Regicide: The Official Assasination of John F. Kennedy

[William Kelly]

Why have I been absent? Well, It seems like I am getting more done on other fronts at the moment.

As for this thread, and Janney's book, I think that Peter is a good researcher and writer, I don't think that his father's position in the CIA disqualifies him from writing about Mary Meyer, but I am disappointed that he seems to have accepted the bogus - Douglas-Zipper docs as legitimate, as they have been exposed as a fraud. But they are a very sophisticated fraud, and can be considered legitimate dizinformation. They shouldn't be totally discarded because such diszinformation, like the original Castro Commie Cover Story- stems from very close to the real perpetrators.

Since I haven't read the book yet, I can't really comment on it.

I also think its possible for John Simkin to have his own opinions and appreciate Peter Janney's talents and contributions without being smerred.

I do anticipate writing book reviews on a number of important books, after I read them, including Lattel's book on Castro, Caros on LBJ and Janneys.

BK

JFKcountercoup - Sprague's Files Being Requested by NARA

JFKCountercoup2 - Jesse Ventura - "We can handle the truth!"

Here's my recent review of "Dead Wrong"

Billsbooksblog: "Dead Wrong" Right On

Edited August 31, 2012 by William Kelly

[Guest Tom Scully]

Bill are you the member I've quoted as follows? If you are, I understand almost nothing you've written in your most recent post.

Are you accusing me of smearing John Simkin? Did you write your most recent opinion of Peter Janney with a straight face?

I have not read the book and therefore cannot comment on it. However, one of the best researchers I know on the JFK assassination has this to say on Gregory:

"I met and talked to him over three days at a Washington conference four or five years ago, I am convinced as to his contacts and personal knowledge of Crowley .... imo, Gregory has been the subject of a highly sophisticated smear campaign."

John,

Gregory only smears himself.

If he is the subject of a highly sophisticated smear campaign, include me as part of it.

I bought and read his book when it first came out and it was immediately apparent that what he was pawning off as the Zipper Documents were never legitimate government documents.

One such document, said to be pilfered from the Russians and translated to English, would have to be considered a less sophisticated forgery than the smear campaign allegedly applied against him.

What is highly sophisticated was the framing of Oswald as the patsy, and that was acomplished by people very much like Crowley, Corson, Trento, Angleton and Gregory.

One immediate tip off Gregory is not for real was his publishing as an appendex, a list of those who were dues paying members of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO), which includes Mary Ferrell and other JFK assassination researchers, and miss-identifying the list as CIA officers and assets.

I showed it to a friend of mine who is on the list and he immediately identified it as a list of AFIO members, and others have confirmed this (including Dan Brandt).

Gregory, given his "convincing contacts and knowledge" must have known what this list was, and where it came from, yet he purposely misidentifies it.

Now it may be significant that Brandt's former secretery (Bancroft) is now the chief organizer of AFIO, and publishes the newsletter that Don Bohning used to slander you and this forum.

I think that the whole Zipper Doc operation was/is a transparently bad black propaganda - disinformation campaign to blame the assassination on the CIA, and then show that it is based on bad or faked records, and therefore the CIA didn't kill JFK.

If you want to believe your secret inside source, Crowley (ex-CIA corporate chief), Corson (intelligence historian USMC), Angleton (CIA CI) and Gregory (fake journalist), then go ahead and believe them.

I believe they're all full of crap.

Bill Kelly

bkjfk3@yahoo.com

http://web.archive.o...hives/a2854.htm

TBR News June 30, 2008

The Voice of the White House

................

The Marriage of Evil

by Dr. Peter Janney and Brian Harring

Humbolt House Publishing

A planned new route into Europe for Turkish heroin has been discovered as the result of investigations by European law enforcement agencies, to include Interpol and Europol and the American FBI. ......

Since Professor Fetzer has inserted one of Gregory Douglas' bogus documents into the JVB story, and has even reviewed one of his books, I thought reviving this thread might shed some light on the origin of the document and the disinformation behind the book and the man.

Since Mr. Douglas claims that former CIA officer Crowley is his source of the bogus documents, and Douglas has a history of promoting bogus stories and using aliases, he's sort of the Clifford Irving of secret history.

Crowley's family has said that the documents attributed to Crowley are fake, and were going to sue Douglas, but after checking into his background and discovering he has no visible assets worth seizing, they didn't think it worth pursing in court. That's a shame because you would think that you wouldn't pursue such a case for money, but for honor and the truth.

In any case, Douglas didn't like what I wrote about him and penned this note to me under yet another alias.

More of Bill Kelly's fan mail:

Re: Your Reviews of 'Regicide'

Mr. (Gregory) Douglas, who does not like to get his hands dirty, sent me copies of some of your reviews of his book, 'Regicide' which I found, unintentionally of course, highly amusing.

First of all, it is my personal opinion that the subject of the Kennedy assassination has become a roosting place for legions of pompous blowhards, opinionated idiots and, often (like the Farrell woman) disinformation sources for the CIA.

I note with some humor that your commentaries were nothing more than ad homonym attacks on Douglas, who can obviously write circles around you, if your postings are any indication of your literary skills.

Jealousy is a wonderful goad because if brings all the frogs out of the pond at the same rime, just in time to be run over by a truck.

I know, because I personally shipped the books out, Douglas sold over 10,000 copies of 'Regicide' and is planning a rerun. Tell me, sir, what have you written, besides your phone number on lavatory walls? And might I ask here in conclusion, a most important question?

Are you anybody in particular?

Brian Harring

Bill Kelly: Gee Brian, I didn't say Gregory Douglas wasn't a good writer, of fiction. I would have thought you would have thanked me for promoting his book(s).

Who is Brian Harring?

UPDATE: TBRNews and the Real "Brian Harring"

by jbalazs 12, 2005 at 03:35:09 PM PST

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/12/18359/8939

those of you actually following the stories I've been posting concerning TBRNews.org, I have recieved further information on the real identity of Brian Harring (the so-called author of the de-bunked 9000 dead servicemen story). I have been in e-mail communication with him and he has authorized me to post this diary in the hopes that he can somehow clear his name.

Assuming everything he has told me is true and he isn't part of this whole scam, then this gentlemen needs some help, if only to get the truth out there.....

http://www.drlaniac.com/articles/view.asp?file=ConspiracyDisinfo.htm

Conspiracy Theories and Far-Right Disinformation The rabbit hole goes much deeper than you would ever believe. Or so the conspiracy theorists of the world would have you believe. But dig behind the scenes of the conspiracy crowd, and you'll find another conspiracy.

August 20, 2005

The Beginning

Back in June, an entry on The Huffington Post by Jim Lampley caught my attention one Sunday morning. Lampley linked to a story from TBRNews.org that stated there were thousands more US troops killed than was being reported by the Pentagon. Supposedly, they had secret documents showing this to be true.

The Bush Butcher's Bill: Officially, 52 US Military Deaths in Iraq from 1 through 15 May, 2005 – Official Total of 1,803 US Dead to date (and rising)

U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals have not previously been counted. They total about 6,210 as of 1 January, 2005. The ongoing, underreporting of the dead in Iraq, is not accurate. The DoD is deliberately reducing the figures. A review of many foreign news sites show that actual deaths are far higher than the newly reduced ones. Iraqi civilian casualties are never reported but International Red Cross, Red Crescent and UN figures indicate that as of 1 January 2005, the numbers are just under 100,000.

by Brian Harring, Domestic Intelligence Reporter

Note: There is excellent reason to believe that the Department of Defense is deliberately not reporting a significant number of the dead in Iraq. We have received copies of manifests from the MATS that show far more bodies shipped into Dover AFP than are reported officially. The educated rumor is that the actual death toll is in excess of 7,000. Given the officially acknowledged number of over 15,000 seriously wounded, this elevated death toll is far more realistic than the current 1,400+ now being officially published. When our research is complete, and watertight, we will publish the results along with the sources In addition to the evident falsification of the death rolls, at least 5,500 American military personnel have deserted, most in Ireland but more have escaped to Canada and other European countries, none of whom are inclined to cooperate with vengeful American authorities. (See TBR News of 18 February for full coverage on the mass desertions) This means that of the 158,000 U.S. military shipped to Iraq, 26,000 either deserted, were killed or seriously wounded. The DoD lists currently being very quietly circulated indicate almost 9,000 dead, over 16,000 seriously wounded* (See note below. This figure is now over 24,000 Ed) and a large number of suicides, forced hospitalization for ongoing drug usage and sales, murder of Iraqi civilians and fellow soldiers , rapes, courts martial and so on –

Because I cannot publish the DoD pdf file in this country (no one has said anything about it being published outside the country) I am working up a specific overview for posting and my lawyer has made the following suggestion for me. I think it's good and it certainly is legal.

I have a copy of the official DoD casualty list. I am alphabetizing it with the reported date of death following. TBR will post this list in sections and when this is circulated widely by veteran groups and other concerned sites, if people who do not see their loved one's names, are requested to inform their Congressman, their local paper, us and other concerned people as soon as possible.

The government gets away with these huge lies because they claim, falsely, that only soldiers actually killed on the ground in Iraq are reported. The dying and critically wounded are listed as en route to military hospitals outside of the countryand not reported on the daily postings. Anyone who dies just as the transport takes off from the Baghdad airport is not listed and neither are those who die in the US military hospitals. Their families are certainly notified that their son, husband, brother or lover was dead and the bodies, or what is left of them (refrigeration is very bad in Iraq what with constant power outages) are shipped home, to Dover AFB. You ought to realize that President Bush personally ordered that no pictures be taken of the coffined and flag-draped dead under any circumstances. He claims that this is to comfort the bereaved relatives but is designed to keep the huge number of arriving bodies secret. Any civilian, or military personnel, taking pictures will be jailed at once and prosecuted. Bush has never attended any kind of a memorial service for his dead soldiers and never will. He is terrified some parent might curse him in front of the press or, worse, attack him. As Bush is a coward and in denial, this is not a surprise.

This listing program is about finished and we will start publishing in the very near future so act accordingly. If there is an actual variance of, say, 10 names, that is acceptable. 50 would indicate sloppiness and anything over 100 a positive sign of lying.

*The latest on the wounded: "Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, is a 150-bed hospital that's already seen over 24,000 wounded military patients from Iraq and Afghanistan since the commencement of hostilities ".Knight Ridder Newspapers June 6, 2005 (Note: The Pentagon refuses to publish accurate lists of any wounded. Ed)

Brian Harring

Haven't we had enough of this?

.....This is a fully alphabetized list of the official number of American dead in Iraq from the beginning of the Iraqi war through June 6, 2005.

There are many more deaths that have not appeared on the official lists because the DoD has taken the tricky tack of loading dying and probable fatalities onto aircraft and flying them out of Iraq to bases and hospitals outside of that country. So, if a GI is dying or has every expectation of dying, he or she is loaded on an aircraft and their subsequent deaths are not publicly reported as "Combat Deaths." Of course the families or survivors are certainly notified of the death but the public is not.

The purpose of publishing this alphabetical name list (which I will update monthly) is to encourage the families and friends of survivors to contact us with the names of these unreported casualties.

We suggest supplying the name, rank and unit of the individual as well as contact information for verification.

We have encountered serious objections to our publishing the original DoD pdf file that lists the actual dead, injured, deserters and so on so we are getting around this by publishing the original cover page and then reformatting the information contained inside the cover.

Because there are over a hundred pages of the dead alone, this project will take some time because I am doing it myself, without any assistance and please do not volunteer to assist me.

And to those who keep writing to me in care of TBR News wanting to know my name and address "so they can help me" or "because if you don't give me your name, SS number and address, I just can't believe a word you say." I can tell you that I have been around the academic world long enough to have learned not to give away my lengthy research to someone eager to get the credit, and the money, for my work.

They say that for an academic (or any writer for that matter) to steal from one person is plagiarism while stealing from many (like the late Steven Ambrose) is really research. And yes, I am working on a book and yes, I have a publisher so be good enough to bug off and do your own work.

As far as the demanders of my name and address are concerned, go spy on your neighbors and then run, panting, to the FBI to get your plastic pin and tin toy badge. Or better still, stick your head in a chipper and turn it on.

Update as of June 16, 2005: We have been receiving a surprising number of emails concerning U.S. military personnel who died but were not listed as Combat Deaths. Their names are not found on the public postings of the DoD. More later!

Brian Harring

US Military Report: The High Death Rates exposed by Brian Harring

The Anne Frank Diary Fraud

http://www.thetruths...cle.asp?ID=4197

The Anne Frank Diary Fraud

by Brian Harring – TBR News.org

When Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin, she did so prompted by the highest of motives. Yet she, herself, relates the incident that when she first met Abraham Lincoln in 1863, he commented "So you are the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war!"

Few will deny that the printed word in this instance fanned the flames of passion which brought about one of the bloodiest and saddest wars of American history, with brother sometimes pitted against brother, father against son. Perhaps if there had been less appeal to the emotions the problems might have resolved themselves through peaceful means. However, almost universally read at the time, few people then recognized the potency of one small book or the injustice done the South through its wide acceptance as a fair picture of slavery in the South.

Propaganda, as a weapon of psychological warfare is in even wider use today. Communists were masters of the art. Often they used the direct approach; just as often they employed diversion tactics to focus the eyes and ears of the world in directions other than where the real conflict was being waged. For many years, through propaganda alone, the dead threat of Hitler and Nazism had been constantly held before the public in a diversion maneuver to keep attention from being directed against the live threat of Stalin, Khrushchev and Communism.

Such has been the effect, if not the deliberate intention of many who have promoted its distribution, of a book of popular appeal-The Diary Of Anne Frank. It has been sold to the public as the actual diary of a young Jewish girl who died in a Nazi concentration camp after two years of abuse and horror.

Many Americans have read the book or seen the movie version, and have been deeply moved by the real life drama it claims to present. But have we been misled in the belief that Anne Frank actually wrote this diary? And if so. should an author be permitted to produce a work of fiction and sell it to the world as fact, particularly one of such tremendous emotional appeal? ........

http://www.oilempire.us/afp.html

The American Free Press publishes "The Barnes Review," a neo-Nazi holocaust denial site that shares the same mailing address as AFP. The "Barnes Review" page www.barnesreview.org/Nobel_Prize/nobel_prize.html included this gem

Adolf Hitler: An Overlooked Candidate for the Nobel Prize

By Alex S. Perry Jr.

If anyone deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, it was Adolf Hitler. Hitler did not want war. World War II was forced on Germany.

Barnes Review offers a wide variety of neo-Nazi holocaust denial literature that severely tests any sane person's committment toward tolerating the First Amendment. It is interesting to see how AFP carefully "segregates" their Nazi literature onto the "Barnes" site, so that their AFP newspaper seems somewhat legitimate if you don't look closely at the organization.

Who was Barnes?

http://holocaust-history.org/denial/abc-clio/index.shtml

Holocaust Denial, a Definition

by Andrew E. Mathis

This entry on Holocaust denial appears in Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia. Written by a member of The Holocaust History Project, it discusses the history of this conspiracy belief in Europe and America.

... At the same time, antiwar historians, notably Harry Elmer Barnes, began to suggest conspiratorial motivations on the part of the major powers at war [note: World War I]. As historian Deborah Lipstadt has noted, Barnes and his colleagues were correct in many of their assumptions, for example, Germany was not solely at fault for the war (Serbia had, after all, fired the opening salvo); much anti-German propaganda spread during and after the war was, in fact, false; and there were war profiteers who made fortunes on the slaughter of the war (Lipstadt, (33-34)01). However, this did not change the essentially imperial nature of the war itself. Nevertheless, with the doubts of Barnes and his cohorts borne out through historical method, reports of German atrocities committed during World War II (this time true) would be treated with even greater skepticism. Barnes, who lived into the late 1960s, was among the first Americans to embrace Holocaust denial. [emphasis added]

Edited August 31, 2012 by Tom Scully

[William Kelly]

Tom,

Okay, I'll draw a line in the sand, but instead of totally discarding - if one line is wrong or bad the whole book is BS - and unquotable - as you and Jimmy D seem to imply, I say that unlike real BS - that you totally ignore (ie. James Files, Judyth, Roy Factor, et al), the Crowley/Douglas "Zipper Doc" is a very sophisticated disinformation ploy, and by extension so is Janney's Mary's Mosaic.

For those who are familiar with the basics of propaganda, especially black propaganda, unlike those who are simply idiots or wrong, black propaganda stems from a very distinct source and can be traced back to its origin, which in this case, is very close to those who concocted the Dealey Plaza operation, so what they say can be properly categorized.

So I disagree with both Jimmy D's contention that the book should be totally trashed, and your contention that because these people are all spooks, we can't trust anything they say.

The sons and daughters of witnesses and suspects in the JFK assassination have a great, personal motivation to discover the truth, more so than the merely curious, and they have and are making great inroads in the case, some more so than truly independent researchers.

Rather than totally reject all this new information, it should be properly classified as what it is, and we should take it further - use it to identify new records and witnesses that we didn't know about before. Tom, your work expanding on things we've just learned from this thread (ie Woods Hole, etc.) are really impressive, so I know you can follow my reasoning.

You can throw the baby out with the bathwater, but I'd rather pick out the gold nuggets that are in every new work.

Besides, I want to remain friends with Peter and John so I can buy them a beer when I finally meet up with them.

BK

[Mike Rago]

As for this thread, and Janney's book, I think that Peter is a good researcher and writer,

Can you please tell us what , in your opinion, makes a good researcher? I really am interested in your opinion on this.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Mike Rago

[William Kelly]

As for this thread, and Janney's book, I think that Peter is a good researcher and writer,

Can you please tell us what , in your opinion, makes a good researcher?

Well, I can't speak for every good researcher, but Peter got interviews with the guys at NPIC and the CIA that nobody else could get, mainly because of his dad's connections, and he's accurately recorded what they said and shared them with everybody, and Peter was the original source of the McMahon AARB testimony, and shared that, so in my book Peter's a good researcher, not only for acquiring new, important information, but sharing it freely. Peter made no bones about how he got the goods nor betrayed the trust of those who were talking to him.

Then there are scavangers and swine like Lawrence Schiller and Phil Zelikow - both known to be brilliant researchers but are not very good guys, Schiller - Norman Mailer's "researcher" inherited his papers, including the Soviet archive documents on Oswald, but refuses to turn them over to ARRB or share them with the rest of us - and Zelikow, of Miller Center and 9/11 Commission, both whores for their masters.

So in answer to you question, I guess a good researcher is one who tells you where he stands from the get go, acquires significant new information and shares it freely, and Peter certainly qualifies.

I think Greg Parker, Robert Howard, RCD, Larry Hancock, Linda Miner, Tom Scully and Bill Simpich are among the best of the "good researchers" working today.

BK

BK

Edited September 1, 2012 by William Kelly

[Mike Rago]

No Message.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Mike Rago

[William Kelly]

As for this thread, and Janney's book, I think that Peter is a good researcher and writer,

Can you please tell us what , in your opinion, makes a good researcher?

Well, I can't speak for every good researcher, but Peter got interviews with the guys at NPIC and the CIA that nobody else could get, mainly because of his dad's connections, and he's accurately recorded what they said and shared them with everybody, and Peter was the original source of the McMahon AARB testimony, and shared that, so in my book Peter's a good researcher, not only for acquiring new, important information, but sharing it freely. Peter made no bones about how he got the goods nor betrayed the trust of those who were talking to him.

Then there are scavangers and swine like Lawrence Schiller and Phil Zelikow - both known to be brilliant researchers but are not very good guys, Schiller - Norman Mailer's "researcher" inherited his papers, including the Soviet archive documents on Oswald, but refuses to turn them over to ARRB or share them with the rest of us - and Zelikow, of Miller Center and 9/11 Commission, both whores for their masters.

So in answer to you question, I guess a good researcher is one who tells you where he stands from the get go, acquires significant new information and shares it freely, and Peter certainly qualifies.

I think Greg Parker, Robert Howard, RCD, Larry Hancock, Linda Miner, Tom Scully and Bill Simpich are among the best of the "good researchers" working today.

BK

BK

What do you mean - "No message." ?

Did you post that just to step on my response, just as you did to my Valkyrie piece?

Thanks for responding,

BK

JFKcountercoup

[Mike Rago]

I moved that message to the Mary Mosaic thread and deleted from this thread.