« November 2013 | Main | January 2014 »

Bill Lord's letter to President Jimmy Carter re: JFK assassination and Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) plus George Herbert Walker Bush laughs in the American people's and the world's face concerning the LHO relation

 February 2, 1977

 

 

My dear Mr. President:

 

I have refrained from troubling you with the contents of

this letter as long as I possibly could. But I have finally

decided that a personal letter to you is, in the end, in your

interest and in the country’s interest.

 

I am simply transcribing notes which I set down about two

weeks ago--and which concern, and must concern, any leader of

this country.

 

I was Lee Oswald’s cabinmate on the SS MARION LYKES, which

sailed from New Orleans to France in September-October, 1959.

I have recently been the subject of surveillance, of harass-

ment, of pressure tactics, and possibly of terror tactics.

 

First, in September, when I was teaching in Japan, some-

one broke into my house, rifled my papers, but stole nothing.

I returned to the United States shortly thereafter. Back in

Texas, I was suddenly and improbably the subject of a blitz of

contacts by telephone from persons wanting to know urgently and

insistently what I knew or remembered about Oswald. No one had

asked me anything about Oswald since the time of the Warren

Commission investigation twelve years ago. The blitz of calls

came out of the blue. It was highly improbable, and, after

the break-in, I was suspicious. I stalled these people, who

represented two major national publications. During this

period of non-cooperation, I received another surprise, another

“first” for me. Two Iranian gentlemen appeared at my front door.

My mother’s house was up for sale and they were prospective

buyers. A small ad had been placed in the paper. The Iranians

strode through the house in a very cursory, almost arrogant

manner, paced off the front yard, and drove away. The sale of

the house had been discussed on the telephone among family; a

small ad had been placed. Only one other couple showed up to

look at the house. Neither I, nor my mother, who is 63, had

ever received a visit from Iranian gentlemen before.

 

One of the parties which has blitzed me with telephone calls

trying to persuade me to tell them what I know about Oswald, is

engaged in a very costly project which allows them to locate,

interview, monitor, and influence every single available person

who ever knew Lee Oswald--and this, just in advance of the new

governmental investigation by the House Select Committee on

Assassinations. I finally consented, not to grant an interview,

<page 1>

 

but to allow the publication’s representative to explain their

project to me in person. After a lunch with this researcher,

I was told that if I had refused even to meet with him, pressure

was in the offing through two Midland men: Mr. Jim Allison,

publisher of the ultra-conservative Reporter-Telegram, my em-

ployer (out of necessity, and for the moment!), and Mr. George

Bush, Jr. The researcher said he had asked an acquaintance, a

Mr. Beamis (?), chairman of the Republican Party in Virginia

and owner of “a string of hotels” in that state, for help in

persuading me to tell what I know about Oswald. After this

revelation, and when I still refused to be interviewed, the

publication’s leg-man made an effort to purchase my knowledge

about Oswald. I refused, and he left.

 

Shortly thereafter, my mother discovered that her tele-

phone had been tampered with. The casing around the dialing

apparatus had been pulled out about one-half inch. It was so

obvious as to be grotesque. But we cannot doubt that someone

entered the house at a time when I was at work and my mother

was away; she returned to the house, however, at an unaccustomed

time.

 

I have been in anguish for weeks, Mr. President, trying

my best to laugh at my apprehensions and to see these events

as fortuitous ones. Experience, common sense, and logic

persuade me otherwise. So I have been compelled to react

to all this in the form of a statement--and it may shed some

light on the reasons for the intrusions into my life:

 

Speaking as the man who spent more than two weeks in the      

same ship’s cabin with Lee Oswald at the time of his 1959

“defection”, and speaking as a man who has been the subject

of the above-described tactics of cowards, I offer the

following considerations to the American people and to

people everywhere:

 

1. It is the CIA and FBI relations with Lee Oswald which have been

    covered up since November 22, 1963.

 

2. It is the CIA and the FBI which have concealed and destroyed

   evidence of their relations with Oswald prior to November 22,

   1963.

 

3. It is the CIA which has, from the beginning, fabricated or

    distorted certain Cuba-Oswald relations, and certain Cuba-

    JFK relations, as a smokescreen and decoy to conceal the

    CIA-Oswald relationship.

 

4. I can testify, and others can testify, that the CIA did not

    conduct a real investigation of the so-called defector Oswald

    in 1959. The CIA has long been concerned about witnesses

    who can testify to this oversight on their part.

 

<page 2>

 

5. They did not conduct a real investigation because Mr. Oswald

    was a bogus defector.

 

6. The CIA is concerned lest the knowledge that Oswald was a

    fake defector in 1959, linking him to CIA, also link him

    with CIA on November 22, 1963. But there is an impressive

    body of evidence that CIA used--and abused--Oswald as late

    as November, 1963.

 

7. It is the CIA-Oswald relation and the FBI-Oswald relation

    which have necessitated the thirteen-year cover-up.

 

8. A necessary conclusion is that the CIA and FBI elements in 1963

    are suspect in the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

 

9. The assassination of John Kennedy has every appearance of

    having been our first American coup d’état.

 

 

Mr. President, as a man, a father, and a concerned citizen,

I believe that you would act energetically also, if you were in

my shoes. I believe that you should be aware of the fact that

one of your fellow-citizens does not feel that he, his wife and

three children, and his mother, are safe in Midland, Texas.

 

I conclude, Mr. President, by assuring you that I have

the most enormous respect for you and the most hope-inspiring

indications of your good will, as of your rare ability to lead

the nation. Without flattery, you are quite simply the political

light of this period in history. God be with you.

 

I apologize for the crude and, doubtless, offensive tone

of this letter.

 

                                                                                       Sincerely,

 

                                                                                <signed Bill Lord>

 

                                                                                       Bill Lord

 

2403 Holloway

Midland, Texas 79701

(915) 68-44537

 

<page 3>

___ 

In re: Mr. Beamis (sic):

Here is the link in which further research was done into the "Beamis" mentioned by Bill Lord by Robert Morrow and others:
 
 
___

___

My CSPAN snippet to prove this wasn't a fake modified video (go to the below link immediately below to view):

 http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4479286 (particular snippet from recording by CSPAN, 02:03)

___

___

OpEdNews Op Eds 3/8/2014 at 15:50:33

The Anti-Latell Report: Addenda on Oswald'€™s Impersonation

By  (about the author)


Three explanatory books
(image by Amazon - Mary Ferrell Foundation)

 

Although Professor John McAdams wrote The JFK Assassination Logic (Potomac Books, 2011), the book is far away from its declared purpose of "how to think about claims of conspiracy." The underlying intention is to reject all claims of conspiracy and to confirm the Warren Commission (WC) Report on a lone gunman who shot a magic bullet. Thus, Professor McAdams devised his logic on the basis of the classic Only Game in Town (OGT) fallacy.

Even if it weren't available, a better account than the WC report, nobody is obliged to accept it in default, because there is always an alternative to the OGT fallacy: to find a more plausible explanation. All the JFK assassination researchers face the same logical problem of finding evidence that strongly discriminates between the two competing hypotheses:

        : The deed of a lone gunman

        : The result of a conspiracy

All of them are forced to infer to the best explanation through good arguments, id est: those containing true premises related in the right way to the conclusion. For this kind of reasoning, the American philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce coined the term " abduction ," but it rather suggests kidnapping nowadays. We can use instead "inference to the best explanation" for what Pierce meant, and he actually meant that an observation O strongly favors one hypothesis (let's say ) over another ( ) if the following conditions are satisfied at once:

        If were true, is to be expected (unsurprising)

        If were true, would have been unexpected (surprising)

The No Surprise / Surprise Principle rules the inference to the best explanation and it applies not only to the whole set of facts regarding the JFK assassination, but also for every single fact in dispute.

Oswald's Impersonation in Mexico City

In the fourth part of the series, I trusted the old sleuth Alan H. Belmont in his report to FBI Associate Director Clyde A. Tolson: "The Agents who have talked to Oswald have listened to the tape provided by CIA of the call allegedly made by Oswald to the Soviet Embassy, and they do not think the individual is Oswald, as his voice is different, and he spoke in broken English" (Research Papers of John Armstrong, Book 1, Notebook 2 , pages 38-39).

Jane Davidson replied that Belmont misunderstood what Dallas FBI Special Agent in Charge Gordon Shanklin told him at 9:15 AM on November 23, 1963. If this hypothesis were true, it's surprising that, after calling Shanklin again at 11:50 am EST , Belmont kept on reporting to Tolson: "Inasmuch as the Dallas agents who listened to the tape of the conversation allegedly of Oswald from the Cuban Embassy to the Russian Embassy in Mexico and examined the photographs of the visitor to the Embassy in Mexico and were of the opinion that neither the tape or the photograph pertained to Oswald , I requested Shanklin to immediately send a photograph of Oswald to our Legal Attaché."

Davidson discovered that the very agent who had flown from Mexico City with CIA materials for the FBI in Dallas, Eldon Rudd, had memoed : "CIA has advised that these tapes have been erased and are not available for review." The HSCA concluded : "A review of relevant FBI cable traffic established that at 7:23 p.m. (CST) on November 23, 1963, Dallas Special Agent-in-Charge Shanklin advised Director Hoover that only a report of this conversation was available, not an actual tape recording" (Final Report, page 250). And Professor McAdams flatly states: "No tapes from Mexico City were sent to Dallas. That's a factoid."

The well established fact is then that the tapes were erased. It's surprising, since the hypothesis of common sense indicates that the CIA must have preserved taped conversations involving an American citizen who had visited both the Cuban and the Soviet embassies in Mexico City.

Instead of going deeper into this fact -- to show "how to think about claims of conspiracy" -- Professor McAdams simply used it as evidence of a " Clueless J. Edgar Hoover " and against the hypothesis of Oswald's impersonation without inferring to the best explanation through some good arguments:

        The own CIA Mexico City Station History refers it as "the best in WH [Western Hemisphere] and possibly one of the best in the Agency. [Its] technical facilities and capabilities were described as extraordinary and impressive" (page 45). Its two phone tap operations were LIENVOY and LIFEAT. The former focused on the Soviet bloc's and Cuban diplomatic compounds (page 104 ff.).

        In August 1963, the monthly operational report for LIENVOY included the protocol for exploiting info (page 3): "The outside staff agent, Arnold AREHART [Charles Flick], has instructions to alert the Station immediately if a U.S. citizen or English speaking person tries to contact any of the target installations [by] a telephone call from outside the tap center at a pay phone to Robert B. RIGGS [Anne Goodpasture] inside the Station (") RIGGS meets AREHART within fifteen minutes at a pre-arranged downtown location and receives the reel with an extract of the pertinent conversation. This reel is then taken to the Station and given to the case officer responsible for the target the person was trying to contact. Headquarters is notified by cable of the action taken. Only in rare cases is information on a U.S. citizen passed without prior Headquarters approval."

        By the time of Oswald's visit to Mexico City, LIENVOY had intercepted three Cuban lines: Ambassador (14-42-37), Chancery (14-13-26) and Commercial Office (25-09-14) , and five Soviet lines: Commercial Office (15-61-07), Soviet Film representative's (15-12-64), Military Attaché's (15-69-87) and two consulate lines at the Chancery (15-60-55 and 15-61-55). From all of them, LIENVOY recorded the dialed digits and audio for outgoing calls and just audio for incoming calls.

        At Russ Holmes Work File (NARA 104-10413-10074 ), the September 27 -- October 1, 1963 LIENVOY transcripts [in Spanish and some in English] show five taped conversations linked to Oswald [emphasis added].

        Page 4. September 27, 16:00 hours. Phone number: 15-60-55. The Soviet Consulate received a call from the Cuban Consulate (Sylvia DURAN) who said she had there a U.S. citizenwho had requested a transit visa to Cuba because he is going to URSS (") [A] Soviet tells her to leave her telephone (number) and her name and someone will return the call. DURAN gives her name and phone number 11-28-47.

        Page 17. September 27, 16:26 hours. Phone number: 15-61-55. A Soviet calls from the Soviet Embassy Chancery to the Cuban Consulate and asks for Sylvia DURAN. He asks DURAN if the American has been there.

DURAN: Yes, he is still here.

SOVIET: According to the letters that he showed them from the (Soviet) Consulate in Washington, he wants to go the URSS to stay a long time with his wife, who is Russian, but also the answer had not been received (") This man (the American) showed him a letter in which he (the American) is a member of an organization in favor of Cuba and said that the Cubans could not give him the visa without the Russian visa."

DURAN: [H]e doesn't know anyone in Cuba and in that case it is very difficult to give him a visa [and] neither can (the Cubans) give him a letter because they do not know if the visa will be approved."

SOVIET: Neither can I give him any letter of recommendation because I don't know him."

On the second call's Spanish transcript, the Chief of Station (COS) Win Scott noted: "Is it possible to identify?" This reaction is to be expected under the hypothesis of normal circumstances, but Scott's next move reinforces the alternate hypothesis: something anomalous was going on.

On October 10, Scott wrote the LIENVOY operational report for September 1963 and referred only "two leads of operational interest" (page 3): a female professor from New Orleans calling the Soviet Embassy, and a Czech woman calling the Czech embassy (page 4). It's very surprising that a U.S. citizen at the Cuban Consulate, who had requested a transit visa to go on to URSS and showed to the Soviets a letter of membership to a pro Cuba organization, was neither reported as an operational lead nor notified to Headquarters, in flagrant violation of the CIA protocol. The hypothesis of abnormality becomes stronger due to the next call.

        Page 26. September 28, ca. 12:00 hours. Phone number 15-60-55. The Soviet Embassy Consulate receives a call from Sylvia DURAN of the Cuban Consulate. She says that here in the Consulate there is an American that was just at the Soviet Embassy. A Soviet says to wait a minute. DURAN, while waiting, speaks to someone in background, 'Do you speak Russian? Yes, why don't you talk to him? I don't know.' Then back to Spanish, DURAN says they installed a telephone for APARICIO and take down the number as 14-12-99. 'About this U.S. citizen, he is going to talk with you.'"

AMERICAN: Speaking in broken Russian, 'I was in your Embassy and spoke to your consul.'"

SOVIET: 'Just a minute' ... 'Ask the American in English what does he want?'"

AMERICAN: In Russian, 'Please speak Russian.'"

SOVIET: 'What else do you want?'"

AMERICAN: 'I was just now at your Embassy and they took my address.'"

SOVIET: 'I know that.'"

AMERICAN: [Translator comment: speaks terrible, hardly recognizable Russian] 'I did not know it then. I went to the Cuban Embassy to ask them for my address, because they have it.'"

SOVIET: 'Why don't you come again and leave your address with us. It is not far from the Cuban Embassy.'"

AMERICAN: 'Well, I'll be there right away.'"

If the hypothesis of Oswald in Mexico City for visa proceedings were true, it's to be expected that he would have gone right away to the Soviet Embassy. He didn't come ever again. This was incontrovertibly stated by Valeriy Kostikov and Oleg Nechiporenko, two Soviet officials who dealt with Oswald that very Saturday before noon at the Soviet Consulate. They also claimed that no outsider could have placed that call because the switchboard was closed (Passport to Assassination, Birch Lane-Carol, 1993, pages 75-81).

The transcripts corroborate that all the callers that Saturday, except "Duran," were people with friends or relatives at the Soviet Consulate. Furthermore Sylvia Duran (née Tirado), a Mexican employee at the Cuban Consulate, consistently denied having made such call. She was arrested and harshly interrogated by the Mexican Police on November 23 and November 28. The info taken from her included that "she had no fear [of] extradition to the United States to face Oswald" (page 13). Surprisingly, the CIA had fear [of] "any Americans to confront Silvia DURAN or to be in contact with her" (page 16).

Neither the eyewitness [Duran] nor the earwitnesses [CIA transcribers Boris and Anna Tarasoff] were ever questioned about the call by the WC. The info developed by CIA barely stated: "We deduce that OSWALD visited the Cuban Consulate [again] on September 1963 (") This may well have been 28 September, but we cannot be certain of this conclusion" (page 3).

It's surprising not only that the CIA didn't trust its own LIENVOY evidence, but also that such critical wiretapped call by "Duran and Oswald" was omitted in the September LIENVOY Report, even though COS Scott wrote it after having notified an intriguing October 1 call to Headquarters. To cap it all, the CIA "Responses to Questions Raised by [HSCA] to Richard Sprague" included that "the Station went onto say that it was unable to compare the voices in the two conversations because the tape of the first conversation (September 28) had been erased before the second call (1 October) had been received" (page 33).

        Page 38. October 1, 10:31 hours. To phone number 15-69-87. A man outside (MO) calls the Soviet Military Attaché Office speaking in broken Russian.

MO: 'Hello, I was at your place last Saturday and talked to your Consul. They said they'd send a telegram to Washington and I wanted to ask you if there is anything new?'"

SOVIET: 'I'd like to ask you to call another phone number.'"

MO: 'Please.'"

SOVIET: 'Please write it down; 15-60-55 and ask for a Consul.'"

MO: 'Thank you.'"

SOVIET: 'Please.'"

      Page 44. October 1, 10:35 hours. To phone number 15-60-55. A man [MO] described by the translator as the same person who had called a day or so ago and spoken in broken Russian called the Soviet Embassy Consulate and spoke with the Soviet guard on duty:

MO: 'Hello, this LEE OSWALD speaking. I was at your place last Saturday and spoke to a Consul, and they say that they'd send a telegram to Washington, so I wanted to find out if you have anything new? But I don't remember the name of that Consul.'"

SOVIET: KOSTIKOV. He is dark?

MO: 'Yes. My name is OSWALD.'"

SOVIET: 'Just a minute. I'll find out. They said that they haven't received anything yet.'"

MO: 'Have they done anything?'"

SOVIET: 'Yes, they say that a request has been sent out bur nothing has been received as yet.'"

MO: 'And what' (SOVIET hangs up)."

The CIA transcriber Boris Tarasoff remarked that "Lee Oswald" was the same person who had called before speaking "in broken Russian." Oswald was fluent in Russian, but Jane Davidson argues that, after returning to the U.S. in June 1962, "he was no longer forced to speak Russian almost exclusively [and] his Russian gradually got worse according to Marina. To a professional translator, maybe he sounded awful." Tarasoff noted: "hardly recognizable Russian." Is it plausible having reached that extreme in few more than a year?

Nonetheless, the October LIENVOY Report and the related CIA cable traffic bring more valuable observations that strongly favor the hypothesis of impersonation. The report mentions that "MEXI-6453 reported a contact by an English-speaking man with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. This was forwarded to Headquarters (HDQS) for further dissemination." Surprisingly, the unequivocal link between this contact and the "Duran-Oswald" call was omitted. The cable traffic between the Station (MEXI) and HDQS (DIR) is even more surprising:

        October 8. MEXI 6453 reported to HDQS that "an American male who spoke broken Russian" had said his name was "Lee Oswald." He was at the Soviet Embassy on September 28 and spoke with Consul Vareliy Kostikov. This cable also provided a description of a presumed American male who had entered the Soviet Embassy at 12:16 hours on October 1, but his photo was actually taken on October 2.

 

        October 10. DIR 74830 replied that Lee Oswald "probably" was "Lee Henry Oswald." The cable provided an inaccurate description [5 ft 10 in / 165 lb] and specified: "Latest HDQS info was ODACID [State Department] report dated May 1962" on Oswald as "still US citizen [returning] with his Soviet wife [and] their infant child to USA." Surprisingly, HDQS omitted two 1963 FBI reports from Dallas (September 24) and New Orleans (October 4) on Oswald's leftist activism, his militancy in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) and his scuffle with Cuban exiles. Instead, HDQS quoted from a 1962 report by the U.S. Embassy in Moscow: "Twenty months of realities of life in Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald."

        October 10. DIR 74673 disseminated to ODACID, ODENVY (FBI), and ODOATH (Navy) the description provided in MEXI 6453 for the presumed American male and omitted the hint that Oswald had spoken with Soviet Consul Valeriy Kostikov.

What's going on here? If the hypothesis of the lone gunman were true, it's not to be expected that the CIA concealed and even falsified Oswald's data before the JFK assassination. Thereafter, the CIA Inspector General blatantly lied: "It was not until 22 November 1963 [that the] Station learned (") Oswald had also visited the Cuban Embassy."

By dismissing the "tapes of not Oswald" story with the "no tapes of Oswald" story, Professor Mcadams has actually paved the way to the hypothesis of conspiracy with focus on the CIA, particularly since no "recording of Oswald's voice" adds up to no photo from his three visits to the Cubans and two visits to the Soviets.

Note that the Station in Mexico City and HDQS in Langley also hid from each other their respective knowledge of Oswald's contacts with Cuba. The best explanation can be inferred by connecting Philip H. Melanson's Spy Saga in New Orleans with John Newman's Oswald and the CIA in Mexico City.

Bill Simpich did it and his conclusion is that the tapes "were treated as a dark state secret." The exposure of Oswald impersonation would have led to the exposure of the Mexico City wiretap operations." Moreover, Simpich unveils two other circles of intrigue in Mexico City: the CIA-FBI joint operation against FPCC and the molehunt embedded within the CIA cables traffic in October 1963. For further reading go to Simpich's State Secret at Mary Ferrell Foundation's web page .

Ref: http://www.opednews.com/articles/5/The-Anti-Latell-Report-Ad-by-Arnaldo-M-Fernand-Assassination_Mexico_Oswald-140308-737.html

___

Related: 

http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_01_16/JFK-and-9-11-bookends-of-American-fascism-Wayne-Madsen-6483/

 

More information here:

Nixon-Bush Connection In The Kennedy Assassination

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2014/03/the-kennedy-assasination-the-nixon-bush-connection.html

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2013/11/jfk-murder-truth-telling-heading-to-the-grassy-knoll-on-november-22nd-50th-anniversary.html

Also of note re: CIA and Robert Kennedy Assassination:

 Release the files!

http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/jfk-facts-scoop-2-the-joannides-files/

Support the JFK Facts lawsuit against the CIA

I filed suit for the records of George Joannides ten years ago, and the case is still not over. The legal bills of my attorney Jim Lesar now run to more that $125,000, and the CIA refuses to pay, even though the Court of Appeals ruled in our favor.

No one is doing this kind of work except for JFK Facts. We need your help to continue.

JFK Assassination: George Joannides’ CIA Files - Can They Help Determine Who Killed President Kennedy?

http://www.ibtimes.com/jfk-assassination-george-joannides-cia-files-can-they-help-determine-who-killed-president-kennedy

___

E. Howard Hunt:

Everette Howard Hunt, Jr. was an American author and spy. He worked for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and later the White House under President Richard Nixon. Hunt, with G. Gordon Liddy and others, was one of the White House's "plumbers" — a secret team of operatives charged with fixing "leaks." Information disclosures had proved an embarrassment to the Nixon administration when defense analyst Daniel Ellsberg sent a series of documents, which came to be known as the Pentagon Papers, to The New York Times.
 
Hunt, along with Liddy, engineered the first Watergate burglary. In the ensuing Watergate Scandal, Hunt was convicted of burglary, conspiracy, and wiretapping, eventually serving 33 months in prison. In 2007 his son released audio tape of Hunt naming President Lyndon B. Johnson and others as the orchestrators of the John F. Kennedy assassination.
 
I heard from Frank, that LBJ had designated Cord Meyer, Jr. to undertake a larger organization, while keeping it totally secret.

Cord Meyer, himself was a rather favored member of the eastern aristocracy. He was a graduate of Yale University and had joined the Marine Corps during the war, and lost an eye in the Pacific fighting.

I think that L.B.J. settled on Meyer as an opportunist / paren (like himself) a paren and a man who had very little left to him in life, ever since J.F.K. had taken Cord's wife as one of his mistresses.

I would suggest that Cord Meyer welcomed the approach from L.B.J., who was after all, only the Vice-President at that time, and of course could not number Cord Meyer among J.F.K.'s admirers. Quite the contrary.

As for Dave Phillips, I knew him pretty well at one time. He worked for me during the Guatemala project. He had made himself useful to the Agency in Santiago, Chile, where he was an American businessman. In any case his actions, whatever they were, came to the attention of the Santiago Station Chief, and when his resume became known to people in the Western Hemisphere Division, he was brought in to work on Guatemalan operations.

Sturgis and Morales, and people of that ilk, stayed in apartment houses during preparations for the big event. Their addresses were very subject to change. So that where a fella like Morales had been one day, you'd not necessarily associate him with that same address the following day. In short it was a very mobile experience.

Let me point out at this point, that if I had wanted to fictionalize what went on in Miami and elsewhere during the run up for the big event, I would have done so.

But I don't want any unreality to tinge this particular story - or the information, I should say. I was a 'benchwarmer' on it and I had a reputation for honesty.

I think it's essential to refocus on what this information that I have been providing you - and you alone, by the way - consists of. What is important in the story is that we've backtracked the chain-of-command up through Cord Meyer, and laying the doings at the doorstep of L.B.J.

He, in my opinion, had an almost maniacal urge to become President. He regarded J.F.K. as - as he was in fact - an obstacle to achieving that. He could have waited for J.F.K. to finish out his term and then undoubtedly a second term.

So that would have put L.B.J. at the head of a long list of people who were waiting for some change in the Executive Branch.
___
 By Jonathan on Monday, December 31, 2007 @ 1:18 AM
 
In the deathbed confession from Howard Hunt, he mentions the name of Morales. Morales connects to James Files and the Miami operations. Morales and James Files both served in the 82nd Airborne together, as well as operations in Laos.
David Sanchez Morales was born in 1925. He spent his early life in Phoenix, Arizona. A Mexican-American, Morales was later to be nicknamed El Indio because of his dark skin and Indian features. As a boy his best friend was Ruben Carbajal. After his mother divorced his father he was virtually adopted by Carbajal's parents.
 
Morales joined the United States Army in 1946 and after basic training was sent to Germany where he was part of the Allied occupation force. According to Ruben Carbajal, Morales was recruited into army intelligence in 1947. However, officially he was a member of 82nd Airborne of the US Army. It was during this time he began associating with Ted Shackley and William Harvey.
 
In 1951 became a employee of the Central Intelligence Agency while retaining his army cover. The following year he joined the Directorate for Plans, an organization instructed to conduct covert anti-Communist operations around the world.
 
In 1953 he returned to the United States and after a spell at the University of Maryland he assumed cover as a State Department employee. Morales became involved in CIA's Black Operations. This involved a policy that was later to become known as Executive Action (a plan to remove unfriendly foreign leaders from power). This including a coup d'état that overthrew the Guatemalan government of Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 after he introduced land reforms and nationalized the United Fruit Company. After the removal of Arbenz he joined the staff of the US embassy in Caracas (1955-58). During this time he became known as the CIA's top assassin in Latin America.
 
Morales moved to Cuba in 1958 and helped to support the government of Fulgencio Batista. Later Morales worked behind the scenes with people like David Atlee Phillips, Tracy Barnes, William Pawley, Johnny Roselli and John Martino in an attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro.
 
In November, 1961, William Harvey arranged for Morales to be posted to JM/WAVE, the CIA station in Miami. In May, 1962, Morales was seconded to ZR/RIFLE, the plot to assassinate Fidel Castro.
 
Some researchers such as Gaeton Fonzi, Larry Hancock, Noel Twyman, James Richards and John Simkin believe that Morales was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. It has been suggested that others involved included James Arthur Lewis, Roy Hargraves, Edwin Collins, Steve Wilson, Gerry P. Hemming, Herminio Diaz Garcia, Tony Cuesta, Eugenio Martinez, Virgilio Gonzalez, Felipe Vidal Santiago and William (Rip) Robertson.
 
In 1966 Ted Shackley was placed in charge of CIA secret war in Laos. He recruited Morales to take charge at Pakse, a black operations base focused on political paramilitary action within Laos. Pakse was used to launch military operations against the Ho Chi Minh Trial. In 1969 Morales moved to Vietnam where he officially worked as a Community Development Officer for the International Development Agency.
 
Morales moved to Chile in 1970. He was a member of the team that used $10 million in order to undermine left-wing forces in the country. Morales told friends that he had personally eliminated several political figures. He was also involved in helping Augusto Pinochet overthrow Salvador Allende in September, 1973.
 
After arriving back in the United States Morales moved to Washington where he became Consultant to the Deputy Director for Operations Counter Insurgency and Special Activities. Larry Hancock believes that during this period he provided advice to right-wing governments in the Condor Coalition (Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Brazil and Argentina).
 
According to his friend, Ruben Carbajal, in the spring of 1973, Morales talked about his involvement with the Bay of Pigs operation. He claimed "Kennedy had been responsible for him having to watch all the men he recruited and trained get wiped out". He added: "Well, we took care of that SOB, didn't we?"
 
David Sanchez Morales retired from the Central Intelligence Agency in 1975. Three years later he was added to the list of people to be interviewed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He died of a heart-attack on 8th May, 1978."
 
Ref: http://truthalliance.net/Archive/News/tabid/67/ID/366/font-color0079D4Learn-the-Complete-Story-of-the-Kennedy-Assassination-Conspiratorsfont.aspx
 
 By Jonathan on Monday, December 31, 2007 @ 1:18 AM
In the deathbed confession from Howard Hunt, he mentions the name of Morales. Morales connects to James Files and the Miami operations. Morales and James Files both served in the 82nd Airborne together, as well as operations in Laos.
David Sanchez Morales was born in 1925. He spent his early life in Phoenix, Arizona. A Mexican-American, Morales was later to be nicknamed El Indio because of his dark skin and Indian features. As a boy his best friend was Ruben Carbajal. After his mother divorced his father he was virtually adopted by Carbajal's parents.

Morales joined the United States Army in 1946 and after basic training was sent to Germany where he was part of the Allied occupation force. According to Ruben Carbajal, Morales was recruited into army intelligence in 1947. However, officially he was a member of 82nd Airborne of the US Army. It was during this time he began associating with Ted Shackley and William Harvey.

In 1951 became a employee of the Central Intelligence Agency while retaining his army cover. The following year he joined the Directorate for Plans, an organization instructed to conduct covert anti-Communist operations around the world.

In 1953 he returned to the United States and after a spell at the University of Maryland he assumed cover as a State Department employee. Morales became involved in CIA's Black Operations. This involved a policy that was later to become known as Executive Action (a plan to remove unfriendly foreign leaders from power). This including a coup d'état that overthrew the Guatemalan government of Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 after he introduced land reforms and nationalized the United Fruit Company. After the removal of Arbenz he joined the staff of the US embassy in Caracas (1955-58). During this time he became known as the CIA's top assassin in Latin America.

Morales moved to Cuba in 1958 and helped to support the government of Fulgencio Batista. Later Morales worked behind the scenes with people like David Atlee Phillips, Tracy Barnes, William Pawley, Johnny Roselli and John Martino in an attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro.

In November, 1961, William Harvey arranged for Morales to be posted to JM/WAVE, the CIA station in Miami. In May, 1962, Morales was seconded to ZR/RIFLE, the plot to assassinate Fidel Castro.

Some researchers such as Gaeton Fonzi, Larry Hancock, Noel Twyman, James Richards and John Simkin believe that Morales was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. It has been suggested that others involved included James Arthur Lewis, Roy Hargraves, Edwin Collins, Steve Wilson, Gerry P. Hemming, Herminio Diaz Garcia, Tony Cuesta, Eugenio Martinez, Virgilio Gonzalez, Felipe Vidal Santiago and William (Rip) Robertson.

In 1966 Ted Shackley was placed in charge of CIA secret war in Laos. He recruited Morales to take charge at Pakse, a black operations base focused on political paramilitary action within Laos. Pakse was used to launch military operations against the Ho Chi Minh Trial. In 1969 Morales moved to Vietnam where he officially worked as a Community Development Officer for the International Development Agency.

Morales moved to Chile in 1970. He was a member of the team that used $10 million in order to undermine left-wing forces in the country. Morales told friends that he had personally eliminated several political figures. He was also involved in helping Augusto Pinochet overthrow Salvador Allende in September, 1973.

After arriving back in the United States Morales moved to Washington where he became Consultant to the Deputy Director for Operations Counter Insurgency and Special Activities. Larry Hancock believes that during this period he provided advice to right-wing governments in the Condor Coalition (Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Brazil and Argentina).

According to his friend, Ruben Carbajal, in the spring of 1973, Morales talked about his involvement with the Bay of Pigs operation. He claimed "Kennedy had been responsible for him having to watch all the men he recruited and trained get wiped out". He added: "Well, we took care of that SOB, didn't we?"

David Sanchez Morales retired from the Central Intelligence Agency in 1975. Three years later he was added to the list of people to be interviewed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He died of a heart-attack on 8th May, 1978."

December 31, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

High Speed Rail and what could have been

High Speed Rail

by Preston James and Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall

bullet-train

In the second half of the 19th century, the Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe (AT&SF) Railway took to heart Horace Greeley’s advice go “Go West, young man, go West.”

Until that time, American pioneers found their way across the rugged western plains via wagon train. After the Civil War, the country was ready to be united by train, the first Transcontinental Railroad in the United States… and the AT&SF Railroad became the Santa Fe Southern Pacific Railroad.

In the late 1980s, United States President Ronald W. Reagan gave a mandated order/directive to Leo Emil Wanta* (Presidential Executive Order No. 12333). President Reagan authorized Wanta’s company, New Republic/USA Financial Group, Ltd., Jackson, Mississippi, USA (a Mississippi intelligence operations group under Title 18 USC Section 6 (line 11) to build or otherwise obtain a rail system capable of moving MX Mobile Missiles.

220px-Ronald_Reagan_with_cowboy_hat_12-0071M_edit

Reagan’s directive had to do with an Operational Plan to lawfully purchase the Santa Fe & Southern Pacific Railroad in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for authorized mobilization and deployment activities. One of those authorized activities involved the movement of MX Mobile Missiles to an underground storage facility at Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. Redstone began as a chemical weapons manufacturing facility for WWII but became the Army’s focal point for rocket and space projects (including the development of the first U.S. ballistic missiles and space launch vehicles).

Ambassador Lee Wanta was asked by President Reagan to assist with the transportation of MX Missiles.

229px-Peacekeeper_Rail_Garrison_Car_-_Dayton_-_kingsley_-_12-29-08

MX Missiles transported in disguise inside specially constructed Railroal Cars.

Though using an old bankrupt railroad called Santa Fe & Southern to move MX Mobile Missiles is a far cry from planning a national high-speed rail system, that is how Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta got involved in planning a national high-speed rail facility for the American people. It began as a means to quickly and efficiently move MX Mobile Missiles and ended as the dream of an engineer who could see the long-term benefits to his nation if such a system were implemented.

For those who have no idea how far-sighted President Ronald Reagan and his intelligence team were, a mid-December 2013 news story might help you understand. It’s about Russia and an announcement made by President Vladimir Putin. These paragraphs were included in the Associated Press news article:

“Russia is developing a new intercontinental ballistic missile mounted on a railway car in a bid to counterbalance prospective U.S. weapons, a senior military officer has said.

“Colonel General Sergei Karakayev, the chief of the military’s Strategic Rocket Forces, said in remarks carried by Russian news agencies on Wednesday that the new weapon would be much easier to camouflage than its predecessor. The Soviet-designed railway missiles were scrapped in 2005.

“Karakayev said the Yars missile intended for the project was much lighter than the Soviet-built system and could be put inside a regular refrigerator car unlike its predecessor, which required a heavier and bigger car that could be detected by enemy intelligence.”

All Putin is doing today is a mirror image of what Reagan and Wanta were doing back in the 1980s and 90s. There is a long and not-so-glorious history for a high-speed rail program that has yet to be implemented in the United States… but let’s start at the beginning.

Wanta purchased the Federal Land Bank Building in Jackson, Mississippi.

The direct mandated order that Lee Wanta got from President Reagan told him to purchase the Federal Land Bank Building in Jackson, MS, which would be used for logistics and satellite feed. The funds to buy the building and the Santa Fe & Southern Pacific Railroad came from the Department of Defense to Wanta’s company, New Republic. The money was placed in Deposit Guaranty Bank in Mississippi and the credit cards for field operations were issued by Merrill Lynch to the New Republic/USA Financial Group.

If you have read Chapter 9 of Wanta’s biography, WANTA! Black Swan, White Hat (1) (available at Amazon.com Kindle), you are aware that the prosecuting attorney in Wanta’s civil/criminal tax evasion Kangaroo trial, J. Douglas Haag, a Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General, made much to-do about a $500,000 deposit made to the Mississippi bank, informing Wanta’s civil tax evasion jury the funds were Wanta’s personal property, but then misrepresented them as evidence of his guilt as a tax evader in the State of Wisconsin.

Wanta is wrongly set up in one of the biggest miscarriages of justice ever.

These funds, of course, came from the Department of Defense and represented nothing of the kind… but Haag had Wanta in a box. The money had been provided to purchase a railroad that would be used to haul MX Mobile Missiles to defend the nation. The railroad and building for which the funds were provided both were linked to a highly secret mandate from the President of the United States and Wanta could not make that information public at his phony criminal trial for tax evasion. Instead, he had to eat a 22-year prison and parole sentence.

At the time of Wanta’s Mississippi attempt to purchase the Santa Fe & Southern Railroad for moving the MX Mobile Missiles to appropriate locations for the national defense of the country, the Central Intelligence Agency (for which Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush had been Director until becoming vice president under Reagan) was America’s primary intelligence agency. Because Reagan believed that the CIA was totally corrupted, he and Wanta were in the process of implementing a new intelligence agency called Intelligence Services Agency (ISA) which would have put the CIA into competition with the ISA for its survival. Lee Emil Wanta was to be the Assistant Director of the new intel-ops group… one of the reasons he was targeted as someone who needed to be “taken down.”

High Speed Rail (HSR)  blocked by Political Cronyism.

As is almost always true in the world of political cronyism, the CIA was threatened by the presence of the new ISA group and was probably behind the failure of the acquisitions program – the railroad and the Federal Land Bank Building – to implement President Reagan’s plans. The result: the CIA did not want the MX Mobile Missiles being moved around by the Department of Defense via Wanta’s company – a Title 18 USC Section 6 (Line 11) intelligence gathering corporation. They wanted to control the operation complete with “set-aside allocations” and other financial motivation to be enjoyed by the participants at the expense of American taxpayers.

Today’s politics include guaranteed employment for well-known public employees called upon to perpetrate fraud upon the people of America while being paid by those very same people… they get set-aside allocations (like university positions funded by the government) and other revolving door professional courtesies like honorariums that bring with them power and position.

Surely you’ve noticed how the doors at Goldman Sachs swing open to place Henry Paulson as Secretary Treasury and how the government doors swing open so Robert Rubin can join Goldman Sachs… or how easily Janet Napolitano walked into her new job in California’s University System. Reagan’s and Wanta’s ISA made no such concessions to politicians and bureaucrats and so completing the mission was made impossible for Wanta. To make sure completing the mission was impossible, Wanta was put in prison in Switzerland – no charges were ever filed during his 134 day prison stay in Lausanne’s du Bois prison. They just kept him in an isolated dungeon cell likely built about the time Rome fell.

High Speed Rail (HSR) can provide Civil Defense capabilities not otherwise possible.

The public was to be told that the rail system Wanta was told to purchase was that people could quickly be moved to safety when the need arose… a hurricane evacuation route for Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas and that high-speed rail filled that need nicely. The hard core reason that justified the costs involved was, however, national defense: the movement of MX Mobile Missiles to critical locations.

So there you have that’s the synopsis of why Putin is, in December 2013, taking advantage of the original plan for Mobile MX Missiles born during the Reagan Administration under the management of Secret Agent Lee Emil Wanta… a plan that would have saved us from the USSR at that time. Wanta was working in concert with General James A. Abrahamson, Central Intelligence Director William Casey, former Central Intelligence Director William Colby, and Reagan’s Attorney General, William French Smith. Gen. Abrahamson was Director for the F-16 Multinational Air Combat Fighter Program at Aeronautical Systems Division before being assigned Administrator for the Space Transportation System, and was responsible for the nation’s space shuttle program. In 1980, he assumed the duties of Deputy Chief of Staff for Systems, Air Force Systems Command Headquarters.

And there you have the reason behind the birth of high-speed rail and the many positive ways it can be used for the good of the people to escape natural (and other) disasters rather than being trapped in big cities and forced to face possible death… and, of course, as is always in the very busy mind of Secret Agent Leo Wanta, the national defense.

What is this national high-speed rail system that is so high on Lee Wanta’s list of things that America needs done so the Constitutional Republic can be restored? Is it something we should do?

First, it’s not a “should do” thing – it’s a MUST DO because HSR will increase employment and the career opportunities – full-time, well-paid jobs with full benefits – will help stabilize economic recovery nationally, and do it quickly. Well, if it’s done properly and is a privately-owned, national project rather than another cronyism project of either political party, economic recovery will stabilize nationally.

Building a high-speed rail system will cause local, state and federal tax revenues to stop their drop into oblivion. Is there a city or town that didn’t think the gravy train would go on forever – and are suffering mightily from their over-spending and lack of saving for economic downturns? How many cities in California alone have gone bankrupt? That disease of bankruptcy has spread to Detroit – with Chicago next? How many municipal bonds are at risk as this is being written? Far more than you’re hearing about is the answer to that question. Who do you think will be asked to pick up the tab for these failed cities?

Other major nations have High Speed Rail including France, Japan and China.

The rest of the world is passing America by in the world of transportation. This isn’t about winning a competition, it’s about increasing our capacity to produce and compete with other nations to sell American goods effectively both nationally and internationally. Japan implemented its first HSR train in the mid-1960s. On any given day in France, more than 450 high-speed rail trains are running. In France, they are known as TGV (Train a Grande Vitesse). French HSR offers about 150 destinations and the trains travel at 200 miles per hour. The TGV Atlantique carries over 40,000 passengers each day.

China has opened more than 42 high-speed rail lines and has the world’s biggest train network, with 56,000 miles (91,000 kilometers) of passenger rail. Even with so much traditional and high-speed rail access, trains are overloaded with passengers and cargo.

Chinese rail technology dominates that nation’s foreign diplomacy, extending the country’s regional influence as well as addressing its growing energy demands. During this same time, US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood played Tinker Toys with Amtrak, thinking he can hornswoggle the American people into accepting the equivalent of Amtrack’s Acela line as “high-speed rail” – which it is not. The U.S. Government appears to want to charge American taxpayers for the larger costs of high-speed rail, but provide instead the same failed system that keeps Amtrak in the red by a billion plus dollars every year.

Amtrak is old, inefficient, slow and is government owned and controlled.

Amtrak is the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and it is 40 years old. It is government owned and controlled. It is Union operated and employs more than 20,000 workers and its CEO is appointed by the President of the United States… a political appointment. The Amtrak budget is allocated by Congress (and it is thus dependent upon its friendly relations with Congress – keeping elected officials happy for its existence – do I hear echoes of “cronyism” here?).

Does this sound like the best possible expertise source to build a new, high-tech rail project? Amtrak can’t even run its own company in a business-like manner. In fiscal year 2010, Amtrak earned $2.51 billion and expensed $3.74 billion… a net $1.2 billion loss. The Amtrak system is antiquated, bloated and inefficient and its total cost to taxpayers for its 40 years of service is $50 billion.

Yet, Amtrak which has absolutely no experience in the world of high-speed rail is the expertise source selected by the Obama Administration. It was the expertise source for George W. Bush, too – and Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. Why? Remember those “set-aside allocations” we discussed above? Since Ronald Reagan left office, both elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats can control the goodies handed out by a government-controlled entity.

No cronyism would be allowed by President Reagan and his Secret Agent Wanta in the construction of the High Speed Rail System (HSR).

Wanta and Ronald Reagan were determined there would be no set-aside allocations, no cronyism – no favors given to former college roommates to develop the Obamacare computer software, no $528 million loan losses to Solyndra. You remember a major backer of the solar energy company, billionaire George Kaiser, don’t you? He was a major Solyndra backer and was heavily involved in soliciting donations for Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. To complete the disgusting picture of cronyism at its worst, Goldman Sachs, was Solyndra’s financial adviser. Lee Wanta is determined that the American people will not pay for set-aside allocations for politicians or freebies for bureaucrats. Not on this railroad!

COST

People talk about the cost of high-speed rail, but it is tens of billions less costly than the alternative – expanding highways and airports to accommodate population growth. And, the environmental advantages to HSR are phenomenal – far better than jets, buses and cars. People who think it’s costly to build a high-speed rail system need to check with Boeing to find out the cost of building jet airplanes (that carry far fewer people) for the airline industry. Of course, the government doesn’t own the airlines – yet – but wants to own high-speed rail. And the airlines don’t want the competition of a well-run high-speed rail line and lobby effectively to prevent Lee Wanta from gaining access to his own funds that will make it possible for him to build such a system for the American people.

High Speed Rail

Above is Lee Wanta’s high-speed rail map. Below is a map provided by the Department of Transportation for their proposal of a much lower speed, segmented system. Which do you prefer?

clip_image004[2]

WHAT IS HIGH-SPEED RAIL?
A. High-speed rail trains exceed 150 m.p.h. China’s newest trains average 222 m.p.h.
B. Rapid Rail trains average between 75/100 to 150 m.p.h.
C. Rapid Transit – city trains and Amtrak, etc. – travels from zero to 75/100 m.p.h.

OTHER IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES.

The newest HSR trains don’t rely on locomotives pulling or pushing them. Power is distributed throughout the maglev rails.

In addition to track beds and rails and fences and signals and new train depots that need to be built, we will need a new electrical grid – a system with substations (nuclear/non-nuclear). Can the government afford that? Are you kidding? They can’t even afford to pay retirement pay increases to retire military personnel! That’s why it requires a private investor who is experienced in the field and knows what he’s doing. If Obama and Biden and Amtrak can’t even define high-speed rail properly, how in the world can we expect them to build it?

JOBS:
Here’s what AmeriRail’s statistics say about job creation:
1. Within 60 days: 100,000 new career employees;
2. Within 120 days: 300,000 additional new career employees;
3. Within 180 days: 600,000 additional, new career employees;
4. Within 270 days: 200,000 additional, new career employees;
5. Within 365 days: 300,000 additional, new career employees;
6. Within 18 months: 500,000 additional new career employees.

The AmeriRail plan results in two million new career employees for at least five years – that’s Private Sector, not government/public sector jobs.

That sounds like a lot of jobs, but in China, 110,000 jobs were created for one 820-mile high-speed rail route from Shanghai to Beijing. Another plan, created by the State of Florida for its high-speed rail system, created 40,000 new jobs for that State, alone. Multiply that by 50. The jobs are in construction, manufacturing, operations, maintenance, etc. The AmeriRail plans call for coast-to-coast construction, East/West and North/South.

HISTORY OF High Speed rail (HSR) USAGE:

At peak times, more than 1,000 people leave Paris every 30 minutes for Lyon – and those trains are full. Why? Because for every 621,000 miles HSR trains travel, there are only FIVE MINUTES of delays. Those statistics came from the French.

THE POLITICS OF IT ALL:

The airlines lobbyists are fighting hard against high-speed rail because it will cut into their already hurting cash flow. Experience around the world proves that consumers choose high-speed rail, not airplanes, for trips of three-hours, or less. There go the flights between Chicago/ Cincinnati/St. Louis/Minneapolis and between Denver/Salt Lake City/Phoenix, etc. Actually, high-speed rail would allow the airlines to go back to what they were intended to do: Carry passengers on long flights and stop socking it to people who need only travel short distances but must pay an arm and a leg for a 300 or 400 mile trip.

Too, the Federal Rail Administration just doesn’t have a clue when it comes to high-speed rail. In a Canada Free Press article, Marilyn Barnewall refers to the terrible “Business Plan” created for high-speed rail by that agency. She mentions that the Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, focused on safety to a point that makes it impossible to build an American high-speed rail system.

In a June 2009 New York Times article, those affiliated with European high speed rail are quoted as saying: “The FRA has largely focused on requiring trains to demonstrate crash worthiness, whereas in Europe and Asia the emphasis is on avoiding crashes.” For almost 50 years of HSR history, there was not a death caused by an accident. On July 23, 2011, two Chinese HSR trains were traveling on the same rail line and collided. Both derailed and 40 people were killed. Close to 200 people were injured. It was the first fatal HSR crash in China and the second in its number of deaths and injuries in HSR history. High speed, however, was not a factor in the Chinese crash as both trains were moving at about 60 miles per hour at the time of the accident. It was a track signaling problem caused by faulty equipment – built too hastily in the government’s drive to increase the competitive factors involving its high-speed rail program.

We don’t need another industry taken over by government. And always remember that high-speed rail as planned by government is tied to Agenda 21/sustainable development objectives designed to get citizens off of the land in rural America and to “stack ‘em and pack ‘em” in apartments in large metropolitan areas where they can ride rapid transit to work – or, a bicycle – or, they can walk. Rapid Rail and Rapid Transit will be used to “stack ‘em and pack ‘em.” High-speed rail achieves the precise opposite. It makes possible the movement of people from rural America where they live to highly-populated areas where they work and can provide that service on a reliable daily basis. You can live 100 miles from where you work and get there in less than an hour.

By preventing the construction of a suitable High Speed Rail System (HSR), government can much more easily control the mass transportation of citizens by airlines, conventional train, bus and highway.

There is no doubt that the United States needs to recapture and rebuild its manufacturing and industrial components. If we do not, we will never be able to take care of ourselves as a nation. HSR can, properly implemented, stimulate several industries. Steel for rails is needed. A new electrical grid is needed. Stations and depots must be built. Since American industry knows nothing about building high-speed rail cars, one of the world’s HSR rail car experts needs to be enticed into opening a plant here, to hire and train American workers.

What needs immediate attention for High Speed Rail (HSR).

The following is a list of things that need immediate attention if high-speed rail is to become a reality. It was created by a private company – Lee Wanta’s company – that has been offering since 1995 to build America’s high-speed rail system with zero tax dollars. That is unfamiliar territory for bureaucrats, but “private capital” translates to “zero tax dollars” – which is about what the government currently has in its coffers.

1. Right of Way and Roadbed planning and construction;
2. Roadbed equipment and engineering; with vehicular traffic tunnels;
3. Hi-Speed Train engines and passenger rail-cars;
4. Civil engineering studies and FDA/US Army approvals/modifications;
5. Real Estate and Land procurement;
6. Electrical Power Stations;
a. Westinghouse
b. General Electric
c. Other alternatives
7. Hotel, Depot and Maintenance Facilities: design and construction;
8. Rail Track Assembly Plants (20 buildings, minimum);
9. Electrical Power Stations/Plants (Non-nuclear/Nuclear);
10. Human resources;
11. Vehicle procurement;
12. Metal Tower fabrication and wiring;
13. Overall safety and security programs;
14. Underground electrical, water, gas piping between corridors;
15. Parallel two way emergency and evacuation vehicle roadways;
16. Food Management Services;
17. Emergency Health and Safety Services”

The above list is taken directly from the AmeriRail/Wanta high-speed rail plan which government has had in its greedy little hands since the mid 1990s. Had the government allowed the plan to be implemented, how many people could have escaped the devastation of Katrina?

How many people in New York would have had access to clean water after Hurricane Sandy from the Wanta high-speed rail water lines? Actions have consequences. Instead, government bureaucrats and elected officials found it of greater benefit to them to keep playing games with the Wanta funds… the $4.5 trillion SWIFT (Clear Inward Remittance) wired to his Richmond, VA Bank of America checking account which disappeared down a Federal Reserve/Treasury Department rabbit hole in 2006. So, the obvious question presents itself: Why is the government refusing to give to Lee Emil Wanta the funds that make a high-speed railroad system available to the American people?

Why is the American government letting China, France, England, Japan and other nations get a 50-year head start on us? The People’s Bank of China made the funds transfer in 2006?

These questions are not passive in nature. They are questions each one of you reading this article should be asking your elected officials.

Judge Gerald Bruce Lee determined the funds belonged to Wanta is a 2003 Federal District Court Decision.

Reference : United States District Court – Richmond, Case No. 02-1363-A Wanta – vs – United States of America :

THE HONORABLE, JUDGE LEE, ON APRIL 15, 2003, ISSUES A MEMORANDUM OF OPINION, REFERENCING PAGE 10,  PLAINTIFF’S SOLE REMEDY IN THIS MATTER IS TO PROCEED WITH THE LIQUIDATION OF THE CORPORATIONS AND REPORT THESE TRANSACTIONS TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AND THEN CHALLENGE THE ASSESSMENT OF ANY TAXES IN A REFUND PROCEEDING. ( SEE INT’L LOTTO FUND, 20F. 3d AT 591.)

Everything is in place to activate the Wanta HighSpeed Rail System (HRS) Plan.

All that must happen to activate the plan is the enforcement of the American Rule of Law so that Lee Wanta can proceed with the HSR System (HRS Maglev Bullet Train) Plan.
References:

(1) Black Swan, White Hat, Kindle Edition, http://www.amazon.com/WANTA-Black-Swan-White-Hat-ebook/dp/B00FPDOFT4

(2) http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/10/was-ronald-reagan-the-last-duly-elected-president/

* Lee Wanta: Former Presidential Secret Agent under the Totten Doctrine [92 U.S. 105, 107 (1875), National Security Decision - Directive Number 166, dated March 27, 1985, inter alia] under U.S. President Ronald W. Reagan, whom some experts consider to be our last legally and duly elected President.(2)  Ambassador Wanta served – under Presidential Mandate – as a close personal consultant to President Reagan and was credited with having a major role engineering an end to the Soviet Union Cold War and the “tearing down of the Iron Curtain”. His remarkable story is now revealed in detail for the first time in a book authored by his biographer, Marilyn MaGruder Barnewell, titled, Wanta! Black Swan, White Hat, latest Edition now available on Kindle.

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: A career banker who holds a graduate degree in business and finance, Marilyn Barnewall began her career as an investigative journalist in 1956 at the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her banking career, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, and was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin) as well as other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction and two fiction banking books, and her most recent book is the biography of Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta. Barnewall is the former Editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain news, and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she writes for News With Views, Canada Free Press, Veterans Today, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal, and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who of American Women, Who’s Who in Finance and Business, and Who’s Who in the World.

Ref: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/28/high-speed-rail/

December 30, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

PUBLIC LEGAL NOTICE by United States ex rel.: All Federal Reserve Banks are now IN CONTEMPT of the AUTOMATIC STAY expressly authorized by 11 U.S.C. 362

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:05 PM, "Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S."  wrote:


http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/11/362  
(supreme Law pursuant to Supremacy Clause)


For recent discussion, see:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/maugans/Two.Invoices.htm
 
begin:
 
1.  What were the underlying causes related to filing against the California State BAR, its members and officers?  Why California, and how does this impact other of the several States in actions that would bring about the same results?

When I commenced my copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit against 129 named defendants, the Office of Clerk of Court issued several SUBPOENAs to the attorneys who did initially appear:

All of those initial attorneys refused to produce valid licenses to practice law in the State of California:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/related.subpoenas.htm 

One of them tried to argue his way out of the requirements imposed on him by Sections 6067 and 6068 of the California Business and Professions Code (“CBPC”):  I carefully refuted his claims as follows:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/aol/contest.ehlers.htm

 2.  What, if any responses have been received by the CA BAR, et al., or Secretary of the Treasury?

There is presently no lawful Secretary of the Treasury, because both Geithner and Lew have turned up with COUNTERFEIT credentials:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/letter.2010-04-21/affidavit.refused.jpg

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/letter.2010-04-21/affidavit.gif

 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/affidavit.refused.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/affidavit.gif

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/

 Later, we served The State Bar of California with a comprehensive SUBPOENA, and their correspondence was promptly REFUSED for failing to produce ANY valid certificates of oath that must be indorsed upon the back of all licenses to practice law.

The folder containing the documents related to that SUBPOENA is here: 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/

 3.  Is there any lawful court which could hear the matter of the unlicensed attorneys practicing "as if" in California;  is this not a massive conspiracy of collusion?  What is the evidence that would compel a lawful proceeding -- OR, are the facts, as entered, a default admission of guilt by virtue of failure to respond?

Because the entire "legal system" in California appears to be compromised by these numerous impostors, many of whom have infiltrated both State and Federal Courts, it's nearly impossible to commence an impartial proceeding anywhere in the State of California.

Yes, it is a massive conspiracy -- chiefly to infringe rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as the Oath of Office Clause as implemented by several State and Federal statutes e.g. 4 U.S.C. 101, 5 U.S.C. 3331, etc.

The evidence is the failure by all 200,000+ "members" to produce ANY evidence of a complete, valid license to practice law;  after doing this investigation for NINE YEARS, we received ONE-HALF of one such license, and it was the front side only, not the back side where the certificate of oath must be "indorsed":  "in dorso" in Latin means "on the back" as when indorsing a standard bank check: 

http://supremelaw.org/cc/rainmaker/azar/State.Bar.License.1.JPG

Notice the huge overlap between missing licenses and the Federal "robes"

in California who are directly affected -- because they were also registered

as "members" of The State Bar of California:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/aol2/criminal.complaint.4.htm

Later, we confronted all California Appellate Court and California Supreme Court "robes" and they ALL failed to produce valid licenses, even though they too were also registered as "members":

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/calcourts/

4.  What are the procedures already in place to recall "damaged FRNs", please elaborate on where this action would originate, and the proposed mechanism (i.e. recall of outstanding notes, replacement of present fiat notes).

(re: http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/memo.recall.program.htm)?

U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Washington, D.C., assisted by Federal law enforcement officers e.g. Secret Service, U.S. Marshals, etc.

My Proposal to the Director of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing gets into some of the functional details which we believe would make this recall simple and straightforward:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/memo.recall.program.htm

And, here is a template letter which Americans can write and send to their State Governors:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/state.governor.intro.htm

A worldwide recall of all FRNs has more than symbolic value because Americans are presently required to pay interest on all FRNs in circulation;  however, those interest payments are now legally BARRED by the AUTOMATIC STAY authorized by 11 U.S.C. 362 and the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY filed by the United States ex rel. in a U.S. Bankruptcy Court here:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm

All Federal Reserve Banks are presently IN CONTEMPT of that AUTOMATIC STAY:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/interpleader.htm

5.  Where can one find a record of the filing of the United States Declaration of Insolvency?  What entity is represented as "bankrupt": the de jure Constitutional united States of America, or the corporation known as UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, domiciled in Washington, D.C.?

See above for a link to the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY etc.

The bankrupt entity is the "United States" i.e. the Federal Government domiciled in Washington, D.C., with standing to sue and be sued conferred by 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1346.

The "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" did incorporate twice as such in Delaware, but both corporations were subsequently revoked by the Delaware Secretary of State;  also, neither corporation ever registered to do business in any of the other States where we checked:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/  (e.g. New York = locus of The Conspiracy)

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/

There is a lot of mythology circulating on the Internet claiming -- falsely -- that the Federal government is a corporation;  we refuted that myth numerous times already e.g.:

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm

... and quite formally here at the U.S. Court of Appeals:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/reply.to.brief.for.appellee.htm

6.  What is the standing of present fiat bankers and their Federal Reserve Shell Corp's, acting "as if" legal guarantors of the present currency?  Does the formation of State banks effectively end the Federal Reserve System, and return legitimate power to the BOE?  What is the role of the U.S. Treasury, which is, my understanding, is also a PRIVATE CORPORATION?

They are in contempt of the AUTOMATIC STAY invoked formally at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Washington (State), and they are also implicated in a conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activities, due in large part to all of the fraud which their collection agency -- the IRS -- has been committing via fraudulent enforcement of a "liability" for IRC subtitle A which does NOT exist, as a matter of FACT:

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm

Even if it were a de jure service, bureau, office or other subdivision of the U.S. Department of the Treasury -- the one domiciled in Washington, D.C. -- the IRS would STILL have no authority to create a tax liability solely by means of Regulations published in the Federal Register:  see Commissioner v. Acker:

http://supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm

http://supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.gif

IRS is now what was left over of "The Untouchables" after alcohol Prohibition was repealed by the Twenty-First Amendment:  see U.S. v. Constantine.

Prohibition was secretly financed by the petroleum cartel, in order to perfect a monopoly in automotive fuels.

7.  What is the proposed backing of any such currency issued through the State Banks by the BOE?  Would there be a movement to asset-based currency, i.e. precious metals/commodity backed money, vs. the present toxic system of recycled debt notes churned through the financial markets at home and abroad?

The recall program we have proposed should be viewed as an "interim" measure, until such time as all circulating U.S. Notes can be redeemed in gold or silver specie.

We anticipate a simple Act of Congress which renders them redeemable as soon as the Treasury of the United States can execute such redemptions with a realistic guarantee of performance.

FRNs have been redeemable for a long time, but the Federal Reserve Banks have flatly refused to honor the laws which render FRNs redeemable.

Dr. Edwin J. Vieira, Jr. explained the importance of redemption in this lecture, which I transcribed and edited with his permission:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/vieira/vieira.htm

8.  What is the enforcement mechanism for the collection of the $8.6 TRILLION funds from the named parties?  Would we expect to see movements to protect assets, utilize off-shore shelters, or any types of "legal dodge" to prevent seizure of assets, and how would this be addressed?

This is where things get very sticky, because of the intense politics associated with the funds embezzled from the Pentagon.

You should know that my office has already requested the Joint Chiefs of Staff to pursue the passenger manifest of the full El Al Boeing 747 that departed JFK at 4:11 PM on 9/11/2001, destination David Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv:  that jet appeared to be the "getaway vehicle" for a plane full of 9/11 co-conspirators:  its departure was assisted by U.S. Military ground crews in violation of the grounding order issued earlier that day by U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.

In the main, a large chunk of funds disappeared when $2.3 TRILLION USD were embezzled from the Pentagon prior to 9/11/2001:

The forensic accountants who were reconstructing that crime were housed in offices adjacent to the Naval Command Center, most of those accountants perished on 9/11, and much of their evidence was intentionally destroyed by the hit on the Pentagon.

Nevertheless, not all such evidence was destroyed, and my office "followed the money" long enough to identify one key suspect and his Principal:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/zakheim/invoice.4.htm

When both he and his Principal fell silent, that INVOICE went into DEFAULT.

The funds payable by all 200,000 California State Bar members can come from their professional liability insurance contracts;  or, if some of them failed to maintain such liability insurance, the $9 Million will need to be paid from their private estates.

If they can't pay that amount from their private estates, then they can go to Federal prison:  that's how the United States views the $9 Million liability owed to the U.S. Treasury by each of those 200,000 "members" who never had valid licenses to practice law.

The $60,000 Management Fee payable to me by each such "member" is negotiable:  for example, I can anticipate selling my right to one such amount to someone who has already been damaged by one of those UNlicensed attorneys.

Just today, for example, an article published in the Washington Post disclosed a predatory attorney who is using foreclosure proceedings on struggling Americans, after paying their overdue property taxes in the District of Columbia:

Since he never had a license to practice law in California, the parties he has damaged now have a lot of leverage to apply again him, e.g. for mail fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud.

It may be wise for me to "assign" each $60,000 account receivable to one or more of such damaged parties, for a modest handling fee e.g. $500.  Even that amount is negotiable, depending on the damaged parties' ability to pay that amount.

I understand that some of this predator's victims were forced from their homes!

9.  Please explain your role as the Manager of the triple damage multiplier funds, and how you would interface with the BEP, U.S. Treasury, and State Banks.  Also, what time table would we expect in the adoption of your proposals through the remaining 49 states, upon adoption by the initial State Bank?  Does this require new legislation to implement across multiple States?

No one was doing anything about the $2.3 TRILLION USD which Donald Rumsfeld admitted was missing, at a Pentagon Press Conference on 9/10/2001 (the day before 9/11).

As part of the pro bono work I did for U.S. Coast Guard Investigations in San Diego, we investigated many facets of that mass murder:

One of those facets was the motive for hitting the Naval Command Center in the manner with which it was attacked:  the hit on the WTC triggered an emergency meeting of Naval Commanders at the Naval Command Center, and they were sitting ducks for the incoming AGM's depleted uranium warhead, and heavily modified A-3 Skywarrior filled with TNT and jet fuel, that both crashed into those offices in the Pentagon's "E" Ring.

So, I stepped in as Private Attorney General legally representing the United States "ex rel." -- as I have done previously many times.

There are ways in which Israel's debt to the United States could be "monetized" e.g. by way of forgiving major portions of that debt, in exchange for selling convertible bonds in open markets at major stock exchanges, like the New York Stock Exchange, Hong Kong Stock Exchange, New Zealand Stock Exchange, etc.

When I wrote to the S.E.C. with this idea, they ignored my letters, and so did the Washington State Attorney General's office:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sec/

I have written up a rudimentary demonstration of how that "monetizing" could be implemented, but to date the numbers I've used -- as example cash flows -- are not readily understood by the average American.

If you wanted to do some homework on this concept, Google "convertible bonds" and/or "convertible debentures".

Although your question about timetables is excellent, I have no particular timetables in mind, at this time.

And, yes, we do anticipate needing additional legislation, particularly in States where no State Banks are currently operating.

For example, I have no personal need for all of the funds that would be credited to my own private account in each State Bank.  And, for that reason, I intend to work with State Government officials and State Bank officials to identify the most beneficial ways to utilize all that money for the public good.

10.  How would the "average American" benefit from your proposal, and what actions would be required to educate the "public", to advance acceptance of this new system?

Lots of ways, and actually too many to enumerate here, or to mention here.

Average Americans need to understand that:

(a)         they have no legal obligation to pay Federal income taxes;

(b)         interest payments have been payable on all FRNs in circulation;

(c)         the AUTOMATIC STAY now prohibits the FED banks from collecting any more of those interest payments;

(d)         compensating Federal employees with United States Notes will provide a functional vehicle by which FRNs can be "driven out" of circulation, in conjunction with a well advertised government program of recalling all FRNs during a reasonable transition period;

(e)         a lot of education will be required, and you are already demonstrating excellent leadership by airing an open discussion about all of these issues;

(f)          if Americans will focus on replacing all FRNs with U.S. Notes, along with that focus they can and should understand that halting a substantial amount of interest payments on the Federal debt will help the entire economy in major ways;

(g)         there are a multitude of second- and third-order effects such as voiding all currently recorded NOTICES OF FEDERAL TAX LIEN because none of those was ever preceded by procedurally proper ASSESSMENTS -- due chiefly to the absence of any liability STATUTE;  IRS cannot satisfy IRC section 6065 without committing FELONY perjury!

(h)         ultimately, this Proposal contemplates total abolition of the Federal Reserve System and the Internal Revenue Service, at the same time:  I doubt that the average American will oppose abolition of the IRS, but the need to abolish the Federal Reserve System at the same time will need further explanation:

There are plenty of good resources which already explain the need to abolish the FED:  cf. Bill Still's work on YouTube, as one excellent example;  there are many other good examples e.g.:

http://hiddensecretsofmoney.com/

I hope this helps.

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13

 

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Ken O'Keefe wrote: 

Excellent, would love to come to this.

Let me ask you something Paul:

Bill Still (of Money Masters fame), has written a piece saying that executive order 11110 did not actually threaten the Federal Reserve at all, that it was rather inconsequential.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/content/bill-still-jfk-and-executive-order-11110-its-not-what-you-think

I do not want to believe this really, but I just wonder if Bill Still has got this wrong and if you have an opinion of what he says?

Either way Kennedy was a changed man after the Cuban Missile Crisis and had pissed off Israel (Rothschild's bankers) in more than one way.

TJP

 

Many thanks, Ken.

There is a lot of debate about JFK's EO 11110, and I'd need to review the specific language of each authority which Bill Still is citing, before I could answer your excellent question properly:

For an opposite argument, please see this:

http://www.rense.com/general76/jfkvs.htm

In some ways, that Executive Order is similar to a red herring, which causes many people to overlook the forest for the trees.

I think you and your many contacts will do a lot better to study this next excellent presentation, because it does a very good job of simplifying the obvious and deliberate complexity which surrounds the FED:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=005_1386131628

also here:

http://hiddensecretsofmoney.com/

I believe I have identified at least one path to a monetary system that does NOT charge interest on our currency.  And, yes, that path necessarily stops any and all future interest payments to a private banking cartel bent on damaging America.

The steps I've proposed are relatively simple and straightforward, by design, because they can be easily understood by most Americans and implemented without enormous disruptions to the entire fiscal and monetary system.

Whether or not JFK increased or limited the supply of United States Notes with one of his Executive Orders, is of little consequence now, except for its historical significance.

THE U.S. NOTES IN QUESTION WERE ISSUED, AND I REMEMBER HAVING ONE IN MY HAND MANY YEARS AGO!  That makes me a Witness.

It is the prior existence of United States Notes which is the KEY HISTORICAL POINT here, and there is no reason of which I am aware why the Bureau of Engraving and Printing cannot resume issuance of such currency -- in the manner and using the procedures I have proposed.

If they can print U.S. Bonds, they can print U.S. Notes.

Brother Nathanael also has a brief but accurate video which emphasizes this same point.

Mine is a policy-level proposal:  recall all FRNs and exchange all FRNs for United States Notes, establish 50 State Banks, and "prime the pumps" with $12 Billion United States Notes divided equally among those 50 State Banks ($240 Million each) as an advance on our Management Fee shown on the INVOICE to The State Bar of California and its 200,000+ "members":

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/invoice.1.htm

This "advance" means that the U.S. Treasury can then charge statutory interest on that amount, instead of leaving that $12 Billion as payable to me, with interest payable to me.

I am told that California law now permits pre-judgment interest of 10%, but we are showing only 7% simple interest on that INVOICE (see above).

How that $240 Million in each State Bank is spent will be decided with the input and cooperation of State Government officials and State Bank officials in each of the 50 States.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing already has established procedures for destroying "damaged" currency.  We execute those same procedures with all FRNs that are surrendered to BEP, chiefly because those FRNs will NOT be conveyed to any FED banks once the recall program is operational.

I hope this helps.

And, many thanks for your concern and support.

:end

Formal DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
was filed and served here at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court,
Eastern District of Washington (State):

http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/interpleader.htm


-- 
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
 
___
 
Related:

December 29, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Private Attorney General in USA Comments Re: "U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III Is A Traitor."

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 1:28 PM, "Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S."  wrote:


http://www.militianews.com/u-s-district-judge-william-h-pauley-iii-is-a-traitor/

"
The decision was made by Judge William H. Pauley III shortly after 
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington ruled ...."


[end quote]


Greetings Mr. Pearson:

Because the major media AND the vast majority of alternative media
are ignoring COMPLETELY an ongoing investigation of missing and
defective credentials for members of the Federal Judiciary --
which is being actively assisted by the U.S. Department of Justice --
we are writing to you in the hope that you will distinguish yourself
from those unfortunate media groups.


Mr. Pauley's OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS are fatally defective
for lacking a valid OMB control number, and he has failed to remedy this error:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#SDNY

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/pauley.william/

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/pauley.william/affidavit.refused.jpg

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/pauley.william/nad.missing.credentials.htm (IN DEFAULT)


 
The legal significance of missing and/or defective OMB control numbers
was explained in detail in this formal NOTICE, which was also filed
in that same USDC / SDNY with no responses from Messrs. Hedges,
Ellsberg or Chomsky either!

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/United.States.Notice.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/  (OPM's ADMISSION (1x))

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/  (OMB's ADMISSION (2x))



Standing authorities re: legal consequences of missing credentials
are summarized here:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions.htm


e.g.:
Without taking the oath prescribed by law
one cannot become a judge either de jure or de facto, and 
such an individual is without authority to act and 
his acts as such are void until he has taken the prescribed oath.
[French v. State, 572 S.W.2d 934]
[Brown v. State, 238 S.W.2d 787]



The Paperwork Reduction Act's Public Protection Clause
was given even greater strength by a subsequent amendment,
after that PRA was first enacted by Congress:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/44/3512


(b) 
The protection provided by this section may be raised in the form of 
complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time during
the agency administrative process or judicial action applicable thereto. 



Your membership can "strike at the root" by 
editing this RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO INSPECT
and timely serving same on all current Federal employees:
Meanwhile, "activists" like Larry Klayman stubbornly continue to 
commit the same Fundamental Error, in blatant violation
of the Oath of Office that is also required of all licensed attorneys.

http://supremelaw.org/cc/aol/criminal.complaint.htm

LIST OF AUTHORITIES

Plaintiff cites the following authorities in support of His VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, to wit:  Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 73 (1932) (“attorneys are officers of the court”);  Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., 987 F.2d 1536, 1546 (11th Cir 1993) (“All attorneys, as officers of the court ....”);  Pumphrey v. K.W. Thompson Tool Co., 62 F.3d 1128, 1130 (9th Cir. 1995) (see section “II.”);  “Let Us Be Officers of the Court,” by Hon. Marvin E. Aspen, 83 ABA Journal 94 (1997);  and FRCP Rule 1, Advisory Committee Notes, 1993 Amendments (“as officers of the court, attorneys share ....”)


Hope this helps.  

Please feel free to forward this message widely,
because our patience is frankly running very thin after so many
"alternative journalists" have stubbornly refused to honor
and enforce Article VI in the U.S. Constitution -- particularly
past and present U.S. Military personnel:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#6:3
p.s.  The bleak situation in California has recently come to a head
with this INVOICE FOR CIVIL RICO DAMAGES to all past and present 
"members" of  The State Bar of California:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/invoice.1.htm
 
Gee, do you wonder if those UNlicensed ATTORNeys have 
professional liability insurance, and do those insurance contracts
indemnify criminal conduct?


http://supremelaw.org/authors/maugans/Two.Invoices.htm

-- 
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
-- 

December 29, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Three of JFK Shooters Had Ties to the CIA

Three of Six Shooters of JFK Had Ties to CIA | Sherwood Ross

Saturday, 28 December 2013, 8:16 am
Article: Sherwood Ross

 

Three of Six Shooters of JFK Had Ties to CIA


By Sherwood Ross

Six shooters who participated in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, including three with ties to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), were named by a prominent critic of the Warren Commission Report (WCR). Remarkably, Lee Harvey Oswald, the Warren Commission's lone-assassin-designate, was not among them.

During an interview published this past Nov. 20th in The Santa Barbara Independent, WCR critic/researcher Dr. James Fetzer of Madison, WI, and Chairman of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, revealed the names of five of those who appear to have been shooters, where he has identified the sixth separately:

(1) The first shot that hit, which struck Kennedy in the back, appears to have been fired from the top of the County Records Building by Dallas Deputy Sheriff Harry Weatherford. He used a 30.06 to fire a Mannlicher-Carcano (MC) bullet fitted with a plastic collar known as a sabot, which hit JFK 5.5" below the shoulder just to the right of the spinal column. This was a shallow wound with no point of exit.

(2) Jack Lawrence, a U.S. Air Force expert, who had gone to work for the automobile dealership that provided vehicles for the presidential motorcade just a few days before the assassination, fired the shot that passed through the windshield and struck JFK in the throat from the south end of the Triple Underpass.

(3) Nestor "Tony" Izquierdo, an anti-Castro Cuban recruited by the CIA, fired the shot that hit JFK in the back of the head after the limousine was brought to a halt. He fired three shots with two misses using a Mannlicher-Carcano, which were the only unsilenced shots fired, from the Dal-Tex Building, which housed a uranium mining corporation, Dallas Uranium and Oil, that was a CIA front.

 

(4) Roscoe White, a Dallas police officer with ties to the CIA, fired from the grassy knoll adjoining the motorcade route, but seems to have "pulled his shot," Fetzer said, "because it would have hit Jackie, so his shot went into the grass." His son subsequently discovered his diary, but gave it to the FBI and it has not been seen since.

(5) Malcolm "Mac" Wallace, who shot from the Dallas Book Depository, may have murdered a dozen people for Lyndon B. Johnson. "Mac" appears to have fired from the west side of the book depository at Texas Governor John Connally in the mistaken belief he was Sen. Ralph Yarborough, whom LBJ despised. Wallace's fingerprint was found on one of the boxes in the "assassin's lair" in the book depository from which Oswald allegedly fired.

(6) Frank Sturgis, later complicit in the Watergate robbery, who also appears to have been connected to the CIA, is said by Fetzer to have fired from the north end of the Triple Underpass the shot that entered Kennedy's right temple. Sturgis is known to have ties to Meyer Lansky, a notorious crime syndicate kingpin, and confessed his role to a New York City Gold Shield Detective when he was arrested attempting to kill Marita Lorenz.

In his interview with the Santa Barbara "Independent," Fetzer said "there were shooters at six different locations," with a total of up to 10 shots fired, three of which missed. He asserted JFK was hit four different times: in the back from behind, in the throat from in front, and twice in the head after the driver had brought the car to a halt to make sure he would be killed. Another shot missed and injured bystander James Tague, while "one or more shots hit Connally."

By contrast, the Warren Commission concluded that a single bullet struck Kennedy in the back, exited through his throat and then wounded Connally. Fetzer explained that the "magic bullet" theory propounded by the Warren Commission is not only false but provably false and not even anatomically possible, because cervical vertebrae intervene.

Ruth Paine, who appears to have been working for the CIA, arranged for Oswald to go to work for at book depository "just weeks before the assassination, which was part of the whole project to set him up as a patsy," Fetzer said. Right up to the time of the assassination, Oswald was a paid FBI informant, collecting $200 a month, which explains why his W-2 forms have never been released by the government.

As for the motivation to kill JFK, Fetzer noted that he was threatening to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces, that the Joint Chiefs believed he was soft on communism, that the Mafia was unhappy because Attorney General Robert Kennedy was cracking down on organized crime, that he was going to abolish the FED and cut the oil depletion allowance.

Fetzer said Vice President Johnson, who had forced his way onto the ticket with JFK in Los Angeles in order to succeed him when he would be taken out, "was a pivotal player" facilitating the assassination. LBJ sent his chief administrative assistant, Cliff Carter, down to Dallas to make sure all the arrangements for the assassination were in place. And his close friend, J. Edgar Hoover, used the FBI to cover it up.

Fetzer said further there where "more than 15 indications of Secret Service complicity in setting Kennedy up for the hit": two agents assigned to the President's limousine were left behind at Love Field; that JFK's limousine, which should have been in the middle of the motorcade, was put first; that the motorcycle escort was reduced to four and instructed not to ride ahead of the limousine's rear wheels; and after the first shots were fired, the driver pulled the limo to the left and stopped.

What's more, Fetzer produced an AP photograph that appears to show Oswald standing in doorway of the book depository at the time JFK was shot. It has been compared with Oswald photographs taken later that afternoon in Dallas police headquarters. When questioned, Oswald told Dallas homicide detective Will Fritz that during the shooting he had been standing with Bill Shelley, one of his supervisors, in front of the building.

Note the missing left shoulder and the figure who is in front of and behind the man in the doorway (left photo) at the same time, which are obvious indications the AP photo has been altered. Facial features have been distorted, but the clothing is the key. "If you look at the height, weight, build, and the clothing he's wearing---especially the highly unusual shirt and the t-shirt he has on---they correspond very closely to what Oswald was wearing when he was arrested," Fetzer said. (Right photo)

For more proof that the man in the doorway (Doorman) was Oswald, visit the Oswald Innocence Campaign on-line. While they altered features of Doorman's face, the only other candidates for having been there were not wearing comparable clothing or did not fit the height, weight and build of the man in the doorway. When you consider the totality of the evidence, no alternative explanation is reasonable.

In his Santa Barbara Independent interview, Fetzer said public opinion polls "have shown over the years that as much as 85 percent of the public has expressed disagreement with the Warren Commission and the lone assassin theory." Fetzer elaborated on the points he made in great detail during his keynote address, "The Assassination of America", for the Santa Barbara JFK conference that he organized and moderated, which is now available at jfk50santabarbara.com.

Fetzer is a former Marine Corps officer who earned his Ph.D. in the history and philosophy of science. He has published 29 books, including three collections of studies by experts on different aspects of the assassination. Distinguished McKnight University Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, he is also an editor for, and contributor to, Veterans Today.#

 

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

(Editors: Further information please contact Sherwood Ross Associates, media consultants to Dr. Fetzer: 102 SW 6th Avenue, Miami, FL, 33130 (305)205-8281. Or, sherwoodross10@gmail.com)

© Scoop Media

Ref: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1312/S00202/three-of-six-shooters-of-jfk-had-ties-to-cia-sherwood-ross.htm

Related: http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2013/11/jfk-murder-truth-telling-heading-to-the-grassy-knoll-on-november-22nd-50th-anniversary.html

December 29, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

How was John Franklin Elrod involved in the John F. Kennedy assassination investigation?

 January 22nd, 2011 |  Author: 

John Franklin Elrod Commercial Appeal Article:

This is an interesting article from the Memphis Commercial Appeal, about John Elrod and how he was factored in with the Kennedy Assassination Investigation

As you read the article, notice that the Sheriff’s office specifically stated that, “Elrod was sober” when he came to them, and that they were impressed enough with him to tell the FBI that he had “information of value”.

In fact, the local Sheriff was impressed enough with Elrod to bypass the local FBI office and writes directly to Hoover.

Unfortunately, the FBI took a somewhat different attitude about Elrod’s story. They falsely claimed in their report, that Elrod wasn’t even in the Dallas jail on 11/22/63, and they tried to create the impression that Elrod never mentioned Oswald’s name, only referring to an “unnamed cellmate”.

Of course, the Sheriff’s report, as well as a recently discovered internal FBI memo confirmed that they were fully aware that Elrod was talking about Oswald.

—————————————————-
Memphis Commercial Appeal (Nov. 10, 1997)

By Bartholomew Sullivan

On Aug. 11, 1964, just after midnight, a troubled man stumbled into the Shelby County Sheriff’s Department in downtown Memphis, carrying a sawed-off shotgun. He had a story to tell about Lee Harvey Oswald.

John Franklin Elrod gave his story to a sergeant on duty, A. C. Gilless. Thirty-three years later, Gilless, now sheriff can’t recall the incident but says that, under the circumstances, he’s surprised he can’t remember.

“1964? Lord have mercy. That’s 33 years ago,” he said. What Elrod told Gilless and then the FBI could go far in debunking the official explanation of Oswald’s televised murder two days after President John F. Kennedy was killed, according to a new book on the case, Oswald Talked: The New Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination.

Among the revelations: Oswald knew his own killer, Jack Ruby.

According to the book and documents now available from the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, Elrod was Oswald’s Dallas cellmate between the time the accused assassin was arrested and the time Oswald was shot to death by strip-club owner Ruby while being taken down to the garage of the Dallas County jail.

The book indicates Oswald was probably an FBI informant who’d infiltrated a Cuban exile group that was buying stolen guns in Texas. According to Elrod, Oswald said Ruby was part of the gunrunning ring, as was another man paraded before the jail cell bars for Oswald to identify, authors Mary and Ray LaFontaine say in their book.


A Dallas police report released to The Commercial Appeal under the Freedom of Information Act says Elrod was arrested Nov. 22, 1963 – the day Kennedy was killed – at 2:45 p.m. “on railroad tracks a few minutes after a radio call was dispatched that [a] man was walking along railroad carrying a rifle. This man was not carrying a rifle at time of arrest.” He was charged with “Inv. murder and Co. Vag.,” apparently investigation of murder and violation of the county vagrancy law.

He was released days later and left town. What he heard Oswald say in jail about Ruby and the gunrunners is the subject of the book that stars Gilless in a cameo role.

Gilless’s original reaction to hearing of his involvement in the controversy was to say the Elrod incident never occurred.

“None of it’s true,” he said in a telephone interview Oct. 16. “I’ve heard from several people who read that book and asked me about it but I can assure you none of that happened.”

But shown the documents from the National Archives last week, Gilless acknowledged his signature on an urgent letter to J. Edgar Hoover, then the FBI director.

“Apparently I had some contact with him (Elrod) because I wrote this letter and signed it,” he said. “But in those days I processed many, many people through this jail.”

Gilless’s letter to Hoover was itself unusual, Gilless says:

“I wrote that letter apparently directly to Hoover, and I don’t know why I did that, rather than call the local office. I don’t know why I don’t remember that.”

Gilless’s letter to Hoover reads in part: “This subject walked into our office at approximately 12:30 a.m. this date and stated he had information concerning the murder of Lee Oswalt (sic). He had with him a travel bag which contained a sawed- off shot gun. The local office of the FBI has been informed of this subject and stated they would conduct an investigation. Please wire reply collect. Yours truly, Alton C. Gilless Jr.”

Hoover did reply, in a memo dated Aug. 12 and corrected by a different typewriter to read Aug. 13. The director wrote simply that Elrod had a rap sheet with the FBI but was not wanted.

The FBI’s local office also was involved in talking to Elrod. In another National Archives document, Special Agent Joseph M. Brewi writes to an unidentified “SAC” or special agent in charge that Shelby County Sheriff’s Capt. R. G. McEllroy called him about Elrod. McEllroy died in 1982.

“(Elrod) claimed he had information re the death of Oswald and wanted to get it off his chest. McEllroy added that Elrod was sober and he, McEllroy, thought Elrod may have some information of value,” Brewi wrote.

The LaFontaines, Dallas-based journalists who found and identified the suspicious “three tramps” photographed walking in police custody shortly after the Kennedy assassination, say they, too, are surprised Gilless can’t recall the Elrod interview.

The couples say Elrod, now 64, fears for his life, doesn’t have a phone and doesn’t want to talk about the incident. They interviewed him on an island in the Mississippi River north of Memphis but won’t say whether he’s still there. By agreement, they won’t reveal his whereabouts.

This information can be found at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02738.html

————————————————————

How was John Franklin Elrod involved in the John F. Kennedy assassination investigation? 11 AUG 1964

Memphis, Tennessee FBI report dated 8/11/64 that describes their interview with Elrod, almost 10 months after the assassination.

August 11, 1964

JOHN FRANKLIN ELROD, an inmate of the Shelby County, Tennessee, Jail, as of August 11, 1964, furnished the following information:

ELROD currently lives at Memphis, Tennessee, and has been staying at the Harbor House, Memphis, prior to the time of his arrest for which he was placed in jail on August 11, 1964. The Harbor House, 1369 Court Avenue, Memphis, is a home for alcoholics, and ELROD stated that he, himself, is an alcoholic.

ELROD had come to the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office during the early morning hours of August 11, 1964, after having consumed some beer and vodka. He was at that time in possession of a sawed-off 12 gauge shotgun which had a pistol grip. He stated that he had begun to think of the possibilities of killing his wife from whom he is now separated. Inasmuch as he had the sawed-off shotgun and the desire to kill her was known to him, he decided he should come to the Sheriff’s Office and talk, which he did.

He further advised that he had been somewhat troubled by events which occurred immediately following the assassination of President JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY at Dallas, Texas, on November 11, [sic] 1963.

Shortly after the assassination of the President, ELROD, who had been about two and one half miles from the scene of the assassination at Lemon and Oaklawn Streets in Dallas, was arrested by the Dallas Police Department and placed in the City Jail. His arrest had nothing to do with the assassination of the President. At the City Jail in Dallas, he was placed in Cell 10 on the fifth floor, and at that time his cellmate was a man whose identity he could not recall. An individual, whose face was smashed up, was brought into the hallway of the jail where ELROD and his cellmate could observe him. At that time the unknown cellmate made some mention that he had known this man with the injured face as a result of meeting him at a hotel. The cellmate stated that five men had met at a motel, and they had been advanced some money under some type of contract. One of these men was reported to have received $5,000. The man with the injured face had received some money, and he was reported to have been driving a Thunderbird automobile with a large quantity of guns contained therein. ELROD advised he was confined in Dallas City Jail for a period of 72 hours, and he was confused at this time concerning the events which occurred. He stated he could not recall whether JACK RUBY’s name had been mentioned prior to the time of the killing of LEE HARVEY OSWALD, but that this cellmate at some time had told him that one of the men who had been at the motel referred to above, name and location unknown, had been JACK RUBY. This was all the information which ELROD could recall.

He stated that on several occasions he has had difficulty remembering due to his extreme use of alcohol. He knew nothing concerning the assassination of the President, the involvement of JACK RUBY in the killing of LEE HARVEY OSWALD, or of any information concerning the possibility of the receipt of money by JACK RUBY, except the hearsay information he had received from his unknown cellmate.

ELROD is described as follows:
Race white
Sex male
Date of Birth November 12, 1932
Place of Birth Bassett, Arkansas
Height 5’11 1/2″
Weight 180 lbs.
Complexion medium
Occupation cook
Wife JACKIE PAT ELROD nee Richards,
2816 Morris, Dallas, Texas
Father HOBSON ELROD, Bassett, Arkansas
Scars and marks one and one-half inch cut scar on forehead; little finger, left hand, off at first joint; left arm is undersized.

 
 Posted in Uncategorized
 
 

December 27, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Curious Facts About the JFK Assassination

Curious Facts About the JFK Assassination

Filed under: John F Kennedy — 8 Comments
February 27, 2012

Curious Facts About the JFK Assassination

Wake Up! JFK, The Last American President

Wake Up! JFK, The Last American President

What do these men have in common?

  • Lyndon B. Johnson
  • Richard Nixon
  • Gerald Ford
  • George Herbert Walker Bush

Of course, they all went on to become American Presidents. But that is too obvious, so what else do they have in common? 11/22/1963… Let’s explore.

LBJ,  Nixon and G.H.W. Bush were all in Dallas that day but only LBJ had a clear recollection of being there (he was in a separate limousine in the motorcade). Both Nixon and GWHB later stated that they couldn’t recall exactly where they were when the President got his brains blown out. I remember that I was boarding my school bus in Bay Shore at age 13 when I heard that he had been shot, but these two future presidents just couldn’t recall.

As for Gerry Ford, he served on the greatest whitewash panel of our time, The Warren Commission. It might also be important to note that G.H.W. Bush served briefly as Director of the CIA and was long time friend of George De Morenschildt, who in turn was a CIA asset and close friends with Lee Harvey Oswald, who in turn was the designated patsy in the presidential brain splatter caper. De Morenschildt had helped Lee Harvey get that cool job at the book depository a few months earlier. That’s what friends are for.

In 1976, George Herbert Walker Bush became CIA Director and promptly received a note of congratulations from his old pal De Mohrenschildt. In that same note, De Mohrenschildt asks GHWB for help because he fears he flapped his lips too much and was being followed and phone tapped. Six months later, on the day he was contacted by the House Select Committee on Assassinations about testifying, De Mohrenschildt committed suicide. GHWB had written back that he could find no evidence of any Federal interest in him, but cannily adds at the end “I can only speculate that you may have become “newsworthy” again in view of the renewed interest in the Kennedy assassination, and thus may be attracting the attention of people in the media. I hope this letter had been of some comfort to you, George, although I realize I am unable to answer your question completely. George Bush, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. ”[CIA Exec Reg. # 76,51571 9.28.76] Ponder that last sentence for a minute “although I realize I am unable to answer your question completely”. Just think about it… GHWB is answering this letter as Director of the CIA. If he did know more, could he actually say so? Not really… and certainly not in a letter. One can take that last line two different ways. Either GHWB really didn’t know any more than he stated or that he really couldn’t disclose it given his new post as super spook.

There is one last curious fact regarding De Mohrenschildt before we move on. He had been lifelong friends with Jackie Kennedy’s family and he knew her pretty much all of her life.

The Cellmate’s story

Lee Harvey Oswald had a cellmate when he was first arrested named John Elrod. Oswald told Elrod that he didn’t shoot anybody and that he had accompanied Jack Ruby a few days before to a motel where money changed hands in exchange for guns. Oswald had been a witness to Ruby’s gun running . As for poor Elrod, his arrest report had curiously vanished from the Dallas police files so the FBI discounted his testimony saying that Elrod was never in custody, so his story had no credibility.

The Infamous Grassy Knoll

Immediately following the last and fatal shot, dozens of people standing near that knoll rushed the area of the picket fence at the top. Dozens of them testified that they had heard that last shot come from the knoll, not the book depository where Oswald was working further up the street. Witnesses who had been standing off to the side some 30 feet from the knoll testified that they had seen a puff of smoke that hung in the air in front of the picket fence at the top of the knoll.

A deaf mute, Ed Hoffman, had stopped his car on the side of the freeway that ran behind the knoll and he said that he saw two men walk away from the knoll; one was wearing a blue jacket and he carried a rifle. Hoffman saw the blue jacketed man hand off the rifle to another man who was dressed in a railroad uniform shirt. He saw the second man quickly take the rifle apart and place it in a toolbox and walk toward the railroad tracks. Witnesses who stormed the knoll reported that they had seen lots of cigarette butts, footprints in mud, and muddy prints on the bumper of a car, all behind the fence at the top of that knoll.

Excellent Dealey Plaza map Dallas Texas

Excellent Dealey Plaza map, Dallas Texas

Lee Bowers, a railroad employee, was stationed in the fourteen foot railroad tower just behind and north of the grassy knoll. At 12:30pm on Nov 22, 1963, he saw a flash and a puff of smoke from the area of the wooden fence on top of the grassy knoll. Four months after giving a recorded statement to Kennedy assassination researcher Mark Lane, eyewitnesses say that Bower’s car was forced off the road by a black car and he crashed into a bridge abutment. He died of his injuries four hours later, but not before telling emergency personnel that he felt that he had been drugged when he stopped for coffee a few miles back.

A friend of Lee Bowers some years later told the “rest of the story”. Lee had seen far more than he told.  He had actually witnessed a car pull up behind the fence. Two men got out with rifles and one got up on the car. He saw both men fire. Bower received no autopsy and he was promptly cremated. His death certificate is curiously missing from the public records and his insurance company refused to pay stating that his death “was not accidental”.

Lee Harvey Oswald being shot by Jack ...

But here is the cherry on the top of the conspiratorial sundae. Approximately one hour before the Kennedy motorcade was to make its approach to the grassy knoll, Julia Ann Mercer was stuck in a traffic jam right at the grassy knoll. There was a green pick up truck next to her. She saw a man take a rifle from the back of the truck and walk up the grassy knoll. She assumed at the time that this was a secret service agent getting into position to protect the president. She continued on her way not giving it another thought, but after Kennedy was shot, she filed a report with the FBI. Several days later, when photographs of Jack Ruby hit the front page of the newspapers, she realized that the man removing the rifle from the back of the pick up truck was Jack Ruby. Ruby, most likely, was not one of the shooters.  He was merely delivering the weapons. There is a stormdrain behind that fence. Most likely, he hid the rifle there or delivered the rifle to a shooter who was to be positioned under the sidewalk at ground level. One other shooter and an assistant arrived later and took position behind the fence, one standing on the bumper of a car, as several witnesses testified. No doubt, there was another shooter in the book depository, but it was not Oswald. He was observed in the lunch room drinking a Coke just before the motorcade drove by. And there is a very controversial photo snapped by a person in the Dealey Plaza crowd that shows Oswald standing in the front doorway of the book depository just as the motorcade begins to drive past.

For information on who did do it:

http://adriaen22.wordpress.com/2012/04/28/the-men-who-killed-kennedy/

Related articles

Ref: http://adriaen22.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/curious-facts-about-the-jfk-assassination/

Related: http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2013/11/jfk-murder-truth-telling-heading-to-the-grassy-knoll-on-november-22nd-50th-anniversary.html

December 27, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Bombshell Proof Oswald A Patsy And An Assassin Hit Team Murdered JFK

See in particular some of the material in JFK - Bombshell Proof Oswald A Patsy And An Assassin Hit Team Murdered JFK at the following link:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2013/11/jfk-murder-truth-telling-heading-to-the-grassy-knoll-on-november-22nd-50th-anniversary.html

December 26, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

The State of Public Education

WTP wrote:

This may be long but I wrote a paragraph summary below. I used to be a member here, but I left a long time ago. I just came here because I genuinely feel it's an issue people should be aware of and at least research to form an opinion for themselves.

This may be long, so I will summarize it here for those who are going to say it's too long to read:

Public Education as we know it today began in Prussia in the early 1800s. Prussia's goal with education was to indoctrinate its youth into a nationalistic mindset, as well as one of obedience. It worked exceptionally well, Prussia became a world power on the heels of its compulsory schooling experiment. One of the most important facets of it was taking children in early, hence kindergarten being a German word. Education as we know it has not changed, though the model has been tweaked. It has the same purpose and for that reason can never be fixed as long as it remains the way it is.

There is a lot of misinformation out there so, if you don't discard this as conspiracy nonsense and decide to research, be wary - there definitely is conspiracy nonsense out there. In general what has happened to schooling is not conspiracy. It is actually quite out in the open. You can look up "Prussian education" on Wikipedia right now and verify the short excerpt above. Really it is just hidden in plain sight.

Woodrow Wilson himself said to a teachers conference: "We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger class, of necessity, in every society, to forego the privileges of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks. " I would add that this was during a time when robotics didn't exist; these days the content of this quote is expired in relevancy, BUT the idea behind it remains the same. The American workforce has just transformed into a bureaucracy.

Another quote by Winston Churchill is: "Schools have not necessarily much to do with education... they are mainly institutions of control, where basic habits must be inculcated in the young. Education is quite different and has little place in school."

I will not lay out the whole history as it is miles long; key players in it are the Prussian Model, John Dewey, corporate foundations such as the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations, the turn of the century psychologist boom of people known as "behaviorists" (think Pavlov's Dogs) and Hugo Munsterberg whom I believe coined the term "Human Resources. And on that note the term "well-adjusted" was coined by behaviorists to mean a subject had been well-adjusted due to behaviorist methods.

William Torey Harris, the Commissioner of Education in the U.S. from 1889 to 1906 said in The Philosophy of Education: "Ninety-nine out of a hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed custom. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which, scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual."

There's also the Gary Schools, an institution that we live in today. This was an education experiment that most prominently introduced the idea of using a bell schedule system to move students from classroom to classroom, but also had an effect on curriculum and how they were taught. The intentions of this system have been debated before, as it was funded heavily by the Rockefeller Foundation (something I will get into in a moment). It was implemented widespread in New York City in the early 1900s, and caused many riots and protests from citizens. It was eventually revoked by a newly elected mayor John Francis Hylan, who said it was "a system by which Rockefellers and their allies hope to educate coming generations in the 'doctrine of contentment,' another name for social serfdom."

The most prominent resource that I have come across to indicate schooling should not be left in the hands of government and certainly shouldn't be compulsory is the Reece Congressional Committee on Foundations. It was a congressional investigation into the hand the industrialist foundations had in schooling.

The committee was disbanded prematurely due to heavy media criticism and attacks to the effect of "they are trying to ruin education."

This link is to the Dodd Report, the official but tentative findings of the premature investigation: http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2008/07/the-dodd-report.html

And finally just to address some possible inevitable criticisms that say "but we need mandatory schools!" I'd ask you first off to go ask your coworker, neighbor or manager to answer a chemistry problem using moles, ask them to answer a physics problem dealing with an object thrown in an arc off of a cliff and what its velocity the instant before impact was, or how far it traveled. Ask them to tell you all the amendments to the Constitution. Ask them what a ribosome is, in fact ask them to name the parts of a eukaryote cell and its significance in biology. Ask them about the Grenville Orogeny, ask them what supercontinents came before Pangea. See if they can answer a quadratic problem, see if they know what philosophers influenced the Founding Fathers the most, and then see if they can tell you what John Locke's, Hume's, Hobbes' or Rousseau's philosophies were.

If they can't answer these questions then school amounted to a waste of time, and even if they can answer many of these questions you may look back over that list and ask yourself: "Why did I need to know what the Grenville Orogeny was? Why did I need to know about eukaryotes? What is the significance in learning abstractions of chemistry if I am not a chemist?"

You might ask: "But what about literacy and math? Who will teach them to read?"

Literacy has been declining. America has been renowned for its literacy in a time when there were no public schools. The country as a whole used to make college graduate level books of philosophy best sellers, whereas now the best selling "philosophy" book is probably "The Secret", a book with what appears to be a 5th grade level of vocabulary.

I'd tell you to disregard the Census Bureau's statistics, they've been criticized for simply asking: "Can you read and write?" - of course they can, you'd be a moron if you couldn't, SLAVES were capable of teaching themselves to read and write using the Bible. Literacy is better measured in quality - to what degree are you literate? In that respect the literacy rate has undeniably faltered. In fact the most famous founder of our country, George Washington, learned trigonometry at the age of 11 and was already fully literate and capable of algebra. 11 was the time he first went to school, so he learned algebra and how to read at a college level without school.

Benjamin Franklin was reading books of a college graduate level as someone who wasn't formally educated by the time one would be in middle school today.

The city with the most famous intellectual culture in history, Athens, had no school system at all. The only thing resembling a school system was Plato's Academy, which from what we know was more like a spot intellectuals discussed math and philosophy than a classroom. I think this illustrates people don't have to be coerced to learn. The human animal is naturally curious.

I'd say that in the past children were treated like individuals. Ben Franklin left his home at the age of 10. Nowadays that would be outrageous, but Franklin got work at this age. The very idea of adolescence was created by psychologists in the 20th century. Before that children weren't treated like drooling idiots that can do nothing, they weren't lied to about the Easter Bunny. They were given the world for what it was, and they lived in the real world rather than being buffered from it and "prepared" for it. People like Thomas Edison would not occur in today's society. Thomas Edison sold his own newspapers out of a train at about the age of 13, and he made good money doing it. He first experimented with phosphorus and electricity in that train, and he was actually kicked out of school because he wasn't good at math.

Thomas Edison today would probably be recommended Adderrall and end up an angsty kid forced to be in an institution he doesn't want to be in.

American society used to be mostly entrepreneurial. Many 16 year olds owned their own businesses. Today everyone waits till the age of 21 to get a BA so they are "specialized" in some field to be employed (disregard the medical field in this criticism for obvious reasons), even though many of the computer science whiz kids that made fortunes on advancing computer technology in Silicon Valley were highschool dropouts.

I think the school system is a great injustice in its current form. It has severely retarded adulthood, and it undermines the ability of people to pursue a particular path from a young age like they used to in the past. Kids are not morons unless you treat them like morons. I'd end compulsory education immediately, though I'd leave open the option to go to public school anyways. I'd consider ending public education completely and returning that money to the hands of the taxpayers to pay for private schools, as it had been for decades of which resulted in many American intellectuals.

Compulsory education IS a totalitarian institution, it's forcing you to go to school with a threatened jail sentence. It has been totalitarian for centuries, even in a time where there was such thing as a public school the only people talking about compulsory schools were philosophers musing about how it could be used to create a docile population for a utopian society (Plato for instance), and that was assuming the rulers were ideal.

The main argument of this though is that the history of compulsory public schooling illustrates that it is not meant to educate you anyways. The structure of our school system can't be fixed unless you remove all standardized tests, grades, curriculums, and create local schoolhouses in every neighborhood with no extended administrative bureaucracy otherwise reform is moot, school as it is was formulated to indoctrinate.

___

Comments:

NS wrote:

Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 

-------
When your mind is full of indecision, try thinking with your heart.

___

ST wrote:

Actually, Napoleon was basically the founder of state education. It was rooted mainly in France. 

-------
http://www.freerice.com/index.php

___

WTP replied:

 Actually, Napoleon was basically the founder of state education. It was rooted mainly in France. 

True, but Horace Mann was the creator of modern education in America, and he based it off of a trip to Prussia. The only real difference is that Prussians had a purportedly universal attendance rate.

Regardless though, Napoleon's intentions with state education were not much different. Their goal was to mold citizens to be better for the state of Imperial France. It's the reason he pushed it so hard, he talked of how France couldn't leave its citizens to the influence of private publications and outside influences at a young age.

 

___

WTP replied:

 Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 

You trollin' brah?

___

NS replied:


 Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 


You trollin' brah?


No? 

___

WTP replied:


 Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 
 

 You trollin' brah?


No?


What can I say, I guess we just disagree. You must have not read my wall of text, but the idea of bringing children into an early education (the age of 3) was first invented (as far as we know) by Plato in "The Republic". He said it was essential to have the state's hand in the youth's upbringing as soon as possible, so as to mold them to authority and to be good political subjects. This may have been enacted in Sparta before "The Republic", I'm not sure.

By the way I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, there are a lot of conspiracy theories about school and I reject the vast majority. I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it just happened through time by men who thought they were doing a good thing. The Reece Committee is pretty much proof that most elected officials aren't really privy to what's going on in education or where it came from.

Anyways, I think it's a terrible mistake to put kids through "school" at ages so early as 4 (even though all Kindergarten amounts to is a daycare).

___

m wrote:

you get what you put into it.  education can be very rewarding.

there's hella alternate options you can even be home schooled or go to college early or go to private school, or go to charter schools, or go to regular old public schools like what i did, but you can't just let your mind rot, that's a population of ignorant lazy fucks without compulsory education.

-------

"Don't bail; the best of the gold is at the bottom of the
barrels of crap."

-- Randy Pausch

___

NS replied:

 Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 

  You trollin' brah?


 

 No?


What can I say, I guess we just disagree. You must have not read my wall of text, but the idea of bringing children into an early education (the age of 3) was first invented (as far as we know) by Plato in "The Republic". He said it was essential to have the state's hand in the youth's upbringing as soon as possible, so as to mold them to authority and to be good political subjects. This may have been enacted in Sparta before "The Republic", I'm not sure.

By the way I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, there are a lot of conspiracy theories about school and I reject the vast majority. I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it just happened through time by men who thought they were doing a good thing. The Reece Committee is pretty much proof that most elected officials aren't really privy to whats going on in education or where it came from.

Anyways, I think it's a terrible mistake to put kids through "school" at ages so early as 4 (even though all Kindergarten amounts to is a daycare). 


Whoa, what a huge generalization! Kindergarten is not daycare. I do not "babysit" my kids. I teach my kids. Some of them come in the classroom in September completely illiterate, and leave in June with a plethora of knowledge, including reading, writing, and math. All of these skills they need to matriculate through grade school.

I don't mean to offend you, but I cannot stand when people outside of the education system make assumptions like these. It is silly assumptions like these that we, as teachers, get disgusting reputations. Furthermore, there are so many tests that we must give these children that it isn't academically feasible to allow a child to enter the 1st grade without a sturdy foundation of the basic concepts of the English language. In Kindergarten, we "catch" children with disabilities and give them proper services which allow them to "catch up" to their normally developing classmates. Taking these services away from children in need is setting the children up for academic failure in grade school. It is so so imperative that these children know how to recognize letters and numbers prior to grade school. Ask any educator, and you will not find a single one who will disagree.

___

WTP replied:

 you get what you put into it. education can be very rewarding.

there's hella alternate options you can even be home schooled or go to college early or go to private school, or go to charter schools, or go to regular old public schools like what i did, but you can't just let your mind rot, that's a population of ignorant lazy fucks without compulsory education


I disagree.

I don't disagree with school, I disagree with the idea that people let their minds rot in lieu of not going to school. There's actually a movement that I don't particularly agree with called "unschooling" in which you don't school your kids at all and let them do whatever they want.

Lawyers have come out of that group, and it's a small group. There's only an estimated 100,000 unschoolers in the country. There's also, from what I've personally seen, scientists (a physicist I met that made me aware it even existed) and a programmer. The most famous is Astra Taylor because she is an activist, she went to brown university as someone who didn't go to school till sophomore year of high school (and she excelled enough in her classes to be accepted to that ivy league school).

Plus the initial example of Ben Franklin and Edison who were both autodidacts as well as all of Athens' intelligentsia. I think human beings are naturally curious, otherwise we wouldn't be in this society we live in right now.

___

m replied:

so i guess education isn't compulsory, if there's unschoolers.  With homeschooling, parents could probably unschool their children as much as they want.  With a well constructed social setting, this could be extremely successful.

Lacking parents who are that committed, I think the public school system provides a valuable resource to the public and I'm happy to have emerged from it successfully smarter than I entered, doing well in college so far.... 

___

WTP replied:

 Kindergarten and pre-K should be state mandated. It is so unbelievably important. 
   

  You trollin' brah?


  No?


 

 What can I say, I guess we just disagree. You must have not read my wall of text, but the idea of bringing children into an early education (the age of 3) was first invented (as far as we know) by Plato in "The Republic". He said it was essential to have the state's hand in the youth's upbringing as soon as possible, so as to mold them to authority and to be good political subjects. This may have been enacted in Sparta before "The Republic", I'm not sure.  

 By the way I'm not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, there are a lot of conspiracy theories about school and I reject the vast majority. I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think it just happened through time by men who thought they were doing a good thing. The Reece Committee is pretty much proof that most elected officials aren't really privy to whats going on in education or where it came from.  

 Anyways, I think it's a terrible mistake to put kids through "school" at ages so early as 4 (even though all Kindergarten amounts to is a daycare). 


Whoa, what a huge generalization! Kindergarten is not daycare. I do not "babysit" my kids. I teach my kids. Some of them come in the classroom in September completely illiterate, and leave in June with a plethora of knowledge, including reading, writing, and math. All of these skills they need to matriculate through grade school.

I don't mean to offend you, but I cannot stand when people outside of the education system make assumptions like these. It is silly assumptions like these that we, as teachers, get disgusting reputations. Furthermore, there are so many tests that we must give these children that it isn't academically feasible to allow a child to enter the 1st grade without a sturdy foundation of the basic concepts of the English language. In Kindergarten, we "catch" children with disabilities and give them proper services which allow them to "catch up" to their normally developing classmates. Taking these services away from children in need is setting the children up for academic failure in grade school. It is so so imperative that these children know how to recognize letters and numbers prior to grade school. Ask any educator, and you will not find a single one who will disagree.  

 


No offense taken, and I don't mean to offend you either, but I would say that there are many educators that disagree with schooling as an institution anyways. Granted I doubt they would disagree with students learning letters and numbers though.

John Holt is one of the more famous educators from a time in the 70s when education methods were getting lots of attention, though he is the proponent of the method I talked about before that I do not totally agree with, his assertion was that (and it wasn't completely pulled out of his ass, he based it on his own studies into schooling) learning how to read and write was such a base skill that it is not necessary to teach it at an early age because anyone who learns it can learn it fluently given a couple of weeks. His examples were various literary figures who didn't learn how to read or write until they were 10 years or older.

But as I said, I don't necessarily agree with that. I'm still forming my opinions on what would be the best way to educate somebody. Another educator from within the institution was John Taylor Gatto, a teacher who got his middle school students over 1,000 internships, over 30,000 hours of community service and some hundreds of jobs. He is a huge critic of the schooling system as a whole, I think he favors small private schooling at a later age (9-10 give or take).

___

WTP replied:

 so i guess education isn't compulsory, if there's unschoolers. With homeschooling, parents could probably unschool their children as much as they want. With a well constructed social setting, this could be extremely successful.

Lacking parents who are that committed, I think the public school system provides a valuable resource to the public and I'm happy to have emerged from it successfully smarter than I entered, doing well in college so far....


Unschooling is limited to certain states.

Regardless I'm not attacking public school, just the idea of a parent being fined or jailed for failing to send their child to school mostly on the basis that school as a state run institution is a very shady business.

The question is would you have been served better by a different system? That's why I referenced earlier adulthood in the first post. Washington was a self-made man. He came from an aristocratic family, but his father died and due to the times left all of his money to his first born. This was when Washington went to a school for two years at the age of 11 and learned surveying. If I remember his age right, he landed a high paying job (roughly 90,000-100,000 current dollars) as a surveyor at the age of 16 and bought Mt. Vernon with the money he made.

This wasn't an uncommon thing, many people became employed or apprenticed in a trade at ages as early as 10 and became entrepreneurs at a time they would have been in high school. Our school system is kind of built on the idea of getting a good GPA in order to qualify you for jobs, and all it has done is pushed back the age one enters the job market at which point one is only really qualified to be employed in 10$/hr jobs (I'm talking about high school, I don't have any problems with college except for the standardization of timescales).

The unschoolers just kind of serve as an example of kids who can get into college after spending their youth deciding what they want to do and working in those areas. All it takes to get into state college is a GED (GEDs are terribly easy tests, I had a friend who took a GED test. He said it was like being in 6th grade). Unschoolers also have the nice privilege of being considered homeschoolers so they can just take a test for a diploma. The question is, is such a long stay in school necessary and does it serve you very well other than filling you with some amounts of information, most of which the majority of the class will not retain in the long run?

___

l wrote:

The further the state has interjected itself into education, the worse the education of the citizenry has become. 

___

l wrote:

Also, it takes one hell of a moron to think that a rejection of mandatory public education is a rejection of education in general.

___

Ref: http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-eeotpno-support-a.html

December 21, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink

"Happy Cows" Kuhrettung Rhein Berg english subtitles / Vacas Liberadas

Heard about this on Late Night in the Midlands, show which aired 12/20/13.

December 21, 2013 in Current Affairs | Permalink