Sunday, July 31, 2016

Dr. Louis Jolyon West visited Timothy McVeigh 12 or more times?
12? You can't tell me that was to evaluate him. And, West lived in L.A. which means that he was getting on planes to make those visits. He also got on a plane to visit and evaluate Jack Ruby. Why didn't the government get a local psychiatrist? We got shrinks in Austin, and I'm sure they had them in Dallas. What was so special about West that it was necessary to use him to determine Ruby's sanity? I found out that West did put Jack Ruby on psychiatric drugs, although Ruby fought it and called it poison. And, West was a big fan of LSD. He once killed an elephant with it, although not intentionally. 

So, they flew in a psychiatrist to see Ruby and McVeigh. That's how important it was that they had to fly in a special shrink? Well then, what about Marina Oswald? Didn't she need a shrink? After all, she was severely traumatized. She had been living with a monster. Didn't he shoot the President of the United States and a police officer? Didn't he shoot at General Walker? Didn't she have to struggle with him to keep him from going out to shoot Nixon? Didn't he pressure her to help him hijack a plane to Cuba at gunpoint? Didn't he beat her repeatedly? Didn't he put out a burning cigarette on her naked skin? Just try to picture that. It makes you shudder, doesn't it? - if you believe it. 

So, didn't Marina need a psychiatrist to deal with all the trauma she had been through?  She was in "protective custody", and it is standard to do medical exams on such persons.  I assume they had her see a GP or internist, and I think it's very likely they had her see a psychiatrist as well.  

And here's why: What her "protective custody" was about was to, first, find out how adaptable she was. Could she adapt to and adopt as her own the story they were telling about Oswald in all its particulars? And secondly, to prep her to testify to the Warren Commission. 

And in a way, they are the same thing except that at the time of the assassination, I don't know that anyone realized there was going to be a Warren Commission. Reportedly, LBJ was pressured into it after the fact. 

In a word, they had to find out how "cooperative" Marina was going to be, and we're talking about a psychological process. So, I think they must have had a psychological expert size her up and determine her attitude, her willingness, and just how open her mind was to suggestion.    

Oswald did NOT go to Mexico City. He did NOT order or own a rifle. He did NOT pose for the Backyard photos. He did NOT shoot at General Walker.  All of these things are false, yet they all became part of Marina Oswald's memory. 

Some think it was a simple matter of her consciously lying- sizing up her best advantage, putting her finger up to the wind to see which direction it was blowing, and going along with the winning side. But, I just don't think so. I don't think it was as simple as that. I think there was a psychological process involved. I think that, at some level, her mind was twisted to adopt and accept the stories about Oswald that she told.   

And there was nothing normal about her psychology, and I mean during her Warren Commission testimony. Here she was, presumably a grieving widow. It was just 3 months since her husband was killed. That's not long.  And besides the trauma of his death, and Kennedy's, and Tippit's, there were all the other traumas that preceded all that in her life with Oswald. And here they were dredging it up again, having her relive it. So, how could she be so unemotional in talking about it? It's not the normal affect of a woman who had just lost her husband and was recalling horrible events with him. She was so matter-of-fact about it all. It isn't normal.

You know she was called back by the HSCA. And by that time, it was all the harder to talk about this stuff.  Here she is wading through the part about locking Oswald in the bathroom. Even the interrogator is having trouble buying it. And he's not hostile to her either. He's just trying to make it work, but it's difficult. 

Mr. McDONALD. All right, now the book "Marina and Lee" states that somehow you lured him into the bathroom, and then slipped out and held him in there.
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.
Mr. McDONALD. Tell us how that happened?
Mrs. PORTER. Well, it was easier to remember details when you were working so many years ago on the book than right now.
Mr. McDONALD. Try, if you could.  At this time he had the handgun on his person, and he was preparing to go out?
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, I guess.
Mr. McDONALD. And how did you get him into the bathroom?
Mrs. PORTER. Well, we wrestle or whatever you call it. You try with the time passing by not to--it is easier to forget the bad things of your life that bring memories back, so I cannot describe you the fight that we have, you know, in such scrupulous details that you wanted me to.
Mr. McDONALD. But do you recall getting him, maneuvering him into the bathroom?
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.
Mr. McDONALD. How normally--well, was he stronger than you?
Mrs. PORTER. Of course.
Mr. McDONALD. So how did you get him into the bathroom?
Mrs. PORTER. First of all, I was very angry and that maybe give me more energy and I was determined just that I am going to keep him there,and maybe he give in after a while. Maybe he was just trying to make me angry and see where he stand with me. If he really want--I mean he was much stronger than me. If he really wanted to, he could overpower me, definitely.
Mr. McDONALD. I see. And then the book says, and other testimony, that you held him in. You held the door shut.
Mrs. PORTER. The door for a while, yes.
Mr. McDONALD. Did he try to pull the door open?
Mrs. PORTER. But not for very long, yes.
Mr. McDONALD. Did he appear to be pulling very hard?
Mrs. PORTER. Well, it was hard for me to hold on to it. I don't know, if he try his best, you know, or how much power he used.
Mr. McDONALD. Is it your testimony that in your opinion if he really had wanted to get out, he would have been able to?
Mrs. PORTER. I think so.
Mr. McDONALD. Thank you, Mrs. Porter. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions at this point. 

So, she said that she "wrestled" Oswald into the bathroom, and McDonald replaced that word with the vaguer term "maneuvered" but I don't claim to know what either of them meant or were thinking. Then, to account for her ability to overcome Oswald at the door, she tried to say that her anger gave her super strength, but no, I don't think so. I don't buy it. But then, she changed it: she made it that Oswald just wasn't using all his strength. But, I don't buy that either. But, the interrogator, Mr. McDonald, was looking for solid ground that he could land on. And, I think he decided that this was the best he was going to get. So, he went with the idea that Oswald could have overcome her, if he wanted to. And she went along with it. It seemed to be what he wanted, and it was good enough for her- anything to end the discussion. 

But, it makes no sense. Oswald would never have done that. The plain truth is that the whole story has zero credibility and should be rejected out of hand. 

Keep in mind that the original story, as told the Warren Commission was that Marina "had locked Lee in the bathroom for the entire day" to prevent him from shooting Richard Nixon. But then, somebody realized that you can't actually lock someone in the bathroom, that a bathroom door only has an internal lock, not an external one. So, since the story was already out there, they tweaked it to her manually locking him in the bathroom through sheer physical strength. But, ultimately, it led to the ridiculous, untenable exchange that we have above between Marina Oswald Porter and Mr. McDonald. 

That it's false is obvious, but how did they get Marina to say it? And I don't mean to the HSCA in 1978 but to the Warren Commission in 1964. How did they flatten her emotional response? What mind-bending techniques were used on her, and was she given any drugs? 

Saturday, July 30, 2016

So, let's think about this a minute: We know that the the Leviathan State prosecuted Roy Crump for the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer, a totally innocent patsy. And, if not for the brilliant lawyering skills of Dovey Roundtree, they would have succeeded. Her victory is one of the greatest and most heroic slap-downs in legal history. When are they going to make the movie about it???? This story is screaming out loud to be shown on the silver screen. 

But, in that case, who was the culprit????? It was the government itself. The government, that is the CIA, which is an agency of the US government, killed Mary Pinchot Meyer, and then they framed the poor hapless Roy Crump. 

And if you read the brilliant Mary's Mosaic by Peter Janney, you know of the irony that one of the cardinal witnesses who testified as an eye-witness against Crump was the actual killer himself, the CIA assassin who actually did it, who killed Mary Pinchot Meyer. His name is William Marshall, and Peter Janney actually confronted him at his home in California.  

And likewise in the JFK case, Oswald was the patsy, the government was "prosecuting" him- in the press; they couldn't dare let him go to trial because his case would have fallen apart faster than the case against Roy Crump. But, who really killed Kennedy? Well, the government. When we talk about the CIA killing Kennedy, we're talking about the US government. And even though Allen Dulles wasn't officially the head of the CIA any more (he was fired by JFK) for all practical purposes he was.  People who were still employed by the CIA, like Angleton, Phillips, Morales, etc., were answering to him, not John McCone, the nominal chief. And hey, it's hardly a stretch to say that McCone was answering to Dulles too. And then, as soon as it was done, Dulles returned to an official government capacity again as a Warren Commissioner. So, it was a parallel situation where Kennedy's real killer (Dulles) was framing the patsy (Oswald) in a legal proceeding. The Warren Commission investigation wasn't a trial, but it was, in effect, a show trial, a Stalinist show trial. 

So, as we look at these cases and compare, it seems highly likely to me that, just as in the Mary Pinchot Meyer case in which the government killed her and then tried to frame Crump, that the government killed Chandra Levy and then framed Ingmar Quandique. And, I hope you know, the case against Quandique stunk out loud from the beginning- as if that guy could have evaded the cops for so long. They just wanted to put the story to bed.

Now, when I say that the US government most likely killed Chandra Levy, I don't know exactly who. Was it a CIA operation? Was it done by Special Ops from the US military? Was it done in cahoots with the Mossad, as some believe? I don't know. But, I do believe that some faction of the US government is responsible for killing her because it was the US government that tried to put the thing to rest with the phony, blatantly bogus prosecution of Ingmar Quandique. So, they had to be involved in that murder, just as they were in the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer,  And remember: they weren't just involved in the murder of MPM; they outright killed her. The CIA outright killed Mary Pinchot Meyer in a planned and executed operation. It was all them. Nobody else. And most likely, they, or someone like them in the US government with a Black Ops mandate killed Chandra Levy.   
A connection between the Chandra Levy murder and the JFK assassination? I'm afraid so. There is a connecting figure from the JFK case that overlaps with the Chandra Levy case. I'm talking about a UCLA psychiatrist who was involved in the CIA's MK-ULTRA program. Dr. Louis Jolyon West. 

West is the government psychiatrist who interviewed Jack Ruby and declared him insane. Then, that same Dr. Louis Jolyon West was assigned to evaluate Sirhan Sirhan in the RFK case. Then, that same Dr. Louis Jolyon West was called in to interview and evaluate Timothy McVeigh in the OK City bombing case. And Chandra Levy is the one who noted, with interest, West's twelve or more visits to McVeigh. Is that why she was killed?  

It was reported that Chandra noted some twelve or more visits to McVeigh by Dr. Louis Jolyon West, the UCLA mind control expert for the CIA who pronounced Jack Ruby insane after he suggested a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. He also was the government psychiatrist who handled Sirhan Sirhan while he awaited trial. Jolly West was infamous for his early use of LSD on unsuspecting victims. He was the head of the CIA's mind-control program known as MKULTRA, and was a pioneer of electronic brain experimentation. Chandra's disappearance was conveniently just two weeks before McVeigh's scheduled execution. Due to the discovery of documents that had not been given to McVeigh's defense team, his execution was rescheduled and carried out on June 11, 2001. Rumors ran strong with speculation about the date of Chandra's disappearance and McVeigh's two execution dates. The information that Chandra Levy possessed would have been far more damaging to the government, and their desire to eliminate the potential loose cannon, McVeigh.
The patsy in the Chandra Levy case has been exonerated. It turns out that Ingmar Guandique was just railroaded, much like Ray Crump in the Mary Pinchot Meyer case, or, of course, Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK case. Prosecutors, at the time, had had a lying witness tell jurors that Guandique confessed, but that was recently exposed as a fraud, and yesterday, the court dropped all charges against Guandique, who has served 5 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. Read all about it here: 

Will this put the spotlight back on former Congressman Gary Condit as being Chandra Levy's killer? Yes, of course. But, I doubt it was him, at least, I don't think it was directly him. I think there were people who were watching him and watching Chandra. She worked in the intelligence area for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and she may have stumbled upon something- perhaps pertaining to the imminent 9/11 attacks or perhaps to Oklahoma City- and that's what made it necessary to silence her. There was definitely more to this than just a sex scandal. What follows is from  

During the summer of 2001, the BIG story was the mysterious disappearance of Chandra Levy on May 1, 2001. Levy had been romantically linked to California congressman Gary Condit. Rumors swirled about Condit's perverse sexual appetite, and how Levy had been done away with, directly or indirectly, by Condit, to keep her from ruining his family and career. However, there is an even more sinister side to this story.On September 11, 2001, Gary Condit, Chandra Levy, and all the attention they had received all that summer, came crashing down along with the World Trade Center Towers. In March 2002 Condit lost his bid for re-election, mostly because of his ties to the scandal. The remains of Levy mysteriously appeared May 22, 2002, over a year from the day she disappeared, in a wooded area in Washington's Rock Creek Park. Massive police searches of Rock Creek park produced no results during the summer of 2001, however the following spring she was discovered by a man whose dog was "looking for turtles". It was declared a homicide by investigators.
Most of the incriminating evidence was long gone due to the effects of time. They found her remains deep in the woods, next to a tree. Her leggings had been knotted at the ends, leading to speculation that she had been tied up with them, possibly to the tree. The rest of her faded clothes, including Reebok sneakers, and a USC sweatshirt were nearby. Her walkman was found sitting neatly on a rock, with the headphones still attached. Her hyoid bone, located in the neck, had been damaged, which indicated she was probably strangled. It looked as though she had gone into the woods willingly with someone she knew, and was attacked unexpectedly by that person, or the crime scene was set up to appear that way, perhaps at a later date, which seems more likely, considering her remains would have almost certainly caught the attention of police dogs in 2001. In either case, it was NOT a random robbery or mugging. Whatever coverage this once big story had received soon came to an end. As with so many other stories, the Corporate Media gave us the Official Party Line when it came to the Levy story, but this story has many layers, and like an onion, the more layers you unravel, the more it stinks.
After September 11, 2001, people began to remark that all of the attention given the Levy case up to the 9-11 attacks was a blatant example of how the media focuses on trivial events in pursuit of ratings. However, believe it or not, the murder of Levy, and the "911 EMERGENCY DAY" attacks, may be directly related. The timing of her disappearance with the September 11 terrorist attacks, as well as the Timothy McVeigh execution, and the circumstaces in her life just prior to her abduction and murder, cast a dark shadow over the entire Chandra Levy mystery. Evidence indicates that the 24 year old Chandra Levy was an agent working for a renegade faction of the MOSSAD, Israel's top spy agency.
Chandra was good looking, and that was an asset. She was known as a thrill seeker, and wanted to become a latter day Mata Hari, a World War One spy who infiltrated high levels of military commands. Even as a teen, Chandra liked to volunteer to assist the local police in her home town of Modesto, California. She would participate in "sting operations", trying to catch local businesses selling alcohol to minors. Those who knew her say she dreamed of becoming a covert operative with the CIA when she grew up. Just weeks before she vanished, Levy took a trip to Israel. Photos of her in Israel later appeared in Time and other major publications. Israel places great importance in its symbiotic relationship with the USA, and they would be unable to exist without the vast amounts of aid, both military and social welfare, that is sent yearly from the U.S.. They also depend on critical intelligence information that is obtained either through cooperation, or covertly. According to a former MOSSAD agent who wishes to remain anonymous, "Operation Dumb Eagle" is the code name for the spy agency's extensive efforts to infiltrate top levels of the U.S. government through the placement of American Jews in sensitive positions. Part of "Operation Dumb Eagle" is the recruitment, training and placement of attractive Jewish coeds as U.S. Interns.
Chandra Levy attended the University of Southern California to earn a Master's degree in Public Administration. While in California, Levy had served as an intern for Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, and California Governor Gray Davis. There she discovered the private world of high level politicians, many of whom live wild satanic sex lives. She moved from from her home in Modesto to Washington DC in September 2000 to begin an internship at the Federal Bureau of Prisons. After moving to Washington, Chandra was in a perfect position gather top secret information, not only at her job, but also by using her female powers of persuasion.
In October 2000, she stopped by the offices of her hometown congressman, Gary Condit. They posed for pictures, and Condit asked Levy if he could see her again sometime. She accepted, and the romance began almost immediatly. The MOSSAD keeps extensive dossiers on a large number of U.S. politicians. And they undoubtedly knew of Condit's wild sex life, and felt that Levy would make the perfect honey trap. Condit's position as a senior member of the intelligence committee would make him a prime target for just such an operation. The sexual seduction of high level government officials by spies is usually of the illicit category, which provides foreign powers the added advantage of being able to better bribe and control the targeted victims, who, as it was with Condit, may be married with children.
As an intern in the Federal Bureau of Prisons during the winter and spring of 2001, she worked in the Public Affairs section, and Press Office. Chandra's co-workers at the Bureau of Prisons praised her work and noted that Chandra was very computer literate. Her last duties at BOP before her unexpected termination, and her disappearance, involved helping arrange media coverage of Timothy McVeigh's execution, originally scheduled for May 16 2001. Chandra had a government signon for Lexis-Nexis that she used at the BOP. There are extensive personal information research capabilities at Nexis, and she had access to those and other highly confidential services as well in working with criminal related research at the BOP. Chandra was in a perfect position to have access to highly classified data about McVeigh, that linked him to U.S. intelligence operations involving CIA sponsored terrorism, both here and abroad.Chandra would easily be able to obtain this information pertaining to McVeigh, and more importantly, related inside information to the impending 9-11 attacks. Information such as the 1993 WTC bombing materials having been purchased with the credit card of a US Muslim and an FBI provocateur named Melvin Lattimore. Melvin Lattimore was seen by 4 witnesses in McVeigh's car at the OKC Travelers Aid office adjacent to the Murrah federal building just ONE DAY before the OKC bombing. Six FBI agents spent 9 months browbeating the 4 witnesses, trying to make them change their story about seeing Lattimore at the Travelers Aid. Lattimore was the roommate of the 20th 9/11 hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui while he attended the Airman flight school in Norman Oklahoma in 2000 and 2001. Lattimore was also the roomate of 9/11 hijackers Al Hazmi and Al Shehhi in Norman Oklahoma. At McVeigh's trial his sister read a letter from him to the grand jury in which he told her he was going into the Special Forces Covert Tactical Unit.
It was reported that Chandra noted some twelve or more visits to McVeigh by Dr. Louis Jolyon West, the UCLA mind control expert for the CIA who pronounced Jack Ruby insane after he suggested a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. He also was the government psychiatrist who handled Sirhan Sirhan while he awaited trial. Jolly West was infamous for his early use of LSD on unsuspecting victims. He was the head of the CIA's mind-control program known as MKULTRA, and was a pioneer of electronic brain experimentation. Chandra's disappearance was conveniently just two weeks before McVeigh's scheduled execution. Due to the discovery of documents that had not been given to McVeigh's defense team, his execution was rescheduled and carried out on June 11, 2001. Rumors ran strong with speculation about the date of Chandra's disappearance and McVeigh's two execution dates. The information that Chandra Levy possessed would have been far more damaging to the government, and their desire to eliminate the potential loose cannon, McVeigh.
Chandra would also have easy access to information concerning members of the Bin Laden Family residing in the U.S., some of whom had national security contracts with the U.S. Government. Osama bin Laden, contrary to the lies put out by the corporate media, was not on the outs with his family, who secretly funded him. It's no coincidence that right after 9-11, the FBI arranged by plane to whisk many Bin Laden Family members out of the U.S.. Chandra had access to records detailing the clandestine business arrangements between the U.S. government and the Bin Laden Family, along with McVeigh's ties to CIA sponsored domestic and foreign terrorists, all of which would be of great interest to the Israeli government.As I've said, Gary Condit was a senior member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, privy to closed door sessions dealing with covert operations of the spy community. Chandra was reportedly pumping Condit for hot information, in return for sexual favors. In a People Magazine interview on September 9, 2001, Condit indicated Chandra had a strong interest in the McVeigh case, terrorism, and the middle east. "She was much more interested in those things than I was", Condit recalled. The massive publicity evaporated when America was attacked September 11, 2001. Condit demanded of Levy total discretion when it came to ANYTHING concerning their relationship. That included not only private information about his perverted sexual misconduct, but also any INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION she might come across in the course of their relationship.
Anyone "connecting the dots" would have to conclude that Chandra Levy had come upon some of the most incredible intelligence secrets in history, including the plan to use huge terrorist strikes in America to justify global wars, finance the military industrial complex, and justify a police state here at home in a huge power grab. David Schippers, Chief Council for the House Judiciary Committee and head prosecutor responsible for conducting the impeachment against former President Clinton, went public revealing that in the months BEFORE the 9-11 attacks, many FBI agents had come to him informing him about the impending attacks. These agents knew the names of the hijackers, the targets of their attacks, the proposed dates, and the sources of the terrorists' funding, etc., many months in advance of the 9/11 attacks. The FBI command pulled them off of their investigations into these terrorists and threatened them with the National Security Act. They told them that if they talked about any of the information pertaining to their investigations that they would be prosecuted. So many of them sought the counsel of Mr. Schippers wanting to get somebody in the U.S. government to take action against these terrorists before their plan could be implemented. Mr. Schippers talked to many Congressmen and Senators, and tried to get a hold of Att. Gen. John Ashcroft, all only to get the run-around.
Chandra Levy, through her sensitive position in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, through their computers and facilities, and human intelligence contacts, and through her intimate relationship with a congressman on the intelligence commitee, unearthed a dangerous group of details related to the coming 9-11 attacks, the same information the FBI agents had brought to Schippers. She had none of the restrictions the FBI agents had, or so she thought, and apparently was about to go public with the information. The MOSSAD had tried to warn American intelligence about their knowledge of the planned 9-11 attacks, and were met with indifference. Was at least some of the information they had, been obtained from their agent, the now missing Levy? It would seem highly likely.
It would also seem that all of this would end Chandra Levy's life. Shortly after signing off of her computer at 1 pm, on May 1, 2001, she walked out of her apartment to meet someone at the Klingle Mansion, an old building now being used as a storage facility, in a remote section of Rock Creek Park, a large, forested area in Washington D.C. about two miles from Levy's apartment. A perfect spot, if you want no witnessess. At this point, she was either abducted, or led into the woods and murdered. Her body was discovered in the woods a short distance from the Klingle Mansion. One of the last things she did on her computer on the day she disappeared was visit the MapQuest website to look up a map of Rock Creek Park, and specifically, Klingle Mansion.On September 11, 2001, five Israelis were seen atop a white panel van in New York City. They were using a video camera. This Israeli spy team videotaped the entire terrorist incident from START to FINISH. Nearby observers who clandestinely saw them were astonished to see the five men shouting joyously and jumping up and down as the explosions ripped through the towers and each building collapsed. These nearby witnesses phoned the NYC police and the FBI. The FBI came and arrested the five, who turned out to be Israelis carrying false visa papers. The five were stripped of their clothes, incarcerated in dark jail cells, and interrogated nonstop for hours by FBI agents. The FBI interrogators believed the five were Israeli MOSSAD spy agents. Their arrest alerted the FBI to the existence of some 200 Israeli "commandos" training at a warehouse in New Jersey. They and the five arrested were "employed" by a bogus moving company owned by an Israeli. After diplomatic intervention at the highest levels of the Israeli and U.S. governments, the NYC FBI squad was ordered to cease their investigation, release the five suspects, and turn them over to the Israeli Consul. They were immediately flown to Israel. It seems highly likely that these events were the result of advance intelligence information obtained by Chandra Levy, and passed on to Israel prior to her May 1st disappearance.
Chandra was also friendly with a circle of Republicans that include George W. Bush's strategy chief, Karl Rove. Of course, not a lot of people knew, or know, that Chandra Levy went to Bush's January 20th, 2001 inauguration, had a seat in the VIP section, and attended one of the balls. There also was MORE sensitive material Chandra Levy had access to. For example, that the government knowingly arranged for their business partner, Drug Kingpin Carlos Lehder, to disappear from the Federal prison system. He was allowed to disappear from the U.S., thanks to the corruption and connivance at the highest levels of the government. Coral Talavera, the wife of Lehder, in an on-the-record interview, has made it clear that Lehder is out of prison, working for the United States government, and is directly connected to the CIA, and the U.S. Treasury. This scenario was well supported by statements from a number of credible sources, including reporters, and Lehder's prosecutor former U.S. Attorney Robert Merkle.
That the the F.B.I. claimed for so long that they had no idea who or what was behind the murder of Chandra Levy is just an outright lie. They know, and knew from the start, that she was being used by the MOSSAD to obtain top secret information. The lead FBI investigator in the Chandra Levy case was Special Agent Bradley J. Garrett. He is known as "The Fixer", because he is called in to find patsy's to take the blame for government murders. Notice a few details from his past: Garrett was the lead FBI investigator in the strange death of Clinton White House Deputy Counsel Vincent W. Foster. Foster's body was, like Levy's, found in a heavily wooded area near Washington D.C.. The official cause of death, touted from the outset as a suicide, was declared due to a gunshot fired into the mouth. The weapon, said to be a black 1913 Army Colt .38 Special six-shot revolver, was said to have been found in Foster's hand.It is significant, therefore, to note that x-rays of the initial autopsy of Vincent Foster's corpse are listed by Federal coroners as now being "missing", and that no one in the Foster family recalls there being a firearm of that model or appearance anywhere, ever, in their residence. Also, there was no blood found on the cuff, sleeve, or wrist of Foster, as would have been elicited naturally, from what they call "blowback", by a self-inflicted gunshot held close inside the soft-palate. The first witness to find the body insisted that there had been no gun near the body. The memory in Foster's pager had been erased. Foster's office at the White House was looted. Secret Service agent Henry O' Neill watched Hillary Clinton's chief of staff, Margaret Williams, carry boxes of papers out of Foster's office before the Police showed up to seal it. There were indications the body had been moved, and a Secret Service memo surfaced which reported that Foster's body had been found in his car! Garrett helped to completly cover up these glaring inconsistencies.
Garrett was also the lead FBI investigator in the murder of Clinton White House intern, Mary Caitrin Mahoney. You see, A U.S. Secret Service Agent assigned to checking doors at the White House, opened a door one night and found Hillary Clinton in a compromising sexual position with Ms. Mahoney, a known lesbian since her high school days. Hillary was furious and whacked him in the head with a metal ashtray. Ms. Mahoney was shot to death at a Starbucks Coffee Shop, right in the heart of Washington DC, a short time later. On July 7, 1997 Mahoney was in the Starbucks cafe cleaning up after closing time with co-workers Emory Evans and Aaron Goodrich. Sometime after 9pm, two gunmen got inside and shot all three to death. Mahoney was singled out for the most horrendous fate - as if she'd been the killers' prime target. Of the ten shots fired, she was hit five times at point blank range, including at least once in the face. The final bullet was delivered to the back of her head after she'd already fallen. In one hand, in a death grip, Mahoney clutched the keys to the store's safe, which held the weekend's receipts of more than $10,000. D.C. cops were mystified by the apparent lack of motive in the crime.
The safe hadn't been opened. The cash registers were undisturbed. The store hadn't been ransacked. None of the victims' personal belongings had been touched. One wonders why a high-powered Washington FBI agent, with ties to the intelligence community, was involved in a case claimed to be a routine robbery murder case, supposedly committed by a small time criminal, one Carl Derek Cooper. After 54 hours of questioning by Garrett and another agent, Cooper signed a confession that he immediately repudiated as soon as he got to court. During his 54 hours of interrogation, Cooper had consistently denied the crime and volunteered several times to take a lie detector test. Most of the testimony against him was by agent Garrett, and based on Garrett's representation of what Cooper had said during the interrogation. The questioning was not recorded or videotaped. Garrett had sucessfully arranged to blame the crime on a vulnerable nobody.
Starting early on in the investigation, there was an attempt to pin the Levy murder on a minor criminal, Ingmar Guandique, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who had been known to assault joggers in the area. After he passed a lie detector test, and the complete lack of any possible similarity between his crimes and the known facts of the Levy case, they dropped it. Then on March 3, 2009, despite the fact that there was NO new evidence, DNA or otherwise, except for some laughable "jailhouse confessions" that inmates use to get time off from their sentences for "cooperating" with authorities, the DC police officially charged Guandique with the crime.This despite the fact that Guandique's attacks bore no resemblance to what is known about the Levy murder. Guandique attacked the other women to steal their walkman radio, while Levy's walkman was found undisturbed at the scene. Guandique attacked the other two women in heavily used areas of Rock Creek Park, while Levy was found in the most difficult to access remote area of the park imaginable. Guandique's two other victims easily fought him off. The diminutive Guandique would have had to overpower Levy, and drag her hundreds of yards down a steep slope to to get her to the scene of her murder. The street-smart Levy was known to always carry pepper spray, was trained in law enforcement techniques of self defense, and would never have ventured into a remote area like that unprepared. She would not have made an easy target, and nothing at the murder scene indicated that any type of struggle associated with a mugging took place.
It took more than a year after Chandra Levy was found for her remains to be returned to her family, which is very unusual. During that time several independent expert forensic doctors came foreward and offered to examine her remains in order to help solve the case, but were REFUSED PERMISSION, despite their efforts being widely publicized.
Chandra Levy had expected to stay on as an intern at the Federal Bureau of Prisons until September 2001. Her internship was abrubtly and unexpectedly ended just days before her disappearance. It's likely she was caught going into unauthorized areas. She also had applied for permanent full time jobs with the FBI and the CIA, where full background checks are mandatory. It's likely her snooping at BOP, her relationship with Condit, AND her connections to the MOSSAD had turned up in her background investigation. And THAT made it imperative to get her out of the Bureau of Prisons immediately, and then off the planet. The BOP offered several conflicting versions of why Levy was let go, none of them believable. Also, her relationship with Condit had taken a sudden turn for the worse. Condit was trying to distance himself from Levy, and was becoming annoyed at her increasingly frequent and almost desperate calls. Levy, in the course of her relationship with Condit, had developed an obsession for him, but the relationship was over. Clearly, both Condit and the BOP had been tipped off, and been made aware of her ties to the MOSSAD. Chandra Levy undoubtedly felt betrayed by all concerned. She no longer had reason to hold back on all of the information she had gathered, and was almost certainly going to make it public.
Not only was Chandra Levy snuffed out to eliminate any risk of the impending 9-11 attacks, and the McVeigh information leaking out such a short time before his scheduled execution, but also to protect high ranking members of the Federal government from having their partnership with drug cartel baron Carlos Lehder, and his disappearance from the Federal Prison System, becoming widely and publicly exposed. So, the Counter-Intelligence Division of the FBI was tapping her phone, and watching her very closely.
These incredible things prove that what is presented to us in the media is almost never what it would seem to be. Through her connections to the MOSSAD, through her internship with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and access to top security information, and through her involvement with a Congressman, a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and having topmost security clearance, and the circumstances in her life just prior to her abduction and murder, one could only conclude that Chandra Levy had knowledge of the Carlos Lehder affair, the Timothy McVeigh matter, and most importantly, the impending 9-11 attacks. Was she about to go public with it? It would seem beyond a shadow of a doubt. On the day before she disappeared, May 1, 2001, she left a message on the phone machine of a close family member. She said that there was something BIG, and something important to tell them about. She wouldn't say what it was, and that was the last time she was heard from.
To those who cannot believe all of this, I contend that you are not only ignoring the opinions of seasoned intelligence operatives, but also ignoring the indisputable truth that all of this is exactly how covert intelligence operations are, and have been conducted, for many years.So exactly who killed Chandra Levy? On November 22, 2010, Ingmar Guandique was convicted of Chandra Levy's murder. The trial was rigged from the start. Key pieces of evidence proving Guandique's innocence, including him passing his lie detector test, were not allowed to be presented to the jury. Even with that outrage factored in, the breathtaking lack of evidence should have given the jury far more than a 'reasonable doubt'. But like most Americans today, they would rather believe the government lies at the expense of the cold hard facts. The facts clearly show that Ingmar Guandique had nothing to do with this crime, and anyone who took a few minutes to seriously investigate it, providing they didn't have an ulterior motive, would clearly see that. They found an illiterate El Salvadoran peasant who didn't speak English to pin it on.
Gary Condit, while obviously leaving much to be desired in his personal life, was probably little more than a dupe in all of this. He made the perfect villain, and the perfect fall guy, and his sick private life gave him all the reason in the world to act suspicious in the glaring light of media attention.
Al Martin, one of America's foremost government whistleblowers, and a retired Navy Lt. Commander, claims there were a mystery set of fingerprints found at the Chandra Levy murder scene. The fingerprints belong to a shadowy figure named Alejandro Martinez, a longtime CIA employee, and former CIA drug pilot during the Iran Contra operation. Martinez had ties to Oliver North. He disappeared, and nobody knows where to. When he went to buy some false identity papers, apparently because he needed to get out of the United States in a hurry, the match came up. There was obviously another dimension to this story, and you will never hear about it in the mainstream media. The facts point to only one conclusion. That Chandra Levy was the victim of a government hit, and that first Condit, and then Guandique, were used as decoy patsies for a murder network that extends to the very heights of U.S. power.

Chandra Levy was used by everyone involved. She was doing her job, and the hottest intelligence secret of all time fell right into her hands. She was young, naive, and still believed that it was wrong to use mass terrorism as a psychological tool for political purposes. Unfortunately, for this, she paid the ultimate price. To say that the disappearance and death of Chandra Levy was more than the result of a random act of violence, or a sexual relationship gone bad, is a gross understatement to say the least. Had she not vanished, it now seems likely that not only the planned 9-11 attacks could have been stopped, but also that the resultant wars, and world wide chaos that we are now witnessing, would never have happened.
As with Waco, the OKC bombing, and of course 9-11, the establishment put their spin on the Levy story, and nothing more is said. The truth about Chandra Levy will never be told by the mainstream media. Condit lost his bid for re-election, Ingmar Guandique sits in jail, convicted of a crime he didn't commit, the global wars are raging with more being planned, and Chandra Levy is just a faded memory. Another lie told, another lie accepted. Mission accomplished. Let's move on. Do not make the mistake of thinking that September 11, 2001 happened the way they brainwashed you to think it did. And try to understand the true nature of the people who control this global government. Illusion is the name of their game, and they're quite skilled at it. They should be. It's a game they've been playing for such a long time.
Using Image Editing software, I converted Robert Groden's image of Lovelady into black and white and also did other things to soften the image. The goal was to approximate what James Altgens would have captured if he had been shooting Lovelady wearing that shirt. The result was this:

As you can see the plaid of Lovelady's shirt still came through. We see the white lines. We see the boxes. And Doorman's shirt looks nothing like it. If you look on the upper left, you see that that side of Doorman's shirt shows no contrast at all; it is completely dark and bland and uniform. So, how could it possibly be a plaid shirt?

So, they went to a hell of a lot of trouble placing phony Lovelady figures into films in order to sell the idea that he wore a plaid shirt that day, BUT, IT DOESN'T MATTER in the least because Doorman isn't wearing a plaid shirt. Doorman isn't wearing a plaid shirt. Doorman isn't wearing a plaid shirt. Doorman is wearing a finely grained tweed shirt which was reflecting sunlight, the way Oswald's shirt did. 

The magnitude of this fraud and the utter failure of it is patently obvious. It is an outrage that they tried such a thing and expected to get away with it. The very people who did this, who went into the movie business to create phony Loveladys to display, were and are killers. They are killers of John Kennedy; killers of Lee Oswald; killers of JD Tippit; and killers of plenty more, countless more. There is a reckoning coming, and every leader since then, and every leader today who supports the official story of the JFK assassination is GUILTY. 

Friday, July 29, 2016

Let's compare the Robert Groden photo of Lovelady to Oswald and Doorman. As in the FBI photo, Lovelady was posing as Doorman.

The first thing to observe is that Lovelady's shirt, in this case, was not just plaid. It was a flashy plaid. Plaid just refers to horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes, and we can see plenty of boxes on Lovelady's shirt. But, in addition to the plaid, there was a lot of contrast in color. It has white lines; black bars; red squares, and also another color square that is hard to define that was framed by the black bars. That is a hell of a lot of flashy contrast. But, if you look at Doorman's shirt, you see some contrast, but no plaid at all; there isn't a single box. And the complex flashiness of Lovelady's shirt is completely missing. There are no corresponding areas that we can circle on each and say they match. The whole idea that the Lovelady's shirt on the left manifested on the right by what we see on Doorman is preposterous. Note that I continue to deny that Lovelady even wore that shirt. I continue to insist that he wore the shirt-sleeved striped one, as he said he did. I also continue to insist that the films in which he was later cited are all completely fake; they are fabrications. But, my point here is that even if Lovelady had really worn that plaid shirt in which he posed for Robert Groden in 1976, that he still could not possibly be Doorman because there is no way Doorman was wearing that shirt. There is no way that James Altgens' camera would have captured Lovelady's shirt that way- the way we see on Doorman. So, that's the first thing. The second thing is to notice the t-shirt. Lovelady, even in posing as Doorman, that time all the times that he did, always wore a high round t-shirt. Doorman is wearing a low vee-shaped t-shirt. It's crudely vee-shaped but definitely not high and round. It's obvious that Lovelady didn't own or wear such a t-shirt. Oswald's got that way from his habit of stretching it. He tugged on it. It was a habit; his habit. 

Number 3: Lovelady's eyes are different, with much more space between the eyes and the eyebrows. The eyes match perfectly between Doorman and Oswald as to space, depth, shape, everything. 

Notice on Oswald that you could literally move his eyes over atop Doorman's, and they would fit perfectly, like the proper piece of a jigsaw puzzle. If you tried it with Lovelady, it would be way off.

Number 4 is the nose. Lovelady had a larger hunk of cartilage at the tip of his nose. There is much better nose correlation between Oswald and Doorman, even though the angles are different. We're seeing the same size nose on the two of them and the same degree of refinement or chiseling.  

Regarding the hair, Lovelady seems plenty bald by 1976, but we have reports, such as from Roy Lewis, that he was already pretty well bald on top in 1963. And the 1964 photo by Mark Lane confirmed it. 

Doorman's hairline doesn't match Oswald's, but that's because they changed it. 

Remember what I said: that everyone in the world who claims to be an Oswald defender must, by necessity, acknowledge photographic alteration in Oswald's pictures, and that's because of the existence of the Backyard photos. Oswald said they were fake. Oswald said that it wasn't him. Oswald said that he posed for no such picture. He also said that he owned no such rifle. So, how can we defend Oswald without supporting him on that? So, if the Backyard photos are fake (and they are) it means that the plotters were faking photographs even before the assassination. So, if they had the mindset to do it before the assassination, how could they not be prepared to do it after the assassination? And that's why no one should doubt that the Altgens photo was altered. Phony claims of a speedy timeline prohibiting alteration are just that: phony. It's just another lie. 

Number 5, the chins, it's definitely a match between Oswald and Doorman. Lovelady's chin was longer and more pointed. We are seeing perfect chin correlation between Oswald and Doorman, where both have a relatively square chin of the same length and width. 

Number 6, the ears, Lovelady's was too flared; it stuck out; it had more pitch, as they say; and it was larger. The ears that match are Oswald's and Doorman's. 

Number 7, the necks, Oswald's and Doorman's match in length, being longer than Lovelady's.   

There's more I could cite but I'll stop. But, I again want to point out the ridiculousness of the situation with the plaid shirt. That flashy, very high contrast, almost kaleidoscopic pattern on Lovelady's shirt is certainly not seen on Doorman's shirt. All he shows is some vague, noisy, unstructured light/dark contrast with absolutely none of the specific design features of Lovelady's shirt. What's causing the contrast on Doorman's shirt? Some of it is haze and distortion due to the gross enlargement of the image, and there is also some light reflection. It was an old shirt with worn, shiny areas which reflected the light when Oswald was standing in bright sunlight, as he was in the doorway. There was also a fine graininess to his shirt which we can see on Doorman. The match to Oswald's shirt is infinitely better than the match to Lovelady's. 

The whole case for Lovelady being Doorman has been a lie, a fabrication from the very beginning on November 22, 1963. And, it has been a huge, never-ending problem for them, the conspirators. They have had to make and remake movies putting Lovelady into them, and even in the 21st century they have done it. You can't overstate how enormous this issue is. That's because if Oswald was standing in the doorway during the shooting, then he couldn't possibly be up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy.  Oswald in the doorway completely destroys the entire official story of the JFK assassination. And that's why they have been fighting Oswald in the doorway so hard for 53 years. 

And, they are going to go on fighting it, but they are losing ground with each passing day. There is no doubt whatsoever about how this is going to end, and that is, with universal recognition that Oswald was standing in the doorway during the shooting of President Kennedy. All they can possibly do is kick the can down the road for a little while. They are shoveling sand to stop the tide. 

I wouldn't normally put a lot of stock in this, but Julian Assange, the head of Wikileaks, although holed up inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for years to avoid arrest on bogus sex crime charges, an arrest that would almost surely lead to extradition to the United States, took down the head of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, quite recently, as you know, and now he says that his next release of emails is going to take down Hillary Clinton. And it doesn't pertain to Benghazi. It pertains to how she dealt with the challenge from Bernie Sanders. 

And, if it doesn't lead to her immediate arrest, then the whole system is just blatantly rigged.     

I think it's going to be the latter. Under other circumstances, it might have led to her arrest. But now, Hillary Clinton is the only thing standing in the way of Donald Trump becoming President. If they didn't arrest her over Benghazi, why think they would arrest her over dirty tricks against Sanders? 

If she were arrested, what would happen in the election contest? Presumably, she could continue running for President because she would get out on bail, and the trial would be scheduled months into the future, but what would it do to her chances of winning? It would destroy them. In fact, it would be far better if she dropped out and was replaced with an untainted candidate. But, how that would work logistically I have no idea. It would be unprecedented, wouldn't it? Would it automatically go to Bernie Sanders, since he came in second in the primaries? I honestly don't know. I have no idea. Again: it would be unprecedented. 

But, if it fell to Sanders, I don't think he would have any chance against Trump. 

But, note that Julian Assange vehemently denies that the Russians have anything to do with this. Here's the link:

Thursday, July 28, 2016

OIC senior member Mees Baaijen has sent me the link to an article concerning something that I have been thinking about recently. And that is the fact that though our prime focus is on the JFK assassination, we have addressed other assassinations, including RFK, MLK, and even Marilyn Monroe and John Lennon. But, what about UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold? I don't believe I have ever mentioned him. But, many people believe that his death by plane crash in 1961 was a political assassination. 

But, did you know that just last year, in 2015, the UN declared that his death was a political assassination? I don't think that made it onto the Nightly News.  And guess who the evidence points to as the culprit? Allen Dulles. Hardly a surprise, is it?

"For example, take the plane crash which killed UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold in the Congo in 1961. Last year, 2015, a UN investigation finally decided his death was political assassination. Playing a crucial role in this investigation were documents (ten letters by a South African intelligence agency) unearthed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in the late 1990s. The name of Allen Dulles was directly linked with the plane crash.
The interview I conducted with Hammarskjold’s right-hand man, George Ivan Smith, which is included in ‘The Incubus of Intervention’ introduced another motive – Indonesia rather than the Congo –  for the involvement of Allen Dulles in the tragic death of Hammarskjold."

This article is an interview of Greg Poulgrain by Global Research correspondent Ed Curtin. The Australian Poulgrain took inspiration from David Talbot and his book on Allen Dulles, The Devil's Chessboard, and wrote his own: The Incubus of Intervention: JFK's and Allen Dulles' conflicting strategies for Indonesia

Poulgrain lays out why Dag Hammarskjold had to be assassinated, and think about it: it lays out another reason why Kennedy had to be killed because the worst carnage in Indonesia took place in 1965-1966, and if Kennedy had lived, he would have been re-elected and therefore President, and he would surely have taken action to stop the CIA.

This is going to be the last song I do for a while because I'm starting to learn a new one that is going to be difficult. There are lot of jazz chords in it that I'm not familiar with, and it will take a while to get them into my head and onto my hands. But, before I get started with that, I have been meaning to do a song to honor the great French composer Michel Legrand. 

He is still alive. He is 84 years old. And, he has devoted most of his career to writing music for films. And he has written some gems. He won the Academy Award for The Windmills of Your Mind from The Thomas Crown Affair. The amazing thing about it is that the song evokes windmills, which go around, and the melody itself goes around. So, he really matched the music to the message. Another great one of his is the score from The Summer of '42 which is entitled The Summer Knows. Many people, including me, think it is one of the greatest, most powerful scores of all time.  And just as with the theme from Laura by David Raksin, it was so great that afterwards they assigned words to it so that people could sing it. And who did they call in to write the words? The same guy they called to do it for Laura: Johnny Mercer.  I'll also mention What Are You Doing the Rest of Your Life which has a beautiful melody by Legrand plus gorgeous lyrics by the married couple Alan and Marilyn Bergman. It's from the movie The Happy Ending, but often the music of Michel Legrand has survived better than the movies for which he wrote. And that's true for his song that I just did: Watch What Happens, which is from the French film The Umbrellas of Cherbourg.  I know nothing about the movie, but Watch What Happens has become a standard that everyone and his brother and sister have covered because it is such a beautiful song. And that includes me. But again, if you listen to this one, I won't be bothering you again for a while.

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Here's some good news: the march for 9/11 Truth goes on.


9/11 | 2016

A Weekend Symposium in NYC

Join Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, and other co-sponsors for a weekend symposium on the pursuit of 9/11 Justice fifteen years after the fateful events of September 11, 2001.

Hundreds of researchers and activists will come together in the historic Great Hall of Cooper Union in New York City on Saturday, September 10, and Sunday, September 11, 2016. Together, in this 800-seat auditorium, we will discuss the state of ongoing efforts to expose the truth and obtain justice for the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 innocent victims and that continue to serve as the pretext for the Global War on Terrorism.

The conference will feature keynote addresses from respected legal figures, as well as panel discussions on the role of the Deep State and the significance of the recently declassified 28 Pages, presentations by movement leaders and researchers, and day-long evidentiary hearings on the World Trade Center’s destruction, which will be conducted by a panel of esteemed lawyers.

Speakers and panel discussions will include:
  • Keynote speaker: Renowned public interest attorney Daniel Sheehan, who litigated cases related to the Pentagon Papers and the Iran/Contra Affair;

  • Keynote speaker: Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy;

  • A team of accomplished lawyers who will hear evidence related to the World Trade Center’s destruction and consider future legal strategies for obtaining 9/11 Justice;

  • Richard Gage, AIA, who will discuss the current activities of AE911Truth, and Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, who will present the findings-to-date of the WTC 7 computer modeling study, which he is conducting at the University of Alaska Fairbanks;

  • Roundtable discussions featuring Wayne MadsenJ. Michael Springmann, and other prominent experts;

  • The launch of 9/11 Truth Action Project (9/11 TAP) by founding members of this new international organization; and,

  • Masters of Ceremonies Mark Crispin Miller, a professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at NYU (Saturday), and renowned International Human Rights attorney William Pepper (Sunday).
Event Details:

10:00 AM to 6:30 PM, September 10 and 11, 2016
The Great Hall, Cooper Union
7 East 7th Street, New York, NY 10003


Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry
NY State Legislative Action Project for 9/11 Justice
9/11 Consensus Panel
9/11 Truth Action Project

Paul Carpenter "This is the fateful rifle of Lee Oswald." -- Marina Oswald, before the Warren Commission. She spoke English as a second language, but it's still an odd way of speaking, isn't it?
UnlikeReply210 hrs
Ralph Cinque It sounds theatrical, doesn't it?
LikeReplyJust now
Ralph Cinque
Write a reply...
Richard Hooke as Ralph said, Marina did not want to be deported and she had the lives of her kids to think about - the strongest nation in the history of the world was bearing down on her - what was she to do? She said what they told her to say; and I do not find that odd - Marina is a survivor.
LikeReply28 hrsEdited
Juliette de la Bretoniere Yes, it is odd. Marina saying "This is the fateful rifle of Lee Oswald" sounds like acting a scripted sentence. It sounds so fake! And it has nothing to do with speaking English as a 2nd language. It would have been credible or genuine if you will, if she had said: "Yes, this is my husbands rifle."
LikeReply5 hrs
Jesús Eladio Sánchez López It's impossible to imagine anyone more pressure than Marina Oswald. 20 years old, alone with two babys, Russian without knowing English, in USA, during the cold war, with her husband died and accused of the President's assesination. It is a case that c...See More
LikeReply29 mins
Jesús Eladio Sánchez López It is not necessary to use brainwashing. All of this it's more easy.
LikeReply27 mins
Ralph Cinque My point is that for Marina, it wasn't just a matter of lying and acting. I don't believe she could lie or act that well. Something happened in her mind that she suppressed the truth about her life with Oswald, and she pasted in this new narrative and began speaking of it as her own. The truth had to still be there in the depth of her mind. She couldn't erase it completely. Maybe in her dreams it came out. But, in her waking hours, she had so many people around her that were supporting the new paradigm and reinforcing it vigorously that it was relatively easy to go along with it. For months, her whole life was being controlled and managed: where she lived, when she ate, when she slept, who she saw, when she went to a doctor; everything. And at the point that her confinement ended, and she became a free person, she continued to be followed, observed, and monitored. And I know that because people who know her have told me that she said that she felt she was constantly being watched. They have also told me that she has lived with the fear of being harmed and her children being harmed. You notice that she is not part of the JFK community. She's at a time in her life when presumably she is retired and presumably has the time to be involved in JFK and Oswald Truth, but she isn't. Are fear and intimidation still weighing on her? Why aren't Oswald's daughters involved? Have they received direct threats? Or is it that their mother has beseeched them never to get involved?
LikeReplyJust now