beliefs are -- but I strongly suspect this isn't him.

http://conservapedia.com/Creation_science

A case of mistaken identity? How unusual in this case!

Walt Brown's segment is found at about the 33:00 minute mark.

[Kathleen Collins]

I am so embarrassed. The evangelist and our Walt Brown are 2 separate people apparently. I will find the link about the fingerprint. Sorry:

"Walt Brown: Author Barr McClellan's partner. Brown has since stated that McClellan's cable documentary The Guilty Men, naming Mac Wallace as a JFK killer, is largely "fiction." McClellan himself calls it "faction." Most of this is boosted from http://davesjfk.com/guilty.html."

http://aconstantineb...st.blogspot.com It goes on to say that Walt Brown is also known for his search for Noah's Ark. What a site that is!

Kathy C

Edited July 1, 2011 by Kathleen Collins

[Greg Parker]

I am so embarrassed. The evangelist and our Walt Brown are 2 separate people apparently. I will find the link about the fingerprint. Sorry:

Kathy, don't worry about it. A fair percentage of people looking into this case, have embarrassed themselves at some stage, myself included.

"Walt Brown: Author Barr McClellan's partner. Brown has since stated that McClellan's cable documentary The Guilty Men, naming Mac Wallace as a JFK killer, is largely "fiction." McClellan himself calls it "faction." Most of this is boosted from http://davesjfk.com/guilty.html."

http://aconstantineb...st.blogspot.com It goes on to say that Walt Brown is also known for his search for Noah's Ark. What a site that is!

That link doesn't work, but someone has their wires crossed. The Noah's Ark dude is the preacher.

Kathy C

[Greg Burnham]

Kathy,

The only "researchers" who have never, EVER been embarrassed by some portion of their work--hopefully of minimal volume--are those who have failed to even scratch the surface!

You got one wrong. So what? We all still love you--carry on.

[Bernice Moore]

Kathy like they above say, no problemo...i make oodles and have of mistooks, oops another one, so what, when one does, one learns something new......it is when the whomever refuses to learn from such that gets them in double dutch eventually, btw this is our walt brown..b

[Tom Hume]

Okay then, I’ll stick my neck out:

After spending a fair amount of time comparing the TSBD and Wallace fingerprints, it’s my amateur but considered opinion that the same finger made both prints.

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/22nd_Issue/breakthru2.html -

John Simkin’s April 14, 2010 post on the “TSBD Fingerprint” thread he started in 2006, asks, “Does anyone know if there has been any progress on linking Mac Wallace to the TSBD fingerprint?”

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6815

So what do you think - is that Mac Wallace’s print that was supposedly lifted from one of the boxes in the sniper’s nest, and If so, what does that imply?

[Kathleen Collins]

Kathy,

The only "researchers" who have never, EVER been embarrassed by some portion of their work--hopefully of minimal volume--are those who have failed to even scratch the surface!

You got one wrong. So what? We all still love you--carry on.

Thank you, Greg and Bernice. I have tears in my eyes. Why the link isn't working is beyond me because it was working last night. Not now. I would try typing "A Constantine Blacklist" and the page should turn up in the summaries. It mentions Walt Brown, that he believes McLellen's book is mostly fiction. And the next paragraph says (paraphrase) Walt is also known for his search for Noah's Ark.

Love you too.

Kathy C

Edited July 1, 2011 by Kathleen Collins

[Ron Ecker]

is that Mac Wallace’s print that was supposedly lifted from one of the boxes in the sniper’s nest, and If so, what does that imply?

Either Wallace was there or the fingerprint was planted. Which raises the question, can a fingerprint be planted, without the person's finger there to plant it? I have no idea.

Which also raises the question, did Wallace have all his fingers when he died?

[Greg Burnham]

To answer your question Ron, yes it can.

It can, indeed. However, the prospect that it may actually have been planted raises other concerns.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Walt Brown, via internet hook up, at the 2010 fall COPA conference that Lyndon Johnson was one of his top suspects in the JFK assassination and that he still believed that Malcolm Wallace's fingerprint was a match.

Currently, as of today 7/2/11, I do NOT believe that that Malcolm Wallace fingerprint is a match with the latent fingerprint on the 6th floor TSBD. It is a left pinky fingerprint, known as a #10 in fingerprint parlance.

I spoke with finger print examiner Kasey Wertheim today and he walked me through WHY it was not a match. Kasey Wertheim has 7 years experience on fingerprints which I think is plenty enough to be expert.

1) http://www.clpex.com/images/Darby-Wallace-Analysis/Erroneous-Match.htm

2) http://www.clpex.com/Mission.htm info on Kasey Wertheim

He also said there was some software that could load fingerprints in and see if it was a match or a possible match, but he did not have it on his home computer.

I would like to have this fingerprint examined by other hotshot, and experienced, finger print examiners and see what they think. And also, loaded into some fingerprint software.

Kasey told me that the fingerprints were so blatantly mismatched that most other examiners would agree with him.

Like I said I am always willing to change my mind, but right now the "It's not a match for Wallace school" is up 31-28 in the football game, after in my mind being down 17-28.

Robert Morrow