textfiles-politics/regexConspTest/jfkmessages.xml

<xml><p>Article 15606 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part I, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:26:52 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep4.132652.2192@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 144</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GARY NULL:
There is criticism on the part of the media to opening up the
John F. Kennedy assassination to a new investigation. However,
there are individuals who are willing to challenge this stance.
They feel that there are more than enough reasons to open up
the Warren Commission findings and to take another look;
even to convene another impartial group of researchers and
investigators who have subpoena power; even a special prosecutor,
if necessary, to delve into this issue without the FBI and the
CIA being the ones who are primarily responsible for giving the
information, as some doubt has been raised concerning their
objectivity in the original Warren Commission hearings and
research-gathering. </p>

<p>Our first guest on today's program is Harold Weisberg, the
House Subcommitee on Assassinations investigator, the author
of a book on Lee Harvey Oswald and the post-mortem, the whitewash
and the frame-up. He has also written a book on the assassination
of Martin Luther King. Welcome to our program, Mr. Weisberg.
I would like you to give us your professional assessment of the
House Select Committee on Assassinations -- since you were a
primary investigator there -- on their findings, on the Warren
Commission, and on ....</p>

<p>HAROLD WEISBERG:
I had no connection with the House Committee. I was the source
for most of the stories that appeared that were critical of them.
It was a synthetic duplication of the Warren Commission. It began
with the intent (now, I'm not talking about each individual
member. I'm talking about the staff who did it; especially
Blakey, the general counsel and chief-of-staff) .... It began
with the intent of putting down all the critics. Each hearing
-- each public hearing -- began with what he called "the
narration", and he picked out the critics whose work he was
going to address, and then the hearing was dedicated to debunking
them and proving them wrong. And I'm happy to say that there's
only one critic he managed to avoid; and that's me. He wasn't
going to pick a fight with me.</p>

<p>All of their [the Committee's] work was faulted in varying
degrees of ways, but they NEVER investigated the crime itself.
In that, they did exactly what the FBI did, and exactly what
the Warren Commission did. They did NOT -- any one of them --
investigate the crime itself.</p>

<p>Now, I think you should know that, unlike the other books,
there are no theories in my book. I'm a former investigative
reporter, a Senate investigator, an intelligence analyst; and
that's not my bag. And I don't think that that's what the people
of the country need for the democratic system to work. They're
factual. Now, I'm going to quote, accurately from memory, a
record I got through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
Perhaps it would help your audience to understand more about
where I'm coming from to say that I filed about a dozen Freedom
of Information Act lawsuits against the Government. Most of them
are on the Kennedy assassination. And most of the records I got
were from the FBI. In all, I have about a third of a million
pages of records. These are the same ones that Oliver Stone has
been promoting for himself in his movie by saying that they're
suppressed. </p>

<p>Now, from the Department of Justice and from the FBI I got a
record of a memorandum. Nicholas Katzenabach -- who was then
the Deputy Attorney-General of the United States and acting
Attorney-General as of the time in question, because Bobby
Kennedy was not there because of the crime and the tragedy.
He [Katzenbach] wrote Lyndon Johnson, through his [Johnson's]
channel, Bill Moyers, recommending to Lyndon Johnson that they
had to convince the country that Oswald was alone, that Oswald
was the assassin, that he had no confederates who were still
at-large, and that the evidence was such that he would be
convicted in trial. The typed copy is dated early Monday morning
the first working day after the assassination, November 25, 1963.
I also happen to have gotten Katzenbach's handwritten copy, which
he wrote when he had no typist available on Sunday. And from the
FBI I got a record which said that Katzenbach had discussed it
with [FBI Director] Hoover on Sunday, as soon as Oswald was killed. </p>

<p>So as soon as the Government knew that there would be no trial of
Lee Harvey Oswald, they closed the books, the crime was solved, and
that was it. So you see, when the crime itself was never
investigated, there are no leads for other people to follow. And I
address this so that your audience can understand that those
people, who develop theories and advance them as solutions, do it
without a factual basis. I don't know of any theory that is
factually supportable by the known evidence. And now I'm talking
about the official investigative reports of the FBI and things
like that which do establish some fact.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay, we thank you very much, Mr. Weisberg, for sharing your
views and for giving us this insight on this important piece of
critical information. I appreciate your being on with us today.
Let's go now to another guest who is standing by, who has a
different point of view, and who has additional information.
I would like to invite Jim Marrs [author of CROSSFIRE] onto our
program again. Welcome to our program, Jim. </p>

<p>I'd like to pick up where we left off yesterday. For those of you
who were not here yesterday and who didn't hear the program, we did
a careful assessment, going step-by-step through the events that
led up to the actual shooting, showing that the American Public
has never been made aware of the fact that earlier in the day, in
Fort Worth, there was also a motorcade for President Kennedy, but
that motorcade was substantially different. It was VERY very
heavily guarded, on proper protocol, by the Secret Service. And the
police were maintained, meaning that sharpshooters were stationed on
rooftops, no window was allowed to be opened, there was adequate
protection. But all of that was suspended at Dealey Plaza and for
the trip through Dallas. WHY? WHO was responsible? Who caused
the rescinding of these orders? Those are questions that have to
be thoroughly analyzed.</p>

<p>I would like just a brief summary of some of the points from
yesterday -- an overview of some of the discrepancies between
what we have been led to believe and what actually occurred.
Then I would like to go into the area that our previous guest,
Mr. Harold Weisberg has suggested -- that there is NO evidence
to support any of the assassination theories. I would like you to
give us YOUR information, your belief, and whatever documentation
you have that could, in any way, directly or indirectly, tie in
any of a number of proposed agendas such as the renegade CIA
agents, the knowledge that FBI director J. Edgar Hoover could
have known or may have known in advance that the assassination
was imminent, certain right-wing extremists, certain members of
the military, and also members of Organized Crime, and some
anti-Castro Cubans.</p>

<p>Now, all of these have been alleged -- depending upon the theorist
-- to have participated. But you have some unique insights and
and I would like you to share with us some of those insights at
this time.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Transcribed by John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 15651 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part II, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:44:11 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep8.174411.10959@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the murder of President Kennedy
Lines: 145</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JIM MARRS [author of CROSSFIRE]:
Well, first just let me say that the one thing I think that
everyone including Mr. Weisberg, including Gerald Ford, including
David Bigeley(?), including everybody who is connected with this
thing at this point .... I think the one thing that we can all
agree on is that there is substantial controversy over the death
of President Kennedy and over the subsequent investigation and
the medical evidence. Now, in this particular case, that
confusion, that controversy, that obfuscation, if you will, is
the basis of what can legitimately be called "the cover-up".
There should not have been a cover-up. There should not have been
this confusion. This was a case .... this was the President of
the United States, for God's sake. There was an autopsy at
Bethesda Naval Hospital. There was treatment at a reputable
hospital: Parkland, in Dallas. And there should not be this
confusion. There should be some very clear-cut answers based on
scientific, medical, forensic evidence to say: "Here's what
happened. He was shot three times from the rear." Or: "He was
shot once from the front and once from the rear." It should be
very clear, but it's NOT. It is TOTALLY muddled. It is TOTALLY in
confusion. And THAT is the nature of this cover-up. Not that
there has never been any information, but that there has been so
much information, and so much CONTRADICTORY information that it
has thrown the whole thing into confusion and controvery, so that
we can't seem to get to the bottom of this. I think that is very
self-evident. </p>

<p>Now, who has the power to do that? And who CAN do that? And who
could have saved us from all of this? The Federal Government!
The Government who supposedly had him autopsied. The Government
who supposedly is in charge of the investigation. It should have
been clear-cut, but it's not. And, to me, that shows, in an
overview, that the Government has been responsible for all this
confusion, rather than clearing it up and actually presenting us
with factual information as to what happened. So this is what is
causing all of the problems, because the Government is STILL
saying: "Well, there's nothing there. It's all cut and dried."
And yet, it's not. </p>

<p>You can look at the evidence for yourself. For instance, in the
medical evidence, I could go down the whole list of doctors in
Dallas who said that he had a large gaping hole in the right rear
portion of his head. Even Clint Hill, the Secret Service agent
who jumped up on the back of the car in a vain effort to save his
life; in his Warren Commission testimony he says, quite bluntly,
quite to the point: "The right rear portion of his head was
missing." End-quote. Okay? How much clearer do you want to be?
And every doctor in Dallas backed him up. Doctor Jones says that
there was a large defect in the back side of his head. Dr. Perry
said: "I noted a large evulsive wound in the right
parieto-occipital area." I could go on and on and on. They all
said the same thing: that there was a gaping hole in the right
rear portion of his head. But today, we have an autopsy
photograph that has come out of the Government that purports to
show the back of President Kennedy's head, and there's no large
gaping hole there. All there is is a small hole that the House
Committee told us was an entrance wound. And yet, the autopsy
doctor, Dr. Humes, in his testimony to the House Committee said:
"Well, I don't know what that was, but that wasn't any wound of
entrance. And I know that for sure." Okay? So what's going on
here? I mean, the confusion points the finger at what REALLY is
going on, and at who is generating all this. And it's the Federal
Government!</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright, so let's take a look here. You're suggesting that the
Government, or various members of different areas of the
Government have participated in a systematic cover-up.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Absolutely! For instance, the Warren Commission tells us -- and
the people who defend the Warren Commission to this very day tell
us -- that one of the shots (it started off that it was the first
shot. Now they're backing up by saying: Well, maybe it was the
second one or the third one) .... but one of the shots, they say,
went through Kennedy's neck and did not hit anything. It went on
to strike Governor Connally, causing all of his wounds --
which has become known as "the single bullet theory"; this idea
that one bullet went through both men. This is the foundation of
the "single assassin theory". Okay? If you don't have one bullet
going through two men, then you've got more bullets, which means
more shooters, which means a conspiracy involving more than one
gunman. So to keep from having to admit that, they came up with
the "single bullet theory" which says that one bullet went
through Kennedy's neck and struck Connally. </p>

<p>Now, the problem is that the bullet did not go through his neck.
The Warren Commission plainly states that it hit him in the
middle of the back -- the third thoracic vertebrae, between the
shoulder blades. Doctor Humes places it there in the
Siebert-O'Neill FBI Report of the autopsy. His jacket and his
shirt, in the National Archives, show a bullet hole in the middle
of the back. Well, if there's a bullet hole in the middle of the
back, and you try to track that to the throat wound -- which is
what they do -- now you've got an upward trajectory, which
destroys the idea that this bullet somehow cursed downward and
struck Governor Connally. Plus, you've got Governor Connally's
wrist X-ray, which shows that there are still more pieces of
bullet in his wrist today than are missing off of the bullet that
the Government still claims caused the wound. So it's very
obvious that they're simply lying about what went on.</p>

<p>We now have the January 27th minutes of the Warren Commission, in
which their Chief Counsel admits that since we have a picture of
where the bullet entered the back, that it's below the place
where it came out the front. So how could it go and turn around,
etc.? They knew it, and so they chose to lie to us and simply
claim that the bullet went through his neck. And the supporters
of the Warren Commission are still telling us the same thing,
although this is totally opposite to what the medical evidence
shows us.
</p>
<p>
So it's a huge thing. You have to look at the totality of this
case. Any one particular issue can be picked apart or explained
away or rationalized as coincidence or happenstance, but if you
look at the total picture, you can begin to get an understanding
of what really went on.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright, Jim Marrs, I want you to hold on, because we're going to
present some new information. By the way, Jim Marrs is an award-winning reporter for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, and he was a
reporter at the time of the assassination for the Denton Record-Chronicle. He teaches at the University of Texas at Arlington.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please assist in disseminating it by posting it to other
networks, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
mass media's thirty year cover-up of the coup d'etat
against the People of the United States, the necessity of
citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 15678 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part III, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:54:18 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep9.155418.16387@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 157</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Now, just today -- just less than an hour ago -- the American
Medical Association gave it's official position on the Kennedy
assassination, and a Doctor George Lundberg, the editor of the
Journal of the American Medical Association and Editor-in-Chief
of Scientific Publications of JAMA, read their position paper,
and I'll just quote something from it. Later in the show we're
going to come back to this, because we have a part of the press
conference recorded by WBAI. It says: </p>

<p> "The recent Crenshaw book"
(and we had Dr. Crenshaw on the show)
"is a sad fabrication based upon unsubstantiated allegations. The best
explanation for the motivations of myriad conspiracy theorists are
paranoia, the desire for personal recognition, public visibility and profit.</p>

<p>Anyhow, it says that this is all nonsense. There was no
conspiracy; that the Warren Commission was right. And THAT was
the press conference. We'll get more on the press conference, but
I just want you to know that finally JAMA (and I don't know why
JAMA would be sticking it's nose into something that it knows
nothing about, to begin with) came out and felt the need to hold
a press conference to say that the Warren Commission was right.
Everyone (they say) in the field writing books, doing broadcasts,
or offering information to the public, must be doing it for profit,
recognition or some other [personal] motive. </p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
I've got news for them. Talk to anybody who has known me and
they'll tell you that I've been making the same criticisms since
the early '70s, and I certainly never made any money. In fact,
people ....</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Jim, let me ask you something. Have you ever been found guilty, in
an extended trial, of restraint of trade, monopolistic practices,
and, if so, was that conviction upheld all the way clear up to
all the different appeals courts, and now the conviction is
final?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Not me.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Well that has happened to the American Medical Association. So,
when the AMA has the audacity to come onto a press conference --
with the muddled background that they have for having been caught
engaging in the restraint of trade and in monopolistic practices
-- claiming that others have ulterior motives, I think it's
absolutely absurd.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Anybody who knows anything knows that the AMA is a FIRM supporter
of the status quo, and that it has been highly political for
years. And I would ascribe political motives to almost anything
that they do. The point that I want to make here is -- if my
understanding is correct -- if they are simply quoting from the
two autopsy doctors who worked on President Kennedy, well then,
this is just an affirmation [of that autopsy]. Of course, those
doctors are going to say the same things they said in 1963 and
1964, and it's going to support the Warren Commission's
contention. But this is a diversion. This is a red herring. This
is not the issue. The issue is that what the autopsy doctors saw
was not the same as what the doctors saw [at Parkland Hospital]
in Dallas. And there is a very DEEP discrepancy between the
wounds as viewed in Dallas .... I just quoted you all these
people who said that there was a large hole in the back of his
head. This was not seen at the autopsy -- or not reported. So
we've got some real discrepancies here, and this particular
little news conference and their pronouncements are simply
skirting the issue.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay, Jim, I want you to hold on because we're going to introduce
some new evidence and a new individual to our conference here.
He is Harrison Edward Livingstone, the author of HIGH TREASON II.
Welcome to our program, Mr. Livingstone.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Thanks for inviting me.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I would like to go straight to some of the most important issues,
and if you would, please give us the research that you have
uncovered on these. First, I would like to have you review, from
your perspective, the eyewitness descriptions of Kennedy's real
wounds.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Well, as you know, I've been able to interview almost every
living medical witness. I did not talk to Doctor Clark, although
he gave me certain answers through his secretary, twelve years
ago. I have talked to Doctor Humes, but I can't say that anything
was productive there, even after as much as an hour of talk.
But, other than that, my book presents the most complete history
of what these doctors are saying today, and put in perspective of
what they said and wrote in 1963. No other book or writer or
researcher has achiveved this.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We're not here to promote your book, as such. We're here for you
to please share your information with us. So if you could, please
go right to the information. Would you talk about the evidence of
forgery and retouching of the autopsy photographs and X-rays?</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
[initial words were drowned out by Gary Null's voice]
.... doctors and the two autopsies. And the point being that they
are trying to head off at the pass the research that I have just
published, and for no other reason; also [they're targeting] Doctor
Crenshaw's book and his statements. They made a number of totally
false statements at this press conference. For instance, that
Crenshaw (they quoted other doctors, and this is an example of how
they cooked their article by the American Medical Association) ....
that Crenshaw was not present at the autopsy -- when if you go and
read in Volume Six of the Warren Commission books, he is mentioned
by almost every doctor as having been there. And he was certainly
in a position to observe the wounds and to see what was going on.
And it doesn't take anybody more than an idiot to know that a
bullet is either an entry hole through the skin of the neck, or
it's an exit, because, if it's coming out, it's going to make
quite a tear. And anybody, basically, would see the difference.
I was pretty stunned, as you probably know, because I was at this
press conference today. You ask: Why is JAMA [the Journal of the
American Medical Association] doing this at this time, and I'm
just telling you there is only one reason why they're doing it.
It's because the whole cover-up perpetrated by the Government in
this case is directly threatened by the research that I have done
and by my making it possible for Crenshaw and the other doctors
to come forward.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Would you give us some link between Richard Nixon's men
and John Kennedy's killers that ties the assassination directly
to Watergate? And could you please give us the facts?
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please assist in disseminating it by posting it to other networks,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty
year cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the
People of the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage
becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
Article 2723 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part IV, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:12:09 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep11.121209.3771@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 152</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Before I get to that, you had asked me a question on this medical
evidence. Do you recall?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yes. I asked you for the evidence of forgery and retouching in
the autopsy photographs and X-rays.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
This is my special area of research. I discovered that the X-rays
were fake in that they show the entire face missing on the right
side. And again, this is what JAMA tried to head off at the press
conference today. They tried to ridicule criticism of the medical
evidence without facing these facts. And I asked them at the
press conference: "Didn't you notice that the face is missing --
that the President's face is missing in the X-rays, but it's NOT
missing in the photographs?" And, of course, at that point, the
press conference became tumultuous, and the whole thing began to
be overturned. The photographs, of course, show extensive
retouching and evidence of forgery. And this was directly how the
Chief Justice of the United States was tricked -- with this faked
evidence. The doctors, most recently (quite a few that JAMA did
not interview, and they don't dare interview, and if they did,
like other researchers, they're not going to report it) ....
because those doctors insist, to this day, that that throat wound
WAS an entry hole. And the many people who were at the autopsy
.... and Doctor Fink, the forensic pathologist who was at the
autopsy, who was not interviewed by JAMA, and whom they claimed
declined, and I've talked to him. But he testified that the hole
in the back was an entry hole that did not penetrate into the
chest. So what JAMA did -- and as Jim Marrs just said: They're a
political action committee that doesn't dare let this evidence
link up because .... they've kept it compartmentalized. I asked
them: "What about Doctor Humes's stating at the end of his
testimony to Arlen Specter that the bullet that hit John Connally
could not possibly have been the same bullet that went through
John Kennedy because of the fragments that were found in Connally?"
They said: "We did not discuss John Connally in this article.
It's not relevant." So that's an example of compartmentalizing
the evidence by a political action committee which has sought
to control the medical community in this country.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. Let's try to go back to the photographs. And please, if
you would, try to keep .... we have limited time and we want the
opportunity for you to give us as much information as you can.
Let's go specifically to the fraud that you are asserting, and
on the retouching of the photographs that no one else in the media
has picked up on.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Right. This is the key to the case, right now. The Chief Justice,
Earl Warren (and he mentions in his memoirs that he was shown
autopsy photographs) [said] that he was tricked by phony
photographs and X-rays which apparently show a shot that came from
behind. They claim that there is an entry hole in the area of the
cowlick, although the autopsists, Doctors Humes and Boswell, told
the committee of doctors at the House of Representatives that
they denied .... He said: I defy you to see this hole here where
you say it is; that this is not a hole. It's something else. And
it was four inches -- as the Clark Panel found in 1968 -- from
where that entry hole was placed in the autopsy report by Doctor
Humes and Doctor Boswell. It was four inches above it. Then,
showing the face missing in the X-rays and not showing Earl
Warren the photographs that showed the President's face intact
made him think that his face was blown away. And that's what we
see in the Zapruder film. And I believe that that's animated.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay, let's go to some specific references. I'm looking now at a
photograph of John Kennedy. It's called "the stare of death"
photograph. And I'd like for you to talk about the reference
black triangle that appears on the right upper forehead of
Kennedy in this photograph.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Yes, if you have a clear print of that in the negative, in the
negative there is no light whatsoever that comes through that
triangle. It's much clearer in a clear print. In my book, we were
able to do the best possible reproductions, but, of course,
they're screened and it's not that clear. But in a comparable
right profile photograph, which we publish there, you can see
what has been covered up. And they're from two DIFFERENT sets of
photographs. One, with the reference black triangle is known as
"the Fox set of photographs" which came into the possession of
Mark Crouch, who was a friend of the Secret Service man, James K.
Fox, who took the rolls of film from Bethesda Naval Hospital over
to be developed in the Navy labs. The other set of photographs,
which were in the possession of Robert Groden, show that there is
a major laceration extending into the forehead of the President.
This was NOT seen in Dallas, but two of the autopsy doctors did
describe this laceration to me. They brought it up. I did not
bring it up. And they told me about the laceration going a half
an inch into the forehead above the right eye. That's where that
reference black triangle is. What the reasons were for covering
it up in some of those photographs are not clear to me. I can't
answer that question. All I know is that they conflict with each
other -- these two different pictures, as do many of the
photographs conflict with each other.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Also, it's very clear that the whole right side of the head is
blackened out, and only the ear is visible. That is CLEARLY
retouching.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
That's it. And the whole back of the head, extending around
behind to the right ear was missing. And a major part of my
research was to try to resolve the puzzles of the medical
evidence. Exactly what did the wounds look like? I was able to
determine -- by having the doctors and the witnesses at the
autopsy and in Dallas draw on mannequin heads -- exactly where
the bone defect was and how much scalp was missing. And they are
identical. The wound was not altered, but there was a large hole
that went all the way around to the side of the head. The autopsy
report is accurate in that respect, but the problem was that
there was sort of a flap of scalp that was badly macerated and it
did have an egg-shaped-sized hole through it. But it could not
possibly cover up all of the missing bone that was underneath
there. And this caused a lot of confusion among engineers and
accountants and other people with that mindset who do this
research, because they can't semantically separate out the
issues, for instance, between alteration and tampering, or
between laceration and incision. A lot of the confusion in the
case (in the medical evidence) is semantic, so I was able to
determine that the body was not altered. It may have been
tampered with, but even that doesn't appear to have been
necessary when all they really had to do was to fake the
photographs and flash them at Earl Warren who put them aside
immediately because of their gore.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 15763 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part V, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:56:49 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep14.165649.23560@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 160</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Alright, now there are two other very VERY important issues here.
And they are that the photographs of John Kennedy's body, where
he is on his face, lying on his stomach here, it shows ....</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Lying on his back. There's no picture of him lying on his
stomach.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Oh, okay. Yeah, it's been turned around there. I have a picture
of his back, and the first bullet hole ....</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
He's lifted up from the table -- yes. </p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. The first bullet hole is about four inches, it looks like,
below the ....</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
Well the larger hole is not the hole. It's about two inches below
that. You'll see a small red thing, closer to the roller, and
that, the men all state, was a hole. And they also indicate that
that deep depression down toward the bottom of the roller is a
bullet hole.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yeah, well there are two bullet holes in his back. How can a man
have two bullet holes in his back, and then ....</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that there were
gunmen all around that car. In Senator Dodd's report -- that was
appended to the House Committee report when he was in the House
of Representatives -- stated that there were at least three
gunmen firing, and two of them had to have been from behind,
because of the closeness of the shots. There ARE six shots on
that Dallas [motorcycle] police tape recording.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yeah, but you see, the Warren Commission does not state that.</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
No! They say that three shots were fired and two struck the
President.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Also, you have the entire back of the head shown very clearly,
and you do not see the ....</p>

<p>HARRISON LIVINGSTONE:
No. Part of that is not clear at all. You see the area that's out
of focus there. The background is in focus and the foreground --
where the cowlick [is] closest to the lens of the camera -- is in
focus. But the area all along the hairline from behind the ear
down to the center of the neck (in the hair) is out of focus. And
that's where they smudged all that over when they made their
composite photograph.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright, what I'd like to do is this. Let's just summarize here
for a moment. What we have are some CLEARLY retouched
photographs. We have more bullet holes in the President's body
than the Warren Commission, or any of the so-called "official"
investigations, have recognized. How in the world does a man end
up with this many proveable bullet holes, and yet, still have
one man doing all the shooting? Some of these bullet holes are
clearly exit wounds. Some are entrance wounds. And yet, the
Warren Commission has, for whatever reason, only presented that
these were rear entrance wounds. The autopsy photographs HAVE
been altered. The X-rays HAVE been altered. It is not possible to
end up with an X-ray .... Let's say if you took a normal anterior
/posterior skull X-ray, and then you took the Kennedy anterior/
posterior skull X-ray -- the Kennedy lateral skull X-ray --
there's an amount of facial bone that's missing. If this were
presented in any regular forensic trial today, it would be
LAUGHABLE. The evidence would be thrown out as inadmissible and
faulty.</p>

<p>We're going to take a brief break. I'd like both Jim Marrs
[author of CROSSFIRE] and also, our guest on the phone right now
-- who just returned from the press conference -- Harrison Edward
Livingstone, who needless to say, was part of the reason that the
AMA called this hasty press conference (and the press conference
itself you'll hear a little later on. We tape recorded some of
it) .... we're going to get to some information that I think the
people in this audience have always wondered about. Are you aware
that not ONCE were we ever given the real reason as to why the
Watergate Break-In occurred? What was in the safe they were
looking for? Why did CIA people go into that safe? Why did Nixon
authorize it? That brought down the whole Nixon Administration
-- about sixty-seven of his top cronies. Why? We were never
asked that! The media never probed it further than what was
given to them.</p>

<p>Well, you're going to hear something when we come back, about the
link between Richard Nixon's men and John Kennedy's killers that
ties the assassination directly to Watergate.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> [JD: There was an incident which remains vivid in my memory, and
it has never been explored by anyone, though it might provide
a fuller picture of the possible link between the Watergate
Break-In and the assassination of President Kennedy.</p>

<p> Those of you who are old enough will recall the numerous
Presidential press conferences of Richard Nixon during which
he was interrogatively flayed and driven to the brink of
impeachment by a concerted onslaught from the press corps,
members of which have since been alleged to be journalistic
prostitutes for the CIA (e.g. Walter Cronkite and, I think,
Dan Rather, notorious among many). In one of those press
conferences (I think it may have been the "I'm not a crook!"
press conference) a reporter asked Nixon [I'm paraphrasing]:
You said something about the John Kennedy assassination as
an example or an analogy ....
And then, Nixon cut him off and exclaimed, with distress:
"No, no, no! I didn't mean to imply that I know any more
about that assassination than anyone else does."
Nixon's tenseness at this moment was striking.
Since then, I have been suspicious that Nixon might have
knowledge, if not some involvement in the assassination.</p>

<p> What ought to be examined is a tape of that press
conference so that perhaps a scientific voice analysis
can be done to indicate, albeit not to prove, that Nixon
was lying about his lack of knowledge of any unreported
evidence surrounding the assassination of John Kennedy.

If enough people wish to collaborate on such a project,
we may be able to finance the purchase of the tape and the
voice analysis with small cost to everyone involved.
Please send me e-mail if you are interested.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com or jad@att!ckuxb</p>

<div>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</div>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
Article 15807 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part VI, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 15:53:10 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep16.155310.24072@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 123</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording of a
broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GARY NULL:
We're also going to talk about proof of fraud and disinformation
campaigns WITHIN the assassination research community, and how a
United States Senator and two former Presidents personally
covered up facts in the case. And we're also going to talk about
proof that bullets WERE removed from the President's body at
Bethesda Naval Hospital before the autopsy began. That's just
some of what we're going to talk about today. New information;
very powerful information. And, contrary to what my first guest
suggested (and I respect that each guest can have their own point
of view, and everyone has the right to have a point of view, even
if it differs with other people on the show) he suggested that
there was no hard data. This is as good data as can be produced.</p>

<p>Now I'm going to ask our guest, Jim Marrs, you're going to have
about ten minutes, and Harrison Edward Livingstone, you're going
to have about ten minutes. You can take a break, because you're
talking on the commercial-free Pacifica Radio station in
New York, WBAI, 99.5 FM, a 50000 watt station. I've been here
for fifteen years. We work for free -- those of us on the air,
and we ask, three times a year, for pledges from the station's
listners to help support our efforts.</p>

<p> [JD: My apologies for missing the subsequent discourse.
I'm trying to obtain a tape of it. If and when I do,
I'll promptly transcribe it for you. However, I have taped
numerous hours of information covering the succeeding
episodes in the series. So the following transcript resumes
the discussion with the next day's broadcast in the series.]</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright, David, if you could, please, would you go through this
evidence in some detail? You're making a lot of statements and a
a lot of allegations. We'd like you now to substantiate the
differences between the official version.</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Okay. With regard to the casket, for example, the witness who
opened the casket .... the persons who saw the casket come in the
back door of Bethesda Naval Hospital, and who actually unloaded
it are Dennis David, the chief-of-the-day at Bethesda Naval
Hospital and a man named Don Rabbatisch [sp] who was actually one
of the casket toters, so to speak -- who took it out of the black
hearse in which it arrived.</p>

<p>The account of Dennis David is that he is at the back of the
hospital. He is in charge of part of the security function. He is
told that the President's body is going to arrive there. They go
down. The black hearse pulls in. He assembles some of his men.
Don Rabbatisch is one of them. They bring the casket inside.
A black hearse pulls up. There's a group of plainclothesmen and
two men in O.R. smocks. They get out of the ambulance. The
shipping casket (and that's what it was: a shipping casket) is
removed from the black hearse. It is brought onto the loading
dock and it is brought to the door of the morgue. In the door of
the morgue is Paul O'Connor. He's the medical technician listed
in the FBI reports, and who is also listed in the official Navy
records, and in the House Select Committee records. He opens the
casket which is a shipping casket, according to O'Connor. Inside
the shipping casket is a body bag. He unzips the body bag, puts
the President's body, along with others in the morgue, on the
table. He said that when the wrapping was removed from the head
area, there was a gasp in the room, and he said: "and I looked
down and said, 'My God, there's no brain!'" And you could see
this. It was apparent. The FBI, at that time, writes notes. They
write a report that weekend. In their report, which was not
published with the Warren Commission documents, but is at the
National Archives, they write that when the body was removed from
the casket in which it was transported, it was (quote) "apparent
that there had been surgery to the head area; namely in the top
of the skull." And that's the official record. That's the
evidence.</p>

<p>Now, the Warren Commission did not know about most of this
evidence that I am talking about here. They did not perform this
kind of analysis. They did not establish what, in law, is called
a "chain of possession" on the body. So the Navy commander who
performed the autopsy simply comes before the Commission, raises
his right hand and testifies as to the condition of the body.
And they accept that autopsy report which states that President
Kennedy was shot twice from behind, based on wounds you see on
the body which were NOT on the body in Dallas, if you compare
Dallas versus Bethesda -- Dallas being where the President was
shot, Bethesda being where the autopsy was performed six hours
later. Based on the Bethesda wound pattern, President Kennedy IS,
or appears to be, in fact, shot twice from behind. Based on the
Dallas wound pattern, he was NOT.</p>

<p>Now ordinarily, you would trust the autopsy over the accounts of
the doctors at Dallas, because the autopsy is better evidence.
It's, in fact, the "best evidence". It's based on the body of the
President. But the irony is that, in this case, there is a
subterfuge, and, in fact, the body was altered. That's what my
book was all about: persuading the reader that there is evidence
that the body was altered, and that this is the reason why the
evidence looks the way it does. I might just add that if you
start with this evidence in 1992, the same evidence that they had
in 1963, unless this autopsy is overturned, you're going to come
to the same conclusion: that Oswald shot the President. This
autopsy is the legal foundation for that whole house of cards.
It cannot collapse unless the autopsy is overturned in a
definitive fashion.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
Article 15839 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part VII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy</p>

<p>Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1992 16:16:26 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep18.161626.13759@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 132</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
What would have been the sequence of events to have allowed the
brain to have been removed, since there is no evidence that it
was removed in Dallas during the procedures that were performed
on the body at that time?</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
If I understand you correctly, you're asking me when was the body
stolen. Is that what you're saying?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yes. When was it stolen, and why would they have removed the
brain, and where did the brain next appear?</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
The only time that the body could have been taken out of the casket
(and this is covered in the conclusion of my book), and the only
time (I don't want to say that the casket is unguarded because
there are always Secret Service agents around, and you cannot have
this go forward without the connivance of some Secret Service agents),
but the only time that the Kennedys aren't all over that casket is
when they come back to Air Force One after the shooting. That is,
after the President is pronounced dead at Parkland Hospital,
a coffin is obtained -- a large viewing casket which everybody sees
on national TV. They go out to Love Field with the President's body
in the casket. They go aboard the aircraft and they learn that
there is going to be a delay. "Why," they ask. "Why can't they
take-off immediately for Washington?" "Well," they're told,
"Lyndon Johnson is aboard this aircraft. He didn't go back to
Washington on the other plane. He's on this plane."
And he appears and says: "I spoke to Bobby Kennedy, and Bobby
Kennedy said, 'Delay the flight. I must be sworn in first in the
state of Texas.'" This is all denied that night by Bobby Kennedy
who tells his sister-in-law Jacqueline Kennedy that he said no such
thing to Lyndon Johnson; that he (Johnson) called Bobby Kennedy,
who was Attorney-General in Washington, and said: I'm being told
that I should be sworn in. Do you have any objections; that it
wasn't the other way around.</p>

<p>Anyway, the result of this is that the flight is delayed by about
a half-hour, and basically, the Kennedys (Mrs. Kennedy and the
Kennedy aides) are told or requested to come to the front of the
plane to witness the swearing in. It is in connection with this
activity of "delay the flight and let's go to the front of the
plane for the swearing in" .... that's the only time that the
Kennedy party is not all over that casket. That's the time, I
believe, (and it's a process of elimination, I will concede. I
don't have a direct witness; otherwise I'd have solved the Kennedy
assassination) .... but it's during that period that the body
must have been taken out of the casket and put into some other
casket and brought somewhere. I personally believe, at the time I
wrote BEST EVIDENCE, that the body was flown to Washington, D.C.,
and that the alterations occurred on the East Coast after the
plane landed at Andrews Air Force Base at six o'clock. And I
cited, as evidence, helicopter activity on the starboard side;
that is, the side facing away from public view -- and from radio
transmissions indicating that they were going to go with the body
to Walter Reed Army Hospital where (quote) "an autopsy was to be
conducted under guard." And all that's on the radio. And I
spelled it out in my book. </p>

<p>Now, it's an unsolved mystery as to where this body was taken.
But wherever it happened, that's where the brain would be removed
and the wounds altered. It would be done very quickly. It was
done VERY sloppily, I might add. And that's why, when the body
arrived without a brain, it was immediately noted that there had
been surgery to the head area. That's what the FBI wrote down.
We're not dealing with some kind of perfect fraud here. We're
dealing with a very imperfect crime with footprints all over the
place; footprints which are ignored by the Warren Commission
because they saw the crime -- or you might say they saw these
events through very Establishment eyes. They never questioned any
of this stuff that's brought up in my book.

GARY NULL:
When did the brain next appear?</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
A brain is infused, in the autopsy room, by another technician:
James Jenkins. Now let me explain this. It's kind of interesting.
There were three technicians in the room: a guy named Ranicki, a
fellow named Paul O'Connor and a fellow named Jenkins. Paul
O'Connor gives me the account (and it's a thing that he will
never forget. It just came out of his mouth when I interviewed
him in 1979), that the cranium is empty. There's no brain, etc.
And on the chart where the body organ weights are listed (a chart
which is perfectly authentic. It has little pink spots on it.
That's Kennedy's blood. It's in the National Archives today)
there is no weight given for the brain, but there is a weight for
many of the other body organs.</p>

<p>That night, at some point -- and I don't know when -- a brain is
brought into the room. That brain is given to James Jenkins,
another technician. James infuses that brain with formaldehyde.
And that brain becomes the evidence brain. It is weighed ten days
later, or something. It's weight is recorded in a supplementary
brain report. When I confronted O'Connor, on camera, with the fact
that there is this brain, he said: "Well I don't know where they
got it from. It certainly couldn't have been the President's!"
In other words, it did not arrive in the body. Now, that's the way
an autopsy is supposed to happen. The body is supposed to have the
body parts inside it. You know, we're not dealing with United
Parcel Service where you send something and say: "See attached."
The brain is supposed to come in the cranium. Now, a brain is
definitely brought into the room. I do not know how it got into
the room. I can just tell you that James Jenkins infused a brain
that night, whereas Paul O'Connor said that the cranium was empty.
And by the way, O'Connor's account is corroborated by the X-ray
technician who said that the hole was so large and the thing was
so empty that he could have put his hands inside the hole.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
Article 2820 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part VIII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 12:50:12 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep22.125012.13133@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 140</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Alright. We're going to be speaking with Paul O'Connor in just a
few moments. We have him on the show, as well, because we wanted
indidividuals who could corroborate your information.</p>

<p>But right now, we're going to ask you to remain on hold. We're in
the midst of a WBAI fund-raising [period] ....</p>

<p>.... My show is on the air five days a week bringing programs to
you that will give you insights. Like right now we're doing a
whole series on Government agendas and hidden agendas, and the
conspiracies. We're targetting, right now, the [John] Kennedy
Assassination, just because that assassination is something that
everyone would agree had a major national impact. The trouble is,
what we were told is the OFFICIAL position doesn't blend with what
other researchers and first-hand observers are suggesting were the
actual cases. And then, we have to ask: Why would someone cover-up
this information? Why? Why would the media not report it? Why
would the Government not investigate it? Why would the Warren
Commission not explore it? So we're looking at that.</p>

<p>Right now, on our program (and I want to thank our guests for
being patient and for standing by) is David Lifton, the author of
BEST EVIDENCE. He is suggesting that there were two caskets, one
body; and that the body arrived without a brain; and that the
brain that we were told was President Kennedy's brain may have,
indeed, been someone else's; that there was a gaping hole large
enough to put a fist through when it arrived in Washington; and
that therefore, there had been alterations. </p>

<p>Now, let us see what other corroboration we could have for this.
We have, on the conference phone right now, Dr. Charles Crenshaw.
Dr. Crenshaw, who graduated from the Parkland Memorial Hospital in
Dallas, Texas, who specializes in general surgery, is presently
the chairman and director of the Department of Surgery at Saint
Peters-Smith Hospital, in the Fort Worth area. He is a professor
of clinical surgery at the University of Texas, Southwestern
Health Center's Science Center in Dallas. Welcome to our program,
Dr. Crenshaw.</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Thank you.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
By the way, Dr. Crenshaw is also the author of a very important
work on the Kennedy Assassination called, JFK: THE CONSPIRACY OF
SILENCE, which right now, I believe, is number one on the New York
Times bestseller list. Isn't it?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Yes, it is.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And, by the way, THREE other books on the top-ten bestseller list
are also about this assassination, so CLEARLY there is interest.
Would you be good enough to explain to us the inconsistencies
between your EYEWITNESS account and the official report upheld by
the Warren Commission?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
That day, on November the 22nd, 1963, all of the surgeons at
Parkland believed that our President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was
shot at least once from the front. We saw two wounds there. Both
of them were from the front. The head wound was tangential in
nature, coming in over the right side, above his ear, and leaving
a large exit area, a vulsed[?] area in the right-rear part of the
head. There was loss of part of the parietal, temporal and most
of the occipital lobe of the right cerebral hemisphere, with
exposure of the cerebellum. It was about two-and-a-half to two-and-three-fourths inches in diameter. It was more or less
circular. And in the photos from the National Archives -- which
are so damaging -- this wound had completely vanished. There was
no wound seen in the exhibits that are marked "B" and "E" in the
book. This wound, that ALL of the physicians at Parkland
described, was completely gone. The second wound was in the
anterior part of the neck. It was about three to six millimeters
in size and with an arc the size of your little finger. It was
clearly demarcated as round and relatively clean-cut. Then the
tracheal tube that had been put down was ineffective. And then
Dr. Perry performed a tracheostomy through the entrance wound.
The incision was sharp with smooth edges, and about an inch to
and inch-and-a-half long. It was no longer than the flange on the
tracheostomy tube, which was one-and-three-fourths inches. Not
only that, after the nurses had removed this tracheostomy tube
before we placed him in the coffin, it was brought back again.
The edges were still smooth and very sharp. And in the autopsy
photographs that I first saw in looking for the head wound, this
wound was widely gaping, it was irregular, and it was now about
two-point-five to three inches long. So there was CLEARLY a
change between these wounds, that I saw at Parkland, and the
wounds that we saw on the autopsy pictures that were given from
the National Archives.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Why didn't you or others at the scene later complain or even make
an issue or an affidavit showing that this was an alteration?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
We never saw the photos. The first time I saw these was in early
1991. The Parkland physicians were never given this opportunity.
They were only told about the additional wounds (which I doubt
whether there was another wound in the back of the head, because
I looked there) and were never told or shown any other evidence.
We were told only about the autopsy. And we, like most people,
felt that they would have had the best forensic minds in our
country to examine our President. However, obviously, [from] what
has been discussed and what we now know, [that assumption] was wrong.
And so, we had no other knowledge other than the description by the
Secret Service.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
So if you had the description by the Secret Service, by an
extension of this logic, the Secret Service or someone would have
had to participate in this cover-up, or this obstruction of
information. Would that be a reasonable assumption?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
I think that's a very reasonable assumption.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 15923 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part IX, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1992 13:24:03 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep24.132403.3774@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 171</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Alright. Do you believe that the shots came just from the Book
Depository, or from the Grassy Knoll, or from where?</p>

<p>DR. CHARLES CRENSHAW:
I cannot say that, but he WAS shot twice from the front. And I
assume, also, that he was shot from the back. So there could not
have been just one shooter; that is, Oswald. We spent all of the
next week from the 22nd to the 29th [of Nov. '63], trying to figure
out (as we had been told the official version: that it was Oswald)
how in the world the President could have been shot from the
front when Oswald was supposedly the lone shooter. And on
December the 5th of that year, it was the same way with the
Secret Service. They reenacted the assassination, and it was
their ability there, trying to show how he was shot from the
front, yet being shot from the School Book Depository. It was a
question in everyone's mind.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We know that there was one bullet that missed the bodies of both
Kennedy and Connally completely, because it ricocheted off of the
cement. There is absolute evidence of that. The ricochet struck
one of the people standing right on the curb. That meant that
there had to have been four bullets shot, at minimum. We know
then of three. There is an estimate of six. There were acoustical
recordings showing six shots. So even if we assume that there
were four, the Warren Commission claims that there were not four.</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Yes.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Now, how in the world is it possible for one shooter, from the
Book Depository, firing at a moving target, to get off four
rounds in what would have to have been under approximately
four-point-eight seconds. And even extending it to six seconds,
it's not humanly possible. No one has ever been able to duplicate
that.</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
No. And I don't think they ever will be. And one other thing.
I also took care of, post-operatively, Governor Connally. And
Connally and Mrs. Connally (Nellie) have always stated that he
was not hit by the same bullet that the President was hit by. He
stated that post-operatively, and he has also stated it recently.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. The Secret Service's refusal, against [Parkland]
Hospital policy and Texas law, to allow an autopsy to be
performed on JFK, and the swift removal of the President's body
from the hospital to Air Force One and back to Washington, D.C. ....
Give us your insights on that, please.</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Well, you know, this is the reason. I was a junior resident,
staying there preparing the President's body along while the
nurses were preparing him. But I would stay there because this is
just a law, and we MUST have a chain of evidence if we were going
to prosecute whoever had shot the President.</p>

<p>Then, all of a sudden, there was such a hubbub with the Secret
Service. They would not have the autopsy performed there, even
though our forensic pathologist, Dr. Earl Rose, had told them, in
no uncertain terms, that this had to be. So they asked the
administrator to get a justice of the peace. A very young,
uneducated justice of the peace came there. And he even talked
with the district attorney and the chief of police, and he was
told that he should at least have an autopsy or a bullet.
However, he chose to go along with the Secret Service and sign
the death certificate. Also, in so doing, he checked the inquest
that was performed. That was merely his walking at the head of
the room, looking in. And also, he checked that an autopsy was
performed. And I can assure you, there was no autopsy performed
there. Then, at Mrs. Kennedy's request and [that of] the Secret
Service, the coffin was brought in, and it is the one that is
described. It was the large bronze coffin. And there, we put a
rubberized sheet there, and a clear plastic mattress cover over
that to keep the blood from getting into the satin. He had,
initially, towels around the head, but he had bled through that,
and Mr. O'Neill, of the O'Neill Funeral Home, put several
rubberized sacks (we had no good plastic then), and then we
placed him in the coffin. After, again, I looked at the head
wound and placed a sheet over the President, with his clothes at
the bottom. And there was no body bag at Parkland. He had just a
sheet over there. And the coffin was the bronze one that all the
pictures were made [taken of] at Andrews Air Force Base.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Isn't it rather unusual that a Dr. Boswell would state that he is
now removing head bandages? What is the significance of that
statement?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
I do not know. Boswell is also the one who has said, of course,
that the tracheostomy was almost three inches long. And it was not
that [length] when it left Parkland. But he did have those rubberized
sacks over his head. This is the only thing that I could have
thought: that maybe they thought it was a body bag. But there was
NO body bag.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. I'm going to go now to Paul O'Connor.
Mr. O'Connor, are you on the line?</p>

<p>PAUL O'CONNOR:
Yes sir.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And Dr. Michio Kaku, are you on the line?</p>

<p>MICHIO KAKU:
I'm on the line.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. We're going to come to both of you in just a second, but I
want to follow this train of thought:
Lyndon Johnson's direct order to YOU, Dr. Crenshaw, to obtain a
deathbed confession from Lee Harvey Oswald during an emergency
surgery to save his life ....</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Yes, this was on that Sunday. Obviously, we did not watch the TV.
And the head administrator of Parkland called for a free
operating team to come to the emergency room. We went there.
We were told that Oswald was coming in. At least we were
prepared. So immediately, in seven-and-a-half minutes, we got
Oswald up to the operating room, and operated on him on the cart.
We didn't even place him on an operating table.</p>

<p>After all of the attending staff .... some even at home had seen
this [the shooting on TV] .... they immediately came. And Dr. Perry
initially started the operation. I was an assistant there. So
when all of the attending staff arrived, I scrubbed out, was
standing there, and looked at this funny looking gentleman over
there on the left side. But, of course, Parkland was so wild
then. People were in every corner there. This man looked like the
comedian, Oliver Hardy, in a small scrub suit. He did have a
badge out of his front pocket, and a very large gun out of the
back pocket. And I thought: Well gee, it's just something weird
again at Parkland. The nurse tapped me on the shoulder then and
asked me if I would take the phone call. I went to the operating
room supervisor's office, picked up the phone, and there, a voice
like thunder said: "This is the President, Lyndon B. Johnson.
How is the accused assassin doing?" And I said: "Well, he's
critical. He's lost a lot of blood, but he is holding his own."
He said: "Would you take a message to the chief operating surgeon?"
And I said, obviously: "Yes sir." He said: "There is
a man in the room, and I want him to take a deathbed confession
as soon as possible."
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
Article 15989 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part X, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 12:03:47 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep28.120347.8405@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 140</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
DR. CHARLES CRENSHAW:
So I went back, I tapped Dr. Shires[?] on his shoulder and he
looked at me because everything was bedlam there. And I said:
"I've just been talking to the President of the United States,
and that man over there is to take a deathbed confession." And we
both just kind of looked and knew that, had Oswald survived, he
wouldn't have been able to talk for two or three days anyway.</p>

<p>Consequently, because of the ravages of hemorrhagic shock,
Oswald's heart started failing and ultimately fibrillating. We
tried all of the resuscitative measures -- chemical injections
and starting with the shocks -- but to no avail. So I then went
over and tapped this guy on the shoulder and said: "There'll be
no deathbed confession today." So Oliver Hardy melted away again.
I don't know who he was. I don't know how he got there. The only
interesting part is that I know that the President of the United
States knew that he was in the room.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Give us again the astonishing differences between the Dallas
medical team's account of the JFK wounds and the findings of the
official Bethesda autopsy team.</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
The most striking, of course, is the head wound which is right at
the back of the head at this occipit. It was in the right-rear
portion, in the occipital area. It was about the size of a
baseball. In the official pictures of the autopsy, this wound had
vanished. It was completely gone. And then the neck wound which
had the tracheostomy performed there, which was an inch to an
inch-and-a-half -- smooth, sharp edges, EVEN when the
tracheostomy tube was removed. This is now gaping, irregular and
was three inches in length [in the Bethesda autopsy].</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
The Parkland Hospital's nervousness about residents treating the
President, which resulted in the Warren Commission's failure to
obtain crucial statements from the attending medical staff ....
Would you give us some background on this please?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
Well, basically, there were thirty visits -- twenty-four of them by
the Secret Service and six by the FBI -- in which they talked to
different physicians and nurses there. And it's interesting that
not ONE of these conversations was given to the Warren Commission.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Not one of thirty?</p>

<p>DR.CRENSHAW:
Not one!</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
What does that tell you? What does that imply?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
It would imply that they didn't want to hear any contradictory
remarks.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. What is your feeling about Robert Kennedy's involvement
in any possible cover-up?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
I've always felt that maybe he wanted to become president so that
he could reopen this investigation. Three days before HIS
assassination, in a small community college, he announced to
everyone that only the power of the Presidency could unravel the
mystery of his brother's death. And he was, of course, assassinated
then. But immediately, Mrs. Lincoln, John Fitzgerald Kennedy's
secretary, called Senator Ted Kennedy and told him of artifacts
that the Kennedy Family had in their possession. And he told her
not to worry; that everything was taken care of. So the implication
has been that the attorney-general or Senator Kennedy, at that
time, did have important information that he had sequestered
there, so that, if it were at all possible, he could
reopen this investigation.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And lastly, Jacqueline Kennedy's immediate reactions and behavior
following the shooting?</p>

<p>DR. CRENSHAW:
I thought Mrs. Kennedy was very regal. She was standing there
initially. We asked her to sit outside the room. And then, of
course, after his death we did not officially pronounce him dead
because of her request for a priest and the last rites. The
priest arrived, and she walked into the room after him. We had
pulled the sheet up. It was a little short. She stopped at the
foot and kissed his great toe, and then went forward and stood
there holding his right hand, listening to the last rites.
Immediately after that, she took her wedding ring off and placed
it on the President's little finger. It would not go past the
knuckle, and so when she came in, after they had had the harangue
about the autopsy, and before we placed him in the coffin, one of
our orderlies there -- I believe it was Aubrey Wright -- helped
her get the ring on his small finger.</p>

<p>I had read many accounts of how their marriage was just that, in
name only. But being in trauma surgery now for thirty years, I
have seen grievances and unhappiness and definite examples of
removing the facade of what one felt. And I still will always
believe that there was no greater example of genuine and intense
love for the President than that exhibited by Mrs. Kennedy.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I want to thank you very much, Dr. Crenshaw, for sharing
your insights with us in this special report on cover-ups.</p>

<p>DR. CHARLES CRENSHAW:
Thank you.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Now let's shift gears. I want to go over to two other panelists
standing by: Dr. Michio Kaku, Professor of Theoretical Physics
here at CUNY, the City University of New York. Would you give us
your comments about the physics of the exhibit 399, the single
magic bullet?
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the necessity of citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 2881 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,alt.activism
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XI, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:01:26 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Sep30.170126.4338@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 137</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
MICHIO KAKU:
I think it's very important when we look at the ballistics tests
that show, for example, frame 313 of the Zapruder film which
clearly shows the President's head going to the rear, which
indicates that a bullet came from the front. Now in the Warren
Commission Report, the FBI, of course, had access to the Zapruder
film and also to the ballistics -- and what they did was they
REVERSED two frames of the Zapruder film to make it look like the
Now, there was one bullet -- the famous "magic bullet" -- that
zig-zagged and essentially reversed direction about seven times,
going through two bodies and winding up on a stretcher with only
two percent of its mass disturbed. However, if you take a look at
the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and simply perform ballistics
analysis on this, shooting bullets through, for example, animal
carcasses, you can show very clearly that when it goes through
cartilage and goes through tissue, you get much more than two
percent deformation of the bullet. So, in two very egregious
examples, we have major deficiencies within the Warren
Commission Report.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Approximately what percentage of that bullet should
have been missing?</p>

<p>MICHIO KAKU:
Tests show that you could easily get twenty to thirty percent
deformation of that bullet. Now I should also mention that NOVA,
the science program on PBS, did a reenactment wherein they got a
watermelon, and they shot bullets through the watermelon, and the
watermelon actually recoiled in the direction of the bullet,
which violates common sense. The conclusion would be, therefore,
that it is possible to violate common sense and have the head
lurch in the wrong direction. However, the tests done on this
watermelon were of a disembodied head, in the sense that there was
no neck and there was no body. You could even blow on a
watermelon with your breath and have the watermelon move.
In other words, this is an extremely minor effect. It only takes
place when you have a watermelon suspended without being attached
to another body. However, tests done on animals by, for example,
deer hunters and bear hunters have not shown this recoil effect
where the head lurches in the direction of the bullet. So I think
that NOVA was grasping for straws, trying to get a relatively
minor effect to explain a major discrepancy within the ballistics
[data] of the Warren Commission Report. And the very fact that
the FBI was forced to deliberately tamper with the Zapruder film
indicates that the FBI itself was aware of the fact that the body
was going in the wrong direction.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
That would therefore give us the impression that the FBI
participated in the cover-up of the assassination of President
Kennedy.</p>

<p>MICHIO KAKU:
That's right. In 1975, the Freedom of Information Act revealed
some of the minutes of the Warren Commission Report, which stated
that they were aware of the fact that Oswald was, in fact,
Agent S179 of the FBI, and that he was an informant of the FBI
who got something like two or three hundred dollars a month for
his work, and that this information would be EXTREMELY important.
But, basically, they failed to follow it up because they couldn't
put FBI agents under oath and have them lie under oath. And so,
this report was essentially unverifiable. But three different
sources, including the Attorney-General of the State of Texas,
stated to the Warren Commission that their understanding was that
Oswald was, indeed, Agent S179 of the FBI. And the conclusion of
the Warren Commission Report was that this evidence was so HOT --
it was SO damaging that it would have to be kept classified for
fifty years. Fortunately, the Freedom of Information Act revealed
this document in 1975.</p>

<p>Also, by the way, in 1978 the House Select Committee [on Assassinations]
interviewed the CIA paymaster -- a Mr. Wilcott, James Wilcott --
and he testified under oath that he was, in fact, the paymaster
of the CIA in charge of covert operations against the Soviet Union,
and that one of his contract employees was, in fact, Lee Harvey Oswald.
So, in other words, Oswald was a bit player and he apparently had
a role to play with the FBI and also the CIA. And both agencies,
of course, had a vested interest in keeping this information out of
the Warren Commission Report.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I think it's interesting at this point that CIA Director Gates is
now suggesting that the file on Oswald, which he is turning over,
will show that Oswald had nothing to do with the Kennedy assassination.
Of course, anyone who would accept for a moment that the CIA is going
to give any information about anything that has not been altered
is extraordinarily naive.</p>

<p>MICHIO KAKU:
Right. In fact, in 1973 the CIA destroyed most of the Oswald
file. We know that it was in two large file cabinets -- in fact,
two large file cabinets with four drawers apiece. He had a 201
file, which means that he had a very long history with the CIA,
and in 1973 the CIA destroyed that entire file. So, in other
words, what is going to come out now is basically a fraction of
what was, once upon a time, in the files of the CIA. Now the CIA
has been questioned about this and they said that this was
"routine cleaning" [housekeeping]. So in the "routine cleaning"
of the files, they destroyed potentially damaging information.
We will never know what was in these files. So whatever Gates
might reveal, at some point, will only be a shadow of what was
actually in there.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And CERTAINLY nothing that would implicate the CIA.
Also, is it not the case that the primary person pushing this
"single bullet", this "magic bullet" theory is Pennsylvania's
Republican Senator Arlen Specter, who also was the Anita Hill basher?</p>

<p> [JD: Sorry, but my tape ran out at this point, and
the person who was taping the broadcast for me did not
immediately flip over the tape. I'm trying to obtain
copies of the missing segments of the broadcasts, so that
I can incorporate those transcripts into future installments
of this series.]</p>

<p> (to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more urgent.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 2927 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:58:20 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct6.145820.996@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 174</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JOHN DAVIS:
Now, first of all, I have to explain myself why I think there was
a conspiracy, because the available evidence indicates that
Kennedy was struck twice by bullets from the front and twice by
bullets coming from the rear, and Governor Connally was struck by
a bullet coming from the rear that was not the same bullet that
hit the President. Therefore, this adds up to anywhere from two
to four shooters. Hence, a conspiracy. But evidence that it was a
conspiracy goes far beyond an accounting of bullet holes.</p>

<p>Let's consider first the motive for an organized crime conspiracy.
We have to realize that, for the first time in United States
history, the executive branch of the Federal Government declared
war on organized crime. This had never happened before. For the
Kennedy brothers, it was all-out war against the Mob.
"I'd like to be remembered as the guy who broke the Mafia", Bobby
Kennedy told an associate in 1961, shortly after he took office
as attorney-general. In his book, THE ENEMY WITHIN, Robert
Kennedy had written: "If we do not attack organized criminals
with weapons and techniques as effective as their own, they will
destroy us." Now, to back up this admonition, one of the first
things that Robert Kennedy did, in his assault against organized
crime, was the so-called kidnap/deportation of Carlos Marcello
on April 4th, 1961. Now this was an unprecedented and arguably
illegal act. Kennedy had Marcello snatched off the streets,
herded to an awaiting Federal jet, flown to Guatemala, and dumped
in a Guatemala City airport. Marcello had complained that he
couldn't call his wife, pack any clothes, or cash a check.
The action put the Mob on notice that Kennedy was serious.
Upon returning to the U.S. illegally, Marcello swore vengeance
against the Kennedys on at least three reported occasions. We
have witnesses for three occasions in which Marcello swore
vengeance against the Kennedys.</p>

<p> [JD: I could not understand a few of Davis's words because
his voice was overdriving the input of the phone.]</p>

<p>JOHN DAVIS:
Immediately after this episode, Robert Kennedy went after (quote)
"friends and associates" of Marcello, Santos Trafficante, [name is
unintelligible due to aircraft radio interference], and the
mob-led Teamsters' [Union] boss, Jimmy Hoffa. Soon, FBI
electronic listening devices began picking up complaints from
mobsters all over the country about what Kennedy was doing to
them. I'll mention just two of them. They were reported by the
House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979. [Name is
unintelligible], a mobster working for the Bruno Family in
Philadelphia, was recorded by a bug saying this: "See what
Kennedy done? With Kennedy, I should take a knife and stab and
kill the f*cker. I mean it. This is true. Honest to God. I hope I
get a week's notice. I'll kill. I'll kill, right in the White
House. Somebody has got to get rid of this guy."
Nicolino Carlente[sp], a Genovese Family caporegine[? - probably
means something like "royal head"], two months later was recorded
by an FBI bug saying this: "I'd like to hit Kennedy. I'd gladly
go to the penitentiary for the rest of my life. Believe me."</p>

<p>Well, by the fall of 1962, the Mafia had become desperate. In the
summer of '62, Jimmy Hoffa, who of course was totally controlled
by the Mafia, confided a plan to assassinate both Kennedy brothers
to Louisiana Teamsters official, Edwin Parton. Parton's
testimony on this issue was later confirmed by a Louisiana judge.
Two months later, a businessman from Las Vegas was present
at a farm house in Louisiana when he heard Carlos Marcello
threaten to kill President Kennedy; not only threaten, but to
outline a plan to kill him in order to neutralize his crusading
brother Bobby. Two weeks after this, Marcello's Florida friend
and associate, Santos Trafficante -- who was very much involved
also in the anti-Castro Cuban movement -- was talking to a Cuban
exile leader, Jose' Alaman[sp] about how Robert Kennedy was
persecuting Jimmy Hoffa. "Mark my word", Trafficante told Alaman,
"This man Kennedy is in trouble and will get what is coming to
him." At this, Alaman took issue with Trafficante and
Trafficante replied, "No, Jose', you don't understand me. Kennedy
is not going to make it to the election. He is going to be hit."
Alaman, incidentally, who doubled as an FBI informant, related
this conversation to the FBI and it was eventually related to
FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. So Hoover, by this time -- by the
fall of 1962 -- must have known that some plot was in the wind.</p>

<p>Skipping a few months, we come to the spring of 1963, and an
allegation by an FBI informant in New Orleans that seemed to
indicate that a plot, a Mafia plot to assassinate Kennedy was in
the wind. Eugene Della Colle[sp], who was a bar man in a Marcello
controlled bar in New Orleans, told the FBI that in April, 1963,
Carlos Marcello's brother Tony had come into the bar one morning
to service the slot machines, and said (quote): "There is a price
on the President's head and other members of the Kennedy Family.
Somebody will kill Kennedy when he comes south."</p>

<p>So, in conclusion, Mafia boss Carlos Marcello and his allies in
the Mob and in the Teamsters Union had powerful motives to kill
Kennedy. We have witnesses who have testified to their planning
an assassination attack on the President; associates who
apparently had foreknowledge of such an attack, such as Santos
Trafficante and the one I just mentioned -- Tony Marcello.
So the motive was there.</p>

<p>Now, if you want to get into a discussion of means, we can do
that. If you want to get into a discussion of how a cover-up was
put in place, we can go into that.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Sir, we're going to get into all those things, but unfortunately,
we have a terrible, almost inaudible connection on your line.
We're going to ask you to hang up so that our engineer can call
you back. But I want Jones Harris to stay on. I just want John
Davis to hang up because we're going to call you back. I'm sorry
for the poor technical quality.</p>

<p>Let's switch over to Jones Harris. Welcome to our program Mr.
Harris.</p>

<p>JONES HARRIS:
Hi, Gary. Nice to meet you at long last. I've looked forward to
this. Now, I'd just like to make a few comments.</p>

<p>I'm nowhere near as informed on the Organized Crime level as John
Davis, who has written an excellent book, that I do recommend to
people to read, called MAFIA KINGFISH. My point is this. I went
to Dallas at the end of '63 and then spent a lot of '64 there.
I interviewed a great many people: police, lawyers who knew
police, and so forth. It was made very clear to me that Jack Ruby
was a member of Organized Crime, that he had been so for a long
time; that he held a very important position for anybody to hold
in any major American city. And that is, he was one of the chief
suborners of all Dallas police who would do the bidding of Organized
Crime. He was the payoff man, which meant that he had a LOT of
important information and a lot of important knowledge. Anybody
who knows the case knows the ease with which he circulated throughout
those days, including getting in [into the Dallas courthouse] in
order to kill Oswald. I don't think there's any doubt that Jack Ruby
worked directly under a man named Joe Civella[sp], who was the
Organized Crime boss in Dallas, who directly, himself, worked under
the far more important figure, Carlos Marcello.</p>

<p>I'd like to tell your audience, Gary, that the idea of a conspiracy
does not begin with a lot of researchers and people like myself,
some of whom wrote books, some of whom didn't. It begins within
the Warren Commission itself. I think there are not many people who
understood that one of the top members of the Commission, Senator
Richard Russell [of Georgia] REFUSED TO SIGN the Warren Commission
[Report] at the end when it was finished. He had felt all along
that it was a conspiracy. He had called Marina Oswald, from whom
eighty percent of the stuff against Lee Oswald came .... he had
called her a liar and said that she had lied specifically to the
Commission on six different occasions. He then had to sit down
with Warren and Johnson, and he finally submitted to signing the
thing, though he changed the preamble a little bit. He then told me,
and told any number of interviewers and close friends for the rest
of his days, that he was UTTERLY convinced that this thing was a
conspiracy: the killing of Kennedy.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 2947 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XIII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:08:17 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct7.200817.23480@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 188</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JONES HARRIS:
When I was fortunate enough again to interview John McCloy some
years before he died, and sat with him and his wife in his home
in Connecticut, and we talked things over, he said to me as I was
leaving: "Mr. Harris, we realized afterwards that there were many
things that were never told to us." Now this was important,
coming from John McCloy because John McCloy had been priveleged
to deal in intelligence matters for the United States from 1917
on. I thought that that was an important admission. I believe
that Organized Crime played a very important role in the Kennedy
assassination, Gary, but I do not think that is the total story.
And one of the reasons I think it's not the total story is the
very thing that John Davis mentioned. I do not believe that
Trafficante would have said to a non-Mob person that "Kennedy was
going to be hit" if Organized Crime themselves were sending in
the killers. I do not believe that he would then have made that
comment to a non-Organized Crime person. I do believe that what
Organized crime did was ..... this crime could have taken place
in Miami. It could have taken place in Dallas. It was a moveable
feat. It could have taken place in Chicago. But wherever it was
going to take place, Organized Crime's contacts with those police
figures who were corrupt were going to be very important to
making the thing come out the right way. And there is no question
that in the Dallas area, that man was Jack Ruby.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. We're going to pause and reflect on all of this, put
this into perspective, and recapitulate some of the things that
John Davis has suggested.
John, are you back on the line?</p>

<p>JOHN DAVIS:
Yes, I am.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I'd also like to introduce Gaeton Fonzi. Welcome to our program,
Mr. Fonzi.</p>

<p>GAETON FONZI:
Thank you.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We're going to come to you in just a moment because you are a
highly respected investigator and journalist. You were an
investigator for the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
And we're going to get your perspective. </p>

<p>Again, it is not our intention to suggest that one group, one
individual alone [is guilty], but rather, we're looking at all of
the pieces and saying: What evidence do we have that was not and
has not been made the primary focus of either the Warren
Commission or the general news media presentation in taking it to
a level that, up to this point, simply has not existed. And also,
we're going to deal with some of the inconsistencies that have
occurred and some of the theories that have gone on. So we're
going to come to these issues in just a moment.</p>

<p>Now, because this is a non-commercial public access station, WBAI,
and as a part of the overall Pacifica Network throughout the
United States, several times a year we have to take a couple of
weeks and just raise some funds so that the station can continue,
so that we can keep ourselves commercial-free.</p>

<div>.......</div>

<p>For twenty-seven years, as an award-winnning investigative
journalist who has broken more stories -- over two hundred and
seventy-three major stories in the areas of medicine, the
environment, consumer health issues, I have always had to start
off with the problem of not just convincing the American Public
that there is something wrong with something that they were
believing in and trusting in, but I also had to go up against the
very forces who have enormous economic power and who have control
over the media. For instance, just two days ago, the New York
Times, in an editorial, started to talk about the fact that there
was a challenge against the theory that the HIV virus is the
single cause of AIDS. Where was the New York Times eight years
ago when this information was readily available? And where was
Time Magazine twenty-five years ago talking about vitamins?
NOW they say that vitamins help to prevent diseases like cancer.
Yes, vitamins do. But the evidence has been there all along. And
it hasn't been hidden. The evidence has been there that the HIV
virus is not the single cause of AIDS. It could not POSSIBLY be
the single cause of AIDS. There's no science to prove that, by
itself, it causes anything. And yet, why is it that no one has
written about it? Today's Amsterdam News writes about it.</p>

<p>The problem is that you have three things to contend with.
First, is convincing someone that something they thought was true
is not. Secondly, trying to deal with the idea that if you're
going to challenge the Status Quo -- as we're challenging the
Status Quo on the Kennedy Assassination -- that means you're
challenging something that people believe in almost as much as
they believe in themselves, or their parents, or their whole
life. And that is: orthodoxy; that is: authority. So it takes a
great deal of effort for the person to even be open to an idea
that challenges the prevailing view. And then, thirdly, is to see
whether or not they believe you enough to even look at the
evidence you have, and then try it. Why do you think, for
instance, just now we changed the Basic Four Food Group, which
was a SCAM. It was a fraud. It was unscientific. It was an
economic ploy. And it killed people by the hundreds of thousands
and millions because they were saturating their bodies and their
arteries with cholesterol and fats. And it causes heart disease
and cancer. Well now we know that. Alright? That's known.
BUT, we knew that all along. Certain people knew it. Just like
my guests today .... they have information that they've had for a
long time. Mr. Harris has had information for a long time. He had
information in 1978 that nobody wanted to pay attention to.
"Nobody", meaning mainstream media, and mainstream belief
systems. But it didn't matter. He has continued. We have a forum.
It's a small forum, but we have a forum for it.</p>

<div>......</div>

<p>AMY GOODMAN:
For a contribution of fifty dollars, you support Gary Null
here every weekday, and you support WBAI, a commercial-free radio
station that would dare to put Gary Null on the air as much as we
do. We don't have corporate sponsors. We don't have drug companies
who say: "We don't want our dogma, our ideology challenged."
Of course, they wouldn't say that on the air, but they would say
it to management. But we are corporate-free. We are commercial-free.
And that's what makes us important. That's what enables us to
bring you Gary Null. If that is a philosophy that is important to
you, (212) 279-3400 is the number to call and support WBAI.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Right now, we're in the midst of a special twenty-five-part
investigation on conspiracies, cover-ups and hidden agendas.
We're looking at life in a way that we've never been told existed.</p>

<p>On the conference phone we now have Jones Harris, we have Gaeton
Fonzi, and we also have John Davis. I'd like to come back to you
at this time, Mr. Harris. If you would please continue talking
about what we now know about the Warren Commission and the
information that it chose to accept and review, and that which it
chose to EXCLUDE, including individuals whose testimony or
evidence it chose not to use, and that information that it chose
to use, which now in retrospect, anyone can see should not have
been included.</p>

<p>JONES HARRIS:
Gary, if I may, let me answer your question in a slightly broader
way than you're suggesting because the limits of your question
would better go to Mr. Fonzi or to John Davis.</p>

<p>But let me say this to the public that is interested in this.
Not only did the Warren Commission go well out of its way not to
explore the Organized Crime end of this thing. Sad to say, he's a
man whom I knew well -- and I know that he's dying at this moment
-- but I have to say that Jim Garrison is also a man who did
everything he could (and I worked for him down there) to shield
the Organized Crime community. I'll give you one example of that,
if this might be of interest to you.</p>

<p>The first day I went down to work for him (and I like him very
much. A very personable fellow), he said: "Jones, what's the
first thing you'd like to do?" And I raised the name of Carlos
Marcello. And this great big six-foot-seven giant looked down at
me and he said: "Well Jones, of course, Carlos used to be in
Organized Crime, but he's just a businessman now." And there was
a pause, and then Garrison said to me: "Jones, you and I can have
lunch with Carlos whenever you want."
Now this was one of the first things that I found worrying when I
started to work down there.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 11001 of alt.censorship:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XIV(corrected), PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:54:34 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct12.125434.10654@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 149</p>

<p>CORRECTED:
I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JONES HARRIS:
So, my point here is this: that the decision not to look very firmly
at Organized Crime starts almost from the beginning. It starts with
the Dallas Police. It starts with the Bureau [the FBI]. It starts
with the Warren Commission. It continues to Garrison, and I must
say that even though the Blakey Committee finally did come through
and say: "Yes, it looks as though there might have been involvement",
considering all the time that they spent, I found that their
information was awful awful thin.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's explore that in some depth now, and let's go over
to Mr. Fonzi. Please hold on, Mr. Harris. Mr. Fonzi, thank you very
much for being with us. Let's explore a few things. Now you were an
investigator with the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Did
you find that there was any attempt by either the FBI or the CIA or
other leading law enforcement agencies or the attorney-general's
office, after [Robert] Kennedy, to downplay or to disengage the
interest of an investigation of Organized Crime in this?</p>

<p>GAETON FONZI:
Well that was not actually one of my areas of investigation. There
was, on the part of all the agencies, I believe, not a total spirit
of cooperation. And, of course, when it came to the CIA, that was
even more so.</p>

<p>Let me go back to something that John Davis said earlier on, as far
as there being no concrete evidence of CIA involvement. There was
no concrete evidence of anyone's involvement. There was no concrete
evidence of Organized Crime's involvement. There was no concrete
evidence of anti-Castro Cuban involvement or pro-Castro Cuban
involvement. There was no concrete evidence of any type of
involvement. There was, I believe, no concrete evidence of Lee
Harvey Oswald's involvement in the assassination.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Are you suggesting that Kennedy shot himself?</p>

<p>GAETON FONZI:
What I'm suggesting is that after all these years, there has not
been an adequate investigation. There was not an adequate
investigation on the part of the Warren Commission, and there
wasn't one on the part of the House Select Committee on
Assassinations.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
But why? There had to have been a reason.</p>

<p>GAETON FONZI:
Well, certainly from my own experience with the House Select
Committee, I know the reason was strictly political. When Bob
Blakey, the second chief counsel after the original chief counsel
Richard Sprague was fired for wanting to conduct a murder
investigation, a unique approach to the Kennedy Assassination, the
new chief cousel Bob Blakey came in and told his staff this at the
first meeting: "We have two priorities. Our first priority is to
get a report done in time. Our second priority is to get a report
done within our financial restrictions." And with those priorities
we set out to do exactly that, limiting, of course, many many areas
of investigation.</p>

<p>Let me just go on for a minute in terms of some of the specifics
that both John Davis and Jones Harris were talking about. I agree
that Organized Crime probably had a part in the assassination
because of Ruby's links to Organized Crime. But I think, in trying
to determine any kind of strategic planning here, you've got to
account for Oswald and Oswald's movements. You've got to account
for Oswald's control. And when Senator Richard Schweiker, who headed
the Senate Select Subcommittee on the [John] Kennedy Assassination
under the [Senator Frank] Church Select Committee on Intelligence
..... when he first got into investigating the Kennedy Assassination,
his immediate conclusion, after digging into it, was that "Oswald
had", as Schweiker put it, "the fingerprints of Intelligence all
over his activities." So I think that, unless you crank in the
control of Oswald, any theory about the Kennedy Assassination just
isn't complete.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Can you take us into an understanding of Alpha 66
and Antonio Visiana?</p>

<p>GAETON FONZI:
Yes, because that goes into .... when you talk about means and
motivation, I think you can find the means and motivation, not only
on the part of Organized Crime, but on the part of the anti-Castro
Cubans or on the part of the intelligence agencies, and in almost
any direction you look. But what I feel is the strongest is the
overall picture of the intelligence agencies' connections to the
anti-Castro Cubans, and their motivation. And that goes back to the
period following the Bay of Pigs. Kennedy was given a lot of blame
for the failure of the Bay of Pigs [Invasion], but it wasn't his
fault. The Bay of Pigs was planned -- including the air strikes --
by the [Central Intelligence] Agency before Kennedy became
president. And he was not even told about the air strikes.
Subsequently, as a result of that failure, Kennedy was very angry,
both at Castro and at the Intelligence Agency. And he sent his
brother Bobby to actually begin taking over the Agency, and set up
a secret war against Castro that was based out of this Florida area
here. And over the course of the years this became the largest CIA
operation outside of Langley [Virginia, CIA Headquarters]. It was
called the Jam Wave Station and it conducted a very very effective
operation against Castro almost on a daily and nightly basis.
These training camps, or these guerilla camps, were set up by the
Agency. They were controlled by Agency personnel using anti-Castro
Cubans as the operatives. And their spirit and motivation became
blended with the anti-Castro Cubans' goals. </p>

<p>Come the Cuban Missile Crisis when Kennedy realized that, as a
result of this very effective war against Castro, Castro permitted
the Russian missiles to be brought into Cuba. Kennedy realized that
he had brought the world to the brink of a nuclear disaster. So he
made arrangements with [Soviet Premier] Kruschev to stop the secret
war and to close down these guerilla bases in return for the
withdrawal of the missiles.</p>

<p>When he did that, the guerilla bases continued operating against
-- in defiance -- of the President's orders. As a result of that,
Kennedy was forced to use other agencies -- the Navy, the Coast
Guard and other military agencies -- to close down these camps.
And in the process, he arrested some of these anti-Castro Cubans
whom the Government had been supporting. This was reason enough for
the anti-Castro Cubans and their Intelligence [Agency] partners to
consider Kennedy a traitor. And as a matter of fact, during the
height of delicate negotiations with Kruschev, it was Alpha 66, one
of the most militant anti-Castro groups, that tried to sink Russian
ships in Havana Harbor, again defying Kennedy's orders.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 2990 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XV, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:23:31 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct12.212331.1686@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 161</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GAETON FONZI:
When I was working for Senator Schweiker, on the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence, I developed a witness in Miami named
Antonio Visiana. He was a former accountant in Cuba who had founded
Alpha 66. As I said, it was Alpha 66 that was one of the anti-Castro
Cuban groups that actually tried to blow up the Russian ships in
Havana Harbor, and blow apart Kennedy's deal with Kruschev. Visiana
told me that he was recruited in Havana in 1961 by an American named
Maurice Bishop. Bishop was the secret behind-the-scenes strategic
director of everything that he did with Alpha 66.
He worked with Bishop from 1961 until 1973, and during that period
of time, he worked with him on three attempts to assassinate Fidel
Castro. These were operations planned by Bishop who was obviously
an intelligence operative. He met with Bishop several times a year
and whenever it became necessary to plan strategy.

In September of 1963, he made arrangements to meet with Bishop in
the lobby of an office building in Dallas. That was nothing new
because he had met Bishop a number of times in Dallas. When Visiana
arrived, Bishop was talking to a young man. When President Kennedy
was assassinated, Visiana immediately recognized Lee Harvey Oswald
as that young man. I thought that this was tremendously important;
perhaps the single most significant piece of new evidence since the
Warren Commission investigation, because Bishop was obviously CIA.
And the CIA had repeatedly denied any connection or contact with
Oswald. After we got Visiana to develop a sketch of Bishop, it was
Senator Schweiker who identified Bishop as being David Atlee Phillips,
a CIA officer who had risen to one of the highest ranks in the
Agency as the Chief of the Western Hemisphere Division. And we
discovered that Phillips was an undercover agent in Havana during
the period in which Visiana said that he had met Bishop. In 1963,
Phillips was Chief of Covert Operations in Mexico City, and he was
subsequently responsible for all the disinformation that the CIA
had fed the Warren Commission about Oswald's visits there.</p>

<p>This was one of the areas -- the link between David Atlee Phillips
and Maurice Bishop -- that I feel the House Select Committee didn't
want to go into because it would have opened too many doors, too
many important doors. And every one of those doors was marked "CIA".</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Now, if that is the case, then let's summarize here.
What we have is a group of individuals with intelligence community
associations: CIA. We also have a few people who were ex-FBI,
including one who would play a very important role, and who was
also very familiar with Alpha 66. Then we had Guy Bannister.
Now I don't believe that it was possible for Guy Bannister and
David Ferrie ..... who both were known to Alpha 66 and the people
[thereunto] associated, and who also were familiar with what had
gone on with some attempted assassinations of Kennedy (with CIA
involvement). I believe that that had to have been a sub-contract to
the Mob. And when you look at what Johnny Roselli was testifying
about in secret, and then he was killed just a short time after
that, then you start to bring in Sam Giancana and Santos Trafficante,
the Mob boss of Tampa. And you start showing the connection -- that
it wasn't just possibly the Mob, and it wasn't just the intelligence
community. It was a marriage of the two.</p>

<p>Still, if you look at the precision of the assassination -- and we
have new information about that assassination that we're going to
be revealing for the first time anywhere, in another week or so --
it could not have been done unless people were very very SKILLED in
hits.</p>

<p> [JD: The tape ran out here. I'll try to obtain a copy of the
missing remainder of the broadcast, but for now, let's resume
with the next day's broadcast. Here again, I missed some of
the beginning.]</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
..... ended up being there when it arrived in Bethdesda. And also,
(a very important piece of evidence) the fact that there were three
separate caskets that entered that hospital .....</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
I said two.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Two. Well, also there was a circumstance of the same one being
seen twice: the bronze casket.</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Separate entries of two caskets. That's correct, according to
the evidence.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
But the public was led to believe that there was only one casket:
the casket that the President's body was put in in Dallas, arriving
at Bethdesda Naval Hospital hours later, a routine autopsy being
performed. And that was the end of the story. That's what the
Warren Commission was told. That's what we have been led to
believe.</p>

<p>In point of fact, another casket, which actually contained the body
of the President, arrived. Give us the circumstances surrounding
the arrival of that casket. What witnesses were there to acknowledge
that another casket had arrived -- that it was not the bronze
casket -- that the President's body was not the way that it was
when it left Dallas?</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Now, these are two separate issues you're addressing here. One is
the condition of the body, and the other is the issue of multiple
caskets. So which would you like me to address first?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Begin with the different caskets.</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Okay. What I was able to show in BEST EVIDENCE (and I obtained
reports which had not been examined. In fact, they're not even in
the National Archives, as far as the Warren Commission investigation
goes) is the report of the military casket team. In that casket
team report (and I interviewed the men who were on the casket team)
..... Let's make sure we understand what the casket team is. These
are the pall bearers, the honor guard that met Air Force One when
it arrived on the night of November 22nd at Andrews Air Force Base.
This is a multi-service casket team consisting of Navy, Air Force,
Army and Coast Guard, and headed by a man named Lieutenant Samuel
Byrd who subsequently died of wounds incurred in Vietnam.</p>

<p>These men described to me (in telephone interviews and, in one
case, in an in-person interview in the year 1967. And it's hard
to believe that it was so long ago: twenty-five years ago) what
occurred at the front of Bethesda Naval Hospital when the Navy
ambulance pulled up. That ambulance pulled up and they tried to
follow that ambulance from seven o'clock when it arrived at the
front of Bethesda until eight o'clock when they finally brought the
coffin in. There is an hour, sort of a missing time in there. Now
we can quibble over whether it's forty-five minutes, thirty-five
minutes. But there's a serious incident in there where they attempt
to follow the Navy ambulance, lose the ambulance, and are told by
their superiors that they have followed the decoy. There is a decoy
ambulance. NONE of this made it into the Warren Commission Report.
It's ALL on my telephone interview tapes. And the written report
says that they brought the big casket, which we all saw off-loaded
on TV, and the one that is supposed to contain the body .... they
brought that in at eight o'clock. That is their official written
report dated December (oh, I don't know) fifth or tenth, 1963.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 16516 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XVI, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 16:04:32 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct16.160432.29973@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 145</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
DAVID LIFTON:
Now, contrary to that evidence, I actually located the witnesses
who were at the back of the hospital, and who participated in
off-loading the vehicle and the casket in which the body actually
was in. And that was a black hearse which arrived at about ten
minutes 'til seven, Eastern Time. That black hearse had two men in
O.R. smocks and a group of civilians. A shipping casket was brought
out of that hearse. Dennis David, who is in Chapter 25 of my book,
described the scene of his men off-loading that casket. Furthermore,
I have documentary evidence, which is in my book (it's actually at
the Gerald Ford Library now), that the arrival occurred at 6:50,
apparently. This is the shipping casket. It was brought into the
hospital. That shipping casket was opened by Paul O'Connor who was
the medical technician at Bethesda Naval Hospital. Inside that
shipping casket, according to O'Connor, the President's body was in
a body bag. He unzipped the body bag. That statement was accepted
and published by the House Select Committee: the fact that he
opened the President's body bag; that the body was in a body bag.
That's the information that the body did not arrive in the same
casket that it left Dallas in, even though, of course, the big
casket arrives at the front of the hospital.</p>

<p>Now, it so happens that the big casket enters twice: once at eight
o'clock, as I've just described in the casket scene. However, it
also enters at 7:14. That casket entry is documented in FBI
documents provided by FBI agents Seibert and O'Neill. So we have
three casket entries: the one in the shipping casket at 6:50 when,
apparently, the body arrived. Then there's this covert entry of the
big casket while the casket team is chasing around looking for it.
And that's apparently when the body was put back into the big
casket so that they could have an official casket opening at 8:00.</p>

<p>This hocus-pocus is documented. I think any historian has to accept
the fact that there are three documented entries. One can argue and
say that it's all a matter of a mix-up of the paperwork. I think
that that is highly unlikely in view of the other part of my case
which involves actual alterations to the body. That's a separate
issue. But on the area of the chain-of-possession, I want to tell
you that when this material was run on San Francisco TV station
KRON-TV, in a documentary in which I was a consultant, narrated by
Sylvia Chase and produced by Stanhope Gould, Stanhope said to the
San Francisco papers (and I was very pleased with this), he says:</p>

<p> "David Lifton has courtroom evidence that the body did not make an
uninterrupted journey from Dallas to Bethesda. Something happened.
He interviewed these witnesses personally, on camera. He sat with
them for hours in restaurants. They are credible." </p>

<p>And unless one believes in some crazy theory of Maxwell's demons,
and that reality went haywire that night, as it is supposed to have
gone haywire in Dealey Plaza that afternoon, with all kinds of
non-physical things occurring; you know, the head going the wrong way
on the Zapruder Film, or witnesses not understanding where the shots
came from ..... This is another episode at Bethesda that night.
And I say that what we are witnessing is, in fact, an interruption in
the chain-of-possession. A disguise was in force. The decoy ambulance
business smells. And something happened that night. Now, in my book
I try to explain what that something is. But focusing just on the
microscopic here, something happened. There are three documented
entries of two caskets. </p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. Now let's go! What do you think happened, and how is it
significant to the conspiracy concept?</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Okay. In what I am now going to say, I'm not addressing the autopsy
X-rays and photographs. I am addressing the descriptions of the
body as recorded in the official documentation in the Bethesda
autopsy report and testimony. Okay? Because the autopsy photos and
X-rays are another issue -- and an important one -- and a separate
issue. But to avoid confusion (on a radio program we do not have
visual aids), what I'm going to say to you is that the legal record
(and one of the accomplishments of my book was to demonstrate
that the Bethesda medical record, based on the descriptions of the
head wound, for example, is different from the Dallas medical
record), the Dallas record described a 35 square centimeter hole
(wound) in the back right-rear of the President's head, with a flap
of scalp connected with that hole at the back -- a wound at the
right-rear of the head. Okay? I documented that in my book.
I showed that news accounts, starting with the press conference
conducted within an hour of the time of death, when the two doctors
Clark and Perry conducted a press conference at Parkland Hospital,
with news interviews over the weekend, with testimony before the
Warren Commission, with their medical reports -- it all points to
the fact that the doctors in Dallas saw a hole at the right-rear of
the head. Connected with that hole was a flap of scalp. They all
thought that a bullet had exited from the right-rear of the head.
When I say, "they all thought", let's say with one minor exception.
But that's what their diagnosis was. And the brain was inside the
head. It was not gone, or anything of that sort. There was severe
damage. There was some brain tissue blown out. But it was not as if
the President was in Dallas, Texas with an empty cranium.</p>

<p>Now, that is the Dallas evidence. I refer anybody listening to this
to Chapter 13 of my book ["BEST EVIDENCE"]. At the Bethesda end of
the line, I personally think that the finest evidence there is is a
blood-stained diagram -- today at the National Archives. That blood-stained diagram, executed by Commander Boswell, one of it's autopsy
surgeons, shows measurements ten-by-seventeen for the hole in the
top of the President's head. Ten-by-seventeen is 170 square centimeters.
That's FIVE times larger than the thirty-five square centimeters hole
at Parkland. To use inches, at Parkland it was thought to be two
and three-quarter inches across. At Bethesda it's seven or eight
inches on the diagonal. In the official autopsy description, it was
listed as thirteen centimeters across, which is still a mighty big hole.
It was not what was seen in Dallas. </p>

<p>Furthermore, specifically stated in the Bethesda report is that
the scalp is entirely gone over that hole. There is no flap. It is
just GONE. Now that huge crater in the top right-hand side of the
head is described in the Bethesda autopsy report, and it conflicts
with Dallas. Furthermore, two agents present -- FBI agents Seibert
and O'Neill, again who are also connected with the coffin business;
that is, in providing us with valuable information about that 7:14
entry -- two FBI agents report that when the body was removed from
the casket in which it had been transported, and placed on the
autopsy table, it was apparent that there had been surgery of the
head area; namely, in the top of the skull. NO such surgery was
performed in Dallas. If the FBI statement is true (and that's a
very critical question; it ought to be investigated by a special
prosecutor) ..... if the FBI statement is true, then something
happened to the body between Dallas and Bethesda.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 16630 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XVII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 12:18:27 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct20.121827.20733@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 141</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
DAVID LIFTON:
Now that is the evidence that something happened between Dallas and
Bethdesda. And the consequence of that medical alteration -- if it
occurred -- is that the Dallas doctors thought that something exited
from the rear of the head. The Bethesda doctors thought that
something entered from the rear and blew out the top. Did the
doctors recognize [believe] it? Was this a perfect medical forgery?
Absolutely not. They didn't recognize it because the FBI documents
that I've obtained under the Freedom of Information Act indicate
that the FBI wrote down what the doctors said. So if I'm correct,
my interpretation not only goes to what happened on the body, but
what happened in the room. In other words, to paraphrase the old
question from Watergate: What did the doctors know, and when did
they know it? Well, according to the FBI, the doctors IMMEDIATELY,
and I stress, immmediately recognized that there had been surgery
of the head area; namely in the top of the skull. That's what I
think the record shows in this case.

This is not some kind of a perfect crime! It's a very sloppy crime.
I think that a special prosecutor ought to question these doctors
who are still alive -- and they MUST be questioned before they pass
on. I think that we would get some stunning new information about
this case because I personally interviewed one of the FBI agents,
and I know that he's going to stand behind his statement, contrary
to a foolish affidavit, excerpted in some weird fashion and
published by professor Blakey in a report in which they tried to
make it appear that the FBI agents said that this was not true.</p>

<p>So that's what happened in the area of the head. I believe that the
configuration of the wounds was changed. Now, in the area of the
neck we have a similar problem. We have a tracheotomy, supposedly,
according to the sworn testimony of Doctor Malcolm Perry in Dallas,
done through the neck wound. That tracheotomy, Doctor Perry told me
in 1966, was two to three centimeters. And according to everybody
there, it had neat edges -- neat edges as made with a knife. I
would be more than willing to testify before any investigation that
Perry told me that it was two to three centimeters, in 1966, and to
offer my telephone interview tapes as evidence. In 1966, I
interviewed all the doctors on this issue of the length of the
tracheotomy incision. At the Dallas end of the line it was two to
three centimeters; four, some of them said. There's one or two
stragglers who say it was a little bit bigger. But Perry made the
incision. He told me it was two to three centimeters. In the
autopsy report, that thing is listed as six-and-a-half centimeters
with widely gaping edges. And under oath, Humes said it was seven
to eight centimeters. And it has, according to the autopsy report,
widely gaping irregular edges. So that is the issue: that something
happened to the throat wound between Dallas and Bethesda.</p>

<p>Now, if it was an entry wound, as the Dallas doctors originally
alleged and believed, if a bullet or fragment entered at the front
of the throat and lodged, as most of them believed, at the top of
the right lung, isn't it interesting that when the body was opened
at Bethesda, where the Dallas doctors thought there was a bullet,
the Bethesda doctors found a bloody bruise with a pyramid-shaped
scar. That's circumstantial evidence, of course, but I think it's
probative. So that's the situation. I believe that there was
bullet extraction from the area of the throat too. All of this put
together raises again this question of probability. Can all these
doctors ..... can this pattern be an accident? Can we simply be
looking at mistaken medical observations, mistaken FBI reports,
mistaken observations of those who know what kind of casket was used?
I think not! I think this is the kind of stuff that the can opener
of a special prosecutor could pry wide open.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. That's a good presentation. Now we're going to summarize
here for a moment. What you're suggesting is that there is hard
evidence, good documentation that the casket and the state of the
President's body that left Dallas is not the same casket and state
of the President's body that arrived in Bethesda.</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
Right. There's not only a break in the chain-of-possession, but
there is alteration of the evidence.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. So they altered evidence. Now if this were put on trial,
that would be a major issue.</p>

<p>DAVID LIFTON:
That would be a major allegation. I can also guide you a little bit,
if you wish, into the way that the rebuttal would work so the
reader can understand the nature of this problem.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. I'm going to ask you to hold onto that thought because
there's a lot more information. Now we're going to go, in just a
few moments, over to our other guest, Doctor Cyril Wecht, on this
issue. There is also the Leibeler Memorandum which I want to talk
about. And I want to talk about some new information and the
emergence of a new hypothesis. I want to talk about the Seibert
and O'Neill Report. And I want to look at the X-rays and the
photographs, and the allegations of Doctor John Ebersole, and some
of the comments from the House Select Committee in 1978.
Alright? We'll be doing that in a few moments. </p>

<p>I do want to mention to our audience that three times a year, here
on WBAI, non-commercial, public, free-access radio, part of the
Pacifica Network, that we must take a break to do some fund-raising
so that we can continue paying our bills. We're going to come back
to our guests in about ten minutes and continue on with this
information, presenting more documentation that the American Public
has not been made privy to, but which it must in order to make
reasonable judgments about the conclusions drawn by the Warren
Commission; about the role that the media has played in the
official position, and what this means.</p>

<p>Yesterday, you heard us talk about the fact that various members of
Organized Crime were implicated in this, and certain middle-level
members, by name, of the CIA; certain members of the FBI, by name,
such as Guy Banister; the pro and anti-Castro movements involving
Oswald, and the fact that, up to this point, we cannot find
evidence that Oswald was implicated in the assassination. It's so
easy to have a single gunman, a single person, and end it there.
But we CANNOT end it there if the evidence doesn't indicate that it
should be ended there. And it does not. And so we're looking hard,
and we're looking where mainstream media either has chosen not to
look, or has looked and chosen not to accept the evidence.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 16698 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XVIII, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1992 13:20:33 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct22.132033.16754@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 147</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
We're allowing you to make the decision, rather than making it for
you. We'll be back with this special investigative report.
Eighteen more [one-hour] parts to this series to come. Bit by bit,
we're laying the information out. It's too much to lay out all at
once. It would be too confusing. .....</p>

<div>......</div>

<p>In our series on hidden agendas, conspiracies and cover-ups, we are
examing one type of cover-up, and that involves the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy. Later on in this series we'll be dealing
with other issues, other forms of cover-up. </p>

<p>Most Americans, for a long period of time, believed the Warren
Commission, which said that two bullets fired by one man, who had
no connection to anyone, killed the President. There was never a
detailed effort to try to understand the inconsistencies, the
missing or altered evidence, nor the media's compliance with this
particular single view. We are now looking at new information and
trying to see whether or not the American Public has been given all
the information by the media to allow it to make an intelligent
decision about what really was involved.

My guest on today's program is Jerry Policoff from WXIX-TV in
Cincinnati, Ohio, a researcher since 1966 whose articles on the
assassination of John F. Kennedy appeared in GALLERY MAGAZINE. He
has also written for ROLLING STONE, NEW TIMES, THE REALIST and
other publications, and in the op-ed pages of the New York Times
and the Washington Post. Most recently he wrote a very fine article
in the VILLAGE VOICE, co-authored with Robert Hennelly.</p>

<p>My other guest is Jim Marrs, author of CROSSFIRE: THE PLOT THAT
KILLED KENNEDY. He is also a reporter for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
He was a reporter for the Denton Record-Chronicle at the time of the
assassination of John Kennedy. He teaches at the University of Texas
at Arlington, on the assassination of President Kennedy.
Welcome to our program, Jerry Policoff.</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
Hi. How are you?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
and welcome to our program, Jim Marrs.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
It's good to be with you.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Jim, we're going to begin with you, and I'm going to be giving
information, through you, which the American Public simply has not
been made generally aware of, so we can throw new light on this
entire issue. I'm going to run through some issues with you. I'd
like for you to address them. First and foremost, let's try to
understand all the different things that occurred in Dealey Plaza
that most people had not even considered -- not even the Warren
Commission. We've been led to believe that it was just part of a
regular motorcade -- that this man just HAPPENED to have known the
[details of the] motorcade, planted himself there in very short
order, and was able to get off what is simply the fastest, most
accurate shooting in the HISTORY of marksmanship -- and that that's
how it went down. Nothing outside of that occurred that should
throw any suspicion upon this. And, by and large, most of the media
in America, for all these years, has accepted that.</p>

<p>Quickly, let's go through it and decide what happened on November
22nd of 1963 in Dealey Plaza -- the motorcade, the crowd, the
suspicious men, the "babuska lady", the Texas School Book
Depository, the districting[?] seizure, the man in the doorway, the
Oswald encounter, the triple underpass, the smoke from the grassy
knoll, the third wounded man, the Zapruder film, the black-dog man,
the badge man, the grassy knoll witnesses ..... Let's go through
all of this so that the American People can know that, all along,
this information was available, that people were coming forward,
and that this was excluded from being properly investigated or
reported on.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Right. And I think you've pretty well touched on it here. If you
look at any one single issue in this whole case, then there is
always doubt, there is always the possibility of a coincidence, or
maybe of just a mistake, or whatever. But you have to look at this
evidence in its totality. All of this evidence -- everything we
could talk about -- still comes back to one thing. And that is the
"single bullet theory". The "single bullet theory" says that one of
the bullets struck both Kennedy and Connally, causing seven wounds
to these two men, including shattering Connally's fifth rib and
shattering his wrist bone. Now if the one bullet did not hit both
men, then there has to be more than one shooter, in which case
we've got a crossfire; we've got a conspiracy. And that elevates this
thing to a whole new ball game. So I'd like to address that first.</p>

<p>They knew how long the assassination took because of the Zapruder
Film. The FBI diligently checked his camera and found out that it
ran at eighteen frames per second. So they know that all of the
shooting happened within 5.6 seconds. Alright. Now, within 5.6
seconds it is physically impossible for one man with a bolt-action
rifle to fire more than three rounds. Hence, they had to say that
there were only three shots fired. Alright. Two of those shots are
accounted for, which leaves only ONE bullet to account for the
seven wounds to Kennedy and Connally. So how did they go about this?</p>

<p>They simply told us -- and they are STILL TELLING US (people within
the Warren Commission: [President] Gerald Ford, David Dillon[?])
are STILL telling us that the bullet went through Kennedy's neck,
did not hit anything, and then went on to hit Connally. In fact,
the Warren Commission Report itself, "Number One: Findings," said:
"President Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered at
the back of his neck and exited through the lower front portion of
his neck." Now the problem is that this is a small, but critical LIE!
And I say it's a lie because I'll prove it to you in just a minute.
The President was struck in the back. Okay? And they were unable
to probe the wound. However, even if they had probed it,
they claimed that it went upward and exited out his neck. Now --
there's no question about this. The autopsy face-sheet shows it.
It's marked "verified" by his personal physician. The autopsy
doctors were quoted in the Seibert-O'Neill Report as saying that
the wound was in the back -- the middle of the back. everybody says
that. The shirt and jacket, which are still available, plainly show
a bullet in the middle of the back. The death certificate says:
"a wound in the posterior back at the level of the third thoracic
vertebrae." And even Glenn Bennett, one of the Secret Service agents,
in his report from hand-written notes on the day of the assassination,
said that he saw the shot hit the President about four inches down
from the right shoulder.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>Article 16734 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part XIX, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1992 22:04:05 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct23.220405.14474@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 150</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
Okay. No problem. He was hit in the back. But the Warren
Commission and everybody up to today has lied to us and said that
he was hit in the neck. Why? Because he was hit in the back, and
it came out his throat. That's an upward trajectory, and it could
not possibly turn in mid-air and come down to strike Connally.
So it destroys the "single bullet theory" which is the whole
foundation of the "lone assassin theory". </p>

<p>Now, the "smoking gun". The "smoking gun" is the minutes of the
January 27th, 1964 meeting of the Warren Commission. And we have
the Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin addressing the Warren Commission
([ex-CIA Director] Allen Dulles, [future President] Gerald Ford).
And he says (quote):</p>

<p> "It seems quite apparent now, since we have a picture of where
the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the
shoulder blade, to the right of the backbone, which is below the
place where the picture shows the bullet came out the neckband of
the shirt, in front. So that how it could turn and ......"</p>

<p>And he trails off, because he realizes he has just talked his way
right out of the "single bullet theory". So they all just decided to
turn their eyes. They're not going to look at the facts, and they're
going to lie to us and say that the bullet went [entered] through
the neck. And THAT is the crux of this whole case. It was a lie
from start to finish. It was a lie perpetrated at the highest levels
of the Federal Government. And those people who knew better --
who knew where the bullet went, and then lied to us -- are technically
and legally, under the law, guilty of being accessories-after-the-fact,
which, under the law, means that they are just as guilty as whoever
pulled the trigger[s].</p>

<p>And that's what elevates this crime from the murder of President Kennedy
to a coup d'etat in the United States.</p>

<p> [JD: a crime of "high treason" against the people of the United States]</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's take a look at the other evidence. Then I want to
come back to your assertion here, because if there was a coup d'etat,
I want to go through the cast of characters and people who have
been alleged, up to this point, to be suspects; such as: Organized
Crime, pro and anti-Castro Cubans, the CIA and other intelligence
agencies, the FBI, some of the oil cartel men, some of the right-wing
reactionaries, some of the military hierarchy. I want to look at
each one of these, because you could not have a coup d'etat without
having the participation of at least four of those groups. It would
not work. And anyone planning a military operation of this magnitude
would have known that. </p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
You do not plan a coup d'etat if you know that the military could
come in and stop you. The FBI would stop you. The Justice Department
would stop you. So, Organized Crime, by itself, could not possibly
do it -- which is what's laughable about many of these assertions
that Organized Crime could do this. First of all, it is my theory
that these members of Organized Crime have never been very smart --
that almost everything that they have ever done we have a very
detailed history of, because they've talked about every crime
they've ever committed on audio tapes that are in the hands of the
different courts. From John Gotti on down, every one of these
people talk. They're braggarts.</p>

<p>Secondly, they couldn't have covered-up because they've never been
able to cover anything up. In time, every one of their secrets has
come forward. And, from that time until now, if Organized Crime was
involved, we would have heard about it on FBI wiretaps or other
taps that have occurred. So they may have had some participation.
But to assume that they were responsible BY THEMSELVES? It goes
beyond any feasibility.</p>

<p>This was a military-style operation. But the military would NOT
have committed this had they known that the security agencies
would have challenged them.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Exactly!</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
So you can't have one group [committing a coup d'etat], knowing that
there is a balance of power within our Government. Any one of those
balances that is left uncontrolled would be the one that would
uncover it or, in effect, take back the power. So you have to have,
in effect, complicity by all the major groups. And I think it's
laughable that Blakey, of the House Select Committee on
Assassinations, would have assumed that the Mob did it by itself,
as if they had the skill to do it. Their hits have been effective,
but not skillful. And these [assassins] were EXTREMELY skilled. And
their cover-up was meticulous. The Mob, by itself, could not have
covered up, and have stolen information out of the National Archives,
and done the things that have been done. So I want you to give us
your view of that. But let's go back and look at other
inconsistencies and obfuscations at Dealey Plaza.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Okay. First, let me make a quick point. I agree with everything
that you've said, except that I would like to point out to your
audience that I don't believe -- and I don't think you believe,
either -- that everbody within Government and everybody within the
intelligence services knew what was going to happen and
participated actively in the assassination of President Kennedy.
It doesn't work that way. They are all highly compartmentalized.
Very often, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
And the way to control that is from the absolute top. So we've got
two men who were in absolute, undeniable, total control of the
investigation into the death of President Kennedy. And it just
happens to be the two men who benefitted most from the assassination,
and who hated Kennedy the most. And that was Lyndon Johnson, his
successor, and J. Edgar Hoover, Johnson's buddy and neighbor, who
was in control of the FBI.</p>

<p> [JD: Many years ago, I read a report that the day before President
Kennedy was assassinated, he was quoted as remarking:
"That's Lyndon Johnson, and he's in a lot of trouble."
Can anyone cite a published source of any quote like this?]
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this series can be retrieved via anonymous ftp from the sites:
ftp.css.itd.umich.edu and red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your email address as the
password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/essays.d/conspiracy.d
(Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system
the user is on. On a UNIX machine, one would do, at the command prompt:
ftp ftp.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.)</p>

<p>Article 3172 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 20, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Organization: AT&amp;T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 17:51:05 GMT
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Oct27.175105.20550@cbnewsl.cb.att.com</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Lines: 156</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
And in the case of the FBI, if you can control the distribution of
the information and what information is released, then you control
the whole investigation. In other words, there were honest FBI
people who were going out, after the assassination, and doing
honest investigative work, and filing honest reports. But these
reports were thrown in with other reports of dubious authenticity;
reports which can be demonstrated to be phony -- false. And then,
from the very top, J. Edgar Hoover and his top echelon was able to
reach into this smorgasbord of evidence and pull out, selectively,
whatever case they wanted to present to the public.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
There is one other character whom you didn't mention, though I'm
sure you're aware of, and that is: JFK had replaced Allen Dulles
as the head of the CIA, and Allen Dulles ends up being one of the
key people on the Warren Commission.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Exactly. Isn't that like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And there was no man in the history of the intelligence community,
before or since, who's ever been as connected to everything within
the intelligence apparatus -- and very much a hands-on person --
as Allen Dulles.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. And let me point out that during the Warren Commission
hearings, the allegation came up, just as it's still alive today,
that Lee Harvey Oswald was a U.S. intelligence agent. His wife and
his mother have both publicly stated that this was so. So they asked
Allen Dulles while they were meeting with the Warren Commission --
they said: If he had been an agent with the CIA, and you were still
the head of the CIA, would you admit it? And he said, "No."
They said: You would lie about it? He said: Yes, I would.
And so, that's kind of where we are. I would point out that this
current committee in Congress that's debating whether or not to
open up the files on the Kennedy Assassination ..... the very first
item that they have listed that they would shield -- that they would
keep files hidden on -- is to protect the identity of a U.S. agent.
Well, that's kind of a catch-22. If Oswald was indeed a U.S. agent,
then by the parameters set by the new Congressional committee, they
can't release any information about it. Isn't that something?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. Well, in any case, we all know that anything the CIA is
going to release is going to be COMPLETELY on their side. Any
damaging files, they will have destroyed or not turned over.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
You know, let's not forget, by the way, that [President] Gerald Ford,
when he was on the committee, was virtually an informant for
J. Edgar Hoover.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I was not aware of that. Let's quickly go through the other
inconsistencies and disinformation from Dealey Plaza.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, of course, there's just a plethora of information there.
Beginning with the fact that the majority of people said that the
shots came, not from the School Book Depository, but from down near
the triple underpass, from behind the picket fence on the Grassy
Knoll. There are even eyewitnesses such as Malcolm Summers and Jean
Hill and Sam Holland and the railroad people who actually said they
saw the flash of light, saw the figure under the trees, and saw
smoke drift out from under the trees. And there's a point there too.
For years, apologists for the Government have claimed: Well, there
couldn't have been smoke because even if there had been somebody
there with a high-power rifle, modern rifles do not smoke.
Well, being the owner of several bolt-action rifles myself, I can
assure you that if you have one that's freshly oiled, you'll get a
nice white puff of smoke. And sure enough, in a film made by a
newsman named Dave Wegman, we have a frame showing Kennedy's car,
with the stricken President, just beginning to enter the triple
underpass. And hanging in the air, coming right off the Grassy Knoll,
is an obvious white puff of smoke. So these people were all telling
the truth, and it's the Government that's lied all these years.
We've got Beverly Oliver who was taking film from the south side of
Elm Street, and she had her film taken by men who identified
themselves as FBI agents. And there's a point there. In the hours
following the assassination, and for several weeks, and in fact,
all the way up into the summer of 1964 when the Warren Commission
was already writing their report saying that Oswald was the lone
assassin, the FBI was in Dallas, actively, in the newspaper and on
the radio, asking people to turn in their films, their photographs,
any pictures they had taken in Dealey Plaza; and, of course,
ostensibly to investigate, to help solve the crime. The fact is
that very few of those people ever got their pictures or their
films back. And so, all these years I've had people saying:
Well look, if there's a big conspiracy, where's the evidence?
Well heck! They TOOK the evidence up. They just took it away.</p>

<p>So there was an ongoing, concerted effort to take up evidence and
to hide anything that would point to the reality of what went on.
And the witnesses, the majority of whom said that shots came from
the Grassy Knoll, were discredited, were laughed at, and were ignored.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's go through a few of the particulars here:
the lack of Secret Service agents protecting the roofs, and the
speed of the motorcade. Those are two primary issues that have not
been properly addressed.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Okay. Number one: the security for the motorcade. A lot of people
don't understand, Gary, that that motorcade that Kennedy was in in
Dallas, where he met his death, that was the SECOND motorcade of
that day. Earlier in the morning, Kennedy rode in a motorcade from
downtown Fort Worth out to Carswell Air Force Base where he boarded
Air Force One for the short hop over to Dallas. Now, having been a
police reporter there in Fort Worth starting way back in the
mid-60s, I came into contact with a lot of police and sheriff's
people and everybody else who participated in that motorcade. And
they said that security was especially tight, and that they had
orders to keep people off of the overpasses and off of bridges that
would overlook the motorcade route -- that they had armed men
stationed on rooftops, looking for anything out of the ordinary.
Most importantly, they had orders that there were to be no open
windows facing the mototcade route. And, in fact, they had orders
to go into buildings and close windows if they saw a window go up
along the motorcade route.</p>

<p>NONE of this was done in Dallas. NONE OF IT !
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this series can be retrieved via anonymous ftp from the sites:
ftp.css.itd.umich.edu and red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your email address as the
password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/essays.d/conspiracy.d
(Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system
the user is on. On a UNIX machine, one would do, at the command prompt:
ftp ftp.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.)</p>

<p>Article 17313 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!Turing.ORG!jad
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 21, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Nov12.125856.14188@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 12:58:56 GMT
Lines: 151</p>

<p> The following transcript was made from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS [author of CROSSFIRE]:
In fact, they used motorcycle officers, who were to flank Kennedy's
car, who were given orders by the Secret Service not to proceed
past the rear bumper. That left him hanging out there, unprotected.
Dallas police Captain Fritz had requested of the Secret Service
that he be allowed to ride a car or two back from the President
with some of his sharpshooters and to watch the windows and watch
for problems on the rooftops. He was told: No, you can ride at
the rear of the motorcade. So, in disgust, he just went on to the
trademart.</p>

<p>None of the normal precautions were taken that day. And, in fact,
there were direct violations of Secret Service regulations, the
most blatant of which was that the men who were actually in charge
of protecting the President -- in direct violation of Secret
Service regulations -- were out drinking until four and five in
the morning over in Fort Worth. And they were not just drinking
beer. They were drinking Everclear. This was a direct violation,
punishable by dismissal from the Secret Service, and yet, all of
this was hushed up and covered up.</p>

<p>The next big security breach was that Secret Service regulations
stated that you would not make a turn greater than ninety degrees.
And if you had to make a ninety degree turn, you'd station
security people at the intersection. Well, the one hundred and
twenty degree turn in front of the Texas School Book Depository
was a direct violation. And no security people were stationed
there. Only one policeman, Joe Smith, was stationed there. And
what was his experience? He said that he heard shots down near
the triple underpass by the little concrete monument, ran down
there, and could still smell gunpowder hanging in the bushes.
So you could see that there was something really wrong going on
with the motorcade.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
So Secret Service elements would have to have been involved.
Isn't it also true that the right-flanking motorcycle cop leaves
the motorcade when everyone turns onto Elm Street, and that cop
continues straight down Houston Street? </p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, that is true, but I think I have an explanation for that.
In one of Mary Moorman's five Polaroid snapshots, we see a
picture of this motorcycle officer, by himself, rushing down Elm
Street. I think what happened there was kind of a normal police
motorcade procedure, like in a funeral or something. One runs up
ahead, checks the intersection and holds traffic while everybody
goes through -- and then he races ahead -- leap-frogs up ahead.
I think that this motorcycle officer simply roared up Houston
Street a little ways to make sure that everything was secured and
that nobody was coming through there; and then he turned around,
rode back and rejoined his companions further down in the plaza.
I don't necessarily see anything suspicious in that one particular
incident. </p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Jim, what you're telling us is very new and very important for
this audience. And that is that there were extraordinarily tight
and professional safety precautions earlier that same day in
Fort Worth, and all of that was undone. All of that was dismissed
in Dallas. That is completely atypical, and that is something
that the media should have picked up on. That story ALONE would
have been enough, if I were the city editor, for me to send out a
reporter -- to say: Hold on a second. Dallas and Fort Worth are
side-by-side. They're only about thirty miles apart. You have, in
one case, tight, complete, total security. And in another case
you have no security ? </p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. Well let me tell you something -- then and now.
First off ..... Well, I don't want to use any names, but a good
friend of mine, a peer, who was a news reporter at that time, and
who knew Dallas quite familiarly .....and that was part of the
problem: all the news media poured into Dallas, but they didn't
really know Dallas. They didn't know how to get around. They
didn't know how to talk to the people. But this fellow did. And
he was beginning to kind of investigate on his own because he
smelled a rat. Okay? And he became convinced that his phone was
tapped, and that people were following him around. He had a wife
and a family, and he just told me, quite frankly, that it scared
him, and he backed off. Now that was back at the time [soon after
the assassination]. Today, just two years ago, a senior editor
for one of the Dallas-Fort Worth major dailies told me -- he said:
"Jim, I know you're right, but I can't print the truth because
it could mean my life." Okay? And the guy was dead-serious.</p>

<p>Now I, for one, do not believe for a minute that some hit-team is
going to come to Dallas-Fort Worth and kill some newspaper editor
just because of some story he runs in the newspaper. The point is,
this fellow does. This fellow really believes it. So we've got
absolute fear still being used as a very, very powerful weapon down
here to keep people who should know otherwise ..... to keep them
silent.</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
Can I interject something here? You know, when you're talking about
security in Dallas, of all of the places where there should have
been a greater measure of security than anywhere else, it should
have been Dallas where [liberal Democrat who ran against Eisenhower
in '56] Adlai Stevenson had been attacked and spat on by a crowd.
Lyndon Johnson had been [too]. There were legitimate reasons to be
concerned about the safety of the President in Dallas, of all places.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. We're going to take a break here to summarize everything.
Then I want to go into the means, the motives and the opportunities
to assassinate the President, and try to give as much new
information as possible, and at that time, also bring in what the
media has done or not done. I even want to get to the information
that was NOT reviewed, or not given credibility by the investigators.
In particular, when one good investigator was doing a good job,
he was fired, and a person who supported the "single gunman theory"
was brought in to take his place. So, at every level, damage control
was maintained. The only way that could have been done is for people
who were in a position to control it from the very first day knew
that no matter how long it took -- no matter who came into the picture,
no one in the major media, or in any Governmental agency was going
to uncover anything that would be that damaging.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
If we seriously listen to this "God within us" ["conscience",
if you will], we usually find ourselves being urged to take the
more difficult path, the path of more effort rather than less.
.... Each and every one of us, more or less frequently, will hold
back from this work. .... Like every one of our ancestors before
us, we are all lazy. So original sin does exist; it is our laziness.</p>

<p> M. Scott Peck
THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:12:03 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA11168; Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:12:01 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152112.AA11168@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:57 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17406 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 22, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Nov16.161704.18600@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:17:04 GMT
Lines: 156</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
My guests today are Jerry Policoff and Jim Marrs. We're going to
come back to them in just a few moments. Jerry and Jim, we're
going to take a ten-minute break because this week, and I believe
next week, WBAI, this non-commercial station which is part of the
Pacifica Radio Network, is in the midst of its fund-raising, and
we use this opportunity three times a year to raise funds so that
this station can continue.</p>

<div>.....</div>

<p>Right now, we're doing our special report on the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy. It will continue until we've laid out
all of the evidence that we have; each day another new piece of it.
Now, let's go back to our main program.</p>

<p>We're talking about the John Kennedy Assassination. On our
conference phone right now -- and I appreciate their patience for
standing by -- is Dr. Cyril Wecht, and also talking to us on
another conference phone is David Lifton. Dr. Wecht, you've been
listening patiently, and I thank you very much for your patience.
Would you be kind enough to share with us your concern about the
Warren Commission's findings and what you feel is the weak link in
that evidence, and what you would propose we should be paying some
attention to?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
Yes. Mr. Null, I'll just be able to make a brief statement because
the time has run out for me at my end. I'm sorry. I would have
enjoyed talking to you more. My concerns about the Warren Commission
Report have been a matter of record. They're now going back
some twenty-seven years. I believe I'm the only non-Government-affiliated forensic pathologist to have testified three times under
oath in this matter before Federal District Court Judge Charles
Hallock[sp] Jr. in Washington, D.C. in 1969, as a prelude to the
Clay Shaw Trial in New Orleans, and before the Rockefeller
Commission in 1975 .....</p>

<p>..... [side A of tape ended]</p>

<p>.... CIA clearance. Any staff member who was reviewing CIA
documents, before he could leave, had to submit notes to the CIA
for review. And basically, the course of the investigation changed.
And all of a sudden the main suspect was Organized Crime. To put a
historical context on this, only slightly before the House
Assassinations Committee began its work, the [Sen. Frank] Church
Committee had ended its work. And, although they didn't review
whether or not there was a conspiracy, they did review the work
of the FBI and the CIA in terms of their initial investigations of
the assassination. And the result was a blistering indictment of
their investigations; in fact, their non-investigations. The Church
Committee made it very clear that J. Edgar Hoover had decided,
immediately after the assassination, that Lee Harvey Oswald was
the assassin. As the main investigative arm of the Warren
Commission, that certiainly put handcuffs on the Warren Commission.</p>

<p>The CIA was guilty of obfuscation at every turn, in terms of
whether Oswald was a CIA agent, had ever worked for the CIA, his
connections or his activities in Mexico City; in fact, whether
that even was Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexio City, which is doubtful;
his connections with Guy Bannister and various anti-Castro groups
in New Orleans. All of that was TOTALLY obfuscated by the CIA.
So, with that in its historical context, you have to really look
at the FBI and the CIA as clearly, at least, suspects when you're
investigating the Assassination. That was never done by [Chief
Counsel] Blakey! Members of the staff [of the House Select
Committee on Assassinations] who weren't cleared by the CIA were
fired. Frankly, even at one point it was discovered that the
autopsy photos and X-rays, which were in the files of the House
Committee ..... somebody had broken into the room in which the
autopsy photos and X-rays were kept, and had hurriedly made an
examination of them, ripping some file folders in the process.
A fingerprint examination revealed that the person who had broken
in was the CIA liaison between the Committee and the CIA. That
person was fired, but it didn't seem to have, in any way, raised
any questions with Blakey in terms of the role of the CIA.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Isn't that a federal offense: breaking and entering, and
tampering with information?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
I would certainly think so.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
To my knowledge, no one from the CIA has EVER actually been put on
trial for ANY crimes. Have they?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
No. Never.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
So what we have is an agency that was repeatedly spying on its own
citizens, interfering in special investigations -- and yet no one
was calling the CIA to account. And, as a result, to this day, the
CIA is still being able to do virtually anything that it wants.</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
Yes. And, as a matter of fact, one of the Committee staffers told
me that, back at the time that the Committee was investigating,
one of the staffers basically put some hard questions to Blakey,
in terms of his acceptance of anything that the CIA told him.
He said, and this is a quote: "You don't think they would lie to
me, do you? I've been working with these people for twenty years."
That really puts into perspective where Blakey was coming from.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Le's go to a few other issues here. Let's take a look at
the NBC documentary on Jim Garrison.</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
Okay. I have to preface this by saying that I really think that
there were a lot of things wrong with the Garrison Investigation,
but it's really clear, from the outset, that the Government was
VERY concerned about what was going on in New Orleans and about
what was going to come out. We know that one of the things that
the House Committee found, but didn't publish -- thanks to
Mr. Blakey -- was that the CIA infiltrated eleven of its agents
into Garrison's investigation. We know that the Justice Department
was spoon-feeding information to Clay Shaw's lawyers.</p>

<p>&gt;From the beginning, the media, rather than taking an arms-length
view and holding back to see what Garrison had .... the media was,
almost from the beginning, almost prosecutorial in terms of the
way they went after Garrison. NBC ran a one-hour documentary
during prime-time. It was produced by Walter Sheridan, who had
never been a journalist all of his life. He had been a private
investigator. He had worked for the Kennedy family. We don't
really know what his agenda was here, but he certainly was not a
reporter. He was accused of bribing witnesses. The documentary,
from beginning to end, was an incredible indictment of Garrison.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>If you would like to hear Gary Null's program, broadcast by satellite
from WBAI to a radio station in your locale, you can help to make it
happen by calling 1(800) USA-1963.
</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:00:12 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10926; Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:00:09 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152100.AA10926@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:56 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17461 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!att-out!pacbell.com!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!Turing.ORG!jad
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 23, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Nov17.223139.4440@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:31:39 GMT
Lines: 143</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
CYRIL WECHT:
Just to put in context what they did, Garrison went to the F.C.C.
to request equal time, and never before or since has the F.C.C.
made a judgment like the one they made in this case. They ruled
that the NBC documentary was so dishonest and so flawed that they
ordered NBC to give Garrison a half-hour of prime time to respond
to it. I think that says something in terms of where that NBC
documentary was coming from.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And Garrison did respond to it?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
He did respond to it in prime time. Yes.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We must state here that Walter Sheridan, since he's not here to
defend himself .... any allegations of any misdeeds or misconduct
are just that: allegations. Since he was never proved to have done
any of those things, we must keep that in this perspective.
Now let's go to the idea of the NBC documentary on the JFK
assassination and the FBI.</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
Okay. When the Warren Commission Report was issued, NBC ran a
one-hour documentary in prime time, just prior to the release of
the Warren Report, that basically was a summary of what the Warren
Commission was going to find. An internal FBI document, that was
generated a week prior to that documentary, reviewed in chapter
and verse what the NBC documentary was going to show, and also it
included in it assurances from unnamed sources at NBC that nothing
in the documentary would criticize the work of the FBI or the
findings of the initial FBI report that had preceded the findings
of the Warren Commission. Clearly, the FBI had an open pipeline
into NBC and it knew exactly what NBC was doing. And clearly,
there was a pipeline back that was assuring the FBI that there
wouldn't be any agenda that the FBI would have a problem with.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. The Washington Post and editor Ben Bradlee?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
Okay. Ben Bradlee .... I have a letter from the then-book-review
editor of the Washington Post in which he informed me that Ben
Bradlee had ordered him not to review any books about the Kennedy
Assassination. A rather interesting incident took place after the
demise of the House Assassinations Committee. One of the things
that the House Assassinations Committee had investigated was a
report that Lee Harvey Oswald had ben seen in the company of a
gentleman by the name of Maurice Bishop, who was said by sources
to be a high-ranking official in the Central Intelligence Agency.
The members of the staff of the House Assassinations Committee
became convinced that Maurice Bishop was David Atlee Phillips, who
had also been a major high-ranking official of the Central
Intelligence Agency. He had been in Mexico City. He later resigned
from the Agency to form a support group for the CIA when the CIA
was coming under a great deal of criticism. David [shouldn't it be
Anthony?] Summers[sp] wrote extensively about the Phillips/Maurice
Bishop connection in his book, CONSPIRACY. And he managed to get
an audience with Ben Bradlee. He suggested to Ben Bradlee that
this was an area that was ripe for investigation.</p>

<p>Bradlee subsequently assigned a reporter to the story. The reporter
was in touch with Summers. He was also in touch with Gaeton Fonzi
who had been an investigator for the House Committee [on
Assassinations]. Prior to that, he had been an investigator for
the [Sen. Frank] Church Committee [on Assassinations], and he was
the investigator who had originally come up with the Maurice Bishop
story. The reporter told both Summers and Gaeton Fonzi that when
Bradlee assigned him to the story, he told him to discredit the
story. Those were his marching orders. Far from discrediting the
story, as this reporter got into it, he developed more information
that tended to support the conclusion that Phillips and Maurice
Bishop were the same person. That is basically the gist of the
story that he submitted. The story was killed!</p>

<p>And that's really in line with what the Washington Post has done
from the beginning. The Washington Post, The New York Times,
TIME Inc. have been obsessed with discrediting the stories of
conspiracy, and with shoring up the official Government findings.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Then you would have to ask: Why? Is it a matter of coincidence?
Is it a matter of editorial opinion that may be completely
innocent of any complicity or malfeasance, or is there some
connection from the New York Times, NBC, CBS, The Washington Post,
TIME Magazine that would have connections to any of the major
people who are under criticism now for having participated; such
as some of the major CIA officers, some of the high-ranking people
from within the military/industrial complex, right-wing extemists,
etc. Are there any connections?</p>

<p>CYRIL WECHT:
That's where I get into difficulty. I mean, I don't really like to
speculate about why I think it's dangerous. I think you can only
point to what was done. Questions have to be raised. I mean, you'd
have to ask why the media has done what it has done; why these
things seem to come from the upper levels of the newspapers,
networks, magazines involved.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Because remember, it's the same Washington Post that allowed [Bob]
Woodward and [Carl] Bernstein to expose Watergate, which brought
down Nixon in the White House and a lot of Ivy League people.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Gary, could I jump in and make a comment?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yes. Jim Marrs, jump in, please.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
If we seriously listen to this "God within us" ["conscience",
if you will], we usually find ourselves being urged to take the
more difficult path, the path of more effort rather than less.
.... Each and every one of us, more or less frequently, will hold
back from this work. .... Like every one of our ancestors before
us, we are all lazy. So original sin does exist; it is our laziness.</p>

<p> M. Scott Peck
THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:00:15 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10931; Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:00:13 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152100.AA10931@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:56 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17664 of alt.conspiracy:
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi.oar.net!caen!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!Turing.ORG!jad
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Part 24, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Keywords: researchers'revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Nov30.205913.8043@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Date: 30 Nov 92 20:59:13 GMT
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Lines: 156</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
You're right. And it seems pretty incomprehensible that the same
media outlets that would basically cause the destruction of Nixon
would try to cover up about Kennedy, but I think there is some
rationale there. First off, to explain why they do this, you go
back to the time of the assassination -- and I think Jerry Policoff
would agree with me on this. This was a whole entirely different
time and place: this country. Okay? A lot of people within the
media actively, voluntarily participated and did things for the
intelligence community out of the noblest of purposes. They felt
like they were being patriotic. If they went to Russia, say, and
did a story and they came back, and the CIA domestic contact
services officer would come to them and say: "Well, what did you
see?" They would tell them what they saw. They weren't spies. They
weren't working for the Government. They weren't on the payroll.
They were simply doing what they thought was patriotic.</p>

<p>Now, at the time of the Kennedy Assassination and for maybe ten
years past then, until about the time of the Garrison
investigation, they were still clinging to this idea. They felt
like they were doing something good. Now, I think a lot of them
can probably look back and realize that they were being used by
these people within the intelligence community, not only to get
information, but also to give information. It just goes right up
the ladder. We've got people today who are successful columnists,
and they're successful columnists because they always seem to have
a little bit of insight into issues and into Governmental matters.
Well they do because they get this from their sources within the
CIA and within other Government agencies. They know that if they
say anything that angers those sources, those sources will close
themselves off to them. And then, pretty soon they won't be able
to have anything to put in their columns, and pretty soon their
columns will be dropped by the newspapers around the country.
So it's a very self-serving thing. It's a self-preservation-type
thing.</p>

<p>And then you keep going until you get to what I think is probably
the major downfall and the major problem within the media today,
which is just sheer, common laziness. The Kennedy Assassination is
a complex subject. It has many labyrinths that you can get lost
into. And it takes a lot of time and a lot of effort. And most
media people and most editors are simply not willing to devote the
time and the effort that it would take to pick their way through
this mine field and find out what's right and what's not right.</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
I would agree with that. And I would also add that I think they
were embarrassed by their early coverage. It's very difficult to
look at the work that the media did in the aftermath of the
assassination, which, by the way, was something that, in that day,
was very natural. They were spoon-fed the Oswald legend. They were
spoon-fed the evidence. Everything was accepted uncritically and
passed on to the American Public. In the years since, I think the
media is very embarrassed to look back at the coverage that they
afforded this issue back in 1963, and they are basically too
embarrassed to repudiate it.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Jerry, let me ask you about a very important character in all this.
And that is L. Fletcher Prouty. And that, I believe also, Jim, was
the character that Donald Sutherland played in the movie, JFK:
the insider who knew all about what was going on, and who explained
it to Jim Garrison in the movie.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yeah. That's correct. I believe that primarily the Mr. X character
in the movie, JFK was based on colonel L. Fletcher Prouty.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. I'd like each of your interpretations of what Prouty has
said and what he knows. At least you can tell our audience.</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
Well, Fletcher Prouty is certainly somebody who needs to be taken
seriously. I believe he was the liaison officer between the
Pentagon and the CIA. He was certainly in a position to know a
great deal about the inner workings of the intelligence community
during the 1950s and '60s. He has reported on the breakdown of
security. I'm not an expert on this, but I believe that security
was passed on to military intelligence that day in Dallas.
Am I right, Jim?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, the Fourth Army Intelligence normally had agents who would
join in and, on that particular occasion, they were told to stand
down, and not to come to Dallas and not to participate in the
security. And this is probably very significant because one of the
things that Colonel Prouty has said -- and the more I look at it,
the more I think he's exactly right -- that the key to a successful
coup is not necessarily finding competent hit-men. I mean, anybody
with a lot of money can go find a competent hit-man. The key is in
withdrawing or reducing the normal security. And it seems obvious
that that's what happened in Dallas that day.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Jim, go on a little further with Prouty. What else does
he know?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, as Jerry pointed out, he was the Deputy Director of Special
Operations, and as such, he was a liaison between the CIA and the
military. In other words, if the CIA was mounting some sort of
operation and they needed support -- if they needed trucks, or if
they needed an airplane, or if they needed air transport, or if
they needed weaponry or something like that, they would go to the
military and say: "This is what we need." And Prouty was the
focal point officer who would do this. </p>

<p>Now here's what was unique about his position. Since he was
military, and not CIA, he was never required to sign the secrecy
oath that all people who work for the CIA have to sign. And the
secrecy oath -- the bottom line of it is that: If I reveal anything
that I learn while working for the CIA, you can suspend my civil
liberties, convict me in a court of law, and put me away for ever
and ever. This is the basis of why so many people within the CIA
cannot and will not talk and tell about what they know. But Prouty
never signed that because he was a military man, and as such, he
has been free to talk. And talk he has. All the way back to the
publication of his book, THE SECRET TEAM, he has been saying
that there is a power group -- a clique, if you will -- of people
within the United States Government who operate this Government
for their own purposes. I think that the Iran-Contra [operation]
has proved this to be absolutely true, right on up 'til today.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
If we seriously listen to this "God within us" ["conscience",
if you will], we usually find ourselves being urged to take the
more difficult path, the path of more effort rather than less.
.... Each and every one of us, more or less frequently, will hold
back from this work. .... Like every one of our ancestors before
us, we are all lazy. So original sin does exist; it is our laziness.</p>

<p> M. Scott Peck
THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:00:06 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10921; Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:00:05 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152100.AA10921@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:56 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17738 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,alt.individualism
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!gatech!concert!uvaarpa!murdoch!Turing.ORG!jad
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 25, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Dec2.173503.13186@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1992 17:35:03 GMT
Lines: 150</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
Which makes it all the more interesting that the day AFTER the
assassination, in a memo from [FBI Director] J. Edgar Hoover, we
are given a complete assessment of the reaction to the assassination
by the anti-Castro Cuban community, and it says at the bottom that
this information was furnished orally by Mr. George Bush of the CIA.
Well now, Bush has never responded to this, but some of his people
have said: "Well, that was a different George Bush; that there is
another George Bush and he's not the one who is now our president."
However, since then, the other George Bush has been located and
interviewed, and he says: "I was just a low-level analyst up in the
northeast and I never had any contact with the anti-Castro Cubans,
so it certainly was not me." </p>

<p> [JD: The CIA has a strict policy of concealing the names of all
of its agents, even if it means committing perjury to do so.
So, how did Bush's people find out that there is another
George Bush who worked for the CIA? They found out because
CIA officials violated their own laws by searching their own
personnel files to luckily come up with another George Bush
to pin the rap on in order to protect the real criminal who knew
of the plot to assassinate President Kennedy and who, therefore,
is an accessory to murder and high treason: George Herbert
Walker Bush, of course.]</p>

<p>So, that brings us back to George Herbert Walker Bush. And I might
mention that I have personally spoken with a pilot who flew arms
and ammunition for the Bay of Pigs invaders, and he says that one
of the oil companies that was being used as a front to move arms
and materiel for the Bay of Pigs invaders was Zapata Oil Company
out of Midland, Texas, which was George Herbert Walker Bush.
So, I think we see that George Herbert Walker Bush's connections
with the Central Intelligence Agency go back far beyond what he
has publicly admitted.</p>

<p> [JD: I have corresponded with someone who told me that another
company which participated in the Bay of Pigs Invasion was
United Fruit Company which donated two of its banana boats to
support the invasion. This person said that he witnessed the
repair of the bullet-riddled deck of one of the boats.]</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
We also know that he generated dozens of memos, while he was the
head of the Central Intelligence Agency, dealing with the
assassination. And yet, he made a statement after the release of
the movie, "JFK" that he was so satisfied with the findings of the
Warren Commission that when he became Director of the CIA, he was
never even curious and never looked at a single file.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's right. So, read his lips. He's telling us another lie.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Are either of you gentlemen familiar with the Council on Foreign
Relations and the Trilateral Commission?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yes. I'm very familiar with them.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Are you familiar with all the different people from the networks,
the media and the major corporations [who are members]?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yes. They comprise a very, very substantial number of people on
the Trilateral Commission, which is, by the way, just kind of an
off-growth or a revised edition of the old Council on Foreign
Relations, which was more-or-less a secret group, and hence, was
coming under more and more scrutiny. So, in order to get away from
that, they founded the Trilateral Commission, for which they set
up an office, they issue reports, and they're a little more above-ground.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
That is a [David] Rockefeller group, right?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Right. And George Bush was, and perhaps still is, a member of the
Trilateral Commission.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
There have consistently been allegations that this group is the
group that has as its agenda this "One World Order". Even though
that's no longer a secret -- and I think that the President and
the media around him have used that to their advantage to talk
about this "One World Order" -- WHOSE order is it? Whose world?
By what design and what ideals are they planning it? And who are
THEY? Then you start seeing that the "they", at every level, are
the people who, coincidentally, happen to belong to this Trilateral
Commission and this Council on Foreign Relations.</p>

<p>In any case, I'm going to thank you very much, Jerry Policoff for
an outstanding series of investigative reports. I think that, in
some ways, the history of your own writing (because I read every
one of your articles in GALLERY Magazine) ..... You should have
had that published in a major magazine. But I'm sure that they
would have rejected it, just as, for over two years, my first
articles on the politics of cancer were rejected. And too, my
subsequent "Medical Genocide" series, which to this day, I've
never had to retract a single line. And there wasn't any person in
that series who ever even threatened a lawsuit or a challenge that
my information was inaccurate. And I REALLY rip up some major
individuals and corporations for corruption and crimes of which I
call "medical genocide". In forty-three articles over sixteen
years, the only publications that would accept them, ironically,
were OMNI and PENTHOUSE, not the best vehicle for mainstream
America, but the only one that was available. So, I think that
tells us that when you have something that seems to be too hot or
too politically explosive, we don't have a forum for it to be
taken seriously. And, of course, the easiest way for someone to
dismiss something is to say:
Did it appear on the major networks?
No.
Did it appear in TIME Magazine or in the New York Times?
No.
Then how can we take it seriously?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Exactly! That is part of the control of the media.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
help to disseminate it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this series can be retrieved via anonymous ftp from the sites:
ftp.css.itd.umich.edu and red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your email address as the
password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy
(Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system
the user is on. On a UNIX machine, one would do, at the command prompt:
ftp ftp.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.)
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:00:03 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10916; Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:00:02 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152100.AA10916@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:55 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17829 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!uvaarpa!murdoch!Turing.ORG!jad
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 26, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Dec4.232418.2064@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1992 23:24:18 GMT
Lines: 120</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
By the way, I want to extend my compliments to Jerry Policoff.
Jerry, I have read your articles for years and years and years,
and I have used them very extensively in my research. My
compliments to you, sir.</p>

<p>JERRY POLICOFF:
Thank you. </p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Gentlemen, you're going to find out something brand new about the
Kennedy Assassination. Next week, and on that show -- because you've
both made substantial contributions of new information recently --
I will have you conferenced in to listen to the new information.
And it's going to shake people up when they hear this information,
never before discussed or written about. No one has found out
about it. That is coming up. And I think it will put a cap on this
whole thing. Whether anything is ever done about it -- who knows.</p>

<p>It's an amazing thing. You write a story. You research. You think
it's really revolutionary. It will give new insights which should
conduct new investigations. And then it comes, and the media
doesn't do a thing. And it all goes by the bye. But we're going to
do it in any case.</p>

<p>By the way, I was just handed a note by our producer who has been
working non-stop. I mean, he's putting in like 100-hour weeks on
this [investigation]. He is Kevin McCrary, and he says that
L. Fletcher Prouty is going to appear on our program later this
week. So, he'll be able to tell us, in his own words, what he
knows and what new information he knows, and new information which
he has not revealed before. </p>

<p>And I'm going to ask you, Jim Marrs if you'll make yourself
available tomorrow, because we did not get to part two, which was
the means, the motives and the opportunities .....</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Okay. Can I make one quick comment about the Garrison thing.
At the time that the Garrison investigation and trial of Clay Shaw was
going on, I was watching it very, very closely as a newsman. I was
trying to be objective and I was trying to really look at it and see
what was happening. And, of course, he said: "I've got a conspiracy
by the tail. I've got individuals here. I'm filing charges on them.
I'm taking them before a grand jury." In other words, he was taking
them through the normal processes of law. Well, the national media
elements within there, and even the Attorney General of the United
States, were saying: "This guy is a nut. He's a fantacist. There's
nothing there. He hasn't got a case." And, quite frankly, I didn't
know who to believe. Today, you've got twenty years of hindsight,
and you look back and you can see that MOST of what Jim Garrison
..... and I'm like Jerry Policoff. I do not want to just blanketly
defend Garrison, because there were a lot of problems with his
prosecution in New Orleans, not all of which was his own doing.
But, you look back after twenty years of hindsight and we find
that most of what he was telling us: Guy Bannister, David Ferrie,
the connection to Oswald, the anti-Castro Cubans and the plotting
that was going on in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 -- all of
that has held up. It's historical fact. Even the House Select
Committee on Assassinations was forced to conclude that most of
that was substantiated. So now we KNOW who was telling the truth
and who was lying.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Well, in point of fact, the judge and the jury said that when Clay
Shaw won his case and Garrison was, in effect, put into the closet
forever after that, and told to shut up, and the media did a
hatchet-job on him, he didn't know that eleven members of his own
staff were CIA plants.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's right. </p>

<p>GARY NULL:
He didn't know that Clay Shaw's counsel had every note, everything
that they [Garrison] needed. And also, Clay Shaw lied. The man
perjured himself. And he did so with the help of his CIA contacts,
because later it did come out that Clay Shaw did, in FACT, work
for the CIA. That is a matter of historical FACT. And the jury
said that they would have convicted him had they known that. So...</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's right. Also, he lied when he said that the did not know
David Ferrie and had had no contact with him, because there is now,
circulating among the research community, photographs of Clay Shaw
and David Ferrie together at a party in New Orleans.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yes. So, clearly, Garrison was right. The media was wrong. The
Government participated in the massive cover-up at that level, and
one very courageous prosecuting attorney was, unfortunately,
disgraced at the time. And the American Public should know that.
The man whom he brought to trial was a LIAR and was complicitous
in much of the plot, and the Government knew it AT the time.
And so, we have to be aware of this.</p>

<p>I want to thank you very much, Jerry Policoff and Jim Marrs, for
being with us. This has been a continuation of our series,
Hidden Agendas: Conspiracies, Cover-ups and Lies.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 16:00:00 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10908; Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:59:59 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152059.AA10908@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:55 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 17974 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,misc.activism.progressive,alt.individualism
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!destroyer!gumby!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 27, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Dec8.212508.3461@mont.cs.missouri.edu</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1992 21:25:08 GMT
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 145</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
.... intelligence organizations certainly did participate, and, as
a result, the organization was forced to protect itself by helping
to cover-up the crime. But, of course, it goes a little deeper
than that because most of the people within those organizations
felt that what happened, tragic though it was, was probably
necessary for the good of the country because Kennedy was going
in the face of much of their own beliefs and their own philosophies.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Now, in the case of the FBI, there is no evidence to point to
the [possible] fact that the FBI orchestrated or initiated the
assassination. But there is all kinds of evidence to point to the
fact that the FBI knew what was happening. Particularly, I refer
to the FBI memo or alert -- the teletype alert that went out on
the night before the assassination, warning that a radical group
was going to assassinate Kennedy in Dallas. Those messages were
subsequently picked up, and if it hadn't been for one clerk who
had made a copy of them, we wouldn't have even a copy today, and
they could effectively deny that it ever happened. But it did go
out. So, the FBI, and particularly [FBI director J. Edgar] Hoover,
I believe, was in knowledge of what was going to happen. And they
simply sat back, allowed nature to take its course, and then
definitely participated in activities after-the-fact which tended,
not just to protect their own reputation, but to actually
incriminate Oswald as the lone assassin, and create this whole story
that we have today that is the official Government explanation.
And the way they did that was in several ways.</p>

<p>First off, there was an ongoing, demonstrable series of events
which include destruction of evidence, suppression of evidence,
alteration of evidence, fabrication of evidence and intimidation
of witnesses. Throughout your series you've heard more and more
about how documents were cooked, that people were intimidated into
silence, and that people's testimony was changed.

I'll cite you one good example: Edna and Wayne Hartman. This is a
Dallas couple. They still live in Dallas today. They heard shots.
They were nearby Dealey Plaza. When they heard the shots, they ran
into Dealey Plaza. They saw a policeman and some plainclothesmen
gathered on the south side of Elm Street. They ran down there and
said: "What's going on?" They said: "Here is where some bullets
hit in the grass." They looked, and they said that there was a
long bullet furrow in the grass where a bullet had turned up the
sod. In the FBI report, made that day, it states all of this, and
it goes on to say that they told the FBI that the bullet furrow
lined up with the Texas School Book Depository. Okay? Oswald, in
the Depository, missed a shot. Furrow in the ground. That all
makes sense. The problem is that that is NOT what they [the Hartmans]
told them. When I was preparing my book, CROSSFIRE, instead of
just taking the Government's documents at face value, which seems
to be the way to do it today (at least that's what the major news
organizations are doing), I called the Hartmans. And they were
absolutely SHOCKED and amazed when I read them this FBI report
which, keep in mind, was part of the fundamental, raw investigative
material that the Warren Commission used to reach their conclusions.
Because THEY [the Hartmans] said: "That's not what we told them at
all. We told them that the bullet furrow lined up with the GRASSY
KNOLL on the north side of Elm Street." So here we have a clear
example of FBI documents that were being cooked, back in 1963 and
'64, to slant away from the truth of the assassination.</p>

<p>And lastly, Gary, I'll just make this one point. When you interfere
with a lawful investigation of felony crimes, such as murder, that
makes you an accessory-after-the-fact. And under the law, an
accessory-after-the-fact is just as guilty of the crime as the
person[s] who pulled the trigger[s]. So, in this case, the
evidence is very clear. And I can say, with great impunity, that
the FBI was GUILTY of being an accessory-after-the-fact and,
therefore, is guilty of the crime of participating in the murder
of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay, let's go on to include in this ..... [tape interruption]
..... [FBI director J. Edgar Hoover] used the FBI to break the
law, in the case of Martin Luther King, with illegal wiretaps to
learn about his sex life so they could use it against him. This
was a man who was in Dallas. Let's be very clear on this. The
American Public is not aware of this. He was in Dallas on the day
of the assassination. Let's also ask the following ... and give me
very clear information on this, if you can:</p>

<p> "Division Five of the FBI: Nomenclature of the Assassination Cable"</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well that's "the Torbit Document." Right?</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Yes. "Division Five of the FBI."</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
It talks about Division Five. There was a Division Five. It was
counter-intelligence. But I think what you're getting at is the
allegations. And I'll have to stress, Gary, that at this point --
I have dug into this at considerable length -- and while I have
found tantalizing evidence that perhaps this is so, I cannot
categorically state, at this point, that this has been proven.
But the allegations are that within Division Five of the FBI was
the capability of assassination -- that they had hit-men on their
payroll, operating out of their Mexico City office, which, by the
way, has always intrigued me because the FBI is supposed to be a
domestic law enforcement and intelligence organization. It is not
supposed to be operating outside of the United States. And yet,
ever since before World War Two, the largest FBI office in the
world is in Mexico City. So we definitely have some things going
on there. And the allegation is that they had these hit-men who
operated out of Mexico City. This has come forth in several cases,
particularly here in Texas, such as the Buddy Floyd murder case,
where the allegation was that these hit-men out of the FBI's
Mexico City office were being brought into this country to perform
assassinations for wealthy and powerful people who were very close
to J. Edgar Hoover.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. Those are allegations, not proven facts. We want to make
that clear for the sake of objectivity. But we do want to state
that it is a fact that Division Five did exist.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. And it was headed by William Sullivan who -- in 1977,
when he was about to be called before the House Select Committee
on Assassinations -- walked out in his back yark and was shot in
the head by the son of a New Hampshire State patrolman.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
help to disseminate it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Tue Dec 15 15:59:54 1992
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA10903; Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:59:48 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9212152059.AA10903@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 15:54 EST
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Status: O
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 18245 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
Path: cbnewsl!cbnewsk!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ukma!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 28, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Dec14.191408.8449@mont.cs.missouri.edu</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:14:08 GMT
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 139</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
And the local sheriff said that he knew both the son of the
patrolman and Sullivan, so he felt like he was too close to the
case. So he turned over the investigation of this particular
incident to the local game warden. I've seen a copy of the report,
and it's simply checked where it says:
"Victim: Animal or Human."
They checked "Human". And that was about the extent of the
investigation.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Now, keep in mind that Sullivan was one of the former top heads
of the FBI. In fact, outside of Hoover, he was probably the second
most powerful member of the FBI.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. And he has stated some things that are very
eye-opening. One of the reasons why he left the FBI is because he
said that Hoover was concentrating more on inflated statistics and
figures about the American Communist Party than he did on
Organized Crime.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
By the way, let's also remember this. It's up to the Public to
decide whether they feel that this is coincidence or not:
William Sullivan, Louis Nichols, Alan H. Belmont, James Caddigan,
J.N. English, and Donald Kaylor[sp] ALL understood what was going
on, or had information concerning the Kennedy Assassination.
ALL died under mysterious circumstances in 1977.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. All within a period of a few months, and all BEFORE
they could be [were about to be] brought to testify before the
House Select Committee on Assassinations.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And I think it stretches credulity to assume that all of these men
from one organization -- all of whom were going to testify --
would all die accidentally in the ways that they did: one man being
shot in his backyard in a suburban home; and the man who shot him
said he thought that [Sullivan] was a deer. I mean, come on.
Give us a break. Now the New York Times CERTAINLY would accept
that logic and rationale, and we understand how the New York Times
would accept that. And Dan Rather may accept that a man in his
backyard looks like a deer. We don't!</p>

<p> [JD: I've heard of a book (it might be "BETRAYAL") that states
that Walter Cronkite and perhaps Dan Rather (I'm not sure) are
among the people whom the CIA employs as journalistic "assets."
Can anyone cite and quote such published accusations and their
sources?]</p>

<p>And we're offended by this kind of explanation that has gone on,
and has NEVER been explored by the mass media in any major way.
It's just been ACCEPTED that way.</p>

<p>Now, let's go to the case of Richard Case Nagle and the registered
letter to J. Edgar Hoover about the assassination.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yes. Richard Case Nagle may be the real Rosetta stone to
understanding the assassination or, if not to understanding the
assassination, certainly to understanding the role of Lee Harvey
Oswald in this whole thing. Basically, Nagle was a decorated
Korean War veteran who late became an agent for the Central
Intelligence Agency, and eventually claimed to have ended up being
a double-agent working for the Soviet KGB. He said that in mid-1963,
his KGB superiors contacted him and said that they had become
aware of a plot to kill President Kennedy, and that they wanted
him to work his way in there, find out what was going on, and put
a stop to it because it could reflect very adversely on Russia and
could make it look like the Communists were behind the thing.
And they didn't want to run that kind of risk. </p>

<p>So, he was sent to New Orleans where he made contact with a man
whom he claimed he had known from U.S. intelligence over in Japan.
And that was Lee Harvey Oswald! They met in Jackson Square.
And, of course, here's Nagle posing as a KGB agent, so he can't
very well just say: "Hey, I'm really one of you," because he knows
that Oswald is a guy whom he had know in Japan, but he hadn't known
him that well. And besides, who knows what had gone on in the
intervening years? So I'm sure he was probably still trying to
maintain his cover. But he basically told Oswald that Oswald was
in a very dangerous situation, and that he thought that Oswald
thought he had penetrated a pro-Castro plot to kill the President.
But, in reality, he was mixed up with anti-Castro Cubans who were
posing as pro-Castro Cubans, and who were involving him in this
plot to kill the President. He said that he got a very negative
reaction from Oswald; kind of like: Oh, yeah? That's interesting;
and a don't-call-me-I'll-call-you type of attitude.</p>

<p>Now, what's interesting here is that this gets into the whole
issue of: Was the Oswald in New Orleans and the Oswald in Dallas
-- was this the real Lee Harvey Oswald? And it gets into a bizarre
series of situations. But there is plenty of evidence to suggest
that the Oswald in New Orleans in the summer of '63 and in Dallas
later that fall was NOT the same Oswald who entered the Marines.
And if that's the CASE -- assuming that that may be true -- this
explains the whole situation with Nagle and Oswald. </p>

<p>Nagle is very circuitously trying to warn Oswald, believing that
this is the same guy he knew in Japan, and that he would recognize
him and realize that he was getting the information from U.S.
intelligence. And yet, if it was NOT the same Oswald -- and there
is MUCH evidence to suggest that this is so -- then Oswald in New
Orleans didn't recognize Nagle, didn't know who he was, and only
perhaps knew him as a KGB officer, and therefore, would be very
hesitant to believe him or to act on his information.</p>

<p>So that's the Nagle story, and I think it pretty well pinpoints
the role of Oswald. Oswald, as his mother and his wife had both
publicly stated, was a U.S. Government agent. He was posing as a
pro-Castroite and as a pro-Communist to infiltrate groups that he
felt were pro-Communist groups. In this instance, I think he had
been picked up by one of the more violent anti-Castro groups who
played him along and helped set him up as the "patsy"
in the assassination.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please
help to disseminate it by posting it to other bulletin boards,
and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus.
As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year
cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of
the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes
ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Jan 18 12:20:58 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA19603; Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:20:55 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9301181720.AA19603@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:16:00 EST
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Status: RO
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 19250 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
Subject: Part 29, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Jan16.001536.7765@mont.cs.missouri.edu</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 144</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Alright, we're going to recapitulate here for a moment, and then I
want to go on with some of the other scenarios involved in all this.
I want to take a look at renegade CIA cliques. I also want to
examine right-wing extremists and Organized Crime. I want to take
a very careful look at Sam Giancana and Johnny Roselli and some
of the other people involved.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Don't forget the Military.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We're going to come to the Military, and also some of the people
who have never really been brought out yet; and that is, I want to
see the Howard Hughes challenge -- the challenge that Howard
Hughes may have had a role in this. We're going to look at that.
We're also going to look at some couriers and some communications
experts and some possible hit-men. So, all of this is going to
be laid out, hopefully, during the remainder of the program --
time permitting.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Gary, before we end this program today, let's not forget to discuss
what I think is the most important thing, which is the common
connecting point, the nexus between all of these groups. And there
IS a connecting point. And it is intriguing. And I think it points
the way toward the solution of who was behind the assassination.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
We will get to that in just a minute. Just to summarize, we are
talking about J. Edgar Hoover. We have ruled out, at this point,
and I feel that history and all the evidence completely rules out
that the Soviets were involved. Premier Nikita Kruschev, KGB
Chairman Yuri Andropov, KGB American expert-turned-defector Yuri
Nosinkov[sp], Marina Pruskovka[sp] Oswald, Oswald's control agent
Albert Osborne, and even the Latin leftist guerillas coordinated
by "the second Oswald", code-named Alec Heidel[sp] a trained KGB
assassin. These people simply did not directly participate.
There's no evidence. We've ruled them out.</p>

<p>We have certainly ruled in J. Edgar Hoover as knowing about it.
That's clear. ... certain other FBI agents knowing about it, and
the FBI being FORCED, upon the mandate of Hoover, to participate in
the cover-up, based upon the Warren Commission stating that it was
the FBI that was to provide all the information to the Warren
Commission through all the interviews. We have repeated references
to them altering evidence, destroying evidence, tampering with
evidence, intimidating witnesses, threatening witnesses .....
And that is not a matter of speculation. That is a matter of fact,
and is demonstrable by [the terms of] law. So, clearly, they
are one of the lead characters.</p>

<p>In a moment, we're going to go on with our special investigation.
I'm Gary Null. Kevin McCreary is the co-producer on this. </p>

<p>....... [passages lost due to tape ending]</p>

<p>..... stories in the media are simply spurious and speculative,
and they've even gone so far as to try to denigrate anyone who
would come up with an idea other than Oswald acting alone. Thus far,
however, there's absolutely NO evidence -- no hard evidence -- that
Oswald was involved in the assassination WHATSOEVER. So let's take
a look now ..... Why don't we go to the Military?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, I think this may be one of the key factors because if you'll
stop and think about it in its broadest scope, you'll understand
that there was absolutely no way that there could be any kind of
large-scale assassination conspiracy that did not, in some way,
take into account the Military, because the Military is the armed
force in this country. I mean, as we saw in the Los Angeles riots,
when the local authorities can't handle the situation, the Military
moves in. And they would have done this in 1963 if there had been
some large-scale coup that did not include them. You have to, at
least, neutralize the Military, if not have them actively on your
side -- which was done.</p>

<p>Now -- we're getting to the nub of it now, Gary, because people who
have studied this assassination in great detail say: "Well, was it
the FBI? Was it the CIA? Was it the Mafia? Was it the anti-Castro
Cubans? Was it the Military?" And this particular line of
questioning has kept us confused for a good number of years because
the truthful answer is: "YES! It was ALL of them!" Now, you say:
"Oh, my God! Now you're talking about a huge, massive conspiracy.
And nobody could have kept quiet about that." </p>

<p>No. That's not what I'm talking about. But I'm talking about
"Operation Mongoose." There was a connection, a nexus point, back
in the early '60s -- in '61, '62. And it was "Operation Mongoose:
The Secret War Against Castro." Most of this is now historical
record. The Senate Intelligence Committee, under [Sen. Frank] Church
[D.-Idaho] and those -- Sen. Gary Hart [D.-Colorado], developed this
information back in the early '70s. It was all in the newspapers.
It has all been established. The plot: "The Secret War Against
Castro", was headed out of the JIMWAVE[sp] Station (which is a CIA
acronym) on the campus of the University of Miami. It involved
anti-Castro Cubans, CIA agents, military officers, Mafia people ...
And THERE we have the common ground, the commonality, the nexus
point at which they were all operating together.</p>

<p>And what were they doing? They were mixed up in plots to overthrow
Cuba, and they were mixed up in plots specifically to assassinate
[Cuban Premier] Fidel Castro. That's historical fact. Why is it
such a big leap in understanding to realize that these same people,
who were trained and who were gearing up to kill Castro, suddenly
were just directed to Dallas? Because the common thought at that
time was that the problem really was in the White House and not in
Cuba; that we COULD attack Cuba, we could knock over Fidel Castro
IF we had a president and an administration that was willing
to do that.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Jan 21 13:36:39 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA14161; Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:36:37 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9301211836.AA14161@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:32:41 EST
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Status: RO
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 19484 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
Subject: Part 30, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Jan20.223054.12083@mont.cs.missouri.edu</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 181</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS [author of CROSSFIRE]:
Now, here's another key point. A few years ago, I was in Alpa 66
Headquarters in Miami. This is one of the oldest and most violent
of the anti-Castro organizations. And I was talking to some of
those people and they were reminiscing about those days. And
something came up about Johnny Roselli, the very TOP-ranking Mafia
guy, and he was. He was a very high-ranking man in the Organized
Crime field. He was kind of the Henry Kissinger of Organized Crime
in that he would travel between the crime families and help make
deals and help make peace between the crime families. This is a TOP-ranking position. And these people in Alpha 66 said that they were
amazed, in recent years, to learn that Johnny Roselli was this
Mafia chieftain, because back at the time of "Operation Mongoose,"
they only knew him as "Colonel Roselli." And Colonel Roselli had
full military credentials, flew in military aircraft piloted by
military personnel, and was an integral part, and a leader of this
secret war to kill Castro and to change governments in Cuba.</p>

<p>So, here now .... and of course the fact that the CIA and the Mafia
were working together in these assassination plots has been well
established. It too is absolute historical fact. So what we have
here is ... we have a situation just prior to the assassination of
President Kennedy, where the Mafia, the CIA, the anti-Castro Cubans
and the MILITARY are all actively working together on a variety of
schemes which include assassination. And I think THAT may be the
key to this whole thing.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. Let's take it a little deeper now. That's some of the basic
scenarios. I still want to go into some of the people in specifics.
When it comes to the Military, let's look at that time, at Kennedy
and Viet Nam, and the military-industrial complex at that time.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Exactly. Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his farewell address, warned us
against the acquisition of power, whether overtly or covertly, by
what he called the "military-industrial complex." And the military-industrial complex is MUCH broader, much more powerful than anyone
I think, even myself, could imagine because, basically, the
military-industrial complex equates to the Status Quo. And never
underestimate the power of the Status Quo. I like to think of
myself as an educated, thoughtful, broad-minded intellectual-type
person. And yet, I'll be the first to admit that there are certain
things that I become very set in my ways about. I like my hamburger
built a certain way, and that's the way I get it. We all are like
that. We all settle into our comfortable lives and comfortable
routines that we are familiar and comfortable with. Okay?
This is the status quo, and it's tough to get out of there.</p>

<p>In 1941, we went onto a full-scale war economy, and we are just now
making the first beginning steps to try to get off of that. And
it's very painful. It's causing a lot of problems. Down here in my
home state of Texas we're really being hurt by the fact that some
of these military bases are being closed, some of the big defense
industries are laying people off. It's a painful process, but it's
gone on all through history. Once you create a giant military force,
that force just doesn't want to go away. And it doesn't go away by
itself. It takes time. It takes effort. Sometimes it's very painful.
And I think that's what Eisenhower was talking about. And we've
been under this military-industrial complex ever since.</p>

<p>The intelligence agencies -- the CIA, the DIA, the NSA -- some of
these twenty-two intelligence agencies, that we have operating in
this country to this very day, are simply the security arm of this
military-industrial complex. And the military-industrial complex,
needless to say, is not going to look kindly on anyone who would
try to dismantle it. And yet, if we go back and look at the record,
we find that essentially, this is exactly what John F. Kennedy was
trying to do.</p>

<p>After the Bay of Pigs [Invasion] and after the Cuban Missile Crisis,
he signed off on National Security Action Memoranda 55, 56 and 57.
And basically, the bottom line of these memoranda was to bring
control over the CIA back under the Military. He said that the
Joint Chiefs-of-Staff would be held responsible for any military or
even quasi-military activities that took place in the World that
was initiated by the United States. So this was an attempt to bring
the CIA back under the control of the Military.</p>

<p>In National Security Action Memorandum 263, we see that he approved
the recommendations of the [Secretary of Defense Robert] McNamara
Report which stated that we could have all United States military
personnel out of Southeast Asia by the end of 1965, and, in fact,
he ordered the withdrawal of one thousand military advisors by the
end of 1963. These were his beginning steps to disengage from Viet
Nam. John Newman, an eighteen-year veteran of military intelligence,
has written a book titled JFK IN VIET NAM. And in there, based on
actual National Security Council minutes, actual orders that are on
file, he showed, beyond any question, that Kennedy was not just
THINKING about pulling us out of Viet Nam, but he had actually
ORDERED that event, and that we had begun to move in that direction.</p>

<p>Of course, after he was killed, his successor, Lyndon Johnson,
signed National Security Memorandum 273, which quietly and subtly
said that there would be no troop decrease from the time of the
Diem Government, which was November the first. That was a subtle
way of blocking Kennedy's pull-out order. And no meaningful drop in
U.S. presence took place in Viet Nam. </p>

<p>And then, of course, in '64, while the Warren Commission was
putting the finishing touches on their report that said Oswald ws
the lone nut assassin, we had the phony Gulf of Tonkin Incident,
and Johnson managed to push through a panicked Congress the Gulf of
Tonkin Resolution -- which abrogates the Constitution of the United
States, which says that only Congress shall have the power to
declare war -- and gave those war-making powers to Johnson himself.
And off we went into a ten-year war that was very much desired by
the U.S. Military and by their attendant groups, their security
agencies, the intelligence groups, and also by the defense
industries and the bankers who supported them. And it's wide! It's
pervasive! It reaches into every state in this Union.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * </p>

<p> As the elaborately concocted smokescreen fades away from the
faces of the gang of murderers who perpetrated this, THE
highest crime of treason in the history of the United States,
we stand flabbergasted and enraged to realize the enormity of
the traitors' crimes. They have scattered the brains of the
People's President onto the streets of an American city.
They have, just as cold-bloodedly, murdered (what is it?)
two hundred or so people, from CIA agent Oswald to Sam Holland
to columnist Dorothy Kilgallen to Senator Robert F. Kennedy. </p>

<p> They have perpetrated a ten-year holocaust comprising the
slaughter of over fifty-eight thousand sons of America, the
wounding and maiming (both physically and psychologically)
of maybe a quarter of a million more of us who served in that
beautiful country transformed into one great hellish inferno;
the absolute genocide (and there's no more accurate word for
it than "genocide") of two million valiant peasants, who
staunchly sacrificed everything, including themselves, to free
their country from the clutches of a brutal invader. </p>

<p> There are Vietnamese babies born every day now with arms growing
out of their chests. Those people are suffering the myriad horrors
of nature's processes gone wild -- all because Dow Chemical
Company wanted to save the few bucks needed to purge dioxin
from the tons and tons of Agent Orange defoliant with which
the genocidal profiteers drenched the Vietnamese countryside.
So they soaked the American taxpayer for Agent Orange enriched
with dioxin -- about the most toxic chemical known to all life
-- and they soaked American boys and Vietnamese people with tons
of death from the skies; not instant death, like the 1000-pound bombs that rained down daily, but slow, torturous,
agonized death -- death, or a lifetime of suffering for Viet
Nam's future mothers and their babies, who would live out
their short lives with deformed bodies and incurable cancers;
and these horrors will be revisited upon all succeeding
generations, to the horizons of time.</p>

<p> A brilliant WBAI political scholar and humanitarian named Leo
Cawley was representative of the multitudes of American victims of
that war. Leo was a combat Marine who suffered for twenty years
until his death from Dow Chemical's lucrative defoliant/depopulant.
But even as he withered away, Leo condemned Bush's Persian Gulf
War with passion and compassion. We could all give at least a
bit of our time and energy to organizing against tomorrow's
holocausts for the sake of tomorrow's victims, and in memory
of yesterday's victims.</p>

<p> The evil men of the military-industrial complex and their CIA
will never be brought to trial. But that's okay. We're working
toward a higher form of justice than even the rectification of
the U.S. Government's farcical facade of a justice system could
possibly imply. We're striving, not to throw these genocidists
into jail cells, but rather, to defeat their system of evil before
they can launch more such genocidal adventures like the ones in
Korea, Viet Nam, Angola, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Kuwait and Iraq.</p>

<p> John DiNardo
</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Jan 27 10:27:16 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA20727; Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:27:13 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9301271527.AA20727@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:13:44 EST
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Status: RO
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 19745 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
Subject: Part 31, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Jan26.225929.7810@mont.cs.missouri.edu</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 150</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS:
Probably, a healthy percentage of the population of this country
derives their direct income, in one way or another, from this
military-industrial state, either working directly for the
Government, or through military pensions, or through active military
[duty], or through the defense contractors or, even from small
companies that produce shoelaces for combat boots, pins for hand
grenades, etcetera. I'm not sure we're even yet in a position to
really, truthfully evaluate the impact of the military-industrial
complex on this country.</p>

<p>But now, was there any tie-in to the assassination by the Military?
Absolutely! James Powell, a military intelligence agent, made the
mistake of going into the Texas School Book Depository before it
was sealed off by police. And once it was, he had to show his
credentials before he could get out. So he became part of the
permanent record. And you may well ask: What was an Army intelligence
agent doing in the School Book Depository at the time of the Kennedy
Assassination? You might also ask why he was outside taking
photographs of the Texas School Book Depository Building at the
time of the assassination when most people were not even aware of
what had gone on, or who was involved, or even of the fact that the
School Book Depository would be identified as the place where the
sniper had fired from. .....</p>

<p> [brief discontinuity due to tape ending]</p>

<p>..... [photos] taken six and eight minutes after the assassination
took place. And they show that there's still somebody up there
moving boxes on the sixth floor. The other key thing that I would
point to was found in the Dallas Police files. We have Lieutenant
Rebell of the Dallas Police. He went back to police headquarters
from the Book Depository and typed up a list of Book Depository
employees. And this was done within, probably, thirty minutes after
the assassination -- even before they had Oswald arrested. And
HEADING the list of School Book Depository employees was Harvey Lee
Oswald. And it gave his address as 605 Elsbeth. Okay? Now, the
problem is, of course, as we know, it was Lee Harvey Oswald. And
his address that he gave in his application for employment to the
Book Depository was the West Fifth address of the Paine house out
in Irving, where his wife was staying. Okay? Nowhere on his records
at the Book Depository was this Elsbeth address. In fact, Oswald
HAD lived at 60'2' Elsbeth in the late fall of '62 and early '63,
but he did not put that down on any of his material at the Book
Depository. So where did the Dallas Police Intelligence Chief Rebell
get this "Harvey Lee Oswald" and where did he get "60'5' Elsbeth"?</p>

<p>Well, he told the Warren Commission that he rode back from Dealey
Plaza to the police station with a military intelligence agent.
Recently, he told a news reporter down here in Texas that not only
was this a military intelligence agent, he was an O.N.I. agent,
Office of Naval Intelligence. And, of course, it's been well-accepted that if Oswald played some role in intelligence, he
probably started off in the Office of Naval Intelligence, since he
was a Marine, and the Marines are under the Navy Department. Okay?</p>

<p>Now, in 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations contacted
a Colonel Jones of Fourth Army Intelligence. And he said that on
the day of the assassination he got word from some of his people
in Dallas that they had arrested a fellow and that his name was
Alex J. Heidel. He told Congress that he checked with Fourth Army
Military Intelligence files and found that Alex J. Heidel cross-referenced to Lee Harvey Oswald, and it gave his address as "60'5'
Elsbeth. So the SAME mistaken address that turned up on Lieutenant
Rebell's Dallas Police Intelligence sheet of School Book Depository
employees turns up in Fourth Army Intelligence files. And Rebell
says he rode back to Dallas Police Headquarters with an O.N.I agent.</p>

<p>Now -- what does that tell us? That tells us that it was the
MILITARY in Dallas, on November the 22nd, that was tipping off the
Dallas Police that the suspect they were after was Lee Harvey Oswald.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
That's DYNAMITE material! By God, if that ..... I don't think that
people know HOW important this information is! This clearly focuses
-- telescopes in on specific areas and people that we should be
paying attention to.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Right. And it goes far beyond simply renegades within the CIA, or
a dissident FBI agent over here, or some Mob hit-men. Now, I don't
think there's any question. It is obvious. There's evidence that
there are Mafia people mixed up in the assassination. I think that
if you want to go get hired killers, that's the place where you
would start. I don't think there's any question about that. I don't
think there's any question that there is a CIA involvement in all
of this.</p>

<p>But the thing is -- somewhere it had to come together. Somewhere
there had to be a connecting point. And I believe that the Military,
and particularly the groups and the individuals in and around
"Operation Mongoose" probably were this connecting point.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's take a look at a few other people here.
Give us your opinions of what, if any, role the following people
had, or of what knowledge they may have had concerning the
assassination: The fired Bay of Pigs architect, General Charles
Cabell.

JIM MARRS:
Alright. I don't think it was just a coincidence that the day of
the assassination, Cabell, who had been fired by Kennedy as the
Deputy Director of the CIA, had simply moved back into the Pentagon,
resumed his duties there and his rank there, and, in fact, was kind
of in hot water because he had publicly branded his commander-in-chief, the President of the United States John F. Kennedy, a traitor.
Okay? If he truly believed that -- and he had to believe that, or
he wouldn't have said that publicly about his superior -- then you
can see that he would have no trouble in justifying the
death sentence for "a traitor". </p>

<p>And I don't think it was a coincidence that his brother, Earl Cabell
was Mayor of Dallas that day. As such, he was one of the prominent
and important politicians who helped guide things and make decisions
that were taken in respect to Kennedy's visit there.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Feb 3 08:16:54 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
id AA08899; Wed, 3 Feb 93 08:16:51 -0500
<info type="Message-ID"> 9302031316.AA08899@css.itd.umich.edu</info>
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 08:13:15 EST
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Status: RO
X-Status: </p>

<p>Article 20003 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Part 32, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb2.131716.7687@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia, FREE Public Access UNIX!
Lines: 152</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
Alright. A key piece of evidence. A CRUCIAL piece of evidence that
the media has overlooked. I'd like for you to fill in a blank here.
Absolutely essential:
We know that the route of President Kennedy's caravan was rerouted.
The motorcade was rerouted. Who did that?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS [author of CROSSFIRE: THE PLOT THAT KILLED KENNEDY]:
Well, it's a murky question, and you get into all kinds of problems
there. First off, the zig-zag up Houston and down Elm Street ....
I'm going to have to admit that Chief Terry[sp], the Dallas Police
Chief, told the Warren Commission -- they asked him about that
route and he told them that that was the normal flow of traffic.
And that is true. And that's why we're going to have a hard time
with this thing about the route because it was the normal flow of
traffic, and you can always argue that: Well, they followed the
normal flow of traffic.</p>

<p>The problem, of course, is that this was not a normal situation.
This was a President of the United States who was visiting. They
had Main Street blocked off already for the motorcade through
downtown. And if I had been in charge of security .... and, in fact,
several of the Dallas police officers brought this point up to the
Warren Commission. They said that they didn't understand why the
motorcade didn't simply go straight down Main Street, which was
already blocked off, and then turn and go right up onto Stimmons
Expressway, which would have left no need to make a hundred and
twenty degree turn.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
You wouldn't have slowed down because Main Street is a straight
street, and as a straight street, the motorcade would not have had
to slow down. Now, having to turn on procession's path and then
back onto Elm Street, you have two turns which necessitate going
very slow.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Exactly. And one of them -- the turn from Houston onto Elm is about
a one hundred and twenty degree turn, which is a VIOLATION of
Secret Service regulations. Now, the only other thing that I'd
point out is that on November the 19th, when the Secret Service
chiefs came to Dallas and they rode the motorcade route, if you
read their description very closely in the Warren Commission
[Report], you find that they came up Houston Street to about Main,
and they said: Here is where the motorcade goes on to the Trade
Mart. And they turned east on Main, and they never did drive that
hundred and twenty degree turn onto Elm Street. So there was
apparently some negligence there on really determining the exact
path of the motorcade and realizing that they had a security
problem there. </p>

<p>Now, who engineered that negligence is still kind of up-in-the-air.
But it seems clear to me that since the Secret Service and other
Federal officials ..... In fact, there was a man from the
Agriculture Department, believe it or not, who came down and
apparently was an integral, important part of the planning of this
motorcade route. And, of course, you have to go back and understand
that the old Agriculture Department head, Orville Freeman, had been
a very close political friend of Lyndon Johnson. And so, there
seems to have been some mechanization that took place in this
planning, but we have not been able to nail that down. And again,
we're back to the point where someone will say: "Well, that was the
natural flow of traffic. So, I think that's going to remain a murky
area in this investigation.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. We do have ....
[interruption due to tape ending]
..... the mayor, Earl Cabell. And Earl Cabell had (we don't know
that it's the case) .... He had the power to reroute the motorcade.
That is something that .....</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
He definitely called Police Chief Terry away from his duties at
the time that they transferred Oswald, and he was shot by Ruby. And
Terry said: "I wasn't there because I got a call from Mayor Cabell.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
I wasn't aware of that.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, there's another possibly important point because if the Police
Chief himself had been there, he might have said something or done
something that would have beefed up the security around Oswald and
prevented Ruby from getting to him.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
And, of course, the American Public should be aware that Kennedy
had fired Allen Dulles as head of the CIA, and had vowed to "smash
the CIA into a thousand pieces and cast it to the winds." And, of
course, Dulles would be on the Warren Commission. Now, to appoint a
man who had been fired seems rather absurd as far as objectivity is
concerned. But, again, nothing about this has been objective or
makes sense.</p>

<p>Now, lastly, I want to go to some of the right-wing extremist
organizations, and also to what some have suspected were some of the
very powerful Texas industrialists who also were in the munitions
business -- the armaments business. And later, as we would find out,
we would be spending nearly ONE BILLION DOLLARS A DAY fighting in
Viet Nam.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yeah. And let's not forget the oilmen. The oilmen were not
providing munitions, but they were providing the life blood of the
military machine, which is oil. And so, they very much wanted
Viet Nam -- to keep the price of oil up.</p>

<p> [JD: The most famous oilman in the World was a CIA agent in Miami
who was involved with the anti-Castro Cubans who have been
linked to the murder of President Kennedy. That famous oilman
had a great deal to gain by the murder of the President because
his Zapata Oil Company stood to make a fortune off of the
slaughter in Viet Nam of over fifty-eight thousand American boys.</p>

<p> That famous oilman is George Herbert Walker Bush, of course.
Why don't we look at the financial records and find out how much
money George Herbert Walker Bush actually made in that ten-year,
blood-for-profits adventure??]
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20160 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 33, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb5.133221.1860@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 13:32:21 GMT
Lines: 157</p>

<p> I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
And the oilmen were favored friends of Lyndon Johnson.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
That's true. They hated Kennedy because Kennedy had already made
one attempt to, and was still talking about doing away with the
27-and-a-half percent oil depletion allowance, which is the bedrock
of oil money. What it is, basically, is the argument that oil is a
finite resource. There's only so much of it under ground. And every
time you pump it out, you're depleting your basic product, I guess
you could say. And, as a result, they have a 27-and-a-half percent
(at that time) oil depletion allowance, which basically meant that
they did not have to pay taxes on 27-and-a-half percent of the money
they made off of oil. How would YOU like to be able to pass on
almost 28 percent of your income, and not have to pay taxes on it?
That would help you out considerably. Wouldn't it?</p>

<p> [JD: On this point, it's also important to know that in Kennedy's
first year as President, one of the three major steel companies
-- I think it was Bethlehem Steel -- pulled the commonly used
trick of being the first company, in collusion with all the others,
to hike the price of steel and thus, to establish an excuse for
all the other steel companies to hike their prices.
Well, John F. Kennedy forced the steel companies, by some means,
to roll back their prices. That was an extraordinary achievement
on behalf of the American consumer which has probably never been
done before or since by any of the corporate-owned Presidents of
the United States.
That deed alone focused upon John Kennedy the hatred of the
barons of big business.]

GARY NULL:
Do you have any knowledge of Howard Hughes as "Mr. X", and the
suspicions surrounding his involvement in the assassination?
Howard Hughes, according to information I've got, was considered to
be "Mr. X" by operatives from the CIA, by some anti-Castro Cubans,
and by some of the right-wing paramilitarists.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
As an intermediary. Well, let me say that in 1963 I was still a
little unclear on how powerful Hughes actually was, and on how much
he was actually running his empire. There is good evidence to
believe that he had already begun to be controlled and to be
operated. He was a recluse. Nobody saw him. And there is good reason
to believe that he may not have been in total control of his empire.
BUT, Robert Mayhue was. Robert Mayhue, at that time, was basically
running Howard Hughes's empire. And Robert Mayhue had ties to both
Organized Crime and to the CIA. And I may point out .... Again, I
think that this is incredibly important: Robert Mayhue was also
tied into "Operation Mongoose".</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Now, is Robert Mayhue alive today?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Yes, he is.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
What is he doing today?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
I have no idea what he's doing. He appears on programs now and then.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Was he ever challenged on these ties?</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Oh, heavens. No, there's never been any hard-nosed investigation of
all this because the Government has always maintained that it was
just Oswald.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. So, we only have this as supposition, and we have to
acknowledge that it is merely supposition ....</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, I would say this. I would say that if there is any one person
still alive today who probably knew and knows how all of this was
pulled together, I think Robert Mayhue would be a good candidate.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. But, again, we do not know that for a fact. We merely have
to, in fairness and objectivity .....
[tape ending]
Did he have any connection to Organized Crime, and what was his
knowledge of the Kennedy Assassination. We must, in fairness and
objectivity, keep it as purely something that is a projected
supposition without concrete evidence.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Oh, there's no concrete evidence that he participated in the
conspiracy to kill Kennedy. I'll be the first to admit that.
BUT, he himself .... and there has been tons written about him.
He definitely was connected into the ..... In fact, he was the
intermediary who put the Mafia people in touch with the CIA for
their assassination plots. That's been documented. That's been
stated. Okay? That's been nailed down by the Government.</p>

<p>He also, of course, was in charge of the Howard Hughes empire, which
is well documented as being a front for the Central Intelligence
Agency. So, he was right in the thick of all of that. And, as I've
said, he was also part of "Operation Mongoose". That has been
publicly stated. So, I think he's the guy who could give us some
answers, if he would talk, and talk truthfully, and talk
extensively, something that, apparently, he has not done to date.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Now, let's take one more look here and try to put this into a
context. We have certain members of Organized Crime who certainly
could have played a role in providing the actual assassins.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Well, of course, about Organized Crime, there's really not any
doubt about all of that. The FBI was operating as it should, and was
keeping tabs on Organized Crime chieftains. Had them wire-tapped.
Had them followed. Had informants, inside their organizations,
reporting back. And each and every one of them, at some point,
threatened the life of President Kennedy. I think, obviously, the
ones who are most important to us would be Sam Giancana, the Mob
boss of Chicago, who apparently helped pull votes for Kennedy in
the 1960 election, and then who also was dating and going to bed
with Judith [Campbell] Exner at the same time that she was slipping
into the White House and having an affair with John Kennedy.
So that puts him in pretty close contact.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20544 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,alt.censorship
Subject: Part 34, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb15.215718.24395@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Lines: 101</p>

<p> The following transcript is from a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station for the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
JIM MARRS [author of CROSSFIRE: THE PLOT THAT KILLED KENNEDY]:
Giancana, who was under HEAVY, intense prosecution and investigation
by both the FBI and the Justice Department, undoubtedly felt like
he was the victim of a turnaround -- a double-cross, if you will.
Of course, his son and his nephew, I believe it was, in fact, have
written a book called "DOUBLE-CROSS". And I think they aggrandize
Giancana's role in national affairs a bit. But nevertheless, they
made the argument that he felt like he had helped to put Kennedy in
office, and he felt that Kennedy had double-crossed him by
prosecuting him and sending the FBI after him. </p>

<p>Of course, one of his compatriots at that time was the New Orleans
crime boss, Carlos Marcello. John Davis has produced a very good
book that pretty well shows that there was some connection with
Carlos Marcello into the assassination. Davis tries to make the
argument that Marcello was the architect of the assassination.
He may have been very instrumental in it, but even Carlos Marcello,
powerful as he may be, did not have the power to cover-up the facts
afterwards. And he did not have the power to misguide, misdirect
and blunt the investigation by the FBI, and to alter the wounds on
the President's body between Parkland Hospital and Bethesda Naval
Hospital, and to do all of the things that are KNOWN to have been
done. This goes beyond Organized Crime, although Carlos Marcello
may have played an important role.</p>

<p>The other [compatriot of Giancana], of course, was Santos
Trafficante, the Mob chieftain in Miami, who was closely connected
to the anti-Castro Cubans, who, in fact, had been jailed on the
Isle of Pines by [Cuban Premier] Fidel Castro back at the time of
his takeover, and who was in contact with JACK RUBY. </p>

<p>So, you've got all of these people and they're all tied together.
And the common point, I would think, between all of these was the
point to where they begin to work closely with the United States
Government, particularly the Central Intelligence Agency and the
Military, and the war against Castro, and in the assassination plot
against Castro.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Okay. That's a good summary for this stage of our program. We still
have more to go. There's still a LOT more evidence that we're going
to be laying out. We're going to talk about a killing on Wall
Street. We're going to talk about Kennedy and the oilmen. We're
going to talk about a Miami prophet. We're going to talk about a
bullet for the general. We're going to talk about the connections
with Lyndon Baines Johnson.
So much more to come.
And then in Dallas: the black car chase, the strange saga of Roger
Craig, the role of hit-men down there, and the shooting of J.D.
Tippett. All these things are still to come, plus the "mystery man"
whom many of us feel was the actual hit-man against Oswald in the
balcony of the theater -- how that came about, who this person was,
and why he didn't manage to get to kill Oswald who was where he was
supposed to be in that theater, even though he never went to movies,
and was specifically located by the police.
Plus, brand new information that has NEVER before been revealed,
in ANY form, in this country -- coming up.
We are having some outside experts -- physicists and ballistics
people and others -- examining documentation at this very moment.
We'll hopefully have that for you very shortly.</p>

<p>I want to thank you very much, Jim Marrs, for sharing some
outstanding insights with us today.</p>

<p>JIM MARRS:
Thank you. Good to be with you.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20571 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Part 35, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb17.210252.10583@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Lines: 128</p>

<p> The following transcript is of a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station of the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
I've spent a great deal of time down in Dallas. In the last year
alone, I've made eight trips, doing measurements -- DETAILED
measurements -- going over analyses. There is an individual
(I don't know if you know him, Jones Harris), Robert Morningstar,
who has done a great deal of analyzing of the Zapruder Film. </p>

<p>We found additional distortions -- editing in that film. We
have also found more tracers. We have found the actual tracers.
We put it through an infra-red scanner, and we can actually
SHOW ..... No one has ever done this before. It was Robert
Morningstar who came up with this, and we have independently
corroborated it. We've done blow-ups of the Zapruder Film showing
the actual tracer[s] [of the] bullets. And you cannot see it with
the naked eye. But every bullet that is fired has a different
marking, a marking of the heat that is created when the bullet
spins out of the barrel of the gun, a marking of the heat when the
sun reflects off of the bullet, a marking of the heat when the
bullet goes through the atmosphere. And in this case, it was very
humid on that day in Dallas. (I have gone back to subsequently
check all the weather reports.) You have four separate markings
of a tracer.</p>

<p>Well, we know that these markings, though not shown to the naked
eye, are on the film and would still be a permanent imprint.
And based upon the idea that there were multiple gunmen -- not one
-- the only way to determine this is if there were multiple shots
that could be proved to have been fired. Up to this point,
there were none [proven to be fired]. </p>

<p>Using an infra-red technology, we have isolated and actually
identified the exact trajectory of all of the bullets: eight --
EIGHT bullets. Now, what is interesting is that we actually have
this, blown up. It is irrefutable. Any physicist will show you
that these are exact. Also, when you time-base them for the sounds
[compare the points in time of the appearances of the tracers
with the points in time of the sounds of the shots] .... We can't
pinpoint the exact [origin of a] sound because the sound is deceptive.
Where you think the direction that a sound is coming from frequently
is not, depending upon the acoustics. Well, we've been able to match
the acoustics with the sound, and then match the trajectory.</p>

<p>We even found .... I shouldn't say "I found". It was actually
Robert who found .... We actually found and were able to demonstrate
that the Zapruder Film was cut in two places to make the car seem
as if it lurched forward, when, in fact, it came TO A STOP! And we
can prove that because, in the film, the flags [mounted on the car]
go flaccid and yet, the car jerks forward. And the building right
across from the car -- which should have been in perfect alignment
-- in the very next FRAME (You're talking about less than one
thirty-second of a second) the building JUMPED FORTY FEET AHEAD!
So, suddenly, if you look, the building that is across from the
President's limousine -- in one frame is in front of it [the
limousine]; in the next frame there's a forty foot difference.</p>

<p>Now, no one has ever done this work before. This is important new
work to prove that the Zapruder Film WAS definitely, unequivocally,
ABSOLUTELY [altered]. And NO ONE has caught it! NO ONE, except
Robert Morningstar.</p>

<p>So then we went into great detail. We then took this -- Robert and
I working together -- we blew up these ..... I went down there and
got very sophisticated measurements. And we found that there HAD
to have been someone on the opposite side of the green, because
two bullets came right across and you can see the TRACER come right
across that sign. Now isn't it interesting: They've added a whole
segment to that sign! </p>

<p>Then, we can show that two bullets missed the car entirely.
We do not believe that missing the car by such a wide margin was an
accident. We believe that those were marker shots, because guess
what we see in one of the tree branches. We see a "shooter's bag".
In one shot [frame] you see it there. It looks like a tiny dot.
You won't notice it! The naked eye will not notice it. But blow it
up, as we did, freeze-frame it, and then you will see that it's
hanging in a limb in one shot [frame], and then the tracer shot
comes across and [the "shooter's bag"] it's blown away. That's what
a marksman uses to line up the target, so that when the target comes
right to that spot, you shoot and you're able to hit your target.</p>

<p>We also were able to blow up and enhance a photo showing,
absolutely, a rifle with a telescopic sight that did NOT fire --
that was in the bushes down near the underpass. And we feel that
that was either the kill shot, through the throat, because when it
passed ..... It was funny because you watch it twenty times; you
don't see a thing. You have experts watch it; they don't see a
thing. You slow it down; they don't see a thing. And THEN, we put
it in freeze-frame, and we say: "Have you ever seen a branch of a
tree move?" And suddenly they all say: "There it is!" And they all
point and say: "Yes, you're right!" But then, it's not a branch,
but it's a telescopic sight. And it's a man with a hat. And we can
actually match the scope to the type of scope used in that time.
The scope follows President Kennedy clear around until he's out of
sight, meaning that he was going to put another shot into him if he
saw that the shot they fired the first time wasn't a kill shot.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>From uucp Mon Mar 15 13:12 EST 1993
&gt;From jad Mon Mar 15 12:41 EST 1993 remote from ckuxb.att.com
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 12:41 EST
To: jad@hopper.acs.virginia.edu
Received: from ckuxb.att.com by hopper.acs.virginia.edu.ACS.Virginia.EDU; Mon, 15 Mar 1993 13:12 EST
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 7697
Status: OR</p>

<p>Article 20571 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 35, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb17.210252.10583@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1993 21:02:52 GMT
Lines: 128</p>

<p> The following transcript is of a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station of the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
I've spent a great deal of time down in Dallas. In the last year
alone, I've made eight trips, doing measurements -- DETAILED
measurements -- going over analyses. There is an individual
(I don't know if you know him, Jones Harris), Robert Morningstar,
who has done a great deal of analyzing of the Zapruder Film. </p>

<p>We found additional distortions -- editing in that film. We
have also found more tracers. We have found the actual tracers.
We put it through an infra-red scanner, and we can actually
SHOW ..... No one has ever done this before. It was Robert
Morningstar who came up with this, and we have independently
corroborated it. We've done blow-ups of the Zapruder Film showing
the actual tracer[s] [of the] bullets. And you cannot see it with
the naked eye. But every bullet that is fired has a different
marking, a marking of the heat that is created when the bullet
spins out of the barrel of the gun, a marking of the heat when the
sun reflects off of the bullet, a marking of the heat when the
bullet goes through the atmosphere. And in this case, it was very
humid on that day in Dallas. (I have gone back to subsequently
check all the weather reports.) You have four separate markings
of a tracer.</p>

<p>Well, we know that these markings, though not shown to the naked
eye, are on the film and would still be a permanent imprint.
And based upon the idea that there were multiple gunmen -- not one
-- the only way to determine this is if there were multiple shots
that could be proved to have been fired. Up to this point,
there were none [proven to be fired]. </p>

<p>Using an infra-red technology, we have isolated and actually
identified the exact trajectory of all of the bullets: eight --
EIGHT bullets. Now, what is interesting is that we actually have
this, blown up. It is irrefutable. Any physicist will show you
that these are exact. Also, when you time-base them for the sounds
[compare the points in time of the appearances of the tracers
with the points in time of the sounds of the shots] .... We can't
pinpoint the exact [origin of a] sound because the sound is deceptive.
Where you think the direction that a sound is coming from frequently
is not, depending upon the acoustics. Well, we've been able to match
the acoustics with the sound, and then match the trajectory.</p>

<p>We even found .... I shouldn't say "I found". It was actually
Robert who found .... We actually found and were able to demonstrate
that the Zapruder Film was cut in two places to make the car seem
as if it lurched forward, when, in fact, it came TO A STOP! And we
can prove that because, in the film, the flags [mounted on the car]
go flaccid and yet, the car jerks forward. And the building right
across from the car -- which should have been in perfect alignment
-- in the very next FRAME (You're talking about less than one
thirty-second of a second) the building JUMPED FORTY FEET AHEAD!
So, suddenly, if you look, the building that is across from the
President's limousine -- in one frame is in front of it [the
limousine]; in the next frame there's a forty foot difference.</p>

<p>Now, no one has ever done this work before. This is important new
work to prove that the Zapruder Film WAS definitely, unequivocally,
ABSOLUTELY [altered]. And NO ONE has caught it! NO ONE, except
Robert Morningstar.</p>

<p>So then we went into great detail. We then took this -- Robert and
I working together -- we blew up these ..... I went down there and
got very sophisticated measurements. And we found that there HAD
to have been someone on the opposite side of the green, because
two bullets came right across and you can see the TRACER come right
across that sign. Now isn't it interesting: They've added a whole
segment to that sign! </p>

<p>Then, we can show that two bullets missed the car entirely.
We do not believe that missing the car by such a wide margin was an
accident. We believe that those were marker shots, because guess
what we see in one of the tree branches. We see a "shooter's bag".
In one shot [frame] you see it there. It looks like a tiny dot.
You won't notice it! The naked eye will not notice it. But blow it
up, as we did, freeze-frame it, and then you will see that it's
hanging in a limb in one shot [frame], and then the tracer shot
comes across and [the "shooter's bag"] it's blown away. That's what
a marksman uses to line up the target, so that when the target comes
right to that spot, you shoot and you're able to hit your target.</p>

<p>We also were able to blow up and enhance a photo showing,
absolutely, a rifle with a telescopic sight that did NOT fire --
that was in the bushes down near the underpass. And we feel that
that was either the kill shot, through the throat, because when it
passed ..... It was funny because you watch it twenty times; you
don't see a thing. You have experts watch it; they don't see a
thing. You slow it down; they don't see a thing. And THEN, we put
it in freeze-frame, and we say: "Have you ever seen a branch of a
tree move?" And suddenly they all say: "There it is!" And they all
point and say: "Yes, you're right!" But then, it's not a branch,
but it's a telescopic sight. And it's a man with a hat. And we can
actually match the scope to the type of scope used in that time.
The scope follows President Kennedy clear around until he's out of
sight, meaning that he was going to put another shot into him if he
saw that the shot they fired the first time wasn't a kill shot.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20777 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 36, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb23.215738.25766@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1993 21:57:38 GMT
Lines: 142</p>

<p> The following transcript is of a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station of the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
This program is a continuation of our ongoing series titled:
"Hidden Agendas: Conspiracies, Cover-Ups and Lies"
at the highest levels of our Government, in regard to deceptions
foisted upon the American People regarding essential information
about the roles of Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald in the John F.
Kennedy Assassination. We have been led to believe that the Warren
Commission Report was the first and last word on this case.
Many individuals are challenging that. We have invited those
individuals to share with us insights, documentation and other
information, much of it being revealed here, for the first time,
to the American People.</p>

<p>Please excuse the poor broadcast quality today because I am not in
the studio. I'm not in New York. I'm about five thousand miles away
from New York, continuing to do investigations on this. I'm tracking
certain ballistic and forensic information, and I'm interviewing
people who, hitherto, have not been heard by the American People so
that I can bring you new information.</p>

<p>On our conference line right now are two individuals who have some
unique insights: Jack Schweick[sp], who has written on Oswald,
especially about the Atsugi [Naval Air] Base in Japan. He was in
intelligence before being in the Marines. He has sued the CIA for
files. And we'll learn about the alleged fourty-four drawers of
files on Oswald and also [on] all the people on that base, and
what Lee Harvey Oswald was doing there.</p>

<p>Also, we have colonel L. Fletcher Prouty. Now Colonel Prouty is a
unique individual in this scheme of things. In the movie, JFK, it
was Donald Sutherland who portrayed the role of L. Fletcher Prouty
or some facsimile of his role. L. Fletcher Prouty was Chief of
Special Operations of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, and he established
worldwide offices. He was a senior Air Force officer, Officer of
Special Operations in the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the
office headed by General G.B. Erskine with Edward Lansdale, CIA-to-United States Air Force on staff. He was also the chief of Team B,
which was Special Operations, Headquarters U.S. Air Force.
And that's very important in military terms. Special Operations was
the official function responsible for the military support of the
clandestine operations of the CIA.</p>

<p>Let's begin with L. Fletcher Prouty.
Welcome to our program, Mr. Prouty.</p>

<p>L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
Good morning, Gary. Nice to be with you.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
First off -- is it correct that there was some facsimile between
you and the character portrayed by Donald Sutherland in Oliver
Stone's film, JFK? </p>

<p>L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
Yes. Oliver Stone met with me in 1990 and asked me to be an advisor
to the film because he had read material that I had written, and he
had written a part into his film that he called "Mr. X". At the
time, I didn't know that. And I read the script when it first came
out in November 1990, and I found the "Mr. X" there and I recognized
myself and words I had written and things I had said. So, at a
speech at the National Press Club, in January 1992, Oliver Stone
turned to the audience and said: "Everybody asked me, 'Is there a
real 'Mr. X''." Well, I was on the podium with him, and he turned
and pointed to me and said: "There's my 'Mr. X'." And so, the secret
broke. And that's the story of it. It was pretty simple. He just
worked it into the film so that he would have an authoritative
voice for certain parts of the film, as you saw represented by
Donald Sutherland.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's go to the actual events, or at least those events
that you have some insight on so that we can get a handle on this.
We have already -- in the first eighteen parts of this special
investigation (twenty-five hours of broadcasting on this) -- laid out
various aspects of this puzzle. We have seen the role of Organized
Crime -- at least those individuals who, on FBI tapes, have made
statemtents, either true or false (at least they've made the actual
statements), that there was going to be a hit on the President,
either in Miami or later in Dallas. We also had extensive insights
about the CIA being "out of control", and about, even at that time,
special renegade elements within the CIA who were very much opposed
to President Kennedy's mishandling of the Bay of Pigs Invasion, and
about the fact that, at a time when he could very easily have given
the support which would have caused the destruction of Castro's tiny
Air Force and ended what people in the military/industrial complex,
the Armed Forces, the general public, the Texas conservative element,
viewed as a substantial threat, he backed off. They found this
incomprehensible.</p>

<p>And, as a result, some feel that elements of that [the CIA] were
responsible for the assassination. But it couldn't have been done
without having members of the Secret Service, the FBI and the
Military participate because it was going to be, not only the
assassination itself, but they were fully aware that you don't go
out and kill the President of the United States unless you can
protect yourself. You have to know that you can protect yourself if
there is a special commission, if there is a special investigation.
So, bringing in people from different segments [of the Government]
at different levels would have been a job that only military
logistics experts could have pulled off. Organized Crime has never
been able to maintain. They don't have the intellectual dexterity,
they have too much braggadocio and they're too unreliable. But they
are capable of killing, and they do. And they are capable of being
used, in effect, as a front for various aspects [of Government
crime], as they had been in their anti-Castro efforts after the fall
of Cuba's Battista Government, which supported their corruption.
Since Castro didn't support them, they were losing many millions of
dollars. So they were conducting regular activities, we now know,
with the aid of the CIA and with the knowledge of the FBI.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address as
the password. The files are kept in the directory /poli/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20864 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jad@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part 37, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Feb26.233930.1942@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: researchers'revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX!
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1993 23:39:30 GMT
Lines: 142</p>

<p> The following transcript is of a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station of the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
So, how do you start to link all these disparate people together?
What roles did they actually play? What roles do you surmise they
played?</p>

<p>L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
Well, take one of the most crucial roles. Certainly, everybody
wants to know who killed the President. How was he killed? What was
the technique that was used. And really, the answer has been before
us in the Press for years, and I guess most people didn't notice it
or didn't see it in the proper context.</p>

<p>President Lyndon Baines Johnson himself, when ex-President, just
before he died, had an interview with an old friend of his -- a
writer for the ATLANTIC MONTHLY Magazine. And, although I don't
have it laying here in front of me at the moment, I'll tell you
three things that Lyndon Johnson said during that interview that,
coming from the President, the man who was most involved -- at
least next to Kennedy -- in that whole affair. Johnson said these
things. He said, first of all: "I never believed that Oswald did
that by himself. Furthermore," he said, "I knew that there was a
conspiracy to kill Kennedy." I mean, he knew as he went along.
I'm not sure that he meant that he knew ahead of time. But, in
either case, those are his words. He said: "I have always felt
that there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy." </p>

<p>But third -- and here he really said what answers your question.
He said: "WE", meaning the United States Government -- "We maintain
a Murder Incorported," and he added the words, "in the Caribbean"
because that was pertinent to the questions that were going on.
But this "Murder Incorporated" is Worldwide. And now the United
States Government maintains a "Murder Incorporated" capability, as
we see, from time to time, when assassinations or other tragic
terrorist movements [covert operations] take place. The people who
do that are professionals. And they work for certain elements of
the United States Government.</p>

<p>Now, President Johnson said that, and that was printed in the July
1973 issue of the ATLANTIC MONTHLY Magazine. Since that has been
put into the Press, then we can explore it a little more. Those
professionals whom the [Central Intelligence] Agency calls
"mechanics" are brought into Dallas. A small team. They do the job.
They kill the President. They leave. They're gone. That's the
murder!</p>

<p>The BIG crime after that is the cover story that we see every day.
For instance, this recent release by the American Medical
Association is ABSOLUTE COVER STORY! Who IS IT that's forcing that
ENORMOUS organization, that powerful organization, the American
Medical Association, just last week or the week before, to release
more cover story articles about the killing of the President that
are NOT true? Why are they being made to do this? Where is the
"power" that makes them do that? Therein is the explanation of
the assassination of the President!</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's go through this. Who had the power to kill the
President and get away with it. Organized Crime could not have done
it and gotten away with it. Anti-Castroites could not have done it
and gotten away with it. And radically right-wing, conservative
politicians could not have done it and gotten away with it.
So who actually did it, and then who do you think ..... Separate
the cast of characters whom you feel did it, and then the cast of
characters who participated in the cover-up because whoever did it
had to have enough power to get the FBI to participate [in the
cover-up] because we know ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY -- it is a
matter of LAW and it is a matter of sworn testimony that the FBI
participated systematically in covering up, destroying, hiding
information that was absolutely essential to the investigation.
They participated in a crime at ALL levels, including the very
highest level with J. Edgar Hoover. Now, you do not get J. Edgar
Hoover and the FBI to consistently commit crimes, to break the laws
which they're supposed to be there to defend unless you're very
powerful. WHO, then, is more powerful than the FBI? And who is
more intimidating than J. Edgar Hoover who could get that done?</p>

<p>L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
This is one of the questions that Oliver Stone ran into as he was
developing the script and the concept of this movie, because there
aren't many of us in this country, in this World who accept the fact
that there are power centers. Winson Churchill called this power
center, during World War II, when he was talking with intimate
friends (This is written. This is clearly available to researchers)
.... He called it a "high cabal". Winston Churchill is talking
about a higher cabal than Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt
and Josef Stalin. He is talking about a power center, a "power
elite" that is ABOVE governments.</p>

<p>Buckminster Fuller, a man who had enormous experience with
governments .... he spent more time as a consultant to the Kremlin
than any other non-Russian. He spent hours and hours and days as a
consultant to Congress in our country. Buckminster Fuller was a man
of great experience. He wrote a book that we should ALL know called
"CRITICAL PATH". In that book, he speaks over and over and over again
about the "power elite". I've written a book about [titled]
"THE SECRET TEAM".

[some words lost when Prouty's phone line is cut off for
a few seconds]</p>

<p>.... because I myself have worked with people, in their own homes,
like [Eisenhower's Secretary of State] John Foster Dulles and
[Director of Central Intelligence] Allen Dulles. I have seen John
Foster Dulles pick up a special telephone. He didn't dial. He didn't
say anything except: "I want" so-and-so. And you could tell by the
name that it was a Soviet name -- a man in Russia. They talked for
a little while. He said "Thank you," hung up the phone and we went
right ahead with business. He had settled something.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address
as the password. The files are kept in the directory
/pub/Politics/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 4396 of alt.conspiracy.jfk:
Path: cbnewsl!att-out!oucsboss!sun!malgudi.oar.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!gatech!concert!uvaarpa!murdoch!hopper!jad
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Part 38, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy
Keywords: researchers' revelations about the assassination of President Kennedy
<info type="Message-ID"> 1993Mar10.180611.4222@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU</info>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Organization: ITC/UVA Community Access UNIX/Internet Project
Lines: 140</p>

<p> The following transcript is of a tape-recorded broadcast
by NO-commercials, NO-corporate-influences, listener-funded,
beacon-of-truth Pacifica Radio Network station for the People:
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707</p>

<p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
COLONEL L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
There are people above our Government structure. And when those
power groups are threatened by a regime such as that which the
Kennedys were establishing in Washington (their own power center),
one of them has to give. And the Kennedys lost that one. So, we
have to accept that a "power elite" DOES exist. It's existing today.
And it keeps the cover story alive. That's bigger than the crime
itself because the cover story is covering the way our Government,
the way our lives are run today. Look around and see.</p>

<p>GARY NULL:
So, in other words, it's your feeling, based upon insider
information .... because you were an insider's insider. You were
Chief of Special Operations to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I mean,
you don't get any closer to the heart of the intelligence community
than that. Certainly, not at the Armed Forces level. And you were
also a senior Air Force officer in the Office of Special Operations
at the Office of the Secretary of Defense. And you were the liaison
with the Central Intelligence Agency in clandestine operations
[between the CIA and the U.S. Air Force]. So we have to trust that
your insights are unique.</p>

<p>So, you're telling us, very literally, that beyond the three
branches of our United States Government there is a "power" cabal
made up of individuals who represent industry, government and
business (within that, the world of high finance) who can make a
phone call and kill a story, make a phone call and take out a
contract, can put into motion any kind of effort that they deem
essential for THEIR economic or personal well-being, and that they
are beyond the law because they control all offices. They control
the Attorney-General of the United States, who is a political
appointee. And that's been relatively simple. Virtually all of the
Attorney-Generals, with the exception of two in the last thirty
years, have been extraordinarily reprehensible people. The "power"
cabal controls the Federal Bureau of Investigation, because we had
a very peculiar man running the FBI who had his own set of values.
They can control politicians. They control the Mass Media, which is
relatively simple because most, not all, of the Media are owned by
major corporations. </p>

<p>So, what you're saying is that these people [of the "power' cabal]
are simply a law unto themselves, and they stay out of the
spotlight, they don't seek publicity, but they do seek power.
And they maintain power through economic power. And they see to it
that they win, no matter what happens, on any level.
Is that what you're telling us?</p>

<p>L. FLETCHER PROUTY:
Gary, you're telling the story pretty straight. Let me add
something. It may sound kind of small and precise. But it's exactly
the kind of example that just draws a line under what you've said.</p>

<p>I happened to be in New Zealand, on the way back from the South
Pole, when I heard about President Kennedy being killed. And I just
heard that as a momentary flash over the radio. And, since I was
transient there, I didn't have the radio to keep listening. I went
out on the street and I looked for a newspaper. Before long, the
local paper in Christ Church, New Zealand printed The Star as an
extra. And on the front page of The Star, there was a large picture
of Kennedy, of course. And on the other side of the page, across
from that, there was a picture of the building, the Texas School
Book Depository that we've all heard about now, where the killer
was supposed to have been firing from. And, as I looked at that
picture, I saw that many windows were open. Now this was a picture
taken in real time. In other words, it was taken at the time that
the murder happened, or very close to that. And the picture was
flashed, by radio, around the World. And I turned to a congressman
who was with me, and I said: "Look, there's something wrong in
Dallas. The protective organization that we have in the Military
and the Secret Service, would NEVER have permitted overlooking
windows to be open when the President goes by."</p>

<p>Well, you see, there is an organization within the Military that is
trained for what we call the protection of the President. And one
of their jobs is to close windows in overlooking buildings, and so
on and so forth. But I found out, when I got back to the United
States, that the organization that should have been in Dallas
protecting the President had SOMEHOW been called by somebody who
knew the system, who knew the code words. And the commandant, the
commanding officer of that organization, had been told: "You're not
needed in Dallas. We're going to have another unit in Dallas." And
this is routine. There are many units. So he didn't go to Dallas.
But then he found out that NOBODY ELSE was there. Dallas was OPEN!</p>

<p>The Secret Service was not there at Dealey Plaza where the President
was killed. There were FALSE Secret Service people there. There
were FALSE military officers there. There were FALSE policemen
there. We have PHOTOGRAPHS of them. There are these photographs of
"the tramps" that a lot of people have seen, showing the policeman
in front of them and the policeman in back of them, leading them to
the sheriff's office. If you look carefully, the two policemen in
the photographs have different uniforms on. They are ACTORS!
The "tramps" are actors! And, if you've been in the business of
protecting the President, you KNOW that things like that
don't happen.</p>

<p>Now, there are only a FEW people who would KNOW -- who would have
the authority to tell those units that have been specially trained
to protect the President -- to tell them NOT to do their jobs!
It's like a fireman. You don't tell a fireman NOT to go when the
bells ring and the fire is across the street. He's trained to do it.
But suppose somebody said: "Don't go. There's going to be another
fire truck." That requires "power" from the top. That defines what
you were just talking about, Gary, and what I was talking about.
That defines the "power elite" who can come from the top and
nullify things. There's where the power is.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</p>

<p> If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please help to disseminate it by posting it to computer
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the
corporate mass media's thirty year cover-up of the corporate
CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States,
the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking.</p>

<p> John DiNardo</p>

<p>The episodes of this and other series can be retrieved
via anonymous ftp from the site:
red.css.itd.umich.edu
Log in with name "anonymous" or "ftp" and supply your e-mail address
as the password. The files are kept in the directory
/pub/Politics/Essays/Conspiracy</p>

<p>Instructions for ftp retrieval are dependent upon what sort of system the
user is on. On a UNIX machine, at the command prompt, type the following:
ftp red.css.itd.umich.edu This may be different on IBMs and Vax systems.
Archivist: Paul Southworth, pauls@css.itd.umich.edu</p>

<p>Article 20 of biz.clarinet.sample:
Path: ns-mx!iowasp.physics.uiowa.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!rutgers!shelby!lll-winken!looking!clarinews
From: clarinews@clarinet.com
Newsgroups: clari.news.movies,biz.clarinet.sample
Subject: Kennedy statue must be removed for cleaning
Keywords: police, legal, art, movies
<info type="Message-ID"> 2Rkennedy-statue_163@clarinet.com</info>
Date: 7 Aug 90 18:02:55 GMT
Followup-To: biz.clarinet.sample
Lines: 32
Approved: clarinews@clarinet.com
Xref: ns-mx biz.clarinet.sample:20
Location: new england states, massachusetts
ACategory: regional
Slugword: ma-kennedy-statue
Priority: regular
Format: regular
X-Supersedes: <special>1Rkennedy-statue_163@clarinet.com</special>
ANPA: Wc: 391; Id: u1507; Sel: bu--u; Adate: 8-7-2ped; Ver: insert
Codes: ynlprxb., yea.rma., yev.rxb.
Note: (ny) (editors: note language in 10thgraf) (2grafinsert after5thgraf xxx
statue.'' pickup6thgraf: No estimate -- adds name of foundry, time for cleaning)</p>

<p>BOSTON (UPI) -- A newly dedicated statue of President John F.
Kennedy in front of the Statehouse on Beacon Hill will be returned to
its foundry to clean graffiti from the memorial, officials said Tuesday.
A man apparently obsessed with the late actress Marilyn Monroe
claimed responsibility for spray-painting white splotches of paint and
the word "murderer'' on the 8-foot bronze statue over the weekend.
Workers using a mild acid were able to hose the paint off the base
of the memorial, but did not attempt to treat the statue itself.
"They are going to move it,'' said Greg Arnold, superintendent of
state office buildings. "They're going to take it back to the foundry
and try to put additional protection on it.''
Arnold said the cleansers used on the base of the memorial were not
suitable for the statue. "It's a stone wash, and you can't do that to
the bronze and the patina of the statue.''
Noel Danforth, a spokeswoman for the legislative commission that
oversees the memorial, said the statue would be sent to the Tallix
Foundry in Beacon, N.Y.
"It's about a three to four week process, depending on how much
work they have to do on it and if they have to repatinate it,'' Danforth
said.
No estimate for the amount of damage to the statue was immediately
available. The statue was to be removed Wednesday, Arnold said.
The defacement took place on the 28th anniversary of Monroe's
suicide. The blond sexpot has been linked romantically to Kennedy in
published reports in recent years.
"The caller stated ... 'Why don't you take a wild look at the JFK
statue in front of the Statehouse. The m----------r murdered Marilyn Monroe,
now it's his turn,'' said Capt. Paul Mahoney, commander of the Capitol
Police, which oversees state government buildings and grounds.
The statue, which depicts a striding Kennedy, was dedicated May 29
on what would have been Kennedy's 73rd birthday.</p>

</xml>