Are JFK Researchers at risk?

[John Simkin]

There has been a very interesting thread about a physical attack on Jack White.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2788

I think it is possible that threats against JFK researchers might provide clues about the assassination and the cover-up. After all, it is possible to assume that researchers become dangerous when they get close to finding out important information.

I have only been working on this case in a serious way for the past 12 months. I have received several emails that could be described as threats. Sometimes these come from people who I have written about. The most worrying comes from a former member of Interpen. He never writes to me directly. Instead he sends copies of emails he is sending to a friend. In these emails he writes about what I am up to and implies that he is going to do something about it.

I have also had several emails from fellow researchers warning me about tackling certain subjects. They relate problems that they experienced when researching the case. Some have been willing to provide me with information they have discovered. However, others pass on these threats without revealing what they have found out. I suppose it is possible that they are warning me off because they don’t want me finding out what they have found. In other ways, they hope to publish the book that finally solves the case.

I have also made contact with some interesting witnesses that have told me some important information. However, in several cases, they have broke off contact without explanation. I fear they are being threatened. In two of the cases this happened at the same time as I received a “warning” to leave a certain topic alone.

These “warnings” have given me the impression that I have been on the right track and has had the reverse effect on what my correspondent wanted. It might interest you to know the areas that people don’t want me writing about: Interpen, the events surrounding the Bobby Baker scandal, Grant Stockdale and Clint Murchison.

[Pat Speer]

The day after I downloaded the autopsy photos for the first time my computer crashed. I've been a little paranoid ever since. I don't believe there's any doubt that there are those who wish the "research community" would go away. Just look at what LBJ's cronies were able to do to "The Men Who Killed Kennedy." Look at what Peter Jennings did to Oliver Stone. We live in strange times, where pursuing an agonizing truth is a worse crime to many than murdering a president.

[Tim Gratz]

There has been a very interesting thread about a physical attack on Jack White.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2788

I think it is possible that threats against JFK researchers might provide clues about the assassination and the cover-up. After all, it is possible to assume that researchers become dangerous when they get close to finding out important information.

I have only been working on this case in a serious way for the past 12 months. I have received several emails that could be described as threats. Sometimes these come from people who I have written about. The most worrying comes from a former member of Interpen. He never writes to me directly. Instead he sends copies of emails he is sending to a friend. In these emails he writes about what I am up to and implies that he is going to do something about it.

I have also had several emails from fellow researchers warning me about tackling certain subjects. They relate problems that they experienced when researching the case. Some have been willing to provide me with information they have discovered. However, others pass on these threats without revealing what they have found out. I suppose it is possible that they are warning me off because they don’t want me finding out what they have found. In other ways, they hope to publish the book that finally solves the case.

I have also made contact with some interesting witnesses that have told me some important information. However, in several cases, they have broke off contact without explanation. I fear they are being threatened. In two of the cases this happened at the same time as I received a “warning” to leave a certain topic alone.

These “warnings” have given me the impression that I have been on the right track and has had the reverse effect on what my correspondent wanted. It might interest you to know the areas that people don’t want me writing about: Interpen, the events surrounding the Bobby Baker scandal and Grant Stockdale.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Most interesting post, John. Are you aware that when he was interviewed on CNN following the publication of "Sons and Brothers", Richard Mahoney stated that he had concern for his physical safety. I may have mentioned this in an earlier post.

Of course, there is a relationship between the Baker scandal and Stockdale. If, as we both believe, Stockdale was murdered, finding his murderer (if that's possible) might open up tremenduous leads in the Kennedy case.

Edited January 4, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[John Geraghty]

I have been reading a book written by James Earl Ray recently and the information he gives about how both Time and Life magazines go after him is quite startling. I will be writing a seminar on the evidence that occurs both in the MLK and JFK cases. Ray himself was knifed 22 times but survived. These deaths do send shivers down your spine, especially since I have been trying to find an address for Braden.

[Denis Morissette]

I have been reading a book written by James Earl Ray recently and the information he gives about how both Time and Life magazines go after him is quite startling. I will be writing a seminar on the evidence that occurs both in the MLK and JFK cases. Ray himself was knifed 22 times but survived. These deaths do send shivers down your spine, especially since I have been trying to find an address for Braden.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let admit something, I prefer to let Braden alone unless someone convinces me of the opposite. Call me chicken if you want.

[Jack White]

There has been a very interesting thread about a physical attack on Jack White.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2788

I think it is possible that threats against JFK researchers might provide clues about the assassination and the cover-up. After all, it is possible to assume that researchers become dangerous when they get close to finding out important information.

I have only been working on this case in a serious way for the past 12 months. I have received several emails that could be described as threats. Sometimes these come from people who I have written about. The most worrying comes from a former member of Interpen. He never writes to me directly. Instead he sends copies of emails he is sending to a friend. In these emails he writes about what I am up to and implies that he is going to do something about it.

I have also had several emails from fellow researchers warning me about tackling certain subjects. They relate problems that they experienced when researching the case. Some have been willing to provide me with information they have discovered. However, others pass on these threats without revealing what they have found out. I suppose it is possible that they are warning me off because they don’t want me finding out what they have found. In other ways, they hope to publish the book that finally solves the case.

I have also made contact with some interesting witnesses that have told me some important information. However, in several cases, they have broke off contact without explanation. I fear they are being threatened. In two of the cases this happened at the same time as I received a “warning” to leave a certain topic alone.

These “warnings” have given me the impression that I have been on the right track and has had the reverse effect on what my correspondent wanted. It might interest you to know the areas that people don’t want me writing about: Interpen, the events surrounding the Bobby Baker scandal, Grant Stockdale and Clint Murchison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The propaganda attacks on ME regarding the APOLLO MOON PHOTOS HOAX are much more vicious than any regarding my JFK research.

Just google JACK WHITE APOLLO MOON HOAX to see the ugly attacks.

Jack

[Greg Wagner]

I think John has an interesting thought here. If in fact we were able to catalog instances of intimdation, it may be useful to then ask what area of the assassination the victim was researching. Perhaps a pattern would emerge. If a high percentage of researchers pursuing leads relating to a certain individual or theory are attacked or threatened, that may tell us something. Conversely, if researchers have success pursuing individuals or evidence to further a certain theory and experience no such problems, that may be equally as telling.

Jack's position is somewhat unique, in that he was working on "JFK". Whether or not one believes the theories put forth in that production, it's easy to understand that those behind the assassination and cover-up didn't want that kind of exposure of the topic in general. In Jack's case, maybe it wasn't a result of any specific area he was researching so much as the exposure the whole notion of a conspiracy was about to receive.

[Jack White]

The propaganda attacks on ME regarding the APOLLO MOON PHOTOS HOAX are much more vicious than any regarding my JFK research.

Just google JACK WHITE APOLLO MOON HOAX to see the ugly attacks.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For specific instances, go to:

http://www.clavius.org/jackwhite.html

http://www.geocities.com/shotonelm/Conspiracy/white.html

Jack

[James Richards]

If I can add my two cents worth here, I think it is important that researchers don't get too paranoid while maintaining a clear perspective on their goals. If you operate under any kind of fear then I would suggest doing something else; life is too short to be constantly stressed. If one swims with sharks then one should be prepared to be bitten every now and then.

What I'm saying is that one should choose a level of participation that one is comfortable with.

FWIW.

James

[Jack White]

I think John has an interesting thought here. If in fact we were able to catalog instances of intimdation, it may be useful to then ask what area of the assassination the victim was researching. Perhaps a pattern would emerge. If a high percentage of researchers pursuing leads relating to a certain individual or theory are attacked or threatened, that may tell us something. Conversely, if researchers have success pursuing individuals or evidence to further a certain theory and experience no such problems, that may be equally as telling.

Jack's position is somewhat unique, in that he was working on "JFK". Whether or not one believes the theories put forth in that production, it's easy to understand that those behind the assassination and cover-up didn't want that kind of exposure of the topic in general. In Jack's case, maybe it wasn't a result of any specific area he was researching so much as the exposure the whole notion of a conspiracy was about to receive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Greg...I choose to believe that my attack was unrelated to my JFK studies.

I hope that I am right. Coincidences do happen.

Jack

[Greg Wagner]

If I can add my two cents worth here, I think it is important that researchers don't get too paranoid while maintaining a clear perspective on their goals. If you operate under any kind of fear then I would suggest doing something else; life is too short to be constantly stressed. If one swims with sharks then one should be prepared to be bitten every now and then.

What I'm saying is that one should choose a level of participation that one is comfortable with.

FWIW.

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right on, James. I agree. I do think it would be important for any potential researcher to understand the possible risks before getting in over their head.

As for being paranoid, I haven't started booby-trapping my place just yet

Greg

[Judyth Baker]

These “warnings” have given me the impression that I have been on the right track and has had the reverse effect on what my correspondent wanted. It might interest you to know the areas that people don’t want me writing about: Interpen, the events surrounding the Bobby Baker scandal, Grant Stockdale and Clint Murchison.

Me, too, John. Bobby Baker, Clint Murchison, and David Atlee Phillips, plus Ochsner, have generated the most problems. They are real. That's why I left the US. I did not have problems until recently when Mr. Vernon began posting. Since then, I have had my mail blocked, a threatening phone call, and a research grant canceled, leaving me in bad financial shape and, frankly, frightened. As if that is going to stop me, though.

I regret making an enemy of David Blackburst (Stephen Roy) who is very angry at me for telling people his real name. Dixie Dea rebuked me for it, predictably. But it's time everyone knows who everyone is. That helps us learn who is associated with whom so that therse people can be traced.

I v\believe we should compare notes and see if we can discover a pattern or maybe pinpoint the times these threats, etvc. occur. I am especially interested in others who have their mail, packages, etc. "lost"constantly. I have had only one insured package (with some items missing) reaching me in three months, with no cards, letters or even bills reaching me -- this ever since I moved from Holland.

I already know the names of most the people who are my enemies. And they always get on my case when I reveal one of their secrets. This 'secret'stuff has got to be exposed.

Thanks for showing people that these situations do exist.

===Judyth Vary Baker====

[Gibson Vendettuoli]

If you wish to find Eugene Brading, alias Jim Braden, look for (I believe this is the name) E. Eugene Bradley in California.

[John Geraghty]

thanks gibson

john

[John Geraghty]

gibson,

i have two addresses, one in goleta and one in santa barbara, do you have any idea which it may be?

john