David Talbot's posting today from Italy

[Ron Bulman]

On ‎6‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 8:20 AM, Ernie Lazar said:

tlyWell, Ron, I defer to what John McAdams has posted here:  http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm

http://www.prouty.org/mcadams/

Factoid's, ad hominem attacks.  I've made the mistake of trying to present logic to the de frocked professor over on JFK facts more than once.  I seriously wonder if he wasn't a paid operative of Operation Mockingbird.  I believe it's been noted he was funded in part by one the Koch supported fronts.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Ron Bulman

[Ernie Lazar]

13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

http://www.prouty.org/mcadams/

Factoid's, ad hominem attacks.  I've made the mistake of trying to present logic to the de frocked professor over on JFK facts more than once.  I seriously wonder if he wasn't a paid operative of Operation Mockingbird.  I believe it's been noted he was par funded in part by one the Koch supported fronts.

McAdams mostly presents the findings made by other people after they investigated the "suspicious" deaths which most often are listed by conspiracy adherents.  Not sure what type of information you are describing as "ad hominem attacks".  He also asks obvious questions or raises pertinent issues which need to be addressed before considering conspiracy explanations.  For example:

1. If the purpose of the "clean-up squad" is to eliminate people who have knowledge of a conspiracy, recruiting people into a "clean-up squad" is a counter-productive activity. Each person recruited becomes yet another person who has knowledge of a conspiracy and might "spill the beans."
2. Marrs' list is drawn from a pool of literally thousands of people — a few of whom had a clear connection with the assassination, many of whom had some tangential connection with the assassination, and some of whom had no connection with the assassination at all. For example, Marrs' list includes one woman who was one of Kennedy's mistresses, but had no known connection with the assassination. It includes a man who was mayor of New Orleans (but who had no known connection with the assassination), and it includes the Chief Steward on Air Force One!
3. The list includes people who were merely connected to the Mafia, the CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, or Time-Life, Incorporated. Marrs is assuming that all these groups were connected with the assassination. In other words, he assumes a conspiracy involving all these groups, tabulates deaths, and then announces that the large number of deaths supports the idea of a conspiracy! Circular logic.
4. Most well-known conspiracy witnesses and authors are still alive. For example, of the best-known conspiracy authors who wrote books in the 1960s, Mark Lane, Edward J. Epstein, and Josiah Thompson are still alive. Sylvia Meagher is dead, but not even Marrs lists her death as "suspicious." Penn Jones died in January 1998 in a nursing home at the age of 83 after a long struggle with Alzheimer's disease. Harold Weisberg likewise died in February of 2002 after a long period of failing health. The most prominent conspiracy authors from the 70s and early 80s like David Lifton, Robert Groden, Henry Hurt, Anthony Summers, and Harrison Edward Livingstone are all still alive.
5. The star conspiracy witnesses who are seen in all the videos had long lives. Beverly Oliver is still alive. Malcolm Summers died on October 8, 2004, Ed Hoffman passed away in 2010. Jean Hill passed away on November 7, 2000. All three witnesses died after having decades to give their testimony to anybody who would listen, and not even their conspiracist supporters claim their deaths were sinister.
6. If a conspiracy was going around killing people who knew things that were dangerous to it, it would make sense that all the key witnesses would be killed quickly. But Marrs' list includes people who died as late as 1984. Given that many people associated with the assassination were at the peak of their professional careers at the time of the shooting, it's not surprising that many of them would have died within twenty years.
7. Marrs' list is laced with people who have a larger than average chance of a violent death: law officers, people on the edges of the underworld (strippers), people very much part of the underworld (Mafia figures), and people with a clear history of alcohol or drug abuse, or of mental illness (Rose Cheramie, Lou Staples, George de Mohrenschildt).
8. About half the people on Marrs' list died of natural causes. Marrs assures his readers that of course the CIA can kill people and make the death look "natural" (Crossfire, p. 556-557). This raises the question of why the conspirators allowed any of the deaths to seem violent or suspicious. It was also terribly convenient for supposed conspirators that so many of the people on the list who are claimed to have died of heart attacks (see below) had arteriosclerotic heart disease, making their deaths plausibly natural.
9. In virtually every case, there is no evidence that the person had any information on the assassination not already given in Warren Commission testimony, statements to police and the media, and interviews with private researchers. The logic seems to be that they must have known something, since, after all, they were killed.
10. People who supported the Warren Commission version of events, or whose testimony was used by the Warren Commission to help convict Oswald, are well-represented on the list. Why would a conspiracy want to kill off those people?
11. Many of these objections can be answered by positing on ongoing surveillance of witnesses. Maybe a witness, after many years of concealing the truth, has finally decided to go public and "blow the whistle." Conspirators, learning of this, then proceed to kill the person. What's wrong with this is obvious: it vastly complicates the problem discussed in 1. (above). For every witness who might potentially "spill the beans," a team of conspiracy operatives must keep a close surveillance in order to catch the moment when the person decides to talk, and then promptly kill the witness. This would require an entire army of assassins!

[Ron Bulman]

Mc Adams article does not address the question. Six upper level FBI agents, all with specific connections to the investigation of JFK's assassination died in a six month period (6/77-11/77), all scheduled at the time to testify before the House Sub Committee on Assassinations.  Some say seven if you include Regis Kennedy's heart attack in 78 the day before he was to testify.  Four heart attacks including him, a fall at home, natural causes after a lengthy illness (what illness?), mistaken for a deer and shot in the throat by an experienced hunter(subject for a different post).  This explains it better.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hsca+fbi+agent+deaths&view=detail&mid=715EC49F091324DFEA10715EC49F091324DFEA10&FORM=VIRE

The odds of this happening seemed suspicious the first time I read about it.  Mathematician  Richard Charnin says if 20 agents were called to testify and 5 had heart attacks, two had accidents (for example) those odds would be one in 190 trillion.

http://whokilledjfk.net/strange_fbi_deaths.htm

If you want to address the odds regarding the bigger picture Mc Adams attempts to address Mr. Charnin does that as well.  In a fashion even a non scientist like me can understand.

https://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-Science-Conspiracy-mathematical-disinformation/dp/1502715996/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1498972558&sr=1-6&keywords=richard+charnin  

 

[Ernie Lazar]

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Mc Adams article does not address the question. Six upper level FBI agents, all with specific connections to the investigation of JFK's assassination died in a six month period (6/77-11/77), all scheduled at the time to testify before the House Sub Committee on Assassinations.  Some say seven if you include Regis Kennedy's heart attack in 78 the day before he was to testify.  Four heart attacks including him, a fall at home, natural causes after a lengthy illness (what illness?), mistaken for a deer and shot in the throat by an experienced hunter(subject for a different post).  This explains it better.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hsca+fbi+agent+deaths&view=detail&mid=715EC49F091324DFEA10715EC49F091324DFEA10&FORM=VIRE

The odds of this happening seemed suspicious the first time I read about it.  Mathematician  Richard Charnin says if 20 agents were called to testify and 5 had heart attacks, two had accidents (for example) those odds would be one in 190 trillion.

http://whokilledjfk.net/strange_fbi_deaths.htm

If you want to address the odds regarding the bigger picture Mc Adams attempts to address Mr. Charnin does that as well.  In a fashion even a non scientist like me can understand.

https://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-Science-Conspiracy-mathematical-disinformation/dp/1502715996/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1498972558&sr=1-6&keywords=richard+charnin  

 

As I have written numerous times, conspiracy theories are constructed so that they can never be falsified to the satisfaction of their authors or adherents.  I'm sure that you have a bottomless pit of questions which McAdams "does not address" -- so even if it were possible to refute something you currently believe, your reply would be "OK, Ernie, but what about this one...?" [enter new conspiracy theory here].

BTW -- as just a small indication of how all this crap begins -- your link above for "strange FBI deaths" lists Louis Nichols at the top of the FBI employee list:   "LOUIS NICHOLS Former #3, responsible for JFK investigation; heart attack"

Louis Nichols was never "responsible for JFK investigation".  

Nichols never investigated anything in his life.  From the day he entered the FBI in July 1934 to the day he retired in 1957 (6 years BEFORE JFK was murdered!), he worked in a public relations role.  In 1941, he became Assistant Director, Administrative Division later known as Crime Records Division (which included Crime Records Section which later became known as Files and Communications Division).  In this capacity he was the FBI's liaison to Congress and media.

 

Edited July 2, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

10 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Mc Adams article does not address the question. Six upper level FBI agents, all with specific connections to the investigation of JFK's assassination died in a six month period (6/77-11/77), all scheduled at the time to testify before the House Sub Committee on Assassinations.  Some say seven if you include Regis Kennedy's heart attack in 78 the day before he was to testify.  Four heart attacks including him, a fall at home, natural causes after a lengthy illness (what illness?), mistaken for a deer and shot in the throat by an experienced hunter(subject for a different post).  This explains it better.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hsca+fbi+agent+deaths&view=detail&mid=715EC49F091324DFEA10715EC49F091324DFEA10&FORM=VIRE

The odds of this happening seemed suspicious the first time I read about it.  Mathematician  Richard Charnin says if 20 agents were called to testify and 5 had heart attacks, two had accidents (for example) those odds would be one in 190 trillion.

http://whokilledjfk.net/strange_fbi_deaths.htm

If you want to address the odds regarding the bigger picture Mc Adams attempts to address Mr. Charnin does that as well.  In a fashion even a non scientist like me can understand.

https://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-Science-Conspiracy-mathematical-disinformation/dp/1502715996/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1498972558&sr=1-6&keywords=richard+charnin  

 

One additional point which deserves a brief mention.  With the exception of William Sullivan (who died from a hunting accident), the other FBI employees whom are listed as "strange FBI deaths" consist of individuals who were born in the period from 1906 to 1917 and they died primarily from natural causes such as heart attack.  If you consult actuarial tables for life expectancy by birth year including the exhaustive analysis which may be seen here:

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/pdf_studies/study120.pdf

you will notice that the average white male who was born in the first part of the 20th century had a life expectancy of about 54 years.  IF that male lived to be 60 years of age, then his life expectancy fell into the range of 73-74 years old.

Of course, it is very difficult to make relevant generalizations here because we do not have any specific data concerning family history, genetics, or behavior patterns of the FBI agents listed. However, it is possible to obtain the FBI personnel files of every one the agents listed (I have some of them) and you can review their annual medical exams to see their medical status.  Their annual medical exams contain a lot of information concerning their health status including, of course, weight, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, cardiograms, and details re: any specific medical issues that required attention.

I don't think you will find much factual basis for skepticism about the death patterns of these guys.  I suspect their death rates (and ages at death) might slightly exceed the normal pattern but it is also the case that they often had very stressful work conditions requiring long hours.  And it should be remembered that they lived during a time when things like heavy smoking were commonplace.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ron Bulman]

Suspicion 40 years ago in 1977, never sufficiently answered, worthy of further question.

https://isgp-studies.com/miscellaneous/death_list/data/1977_11_Bill_Sullivan_death_FBI_hatchet_man_for_Hoover_suspected_of_JFK_RFK_MLK_assassination_involvement.pdf

This is interesting too, even considering the source.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sullivan.htm

It makes me wonder.  The 22 year old son of a state trooper went straight to the nearby Chief of Police's house and walked into his bedroom.  Chief Gary Young "I woke up to a disturbance in my bedroom, a Young Boy." 

"saw a motion through my scope,  I saw brown, I saw a flicker of white, I'm Not Sure What It Really Was, it moved I squeezed my trigger.  Cardinal rule of hunting, you don't shoot without a clear shot you can identify exactly what you are shooting and Where you want to place your shot.  22 year old experienced hunter son of a state trooper would know this.

From Hit List, pg. 207 "During the year before the accident I saw about fifteen or twenty deer," he said.  "I didn't shoot at any of them because I didn't think it was the right shooting time.  I consider myself a sportsman, not a person who goes out to kill as many deer as he can". 587. 

Further in his statement, "dragged him out of the woods and (then) started CPR, drove to Gary Young's house. I got him out of bed.  He made the necessary phone calls.  A bit of a caviler end to a brief statement.  $500 fine, no hunting license for 10 years.

Sullivan, as former chief of Division Five, investigator of the JFK assassination was forced to resign by Hoover.

"The main figure in the FBI involved in the Executive Action program" 

'William Sullivan's goal was to testify before the public HSCA hearings and lay his cards on the table, so to speak. (by)  'Veteran CIA officer Leutrell Osbourene, also investigated the matter."

"He told his friend Robert Novak, Someday you will read I have been killed in an accident, but don't believe it; I've been murdered"

Autopsy says shot in the throat, a lucky accident?  The smallest primary target on a human torso.  Elsewhere said in the back.

To paraphrase another FBI agent,  He was a knowledgeable experienced hunter, (not to mention an experienced intelligence operative), who would not have exposed himself that way.

[Joe Bauer]

Ron, I had never read up on the details of Bill Sullivan's murder before reading the links you provide.

What a ridiculously unprofessional investigation.

Bill Sullivan is running around outside "by himself" between 6:am and 6:30 am. ?

So is the third party of his planned group hunt but no one knows how close or far away he was from Sullivan during the time he was shot?

 A rifle shot is loud, even if this third party were a mile away he would have clearly heard this. Especially at that quiet early morning time.

Third party police Chief Young is asleep in bed at this time ?

How much sunlight is there in New Hampshire at that early morning time and at that time of year?

Do hunters shoot at deer in the dark?

Did they use night vision googles back then?

Since the supposed young hunter who fired at Sullivan couldn't carry him more than 15 yards, couldn't he instead have driven his truck to Sullivan's body?

Since the young shooter claimed to have tried to perform CPR on Sullivan and the wound was in the neck which probably meant a decent amount of blood there or even around or even in Sullivan's mouth, did the young shooter have much blood around his face or clothing next to his face which one would expect in that specific wound area / CPR performing circumstance?

[Roger DeLaria]

If the purpose of the "clean-up squad" is to eliminate people who have knowledge of a conspiracy, recruiting people into a "clean-up squad" is a counter-productive activity. Each person recruited becomes yet another person who has knowledge of a conspiracy and might "spill the beans."

Not if the hired guns don't know why someone is being eliminated. They would have no reason to know. They would not be told and wouldn't ask. They're just being paid to do a job. 

 

[Ron Bulman]

On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 0:17 AM, Joe Bauer said:

Ron, I had never read up on the details of Bill Sullivan's murder before reading the links you provide.

What a ridiculously unprofessional investigation.

Bill Sullivan is running around outside "by himself" between 6:am and 6:30 am. ?

So is the third party of his planned group hunt but no one knows how close or far away he was from Sullivan during the time he was shot?

 A rifle shot is loud, even if this third party were a mile away he would have clearly heard this. Especially at that quiet early morning time.

Third party police Chief Young is asleep in bed at this time ?

How much sunlight is there in New Hampshire at that early morning time and at that time of year?

Do hunters shoot at deer in the dark?

Did they use night vision googles back then?

Since the supposed young hunter who fired at Sullivan couldn't carry him more than 15 yards, couldn't he instead have driven his truck to Sullivan's body?

Since the young shooter claimed to have tried to perform CPR on Sullivan and the wound was in the neck which probably meant a decent amount of blood there or even around or even in Sullivan's mouth, did the young shooter have much blood around his face or clothing next to his face which one would expect in that specific wound area / CPR performing circumstance?

No, night vision goggles were either not invented back then or at least not available to hunters or the general public otherwise.  No, I, as a hunter earlier in life since the age of 14 have never shot at a deer in the dark.   That was not an issue in the statements.  They say it was after daylight, that is questionable.  New England, 6-6:30 AM in November?   I was not the 22 year old son of a state trooper (but was of a military veteran) but I was taught to not shoot at anything you could not clearly identify as a deer clearly enough to see where you wanted to place your shot. 

I think I'll order this in the morning for perspective on Sullivan himself.

 https://www.amazon.com/Bureau-thirty-years-Hoovers-FBI/dp/0393012360/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499318688&sr=8-1&keywords=the+bureau+my+thirty+year 

[Joe Bauer]

I know for a fact that here on the Central California Coast in early November the sun is not up at that hour. My wife gets up at 6:am every morning to get ready to go to work and has done so for years and I just asked her if she remembers the sun coming up that early in that month. She of course said "no, it would be dark. Maybe 7:am."

And we are at a lower latitude than New Hampshire so their sunrise would be even later, if by minutes.

The exact time of death and maybe even ear witnesses testimony ( if any ) as to the exact time of their hearing this rifle shot, are so important in this case.

Was Sullivan close enough to his own home when shot that perhaps his wife heard the shot or was maybe awakened by it?

What time exactly did the police chief say the young shooter barged into his bedroom? Was it still dark enough that the chief had some difficulty at first recognizing the boy?

Knowing exactly when the Chief was awakened by the boy, one can then go over the boy's story and accounting of all that he did after he shot Sullivan to get some idea of how long each of his immediate reactions took in minutes and even when he gave up trying to drag Sullivan, how many minutes would it have taken to then go to his truck and drive to the Chief's house?

Just read Chief Young's official accounting statement ( on the McAdam's site no less! ) and he states that at approximately 6:30 am he was awakened by the young shooter in his home bedroom. The state police received his call reporting the shooting at 6:35 am.

The time frame of everything here in minutes is very important.

Going into the boy shooter's account of the shooting one can logically come up with at least a general time frame of what he says he did and saw.

How many minutes went by from the time the boy says he shot at Sullivan, then started walking toward Sullivan, hesitating at approximately 50 feet when he says he was questioning what he shot, then the next fifty feet and then how long did he take in evaluating the shocking scene, looking at Sullivan on the ground and then trying to resuscitate Sullivan using CPR and then picking his body up and struggling while dragging him 15 feet and then giving up and leaving him at that spot?

Then he had to run to his truck. How far away was his truck from Sullivan?  That's very important. Then the boy had to drive to Chief Young's house and exit the truck and barge into the home and then Sullivan's bedroom.

Chief Young stated that he was awakened by the boy in his bedroom at approximately 6:30 am. If the boy could do all that he stated before he barged into Young's bedroom in 1/2 hour that would seem amazing to my life experience common sense.This is why the exact time of the shooting is so important.

Was the shooting done when there was enough light to rationally do so in the realm of deer hunting?  How light was it at 6:am in New Hampshire that time of year? And if the shooting took place even earlier than 6:am, this suggest the boy's story is even less logical than it already seems.

And this wandering friend of Sullivan's who was out by himself in the woods with his hunting rifle at that early hour and who couldn't be clear about where he was when the shooting took place? And did he report even hearing the shot?

Were all these fellow's homes right next to each other? Within perhaps only hundreds of yards apart?  That might explain some time questions, but it would also raise others about a loud shot that close not being heard by the parties involved?

Edited July 7, 2017 by Joe Bauer

[Joe Bauer]

I just checked the time of sunrise in New Hampshire for the date of November 9th.

It was listed at 6:31 am.

Now maybe some member here could tell us if that 6:31 am "sunrise time"  means when the sunlight is at the very first noticeable beginning of it's visibility ( in which it would still be hard to see things clearly from a 100 foot or more distance ) or full visibility?

But either way I would surmise that at 6: am in New Hampshire on November 9th, there is no sunlight yet visible and at 6:15 am very little.

And unless the entire Sullivan shooting episode as described by the young man shooter ( the fatal shot, the walk to Sullivan's body with a hesitation at 50 feet away, a shocking scene of a wounded human versus a deer and kneeling evaluation of the wound, then an attempt at resuscitation by CPR, then a picking up and carrying effort of Sullivan's body which proved too physical after 15 feet, then a run to the shooter's vehicle and drive to the Chief Young's home to barge in his bedroom at 6:30 am ) took no more than 15 minutes, it just seems too apparent that the shooting took place in the dark or near dark.

And as one forum member who hunts said, you don't take shots at deer in those limited light conditions.

The physical area death and crime scene was obliterated when the young man picked up Sullivan's body and dragged or carried it 15 feet. Think of the crime scene evidence that was lost. The position and poster of the body where it fell could have possibly revealed from which direction the fatal shot came. Also perhaps the distance?

But the time of the fatal shot is so crucial here in regards to the factor of darkness or near darkness and the question of someone shooting at any target when they can't even make out what it is they are shooting at.

And ear witnesses. Was there even "one" besides the shooter?

Sullivan's 3 party hunting friend should have heard that shot. He was out there tromping around in the dark at the same time as Sullivan and the young man, yet he wasn't miles away.

 

Edited July 8, 2017 by Joe Bauer