Best book about the JFK assassination

[Tim Carroll]

William Turner has an entire chapter in Deadly Secrets about Bobby's post Bay of Pigs anti-Castro activity, but no one attacks him for it.

Bill Turner is an example of a good historical researcher/writer. As for previously denied accusations about "attacks," it is precisely the distinction between Turner's scholarship and Mellen's that is at issue. Bill Turner didn't use the hook of a face-to-face meeting between Bobby Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald, only to discredit the story's source.

I assume you are refering to Hemming's tale for Oswald being in Florida. Again, this is not treated as true and is not supposed to be taken that way by the reader.

The reader is supposed to treat Hemming's tale as a metaphor rather than historical narrative? What kind of sense does that make? Looking at the sum total of the use made of Gerry Hemming for this book, one can see that he was a serious contributor to the work, both above and behind the scenes. If one dismisses that contribution as not to be "treated as true," one is cutting out a substantial amount of the new material contained therein.

Tim Carroll

[Owen Parsons]

William Turner has an entire chapter in Deadly Secrets about Bobby's post Bay of Pigs anti-Castro activity, but no one attacks him for it.

Bill Turner is an example of a good historical researcher/writer. As for previously denied accusations about "attacks," it is precisely the distinction between Turner's scholarship and Mellen's that is at issue. Bill Turner didn't use the hook of a face-to-face meeting between Bobby Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald, only to discredit the story's source.

Angel Murgado's story endows Bobby with knowledge of Oswald, but not face-to-face contact. Hemming's story conveys the same gist, but more strongly. She uses it to make Bobby's alleged knowledge of Oswald more forceful to the reader, but it is not the source of her point. It is a "metaphor" for it, as explicitly stated.

I assume you are refering to Hemming's tale for Oswald being in Florida. Again, this is not treated as true and is not supposed to be taken that way by the reader.

The reader is supposed to treat Hemming's tale as a metaphor rather than historical narrative? What kind of sense does that make? Looking at the sum total of the use made of Gerry Hemming for this book, one can see that he was a serious contributor to the work, both above and behind the scenes. If one dismisses that contribution as not to be "treated as true," one is cutting out a substantial amount of the new material contained therein.

Tim Carroll

I really don't see Hemming being a "serious contributor to the work" or contributing a "substantial amount of new material." Angel Murgado is a different person than Hemming, and Mellen assumes that he is not doing Hemming's bidding. Cut out every instance where Hemming is cited, and you will lose next to nothing.

Edited November 20, 2005 by Owen Parsons

[Gerry Hemming]

William Turner has an entire chapter in Deadly Secrets about Bobby's post Bay of Pigs anti-Castro activity, but no one attacks him for it.

Bill Turner is an example of a good historical researcher/writer. As for previously denied accusations about "attacks," it is precisely the distinction between Turner's scholarship and Mellen's that is at issue. Bill Turner didn't use the hook of a face-to-face meeting between Bobby Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald, only to discredit the story's source.

Angel Murgado's story endows Bobby with knowledge of Oswald, but not face-to-face contact. Hemming's story conveys the same gist, but more strongly. She uses it to make Bobby's alleged knowledge of Oswald more forceful to the reader, but it is not the source of her point. It is a "metaphor" for it, as explicitly stated.

I assume you are refering to Hemming's tale for Oswald being in Florida. Again, this is not treated as true and is not supposed to be taken that way by the reader.

The reader is supposed to treat Hemming's tale as a metaphor rather than historical narrative? What kind of sense does that make? Looking at the sum total of the use made of Gerry Hemming for this book, one can see that he was a serious contributor to the work, both above and behind the scenes. If one dismisses that contribution as not to be "treated as true," one is cutting out a substantial amount of the new material contained therein.

Tim Carroll

I really don't see Hemming being a "serious contributor to the work" or contributing a "substantial amount of new material." Angel Murgado is a different person than Hemming, and Mellen assumes that he is not doing Hemming's bidding. Cut out every instance where Hemming is cited, and you will lose next to nothing.

---------------------------------

WHAT ?! You have the "nads" to think that your Khazar Weberman style of "Baiting" is going to have me go into a hissy-fit and get into a rush to tell ALL ??!!

NOT going to happen sweety-pie !! As I said in a recent post, when Prof. Mellen has undergone "peer review" -- then, and only then -- will I make comments with reference "new" her book.

You gullible, silly fools are going to be in the same "slump" as one "Habeas Corpus" law professor was, when after 5 short hours -- I demolished his entire "theory of law" on that subject matter. He had already been published inside the U.S. 4 times, and in the UK twice -- ALL wrong. His tearful comment as we left him -- making some reference to a 5-gallon can of "white-out" necessary to "adjust" HIS tomes !!

I gotz some news for you honey -- NO more freebies -- and all of the stupid trash written about this JFK matter is going to be bathed in a flood of "white-out" !! I am being encouraged to go back to private e-mails so that most of you -- who have wasted tons of money, and years of time -- won't be let down TOO hard.

There are a few shockers coming, so get out your crying towels and "worry beads" -- you and a bunch of wannabe authors are about to see THE LIGHT !!

CHAIRS -- FOOL,

GPH

____________________________

William Turner has an entire chapter in Deadly Secrets about Bobby's post Bay of Pigs anti-Castro activity, but no one attacks him for it.

Bill Turner is an example of a good historical researcher/writer. As for previously denied accusations about "attacks," it is precisely the distinction between Turner's scholarship and Mellen's that is at issue. Bill Turner didn't use the hook of a face-to-face meeting between Bobby Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald, only to discredit the story's source.

Angel Murgado's story endows Bobby with knowledge of Oswald, but not face-to-face contact. Hemming's story conveys the same gist, but more strongly. She uses it to make Bobby's alleged knowledge of Oswald more forceful to the reader, but it is not the source of her point. It is a "metaphor" for it, as explicitly stated.

I assume you are refering to Hemming's tale for Oswald being in Florida. Again, this is not treated as true and is not supposed to be taken that way by the reader.

The reader is supposed to treat Hemming's tale as a metaphor rather than historical narrative? What kind of sense does that make? Looking at the sum total of the use made of Gerry Hemming for this book, one can see that he was a serious contributor to the work, both above and behind the scenes. If one dismisses that contribution as not to be "treated as true," one is cutting out a substantial amount of the new material contained therein.

Tim Carroll

I really don't see Hemming being a "serious contributor to the work" or contributing a "substantial amount of new material." Angel Murgado is a different person than Hemming, and Mellen assumes that he is not doing Hemming's bidding. Cut out every instance where Hemming is cited, and you will lose next to nothing.

---------------------------------

WHAT ?! You have the "nads" to think that your Khazar Weberman style of "Baiting" is going to have me go into a hissy-fit and get into a rush to tell ALL ??!!

NOT going to happen sweety-pie !! As I said in a recent post, when Prof. Mellen has undergone "peer review" -- then, and only then -- will I make comments with reference "new" her book.

You gullible, silly fools are going to be in the same "slump" as one "Habeas Corpus" law professor was, when after 5 short hours -- I demolished his entire "theory of law" on that subject matter. He had already been published inside the U.S. 4 times, and in the UK twice -- ALL wrong. His tearful comment as we left him -- making some reference to a 5-gallon can of "white-out" necessary to "adjust" HIS tomes !!

I gotz some news for you honey -- NO more freebies -- and all of the stupid trash written about this JFK matter is going to be bathed in a flood of "white-out" !! I am being encouraged to go back to private e-mails so that most of you -- who have wasted tons of money, and years of time -- won't be let down TOO hard.

There are a few shockers coming, so get out your crying towels and "worry beads" -- you and a bunch of wannabe authors are about to see THE LIGHT !!

CHAIRS -- FOOL,

GPH

____________________________

-------------------------

BTW Mr.? Parsons, I don't see your picture in your BIO -- let me guess, you joined about a month and a half ago.

Are you the young kid that Mellen hired as a replacement for the other punk who ran off with her files after hacking her computer -- and inside her own home ??!!

Vewwy Vewwy intellesting !! Nicht War ?

GPH

___________________

[Owen Parsons]

Although I had never intended to bait you into a hissy fit, I certainly succeeded. I can only assume that this means that you will show us all that Murgado is doing your bidding and move this out of the area of speculation. Wonderful, Gerry. Blind us all with this light you speak of.

You've lead a fascinating life, no doubt. Even making a fool out of a law professor. My, my.

I am most certainly not Mellen's research assistant. This is the first I've heard of this alleged incident.

Edited November 20, 2005 by Owen Parsons

[Gerry Hemming]

Although I had never intended to bait you into a hissy fit, I certainly succeeded. I can only assume that this means that you will show us all that Murgado is doing your bidding and move this out of the area of speculation. Wonderful, Gerry. Blind us all with this light you speak of.

You've lead a fascinating life, no doubt. Even making a fool out of a law professor. My, my.

------------------------

You suck-seded in WHAT ??!! Are you a "high school senior" in real life NEWBIE/FNG -- or NOT ??!!

Where is your response to my BIO question ?? Cat got your fingers ??

Join up with Ms. MATTine, your cruising in the same lane [Ford] !!

GPH

__________________________

[Owen Parsons]

Although I had never intended to bait you into a hissy fit, I certainly succeeded. I can only assume that this means that you will show us all that Murgado is doing your bidding and move this out of the area of speculation. Wonderful, Gerry. Blind us all with this light you speak of.

You've lead a fascinating life, no doubt. Even making a fool out of a law professor. My, my.

------------------------

You suck-seded in WHAT ??!! Are you a "high school senior" in real life NEWBIE/FNG -- or NOT ??!!

Where is your response to my BIO question ?? Cat got your fingers ??

Join up with Ms. MATTine, your cruising in the same lane [Ford] !!

GPH

__________________________

Its true that I am quite hesitant about supplying a pic. I won't deny this. And yes, I am a high school senior in real life. What kind of idiot would fabricate such stunning credentials as those?

I would certainly classify that outburst of yours as a "hissy fit." What would you call it?

Edited November 20, 2005 by Owen Parsons

[Gerry Hemming]

Although I had never intended to bait you into a hissy fit, I certainly succeeded. I can only assume that this means that you will show us all that Murgado is doing your bidding and move this out of the area of speculation. Wonderful, Gerry. Blind us all with this light you speak of.

You've lead a fascinating life, no doubt. Even making a fool out of a law professor. My, my.

------------------------

You suck-seded in WHAT ??!! Are you a "high school senior" in real life NEWBIE/FNG -- or NOT ??!!

Where is your response to my BIO question ?? Cat got your fingers ??

Join up with Ms. MATTine, your cruising in the same lane [Ford] !!

GPH

__________________________

Its true that I am quite hesitant about supplying a pic. I won't deny this. And yes, I am a high school senior in real life. What kind of idiot would fabricate such stunning credentials as those?

I would certainly classify that outburst of yours as a "hissy fit." What would you call it?

-----------------------------

"Hissy Fit" ?? Your last to Ms. MATTine was the "HF" !!

"....How in hell can I be a Nixon lover if I support Alger Hiss' innocence? And why is my post nonsense, since you obviously agree with my viewpoint here? You aren't making any sort of sense. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)..."

And just why are you so HESITANT about posting your photo ?? Oh ! Another "secret-agent-boy" !! Got your "GTA" gameboy ready ??

Afraid that somebody might recognize you ?? Can't imagine why ? Gratz says that Ms. MATTine's photo seems to have been taken from the LBJ Library !! Come on KID -- your not Weberman up to his usual hacking into a Super-Crey game -- via the usual phone-freaks that got you into legal trouble before ?? HUH ??!!

GPH

______________________

[Owen Parsons]

Why do you think? I like a certain amount of privacy. Maybe you wouldn't recognize me, but anyone else might. Nothing to do with being a "secret-agent-boy." Maybe I am being paranoid... Still...

Also, that would be Terry, not Gratz, who pointed out the striking resemblance between Ms. Foster's photo and Lady Bird, unless I am mistaken.

Edited November 20, 2005 by Owen Parsons

[Terry Mauro]

Why do you think? I like a certain amount of privacy. Maybe you wouldn't recognize me, but anyone else might. Nothing to do with being a "secret-agent-boy." Maybe I am being paranoid... Still...

Also, that would be Terry, not Gratz, who pointed out the striking resemblance between Ms. Foster's photo and Lady Bird, unless I am mistaken.

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

"Also, that would be Terry, not Gratz, who pointed out the striking resemblance between Ms. Foster's photo and Lady Bird, unless I am mistaken."

That would be Linda Byrd, Owen. Lady Bird's daughter, and sister of Luci Baines Johnson.

Plus, we know you're not Gibson Vendittuoli, or whatever the hell his pseudonym is.

Don't listen to Gerry "I-Let-Che-Guevara-Die-For-Nothing" Hemming. He's just trying to "spook" you.

Right, Ger?

[Tim Gratz]

Owen wrote:

When does Mellen ever say that Marcello wasn't involved?

Well, Owen, if you and Professor Mellen agree that Marcello was indeed a conspirator, then that indicts Garrison for his failure to indict Marcello. As you know, many believe that Garrison was covering up for Marcello's involvement by his attack on the CIA. I am pleased that you implicitly admit the participation by Marcello.

Edited November 20, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Dawn Meredith]

Professor Mellen claims that Robert F. Kennedy was organizing his own plans to assassinate Castro, independent of the CIA plans! Is anyone aware of any support for that premise

I think Margudo and Hemming suckered Joan. I did not like this being included in this book. And I do not for one second believe this. Joan needs to read the IG report, and then FIX this inaccuracy in her account.

I concur also with the rest of Tim's post.

Dawn

[Owen Parsons]

Owen wrote:

When does Mellen ever say that Marcello wasn't involved?

Well, Owen, if you and Professor Mellen agree that Marcello was indeed a conspirator, then that indicts Garrison for his failure to indict Marcello. As you know, many believe that Garrison was covering up for Marcello's involvement by his attack on the CIA. I am pleased that you implicitly admit the participation by Marcello.

I don't really think that Marcello was involved to any significant extent (G. Wray Gill is his own man, after all, and his involvement with Ferrie would be more to the point). I just wondered where Mellen said he wasn't. If you still believe that Garrison was covering for Marcello, you must have read a different book than I have. Besides that, how would Beckham's account indict Garrison for failure to go after Marcello, since Beckham didn't tell Garrison any of this?

Edited November 20, 2005 by Owen Parsons

[Tim Carroll]

What is the source for the declarative assertion that Oswald was in Florida in the summer of 1963?

I assume you are refering to Hemming's tale for Oswald being in Florida. Again, this is not treated as true and is not supposed to be taken that way by the reader. If I'm wrong about the source, give me a citation.

On the same page (201) that Professor Mellen says that Hemming "tells a tale ... spins a story ... imagines," etc., she does say: "According to Hemming, among the Cubans that day [in the presence of RFK] stood one Lee Harvey Oswald, even as independent corroboration does indeed place Oswald in Miami that summer of 1963." It's hard to tell if Professor Mellen does or does not believe the evidence to indicate if Oswald was actually in Florida in the summer of 1963.

T.C.

[Tim Carroll]

It's interesting to note that both of the new books, A Farewell To Justice and Ultimate Sacrifice, rely upon Gerry Hemming for the major factual hooks upon which they support their respective theories. In both cases, the intriguing hooks involve Bobby Kennedy's supposed actions. Joan Mellen employs Hemming's assertion that RFK had a face-to-face meeting with Oswald in Florida in the summer of 1963. Waldrop and Hartmann employ Hemming's assertion that RFK had a face-to-face meeting with Johnny Rosselli that same summer in Florida. Does Hemming really have a singular knowledge of Bobby's activities, unmatched by any other?

T.C.

[Gerry Hemming]

It's interesting to note that both of the new books, A Farewell To Justice and Ultimate Sacrifice, rely upon Gerry Hemming for the major factual hooks upon which they support their respective theories. In both cases, the intriguing hooks involve Bobby Kennedy's supposed actions. Joan Mellen employs Hemming's assertion that RFK had a face-to-face meeting with Oswald in Florida in the summer of 1963. Waldrop and Hartmann employ Hemming's assertion that RFK had a face-to-face meeting with Johnny Rosselli that same summer in Florida. Does Hemming really have a singular knowledge of Bobby's activities, unmatched by any other?

T.C.

----------------------------

Tim:

My series of extremely "lengthy" narrative "tutoring" of Mellen [and witnessed by others -- and since reduced to sworn statements (Affidavits)] -- included that: RFK had "foolishly" presented himself before the "Road-Watcher" [NOT the "Shooter-Teams"] at either "Isolation-A" or "Isolation-B" -- or at both locales.

Moreover, I emphasized that my sources (multiple) indicated that: Though RFK was easily recognized & discernible by ALL of those present!! Most of the trainees at "Chekika" were standing in the shadows of the trees and/or alongside the "trailers/mobile homes". -- Those at the Avocado Drive facilty, were lounging about the pool area. [A stupid violation of Op/Sec & "trade-craft" in that: All concerned "already knew" that this operation was endorsed by the "Highest Authority"]

The Navy SEALS who acted as his "Security Detail" were well armed [wearing "utilities/dungarees"] and were positioned on top of the "flat" concrete (and very solid & thick) roof of the "Shops/Garages" side of the main building. Other SEALS were positioned by the "Suburbans" (and one "Land-Rover") -- which were parked in the circular driveway. One each was posted at the two entrances to that facility.

However, other sources also insist that RFK was NEVER face-to-face with LHO; but instead took with him, the "201 File" type Dossiers [not LHM or "302" FBI style] -- and later were kept at the Kennedy Compound in West Palm. Other sources indicate that most of these files were later removed to the "safe house" on Chain Bridge Road, a short distance from the "Hickory Hill" residence in McLean, VA.

[LHO's complete "Bio" was included in "HIS" individual "Dossier"; and moreover, indicated that he HAD BEEN "Fluttered" on more than just one occasion !!]

[Afterwards, RFK invited the SEALS to accompany him back to HST, and from there: Fly with him to Lantana Airport.

[Just south of West Palm, on Hyperion Drive] -- and spoke of "drinks while sitting on the shore". The NAVY Lt. Commander in Charge, told one of RFK's "Guys" that: There was NOT enough seats in the USN H-3 "Sea King" Helicopter for any additional personnel !!]

As for any meeting with Rosselli, that would have been under the same circumstances that Captain Bradley Ayers went into: With reference to folks "standing nearby" -- during either on ONE of RFK's visits to the Elliott Key CIA Base; or the visits to the Coral Gables-by-the-Sea safe house that Gray Lynch operated out of !! [Post-BOP with "Rolando" Martinez, et al.]

The other "alleged-meeting" between RFK and "Hollywood Johnny" Rosselli NEVER happened, and was THE "intentionally-missed" encounter aboard the "Surfside-6" houseboat -- which was then tied up in front of the Fontainebleau Hotel on Collins Avenue, Miami Beach, FL.

["Check-Kiter/Wolfson Scammer" Larry King, was then broadcasting his radio show from that very same houseboat -- and during said "R/Vs"; eavesdropped on some of the chatter by participants -- both before and after RFK departed !!]

[RFK was urged to leave this particular R/V because: "His" Cubans suspected that this was a yet another "Queen" Hoover "photo-op" scheme -- to give some "pay-back" for RFK's having thrown the "Fag-Orgie" pix [from Chi-Town] on his desk at the DOJ Bldg. -- and forced Hoover to "back-off" [1962] !!

Later.

Chairs,

GPH

___________________________________