Love in New Orleans
Martin Shackelford
1963:
Kerry Thornley
Carlos Bringuier
Martin
alexfoyle
Says who? Jeanne Hack herself??
If true, it appears strange that Jeanne Hack would state in an
interview with Bill Tuner in 1968 that she might have seen Kerry
Thornley once together with somebody who "fits Bringuier's
description". Kerry denied this repeatedly and if Jeanne was really
girlfriend with both of them why would she say the man whom she saw
with Kerry fit Bringuier's description?
Reliable informations on Kerry Thornley can be found in Adam
Gorightly's book "The Prankster & the Conspiracy" published by
Paraview Press in 2003.
Dave Reitzes
No shred of unsubstantiated gossip or innuendo would seem to be too
petty for Martin these days.
Of course, this is a guy who also endorses the credibility of a
"witness" who claims to have attended an actual alien autopsy:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
tims...@gmail.com
wrote:
What's your proof for that statement, Martin?
Will it be another five year game of hide and seek like the ultimately
debunked Judyth Vary Baker story?
LOL! Did THAT one ever flop in a heap.
Trafford Press anyone? :-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup Commentator*
alexfoyle
Martin, I can't believe you just put this up and don't provide the
source for this claim.
I knew Kerry and have researched his wild tales extensively.
Thus I would really be interested where you got this claim from.
Alex
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:edfac141-232b-4d1a...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46b4803d-d8db-462d...@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
steve
wrote:
> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
> Martin
>
o that explains this tidbit of nonsense. this wouldnt be the same
guy who told you Adrian Alba picked out Judyths picture and confirmed
he saw her with Oswald would it?
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Martin,
I think you'll have to do a bit better than that, Martin.
Ever thought of providing any specifics for these statements before
you trot them out?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup Commentator*
On Dec 16, 12:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
> Martin
>
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:46b4803d-d8db-462d...@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Dec 13, 5:59 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
> >> A New Orleans woman named Jeanne Hack had two interesting boyfriends in
> >> 1963:
> >> Kerry Thornley
> >> Carlos Bringuier
>
> >> Martin
>
> > What's your proof for that statement, Martin?
>
> > Will it be another five year game of hide and seek like the ultimately
> > debunked Judyth Vary Baker story?
>
> > LOL! Did THAT one ever flop in a heap.
>
> > Trafford Press anyone? :-)
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Tim Brennan
> > Sydney, Australia
> > *Newsgroup Commentator*- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
> Martin
More "secret evidence" from Martin!
Here we go again . . .
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Dave Reitzes
>
> Martin
That's right, lads and lasses: Martin endorses the credibility of a
convicted felon who claims to have worked for the CIA, met personally
with Osama Bin Laden, and witnessed an actual alien autopsy.
Impossible, you say? Read on:
<QUOTE ON>----------------------------------
Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!
newsfeed-3001.bay.webtv.net!nntp-out.svc.us.xo.net!nntp1-
feeder.SJ.svc.us.xo.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!
sjc1.nntp.concentric.net!nntp-master.svc.us.xo.net
From: Martin Shackelford <msh...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Judyth Baker, Dave Ferrie and Cancer Research: Back to
Reality
Date: 23 Sep 2004 03:47:54 EDT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <citv3a$...@dispatch.concentric.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.238.152.91
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4)
Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
At the age of 12, a young science genius named Michael Riconosciuto was
building listening devices for the detective agency of Guy Banister in New
Orleans. As a teenager, he had his own laboratory, and was doing cancer
research, as Judyth Baker was also doing at the time in Florida. David
Ferrie later mentioned to her that they had been expecting a young cancer
researcher on the scene in May 1963, and assumed Judyth Baker was the
person they were expecting. It may have been Michael Riconosciuto instead,
and Judyth may have fallen into the situation by chance, showing up in New
Orleans two weeks before Michael did. At the time, she simply assumed that
Ochsner had mentioned her to them. This was brought to our attention
recently when a journalist shared with us her recent interview with
Riconosciuto. Already aware of his connection to Banister and to his
teenage cancer research, the reporter asked if Banister ever gave Michael
reading materials on the subject of cancer research--and was told yes, he
had. The reporter mentioned names including Judyth Baker and Judyth Vary.
Michael indicated that some of the cancer research materials he had been
shown by Banister were written by a Judyth Vary. Asked if he considered
Judyth to be genuine, he said he did. Later, Riconosciuto became an expert
in computer encryption. He was employed by the CIA-funded
Wackenhut-Cabazon Indian joint venture at another point, and CIA agent
Robert Booth Nichols testified that Riconosciuto was in close contact with
Bobby Inman, who served with both the NSA and CIA. He was one of the
architects of the "backdoor" in the PROMIS software purchased by the CIA
for distribution to foreign intelligence agencies, allowing the CIA access
to information from their systems. The Wackenhut-Cabazon organization was
also involved in biowarfare, according to a manuscript called "The Last
Circle" by Carol Seymour, which mentions it in passing, its primary focus
being a Kentucky paramilitary drug-dealing operation. In 1991, during the
first Bush administration, Riconosciuto was accused of being involved in
the construction of a methamphetamine lab, and sent to prison, where he
remains. In case that wasn't enough to quiet him, his wife was accused of
child neglect, and their children were removed, using the meth lab charge
as a basis.
Martin
<QUOTE OFF>---------------------------------
For anyone interested in evaluating the caliber of witness being
produced to support Judyth Baker by none other than our own Martin
Shackelford, what follows is just a little bit of information gleaned
from a Google search.
Read a bit about convicted drug dealer Michael Riconosciuto's dynamic
CIA career, his personal meeting with Osama Bin Laden, his knowledge
of aliens from outer space, his inside knowledge of deadly Satanist
cults, his insights into a worldwide power cabal called "The Octopus,"
etc., etc., etc.
http://www.publiceye.org/rightwoo/rwooz9-49.html
<QUOTE ON>--------------------------
Michael Riconosciuto
An example of [Harry V.] Martin's tendency to confuse unproven allegations
with established matters of fact can be found in Martin's treatment of
Michael Riconosciuto, a computer software technician who has submitted a
sworn affidavit in the Inslaw software piracy case. Riconosciuto has
claimed that he was threatened by a former staff member of the Justice
Department with criminal prosecution on an unrelated charge and with an
unfavorable result in a pending child custody dispute if he testified on
the Inslaw case. Riconosciuto has also claimed that he made a tape
recording of the telephoned threat, two copies of which were confiscated
when he was arrested. Although he has not produced it, he claims a third
copy exists, which is being held in a safe location. When Martin discusses
Riconosciuto, he begins with what appears to be a statement of uncontested
fact, "In February, Riconosciuto was called by a former Justice Department
official and warned against ooperating with an investigation into the case
by the House Judiciary Committee." In fact, while some of what
Riconosciuto has alleged can be verified, much cannot. Despite the
plethora of details Martin presents, the entire content of Martin's story
on Riconosciuto is composed of Riconosciuto's own unverified assertions or
other unproven allegations made in the early stages of a lawsuit.
Riconosciuto has also been championed as a source by the LaRouchians who
say they introduced Riconosciuto to Danny Casolaro, according to the
Village Voice article by Ridgeway and Vaughan. Anyone reading that article
carefully will get the idea that authors Ridgeway and Vaughan think that
some of the Riconosciuto/Casolaro allegations are unsubstantiated and
reflect undocumented conspiracy theories.
Jerry Uhrhammer of the Tacoma Morning News Tribune covered Riconosciuto's
claims and legal battles for that paper, including Riconosciuto's
three-week-long drug trial, held in Tacoma in April 1991. "I believe it is
significant that Casolaro's theory about a mega- conspiracy he called 'The
Octopus' seems to have developed after exposure to Riconosciuto's tales of
involvement in nearly every major national and international conspiracy of
the past decade," wrote Uhrhammer in a letter to the IRE Journal of the
Investigative Reporters & Editors group.
Uhrhammer says it was relatively easy for him to disprove many of
Riconosciuto's claims. "There were other instances in which it was obvious
that Riconosciuto had obtained small morsels of information, then
embellished and expanded those morsels into seven-course feasts of
conspiratorial derring-do that he fed back through the conspiracy network.
The thought of going into print with a story based on such a story makes
me shudder," wrote Uhrhammer.
Any reporter who checked the court file prior to Riconosciuto's trial
could have found documents that offered a psychiatric explanation for
[his] conspiracy tales. Psychiatrists who examined him in 1972, prior to
his first drug conviction, portrayed him as a mentally unstable person who
had trouble discerning between fact and fiction....I have been dismayed
and appalled by some articles in which Riconosciuto is quoted as a primary
source, if not sole source, in support of some conspiracy theory, but
without any warning to the reader that his credibility is suspect or
nonexistant.
Free-lance reporter Jonathan Littman spent four months investigating
charges regarding the Canazon Indian reservation, including those
circulated by Casolaro, who had been using Riconosciuto as a source.
Littman wrote a fascinating three-part series for the San Francisco
Chronicle on how outsiders were abusing tribal sovereignty. Littman and
Chronicle reporter Michael Taylor also wrote a story about Riconosciuto's
claims about several murders linked to persons associated with the Cabazon
reservation. "We had to throw out tons of stuff from Riconosciuto
wholesale...because we ended up trying to prove a negative," said Taylor.
<QUOTE OFF>-------------------------
http://www.publiceye.org/media/spooky.html
<QUOTE ON>--------------------------
BIG STORIES, SPOOKY SOURCES
From the Columbia Journalism Review May/June 1993
Posted by permission of the author
By Chip Berlet
For an investigative journalist, reporting on official misconduct
involving covert operations, intelligence-gathering, and national security
issues is like competing in a potato-sack race in a minefield. All
officials tend to be suspicious of the motives of nosy journalists;
government spokespersons frequently deny first and dissemble later;
meanwhile, actual spies tend to keep their mouths shut. As a result,
sources for such stories frequently come from a murky netherworld of
ex-intelligence agents, retired military officers, and self-anointed
investigators. Some offer valuable information along with frustrating
fantasies; some are well-meaning but confused; others are professional or
amateur charlatans. A few are brilliant paranoid crackpots. Some people
just plain lie.
Over the past three years, this reporter has interviewed or read the
relevant writings of more than fifty investigative reporters and
researchers spanning the political spectrum. Most of them thought one
should not minimize the continuing reality of illegal and unethical
conduct by government and private intelligence operatives. But even those
who agreed that tough reporting on these subjects helps defend
constitutional safeguards added that they have grown very weary of hearing
the same unproved or debunked conspiratorial stories over and over again.
"A lot of stories with conspiratorial themes have gone a great distance
with very few credible witnesses," says Michael Kelly of "The New York
Times". "Some reporters use a much lower standard of evidence with these
stories. They are tempted to take what they can get, and overlook the fact
that the source has been convicted twice for perjury and on alternate
Tuesdays he thinks he is Napoleon Bonaparte."
If many of the key sources for conspiracy stories are unreliable, why are
so many journalists tempted to use them? One reason is that, in an age of
official denials, many journalists give unofficial sources the benefit of
the doubt. Another is that, in some cases, the tales these sources tell
provide a fairly clearcut explanation of what may otherwise be a confusing
welter of conceivably related events. In short, they provide a story line.
A third reason is that they can usually supply details that seem to
substantiate their version of events. When the details provided by two or
three such sources mesh, the theory gains in credibility and the story
built on it may gain wider attention in the media. Meanwhile, talk radio
shows, interviews on small FM stations, even messages posted on
computerized information networks contribute to keeping theories
alive--and building an audience that wants to hear more.
The following look at a selection of individuals and groups that have
served as sources for recent conspiracy stories may help to point up the
problems they can pose for journalists in both the print and broadcast
media.
Several spooky sources contributed to the October Surprise story line,
according to which the 1980 Reagan-Bush presidential campaign made a deal
with the Iranians to delay the release of American hostages until after
the November elections, to help assure the defeat of Jimmy Carter. A key
figure in that story, and one whose usefulness as a source has been
attacked and defended in these pages, was former Israeli intelligence
operative Ari Ben-Menashe (see "The October Surprise: Enter the Press,"
CJR, March/April 1992, and "October Surprise: Unger v. Weinberg," Letters,
May/June 1992).
One journalist who took Ben-Menashe's allegations more seriously than most
was Craig Unger, author of an October 1991 "Esquire" article titled
"October Surprise." Following several attacks on the Surprise theory,
Unger wrote a long, interesting article called "The Trouble with Ari,"
which appeared in "The Village Voice" in July 1992. There, more clearly
than in his "Esquire" piece, Unger explains the dilemma a source of this
kind poses for the journalist. After reminding readers that some of
BenMenashe's claims can be corroborated and that he was "the guy who
started talking about the clandestine American arms pipeline to Iraq's
Saddam Hussein. . . long before the story started breaking in the press
this spring," Unger writes:
"Ari has put five or six dozen journalists from all over the world through
roughly the same paces. His seduction begins with a display of his mastery
of the trade craft of the legendary Israeli intelligence services. A roll
of quarters handy for furtive phone calls, he navigates the back channels
that tie the spooks at Langley to their counterparts in Tel Aviv. His
astute analysis and mind-boggling revelations can stir even the most jaded
old hand of the Middle East. . . But trust him at your own risk. . . ."
"Listen to him, trust him, print his story verbatim--then sit around and
watch your career go up in flames."
Another oft-cited source in the October Surprise story was Michael
Riconosciuto, who provided many tantalizing leads to investigative
reporter Danny Casolaro before the free-lancer's death, which was ruled a
suicide (see "The Octopus File," CJR, November/December 1991).
Riconosciuto claimed to have specialized knowledge in computer science and
software design, the kind of knowledge that, he said, made him useful to
intelligence operatives. Casolaro was looking into the alleged theft by
the Justice department of a privately owned software program called
Promis. Riconosciuto offered an explanation: he told Casolaro that someone
in the Justice department had given the software to American intelligence
operatives for resale to intelligence agencies in Canada and abroad. One
form of payment, he told the journalist, was the orchestration of the
release of the American hostages being held in Iran.
Riconosciuto went on to weave a tale involving the Cabazon Indian
reservation in southern California, purportedly the site of a supersecret
research and testing base for weapons of interest to intelligence
operatives. Casolaro began to see the reservation as part of a
globe-spanning entity of untold power, which he called The Octopus.
Jerry Uhrhammer of the Tacoma, Washington, "Morning News Tribune" was the
only reporter to cover Riconosciuto's three-week-long drug trial, held in
Tacoma in April 1991. In the July/August 1992 "IRE Journal", Uhrhammer
wrote:
"Any reporter who checked the court file prior to Riconosciuto's trial
could have found documents that offered a psychiatric explanation for
[his] conspiracy tales. Psychiatrists who examined him in 1972, prior to
his first drug conviction, portrayed him as a mentally unstable person who
had trouble discerning between fact and fiction."
Uhrhammer added:
"I have been dismayed and appalled by some articles in which Riconosciuto
is quoted as a primary source, if not sole source, in support of some
conspiracy theory, but without any warning to the reader that his
credibility is suspect or nonexistent." Free-lance reporter Jonathan
Littman spent four months investigating charges regarding the Cabazon
Indian reservation, including those circulated by Casolaro, who had been
using Riconosciuto as a source. Littman wrote a fascinating three- part
series for the "San Francisco Chronicle" on how outsiders were abusing
tribal sovereignty. Littman and "Chronicle" reporter Michael Taylor also
wrote a story about Riconosciuto's claims about several murders linked to
persons associated with the Cabazon reservation. "We had to throw out tons
of stuff from Riconosciuto wholesale," says Taylor.
<QUOTE OFF>-------------------------
<QUOTE ON>--------------------------
From: jpshin...@my-deja.com (Jerry Shinley)
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Subject: Re: BIG STORIES, SPOOKY SOURCES
Date: 28 Sep 2004 21:00:31 -0400
[...]
> > Kenn Thomas reports in his book _Maury Island UFO: The Crisman
> >Conspiracy_ (IllumiNet Press, 1999) that "Riconoscuito also
> >made claims that he witnessed an alien autopsy, before the
> >circulation of the well-known footage of such, as well as
> >knowledge of the group called MJ-12 of UFO spy lore." (p. 149)
> >
> >Jerry Shinley
[...]
Here's a somewhat longer version of Thomas' story from a 1997 article:
http://www.umsl.edu/~skthoma/ocup.htm
http://www.umsl.edu/~skthoma/ocrev.htm
Octopus Revisited
by Kenn Thomas
The following article appeared in issue 6.4 (Oct. 97) of Lumpen, Chicago's
magazine for the disenchanted proletariat. [...]
[...]
After Casolaro's death, Michael Riconosciuto made claims that Casolaro
had learned nothing more than what one of two intelligence factions wanted
him to know in order to embarrass the other faction. One faction was
called Aquarius and had a leadership sub-group called MJ-12, the name, of
course, of the supposed secret group founded by Harry Truman in the wake
of the Roswell flying saucer crash. Riconosciuto even told one writer that
he had witnessed the autopsy of an alien body--this long before the famous
alien autopsy film began to circulate. Some have suggested that the tales
of extraterrestrials that surround areas like Area 51 and Pine Gap serve
as disinformation to deflect attention away from serious issues such as
gun-running and black project weapons development. Casolaro's own view,
and the extent of his knowledge and interest in this tributary from the
Octopus research, and whatever he learned that might have brought the
truth closer to the surface of the murky waters in which he swam, may have
died with him.
<end of excerpt>
Another article:
Copyright 1991 The Seattle Times Company
The Seattle Times
August 29, 1991, Thursday, Final Edition
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 1605 words
HEADLINE: WORLDWIDE CONSPIRACY, OR FANTASY? -- FELON'S
STORY CHECKS OUT - KIND OF
BYLINE: BY CARLTON SMITH
BODY:
[...]
Enter Michael Riconosciuto, offering answers.
Earlier this year, Riconosciuto talked with investigators from the House
Judiciary Committee, which is looking into allegations that the U.S.
Department of Justice stole a computer program from a private company
called INSLAW.
[...]
But from that point, matters involving Riconosciuto turn ever more
weird:
-- Riconosciuto has claimed to have been involved in arms sales to the
Nicaraguan contras.
-- He claims to have invented a breakthrough that would allow a Third
World nation to develop an inexpensive nuclear bomb.
-- He claims to have inside information about a cult of satanists, and
has enlisted the support of a retired FBI agent who once investigated the
unsolved D.B. Cooper hijacking, according to Crawford. A few years ago,
Riconosciuto persuaded a Seattle television station to take him aloft in a
helicopter so he could point out locations where satanic human sacrifices
were supposed to have occurred.
-- Finally, Riconosciuto has claimed contact with forces from outer
space, according to several sources familiar with his statements to House
committee investigators. He has also claimed the U.S. Marshal's office has
hidden a flying saucer in the woods near Tacoma. In an interview with The
Times, Riconosciuto denied telling anyone he had seen a UFO. "No, never,
come on," he said.
[...]
<end of excerpts>
<QUOTE OFF>-------------------------
http://www.orlingrabbe.com/binladin_timosman.htm
<QUOTE ON>--------------------------
When Osama Bin Ladin Was Tim Osman
by J. Orlin Grabbe
The two men headed to the Hilton Hotel in Sherman Oaks, California in the
late Spring of 1986 were on their way to meet representatives of the
mujahadeen, the Afghan fighters resisting the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan.
One of the two, Ted Gunderson, had had a distinguished career in the FBI,
serving as some sort of supervisor over Special Agents in the early 60s,
as head of the Dallas field office from 1973-75, and as head of the Los
Angeles field office from 1977-1979. He retired to become an investigator
for, among others, well-known attorney F. Lee Bailey. And all along the
way, Gunderson, whether or not actually a CIA contract agent, had been
around to provide services to various CIA and National Security Council
operations, as he was doing now.
In more recent years Gunderson was to become controversial for his
investigations into child prostitution rings, after he became convinced of
the innocence of an Army medical doctor named Jeffrey McDonald, who had
been convicted of the murder of his wife and three young children in the
1970s. This has led to various attempts by the patrons and operators of
the child prostitution industry to smear Gunderson's reputation.
Michael Riconosciuto was there to discuss assisting the mujahadeen with
MANPADs -- Man Portable Air Defense Systems. Stinger missiles were one
possibility. If the U.S. would permit their export, Riconosciuto could
modify the Stinger's electronics, so the guided missile would still be
effective against Soviet aircraft, but would not be a threat to U.S. or
NATO forces.
But Riconosciuto had another idea. Through his connections with the
Chinese industrial and military group Norinco, he could obtain the basic
components for the unassembled Chinese 107 MM rocket system. These could
be reconfigured into a man-portable, shoulder-fired, anti- aircraft guided
missile sytem, and produced in Pakistan at a facility called the Pakistan
Ordinance Works. The mujahadeen would then have a lethal weapon against
Soviet helicopter, observation, and transport aircraft.
Riconosciuto was more than just an expert on missile electronics; he was
also an expert on electronic computers and associated subjects such as
cryptology (see my "Michael Riconosciuto on Encryption").
Riconosciuto was a prodigy who had grown up in the spook community. The
Riconosciuto family had once run Hercules, California, as a company town.
In the early days (1861) a company called California Powder Works had been
established in Santa Cruz, CA. It later purchased land on San Pablo Bay,
and in 1881 started producing dynamite, locating buildings in gullies and
ravines for safety purposes. A particularly potent type of black powder
was named "Hercules Powder", which gave the name to the town of Hercules,
formally incorporated in 1900. In World War I, Hercules became the largest
producer of TNT in the U.S. Hercules, however, had gotten out of the
explosives business by 1940 when an anhydrous ammonia plant was
constructed. In 1959 Hercules began a new manufacturing facility to
produce methanol, formaldehyde, and urea formaldehyde. In 1966 the plant
was sold to Valley Nitrogen Producers. Labor problems led to a plant
closure in 1977. In 1979 the plant and site was purchased by a group of
investors calling themselves Hercules Properties, Ltd.
However, Michael and his father Marshall Riconosciuto, a friend of Richard
Nixon, continued to run the Hercules Research Corporation. In the early
1980s Michael also served as the Director of Research for a joint venture
between the Wackenhut Corporation of Coral Gables, Florida, and the
Cabazon Band of Indians in Indio, California. Riconosciuto's talents were
much in demand. He had created the a-neutronic bomb (or "Electro-
Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device"), which sank the ground level of the
Nevada test site by 30 feet when a prototype was tested. Samuel Cohen, the
inventor of the neutron bomb, said of Riconosciuto: "I've spoken to
Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the a-neutronic bomb) and he's an
extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can't prove, that
they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the
CIA."
Riconosciuto's bomb made suitcase nukes obsolete, because it achieved
near-atomic explosive yields, but could be more easily minaturized. You
could have a suitcase a-neutronic bomb, or a briefcase a-neutronic bomb,
or simply a lady's purse a-neutronic bomb. Or just pull out your wallet
for identification and -- . The Meridian Arms Corporation, as well as the
Universities of California and Chicago owned a piece of the technology.
But there was more than explosives in the portfolios of the CIA agents who
surrounded Riconosciuto like moths around a candle. Both Robert Booth
Nichols, the shady head of Meridian Arms Corporation (with both CIA and
organized crime conections), and Dr. John Phillip Nichols, the manager of
the Cabazon reservation, were involved in bio-warfare work -- the first in
trying to sell bio-warfare products to the army through Wackenhut, the
second in giving tribal permission for research to take place at Cabazon.
According to Riconosciuto, the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) was in charge of the classified contracts for
biological warfare research. Riconosciuto would later testify under oath
that Stormont Laboratories was involved in the DARPA-Wackenhut- Cabazon
project. Jonathan Littman, a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle
would relate: "Cabazons and Wackenhut appeared to be acting as middlemen
between the Pentagon's DARPA and Stormont Laboratories, a small facility
in Woodland near Sacramento."
The Race Weapon
Riconosciuto would make additional claims about Bio-Rad corporation, a
medical supplier which had gradually taken over Hercules, California. They
were also, Riconosciuto would say, covertly engaged in bio- warfare
research -- producing some of the deadliest toxins known to man. The focus
of Bio-Rad's research was said to be bio-active elements that could be
tailored to attack those with certain types of DNA. Weapons could thus be
produced that were specifically designed to wipe out specific races or
genetic classes of human beings. (Alternatively, particular DNA types
could be immunized against a deadly biological agent; the agent could then
be released, and everyone else would die.)
A couple of years later, Meridian International Logistics, the parent
company of Meridian Arms, was to farm similar research out to the
Japanese. This included (according to minutes of a corporate meeting dated
Aug. 26, 1988) methods for "induction and activation of cytotoxic
T-lymphocytes". Associated with Meridian's Robert Booth Nichols in a
Middle Eastern operation called FIDCO, a company that ran arms into and
heroin out of Lebanon's Beqaa (Bekaa) Valley, was Harold Okimoto, a
high-ranking member of the Yakuza. Okimoto had longed worked under Frank
Carlucci (who served as Secretary of Defense and Deputy Director of the
CIA before becoming Chairman of The Carlyle Group). Okimoto owned food
concessions in casinos around the world -- Las Vega, Reno, Macao, and the
Middle East. (Free drinks and anthrax while you play blackjack, anyone?)
Meeting Riconosciuto and Gunderson at the hotel were two representatives
of the mujahadeen, waiting to discuss their armament needs. One of the two
was named "Ralph Olberg." The other one was called Tim Osman (or Ossman).
"Ralph Olberg" was an American businesman who was leading the procurement
of American weapons and technology on behalf of the Afghan rebels. He
worked through the Afghan desk at the U.S. State Department, as well as
through Senator Hubert Humphrey's office. Olberg looked after the Afghanis
through a curious front called MSH -- Management Sciences for Health.
The other man, dressed in Docker's clothing, was not a native Afghan any
more than Olberg was. He was a 27-year-old Saudi. Tim Osman (Ossman) has
recently become better known as Osama Bin Ladin. "Tim Osman" was the name
assigned to him by the CIA for his tour of the U.S. and U.S. military
bases, in search of political support and armaments.
Gunderson and Riconosciuto were not on an altruistic mission. They had
some conditions for their help. And they had some bad news to deliver. The
mujahadeen needed to be willing to test new weapons in the field and to
return a research report, complete with photos.
The bad news was that some factions of the CIA didn't feel that Oldberg
and Osman's group were the real representatives of the Afghans. Upon
hearing this both Tim and Ralph were indignant. They wanted to mount a
full-court press. Round up other members of their group and do a
congressional and White House lobbying effort in Washington, D.C.
"Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name."
-- "The Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
Did the lobbying effort take place? I don't know. There is some evidence
that Tim Osman and Ralph Oldberg visited the White House. There is
certainty that Tim Osman toured some U.S. military bases, even receiving
special demonstrations of the latest equipment. Why hasn't this been
reported in the major media?
One week after giving an affidavit to Inslaw regarding the PROMIS software
in 1991, Riconosciuto was arrested on trumped-up drug charges. The
Assistant U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case attempted to cover up
Riconosciuto's intelligence background by claiming to the jury he was
"delusional." A TV station came and pointed a camera out at the desert at
Cabazon and said, "Riconosciuto says he modified the PROMIS software
here." Of course Riconosciuto didn't modify the software out between the
cacti and yucca. Sand isn't good for computers. He did the modifications
in offices in nearby Indio, California. The AUSA told reporters
Riconosciuto had been diagnosed with a mental condition, the implication
being "he's making all this stuff up". Yes, there had been a mental
evaluation of Riconosciuto. I have a copy of the report. The diagnosis?
Here it is: NO MENTAL DISORDER. The Department of Justice consistently and
maliciously lied to the jury, just as had been threatened by Justice
Department official Peter Viednicks if Riconosciuto cooperated with the
congressional investigation of PROMIS.
If the war against Osama Bin Ladin (Tim Osman) is not a total fraud, then
what is Michael Riconosciuto doing in prison? Why doesn't he have an
office next to Colin Powell so he can give realistic advice on Bin Ladin's
thinking? And where is Ralph Olberg?
Thirty-four days before the East African embassy bombings of August 7,
1998, Riconosciuto notified the FBI in Miami that the bombings were going
to take place. Two days prior to the bombings he requested of BOP (Bureau
of Prisons) officials at the Federal Corrections Institution (FCI) in
Coleman, FL., that he be allowed to call ECOMOG security headquarters to
warn African officials. The BOP denied the request. Riconosciuto was
mystified at being ignored by the relevant government authorities. I'm not
mystified. I suspect the reason Riconosciuto was ignored was that the
relevant parties, including especially the Miami FBI office, knew all
along the bombings would take place. And they wanted them to happen.
The same is true with respect to the recent plane bombings of the WTC. It
wasn't an intelligence "failure". The terrorist acts were deliberately
allowed to happen. The actors may have been foreign. But the stage
directors appear to have been all along here in the U.S. Cui bono?
Isn't it time to let Michael Riconosciuto out of prison, and wipe the
slate clean of the trumped up drug charges, and let him be a national
security advisor -- at least with respect to the government's pursuit of
Osama Bin Ladin? Isn't it time to quit pretending Osama Bin Ladin came out
of nowhere?
This is not an academic argument. Sources say three dozen MANPADs have
been imported into Quebec, Canada, from Colombia (where they arrived from
Eastern Europe). The missile shipments followed the "northern" drug route
-- from Colombia into Canada. The missiles involved are Russian Strellas
and Iglas. These will serve just fine to take down commercial airline
flights. Just like TWA 800. Which group of terrorists has the missiles?
Meanwhile, how many biological warfare agents are in the hands of
organized crime? Maybe you should ask Riconosciuto about all this.
Michael Riconosciuto is now incarcerated at the FCI Allenwood, PA. You
know where to find him.
Note: Michael Riconosciuto has just been moved to Springfield, MO. His
address is:
Michael J. Riconosciuto
21309-086 Box 4000
U.S. Medical Center
Springfield, MO
65801-4000
J. Orlin Grabbe's homepage is located at http://orlingrabbe.com.
-30-
from The Laissez Faire City Times, Vol 5, No 46, November 12, 2001
<QUOTE OFF>-------------------------
Dave
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
John McAdams
Well . . . if Martin will believe Judyth, why not this guy?
.John
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
alexfoyle
wrote:
> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
> Martin
>
Don't believe this "research", Martin, it's not true. Kerry did not
meet with Bringuier in NO in 1963, he didn't even know him.
Maybe Paris Flammonde could let you know who made up this claim and we
could verify it from there. Alex
steve
that will never happen. i had to learn this the hard way when Martin
claimed Adrian Alba picked out Judyths picture and said he had seen her
with Oswald. Martin would not give a source. i ended up calling Alba and
he said Shackelford was full of it. i suspect a clown like Flammonde is
the same way, scared you might actually check.
Anthony Marsh
> On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>>
>> Martin
>
>
> That's right, lads and lasses: Martin endorses the credibility of a
> convicted felon who claims to have worked for the CIA, met personally
> with Osama Bin Laden, and witnessed an actual alien autopsy.
>
Poisoning the Well.
For example:
That's right, folks. Dave Reitzes endorses the credibility of people who
believe in UFOs. Therefore nothing he says can be trusted. See how it
works?
Martin Shackelford
I didn't say that Thornley and Bringuier MET in 1963.
I said that Jeanne Hack was the girlfriend of both men, not necessarily at
the same time.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:017fb9e7-b324-45f3...@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"steve" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:a9e9f1ef-8169-4f6f...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
What "secret evidence" are you talking about, Dave. I named the source.
The full information appears in the fourth volume of Flammonde's recent book
on the case.
At least make some effort to make sense.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:dffdc405-95ef-4970...@x69g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 15, 8:51?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
Martin Shackelford
R's teenage
work for Guy Banister and his cancer research. The only thing R. himself
added to this was
that Banister had shown him writings about cancer written by a Judyth Vary.
In addition, it seems to be your opinion that if someone is unreliable on
one issue, they are
unreliable on ALL issues--that is not a sustainable position.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:bae4b526-a2bd-4c42...@p1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
alexfoyle
wrote:
> You don't seem to be reading carefully, Alex.
> I didn't say that Thornley and Bringuier MET in 1963.
> I said that Jeanne Hack was the girlfriend of both men, not necessarily at
> the same time.
>
> Martin
OK, thanks for clarifying this, Martin. So then Jeanne must have been
Bringuiers girlfriend after 1968, because if she had been his
girlfriend before that time she would have had no reason to tell Bill
Turner in 1968 that the man she supposedly saw with Kerry fit
Bringuiers description. Either somebody was your boyfriend and you
know what he looks like or he is not and you would have to rely on
somebody elses description of him. Putting this together with Paris
Flammondes "research" that Jeanne purportedly was girlfriend with both
men "not necessarily at the same time", don't you feel the story is a
bit unbelievable and moreover irrelevant? Did Flammonde interview
Jeanne or where did this research come from? Please cite the source.
You can read up Kerrys side of the story about his relationship with
Jeanne in 1963 in the book I mentioned in my first post on this
thread.
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Dave Reitzes wrote:
>> On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>
>>
>> That's right, lads and lasses: Martin endorses the credibility of a
>> convicted felon who claims to have worked for the CIA, met personally
>> with Osama Bin Laden, and witnessed an actual alien autopsy.
>>
>
>Poisoning the Well.
>For example:
>
>That's right, folks. Dave Reitzes endorses the credibility of people who
>believe in UFOs. Therefore nothing he says can be trusted. See how it
>works?
>
Believing unreliable witnesses *does* harm the credibility of a
researcher, Tony.
Of course, if Martin had some documents on this or that issue, or had
a video tape of this or that testimony, he personal credibility would
be irrelevant.
But he generally *won't* produce such things.
I don't think Martin tells intentional untruths, but he sure
*believes* a lot of things that a sober researcher should reject.
.John
--
Martin Shackelford
and then your evidence turns out to be "I suspect."
Martin
"steve" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:56fe4975-52ed-498e...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
steve
> Dave Reitzes wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>
> >> Martin
>
what exactly is your position on Michael R?
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> You don't seem to be reading carefully, Alex.
> I didn't say that Thornley and Bringuier MET in 1963.
> I said that Jeanne Hack was the girlfriend of both men, not necessarily at
> the same time.
>
> Martin
So states Martin Shackelford.
But should we believe Martin Shackelford?
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
> "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
alexfoyle
wrote:
> More nonsense from Dave Reitzes.
> What "secret evidence" are you talking about, Dave. I named the source.
> The full information appears in the fourth volume of Flammonde's recent book
> on the case.
> At least make some effort to make sense.
>
> Martin
Thanks for the source, Martin. Fourth volume of what book? And
possibly the page, please. In return I give you the page in
Gorightly's book where you can read up on Kerry and Jeanne, i.e. page
123. You can even read it for free at google books.
steve
wrote:
> You keep attacking people with claims about what they "must" be doing,
> and then your evidence turns out to be "I suspect."
>
> Martin
>
what have i said you must be doing? can you cite it? or is this
another tidbit you throw out with nothing to back it up?
steve
wrote:
> You don't seem to be reading carefully, Alex.
> I didn't say that Thornley and Bringuier MET in 1963.
> I said that Jeanne Hack was the girlfriend of both men, not necessarily at
> the same time.
>
> Martin
>
you have to watch out Alex. i know the argument seems pretty simple
given what Thornley told Bill Turner in 1968, but Shack is a slippery one
and can change the subject pretty quick to avoid the whole point of your
post.
Anthony Marsh
> On 17 Dec 2007 22:00:38 -0500, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Dave Reitzes wrote:
>>> On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>
>>> That's right, lads and lasses: Martin endorses the credibility of a
>>> convicted felon who claims to have worked for the CIA, met personally
>>> with Osama Bin Laden, and witnessed an actual alien autopsy.
>>>
>> Poisoning the Well.
>> For example:
>>
>> That's right, folks. Dave Reitzes endorses the credibility of people who
>> believe in UFOs. Therefore nothing he says can be trusted. See how it
>> works?
>>
>
> Believing unreliable witnesses *does* harm the credibility of a
> researcher, Tony.
>
But of course you WC defenders reserve to yourselves the right to
declare who is unreliable. Anything conspiracy minded is unreliable.
Anything cover-up is reliable.
John McAdams
<msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
Yep, the fellow who wrote ALIENS EXIST!
Also, the fellow who couldn't get the spelling of Paese Sera right!
--
alexfoyle
> you have to watch out Alex. i know the argument seems pretty simple
> given what Thornley told Bill Turner in 1968, but Shack is a slippery one
> and can change the subject pretty quick to avoid the whole point of your
> post.
Thanks Steve, but Turner talked to Jeanne and not to Kerry. Martin got the
point and has been trying to play it down a bit which leaves us with the
question: why he put that (dis)information up on the board in the first
place? Probably like Dave suspected in the beginning, more innuendo, throw
some up mud against the wall and see what sticks. Well, this one won't.
Anybody knows which 4th volume of what Flammonde book (his source) he is
talking about?
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> Note that the reporter, PRIOR to interviewing Risconosciuto, had confirmed
> R's teenage
> work for Guy Banister and his cancer research.
Evidence for this?
The only thing R. himself
> added to this was
> that Banister had shown him writings about cancer written by a Judyth Vary.
> In addition, it seems to be your opinion that if someone is unreliable on
> one issue, they are
> unreliable on ALL issues--that is not a sustainable position.
>
> Martin
Read it and weep, folks.
Dave
Anthony Marsh
> On 15 Dec 2007 20:51:48 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
> <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>>
>
> Yep, the fellow who wrote ALIENS EXIST!
>
> Also, the fellow who couldn't get the spelling of Paese Sera right!
>
So, if you ever make a spelling error, that invalidates everything you
write.
You will find something to disqualify someone you don't like, even the
color of his socks. Anything to deny.
muc...@gmail.com
This one: http://www.assassinationofamerica.com/
Also: http://www.freewebs.com/flammonde/
I think I saw a $400 price tag somewhere...
-Mark
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:e97afd30-3e5a-4c5f...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
for some time, but you respond by simply declaring her "non-credible."
As for documents, I have provided quite a few which Tony has put on his
website; others are in Judyth's book; still others are available, but not
yet
in a format Tony can use.
Martin
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:47681cb8....@news.alt.net...
Martin Shackelford
the story
about him, but not his unsupported claims.
Martin
"steve" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e1d86889-b75e-474c...@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
"So states Martin Shackelford"--a false statement. The source is Paris
Flammonde, not
Martin Shackelford.
Try to be a little less ridiculous in your eagerness to cite your webpage
again.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5733e9ff-f60a-4ec5...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 18, 8:33?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
Martin Shackelford
Flammonde.
The specific information is in the Jeanne Hack entry in the annotated name
index.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:edbddd7f-dbc9-4f43...@b1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
know.
Martin
"steve" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2e5c9ce2-31fe-43f4...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
alexfoyle
Wow, the book does exist and all four volumes of it seem to be
available, thanks for the link, Mark. Anybody read it (them) yet?
Flammonde hasn"t got the most reliable of reputations, granted, but I
agree with Tony that somebody should at least read the books and look
at the conclusions. These books shouldn"t be disregarded per se just
because the guy wrote questionable books about UFOs and Aliens. On the
other hand, if there is more stuff like Thornley and Bringuier shared
the same girlfriend crap in there we might as well be able to do
without such further disinformation.
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:4768aabe...@news.newsguy.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
<muc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4de9e26f-33e5-4328...@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
alexfoyle
wrote:
> The fourth volume is Indices to the Assassination of America by Paris
> Flammonde.
> The specific information is in the Jeanne Hack entry in the annotated name
> index.
>
> Martin
Thanks, Martin, but that still leaves the question of when Jeanne was
girlfriend with the two men and ultimately connected to this is the
relevance of this to the JFK assassination. We know that she was
Thornleys girlfriend in 1963. I wonder if Flammonde provides a source
for his claim that Jeanne was also the girlfriend of Bringuier and if
he says when that supposedly was. Does he? I guess Flammonde relies
blindly on Bill Turners interview with Jeanne of 1968 which is highly
dubious as pointed out before, if not, as I find, completely
unbelievable.
muc...@gmail.com
> 400 was the number of illustrations. All four volumes total $165.
>
> Martin
This is what ufodigest.com wrote last year:
"The Assassination of America 3 Volume Set" will retail for over
$400.00 but, through this exclusive pre-publication offer, readers may
purchase the 3 volumes for $125.00 plus shipping. Qualified JFK
Assassination researchers, historians and organizations may apply for
a special "Scholar's Pricing" of $100.00 per set by contacting [...]
http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0806/assassination.html
http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0806/assassination2.html
-Mark
> <much...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Martin Shackelford
investigations in New Orleans, material from his access to the Garrison
investigation, and previously unpublished photos, among other things. And
the Indices, despite some flaws, are also very valuable.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:c191a515-2591-41e8...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
<muc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:38660dc9-3651-4789...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> Once again, I DID cite the source--Flammonde's latest four-volume book.
>
> Martin
Getting Martin to post a source citation has always been like pulling
teeth.
Except that the "teeth" sometimes turn out to not exist:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
Dave
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> I accept his claims that have been documented by the journalist who wrote
> the story
> about him,
Then show us the documentation you find so compelling, so that we all
may be enlightened.
but not his unsupported claims.
>
> Martin
You accept Judyth's unsupported claims. Why the double standard?
> "steve" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e1d86889-b75e-474c...@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 10:00 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Dave Reitzes wrote:
> >> > On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>
> >> >> Martin
>
> > � what exactly is your position on Michael R?
Dave
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> This crap is getting ridiculous, Dave.
> "So states Martin Shackelford"--a false statement. The source is Paris
> Flammonde, not
> Martin Shackelford.
> Try to be a little less ridiculous in your eagerness to cite your webpage
> again.
>
> Martin
Martin, do you know what a source citation is?
Let me explain: you provide a precise quotation from your source, and, in
the case of a book, you provide the author's name, the title of the book,
the publication date, the publisher's name, and the page number.
It looks something like this:
<QUOTE ON>------------------------------------
Jim Garrison, On the Trail of the Assassins (New York: Warner Books,
1992), p. 48.
<QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------
In the case of a secondary source, you may also be wise to flip to the
endnotes and report precisely what the primary source was.
This is important in the case of all researchers, but it is especially
important in your case, because you have previously claimed, at this very
newsgroup, to have seen documents that turned out to be nonexistent.
Like the time you cited a "recently-released [sic] document [that]
connects [Clay] Shaw to the top secret [CIA] project ZRCLIFF, which was
run out of William Harvey's super-secret Staff D along with the ZRRIFLE
assassination program." But in nearly ten years, you've been unable to
produce the document. It never existed outside your imagination, although
you refuse to admit it:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Or the time you claimed to have seen a particular document at a JFK
assassination conference in Al Navis's possession that others at the
conference -- including Navis himself! -- state that Navis simply didn't
have. Faced with this information, you could have verified the facts with
Navis, as I did, but, unable to face up to your error, you instead chose
to insinuate that I was fabricating the information:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
This is why you're unreliable, Martin. Not because you believe ridiculous
things (which, in fairness, is not unusual), but because you frequently
say things that are demonstrably false, you refuse to acknowledge your
errors, you fling irrational accusations at people who correct you, and
you display absolutely no regret or remorse about any of this behavior.
Quite the contrary -- the more you're corrected, the more resentful and
belligerent you become.
So, Martin, as seemingly inconsequential as your innuendo about Kerry
Thornley and Carlos Bringuier would be, even if true; for the umpteenth
time:
Citation, please.
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5733e9ff-f60a-4ec5...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 18, 8:33?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > You don't seem to be reading carefully, Alex.
> > I didn't say that Thornley and Bringuier MET in 1963.
> > I said that Jeanne Hack was the girlfriend of both men, not necessarily at
> > the same time.
>
> > Martin
>
> So states Martin Shackelford.
>
> But should we believe Martin Shackelford?
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> > "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
>
> >news:017fb9e7-b324-45f3...@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Dec 15, 5:51 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >> The source was the New Orleans research of Paris Flammonde.
>
> > >> Martin
>
> > > Don't believe this "research", Martin, it's not true. Kerry did not
> > > meet with Bringuier in NO in 1963, he didn't even know him.
>
> > > Maybe Paris Flammonde could let you know who made up this claim and we
> > > could verify it from there. Alex
Dave
tomnln
I can scan it & post it HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6622d40f-e4c2-4957...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Or are you just blowing more smoke?
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6622d40f-e4c2-4957...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 20, 1:14?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
alexfoyle
provide the source, but your source (Flammonde) doesn't seem to provide
it's source for this claim, I assume, since you didn't answer my last
question regarding Flammondes source for this Thornley/ Bringuier share
the same girlfriend crap. Does Flammonde provide his source?
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> Are you claiming that the source I cited doesn't exist, Dave?
> Or are you just blowing more smoke?
>
> Martin
It's your responsibility to provide a complete source citation,
Martin. You still haven't done so.
You never do.
Why not?
Dave
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
> Dave- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Martin Shackelford
so that
people can evaluate what you're claiming. As it is, there is nothing to
respond to.
As for Flammonde's annotated index, no, it isn't footnoted.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:cef8872c-c331-42cc...@21g2000hsj.googlegroups.com...
alexfoyle
> If you're saying I misquoted Dave, you should leave the alleged misquote in
> so that
> people can evaluate what you're claiming. As it is, there is nothing to
> respond to.
> As for Flammonde's annotated index, no, it isn't footnoted.
>
> Martin
>
Thus the bottom line is: Thornley and Bringuier did NOT share the same
girlfriend! End of this story.
Dave Reitzes
> On Dec 20, 1:41�pm, "MartinShackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > This crap is getting ridiculous, Dave.
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> This is why you're unreliable,Martin. Not because you believe ridiculous
> things (which, in fairness, is not unusual), but because you frequently
> say things that are demonstrably false, you refuse to acknowledge your
> errors, you fling irrational accusations at people who correct you, and
> you display absolutely no regret or remorse about any of this behavior.
> Quite the contrary -- the more you're corrected, the more resentful and
> belligerent you become.
>
> So,Martin, as seemingly inconsequential as your innuendo about Kerry
> Thornley and Carlos Bringuier would be, even if true; for the umpteenth
> time:
>
> Citation, please.
Insert "Jeopardy" theme music here.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
> On Dec 20, 1:34�pm, "MartinShackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > I accept his claims that have been documented by the journalist who wrote
> > the story
> > about him,
>
> Then show us the documentation you find so compelling, so that we all
> may be enlightened.
No evidence forthcoming from Martin?
Gee, I never saw that coming. \:^)
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> but not his unsupported claims.
>
>
>
> >Martin
>
> You accept Judyth's unsupported claims. Why the double standard?
>
> > "steve" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:e1d86889-b75e-474c...@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Dec 18, 10:00 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >> Dave Reitzes wrote:
> > >> > On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "MartinShackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
Dave Reitzes
If Martin had a legitimate source, he would have revealed it right up
front. That's why getting Martin to cite his sources is like pulling
teeth.
What's just as sad is that he thought that bit of petty gossip was
noteworthy to begin with.
More on Martin's sorry record:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
alexfoyle
> front. That's why getting Martin to cite his sources is like pulling
> teeth.
>
> What's just as sad is that he thought that bit of petty gossip was
> noteworthy to begin with.
> Dave
I totally agree, Dave, untrue and irrelevant innuendo, quod erat
demonstrandum ..... after this tedious exercise with Martin Kerry
Thornley most probably would have said something like:
Pffffffffffffrrrrrrrrrtttt!
Dave Reitzes
Martin also claims that Thornley "hooked up" with Lee Harvey Oswald in
New Orleans in the summer of 1963 and apparently assisted Oswald in
his pro-Castro activities:
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/16th_Issue/lho_loner.html
And he endorses Judyth Baker's claim that Thornley had an affair with
Oswald's wife, Marina.
Dave
Martin Shackelford
Just more LN propaganda.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cb399894-bef0-44e5...@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 31 2007, 10:47?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
Martin Shackelford
Many things in the books come from Flammonde's own research. It is not
unusual not
to footnote a name index. That does not make the entry false.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:2778f046-17ee-4351...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Dixie M Dea
On Jan 3, 8:38�pm, alexfoyle <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote:
QUOTE
I totally agree, Dave, untrue and irrelevant innuendo, quod erat
demonstrandum ..... after this tedious exercise with Martin Kerry
Thornley most probably would have said something like:
Pffffffffffffrrrrrrrrrtttt!
UNQUOTE
Fri, Jan 4, 2008, 6:07pm (PST+3) drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes) wrote
QUOTE
Martin also claims that Thornley "hooked up" with Lee Harvey Oswald in
New Orleans in the summer of 1963 and apparently assisted Oswald in his
pro-Castro activities:
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/16th_Issue/lho_loner.html
And he endorses Judyth Baker's claim that Thornley had an affair with
Oswald's wife, Marina.
UNQUOTE
Dave
__________________________________
In regard to Judyth's claims about Kerry Thornley and Marina, in Aug of
2006, I posted the following here at this NG. However, on another Forum,
she made the same claim, but when challenged about it, she said that she
didn't really know, it was just what Lee had told her that he had seen,
but he was very angry about it. But then when her book came out, she had a
different claim. In addition, Thornley's WC testimony conflicts with her
claim.
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: gateway...@webtv.net (Dixie M Dea)
Date: 7 Aug 2006 23:06:58 -0400
Local: Mon, Aug 7 2006 7:06 pm
Subject: Kerry and Marina
From Judyth's Book
Lee Harvey Oswald
Chapter 16
Page 272
{QUOTE}
"On either Tuesday or Thursday in the last week in May, we were on the
bus passing Lee's apartment an hour earlier than we had for several
days. Our bus made a stop at Upperline. As we automatically looked
toward Lee's apartment, we both spotted Kerry Thornley sprinting up to
Lee's porch. Without knocking, he opened the screen door and then
entered the apartment, walking right inside, as if he owned the place."
{UNQUOTE}
__________________________________
Kerry Thornley Excerpt from Warren Commission Testimony
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/thornley.htm
Mr. THORNLEY. I will have to begin at the beginning on that. On April
17, my parents sent me a gift of $100 on the condition that I spend it
for a bus ticket to visit them that summer. Which I did, and I left
around- well, I arrived in California on May 5. I remember going along
the border and seeing fireworks on the other side of the border.
Mr. JENNER. What border?
Mr. THORNLEY. From Yuma to San Diego.
Mr. JENNER. Mexican border?
Mr. THORNLEY. That is Cinco De Mayo. I arrived in California on May 5
and I stayed there until late August. Now, I think in one of these
reports that I gave to the FBI. the information might be different.
Since then I have checked with notebooks that I kept of my activity, and
I was on my way back to New Orleans in late August. I went by way of
Mexico City because I have taken 5 years of Spanish in school and I
never had the opportunity to live in an environment where I would have
to use it, depend on it solely, and I wanted to see how I would do. I
have always wanted to visit Mexico, to see Mexico City. I checked into
the prices. I had found out I had enough money that I would be able to
go down to Mexico City and stay a short while.
So I went down there for about a week, actually it was 6 days I spent
within Mexico, from Tijuana to Mexico City, on a Mexican bus, and then
when my money began to run out from Mexico City to Matamoros or
Brownsville, Tex., on a Mexican bus.
At this time, on my way up on a bus to Matamoros, it was September 2,
because I had that in my notes, I have some notes about the bus ride
and, the date September 2.
And I went from Brownsville to New Orleans by way of either Greyhound or
Continental.
Mr. JENNER. When did you arrive in New Orleans?
Mr. THORNLEY. I went directly to New Orleans, so I imagine I arrived in
New Orleans on September 3, possibly September 4.
Mr. JENNER. So that between approximately May 1, 1963, and September 4
and 5-
Mr. THORNLEY. Say May 3 to September 4.
Mr. JENNER. You were not in New Orleans?
Mr. THORNLEY. Right.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/thornley.htm
_____________
Dixie
alexfoyle
> Bad logic.
> Many things in the books come from Flammonde's own research. It is not
> unusual not
> to footnote a name index. That does not make the entry false.
>
> Martin
Your logic is bad, because you put this unsubstantiated innuendo up here
in the first place without having a proof for its authenticity.
And if it is not a false entry then have Flammonde back up this claim with
his source. Did he interview Jeanne Hack or where did he get this story
from?
Dave pointed out (thanks) that you also think that Oswald "hooked up" with
Thornley in NOLA in 1963. Well, then let's open another thread with that
topic, because this whole Bringuier/Thornley share the same girlfriend
b.s. has been completely invalidated by Jeanne Hacks own interview with
Bill Turner as pointed out before.
As for Thornley met Oswald, you know that even Garrison couldn't prove
that, as his witnesses were completely unbelievable (as usual!) and
Thornley was acquitted. Moreover, did Garrisons witnesses claim they saw
Thornley together with Oswald in the presence of Jeanne Hack. Problem was:
Jeanne Hack couldn't remember ever having been together with Oswald and
Thornley, so maybe we can spare ourselves the grief of having another
thread with that topic.
What proof do you have that Thornley and Oswald hooked up in NOLA in 1963
(as you claim here without any reference:
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/16th_Issue/lho_loner.html)?
And while we are at it, what's your source for the absurd claim that
Thornley picked up the "Hands off Cuba" leaflets for Oswald?
If you want to talk about Kerrys experiences that summer in NOLA read
his "Confession to Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK" for example here:
http://sondralondon.com/attract/thornley/confess/index.htm
or read the book by Adam Gorightly about Kerry mentioned earlier in
this thread.
As long as Flammonde doesn't back up his claim that Thornley and Bringuier
shared the same girlfriend I will tell you that that it is untrue.
Preferably he could also tell us when the two men were supposedly
boyfriends with her as to evaluate if there is any relevance to the JFK
assassination at all.
Dave Reitzes
> The claim that I "never do" is nonsense, and you know it, Dave.
Martin's record speaks for itself:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
http://www.jfk-online.com/shackexcuses.html
> Just more LN propaganda.
>
> Martin
>
>
Dave Reitzes
> Bad logic.
> Many things in the books come from Flammonde's own research. It is not
> unusual not
> to footnote a name index. That does not make the entry false.
>
> Martin
Why don't you simply refrain from making unsubstantiated claims,
Martin?
> "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
>
> news:2778f046-17ee-4351...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 2, 8:50 am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:> If you're saying I misquoted Dave, you should leave the alleged misquote
> > in
> > so that
> > people can evaluate what you're claiming. As it is, there is nothing to
> > respond to.
> > As for Flammonde's annotated index, no, it isn't footnoted.
>
> > Martin
>
> So there we are ... Flammonde doesn't provide a source for this claim.
> Thus the bottom line is: Thornley and Bringuier did NOT share the same
> girlfriend! End of this story.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
> And while we are at it, what's your source for the absurd claim that
> Thornley picked up the "Hands off Cuba" leaflets for Oswald?
>
> If you want to talk about Kerrys experiences that summer in NOLA read
> his "Confession to Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK" for example here:http://sondralondon.com/attract/thornley/confess/index.htm
> or read the book by Adam Gorightly about Kerry mentioned earlier in
> this thread.
>
> As long as Flammonde doesn't back up his claim that Thornley and Bringuier
> shared the same girlfriend I will tell you that that it is untrue.
> Preferably he could also tell us when the two men were supposedly
> boyfriends with her as to evaluate if there is any relevance to the JFK
> assassination at all.
Newcomers should also check out this inside look at how Garrison
trumped up charges against Thornley:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lifton1.htm
Dave
Dave Reitzes
> �BOTTOM POST
>
> On Jan 3, 8:38�pm, alexfoyle <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> QUOTE
> I totally agree, Dave, untrue and irrelevant innuendo, quod erat
> demonstrandum ..... after this tedious exercise with Martin Kerry
> Thornley most probably would have said something like:
> Pffffffffffffrrrrrrrrrtttt!
> UNQUOTE
>
>
> QUOTE
> Martin also claims that Thornley "hooked up" with Lee Harvey Oswald in
> New Orleans in the summer of 1963 and apparently assisted Oswald in his
> pro-Castro activities:
>
Thanks for the post.
Dave
curtjester1
wrote:
> A New Orleans woman named Jeanne Hack had two interesting boyfriends in
> 1963:
> Kerry Thornley
> Carlos Bringuier
>
> Martin
I just read one where Robert Oswald and Marina got it on about two
weeks after the assassination...and that's why Robert ended up siding
with the 'LHO didit' side.
BTW, Martin. Did you actually read the Al Navis letter from Lee
Bowers at a Confrence?
CJ
Martin Shackelford
Judyth has said that Oswald told her this. I've never "endorsed" it.
Try to be less silly in your claims, Dave.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ac9106a5-ba57-4207...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
leaflets. You
can find the information in Weisberg's Oswald in New Orleans.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:8240eb43-6631-41e6...@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d9acd056-9460-44b0...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"curtjester1" <curtj...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e9f1905d-1344-4bda...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
Dave Reitzes
> 2006, I posted the following here at this NG. However, on another Forum,
> she made the same claim, but when challenged about it, she said that she
> didn't really know, it was just what Lee had told her that he had seen,
> but he was very angry about it. But then when her book came out, she had a
> different claim.
Dixie,
Did you happen to keep a copy of your 2006 exchange with Judyth? I've
tried to keep copies of everything she's said on the Web (here,
Lancer, Simkin, JFKresearch, various blogs, etc.), but I can't find
that particular exchange.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> I don't know whether Thornley had an affair with Marina or not.
> Judyth has said that Oswald told her this. I've never "endorsed" it.
> Try to be less silly in your claims, Dave.
>
> Martin
Okay, fair enough. I do see that in a newsgroup post of October 5,
2003, you said:
<QUOTE ON>-------------------------------------
As for the "Marina-Thornley affair" matter, Judyth believed what Oswald
told her--he may have been mistaken, but she reported what she was told.
<QUOTE OFF>------------------------------------
On the other hand, Judyth said in an e-mail:
<QUOTE ON>-------------------------------------
Dear Martin-
[...]
I believe that Kerry and Marina were having an affair because we
spotted Kerry at Lee's house one time while passing on the bus, and
both Marina and Kerry denied seeing each other at that time.
<QUOTE OFF>------------------------------------
And you yourself had previously told a completely different story:
<QUOTE ON>-------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MARTIN SHACKELFORD: Did Judyth Baker Write This?
Date: 07 Aug 2003 08:05:48 GMT
From: Martin Shackelford <msh...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Judyth said an affair with Thornley was SUSPECTED due to things said by
the neighbors.
<QUOTE OFF>------------------------------------
Which account are we supposed to believe, Martin, if any . . . and
why?
Meanwhile, Judyth has said numerous times that "an affair Marina was
carrying on with Kerry Thornley" (from a Judyth writing posted by Terry
Mauro to JFKresearch on December 29, 2002) was a key factor in Judyth and
Oswald's alleged decision to sleep with one another. ("The neglect we both
received from our spouses, and an affair Marina was carrying on with Kerry
Thornley, who Lee kicked out of town finally, eventually worked to make up
our minds for us. we never intended to cheat." -- Mauro post)
And from Judyth's book:
<QUOTE ON>------------------------------------
On either Tuesday or Thursday in the last week in May, we were on the bus
passing Lee's apartment an hour earlier than we had for several days. Our
bus made a stop at Upperline. As we automatically looked toward Lee's
apartment, we both spotted Kerry Thornley sprinting up to Lee's porch.
Without knocking, he opened the screen door and then entered the
apartment, walking right inside, as if he owned the place. Lee's jealousy
index soared." [p. 272]
[...]
. . . Lee and I had not committed adultery at this time. It was the
Thornley event, and Robert's [Robert Baker] ongoing neglect, that worked
to drive us over the line. [p. 273]
<QUOTE OFF>------------------------------------
Strangely, the whole thing apparently became quite obscure for Judyth
later on.
<QUOTE ON>-------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION and chap one A copy BESTRmay2003zzz / 3
The rewrite of the book which I called Deadly Alliance with Dr.
Platzman's help was placed in Mr. Cox's hands, but Cox again added
statements and changed things he didn't seem to like. There was more
emotion in this book, a lot more facts, and an attempt at a timeline. It
would take me a long time to get the timeline straight, as very time I was
asked a question of importance, I would reply with information that often
was not even in the book yet. For example, I was asked about Kerry
Thornley. I had forgotten all about Kerry until asked. Adding the two
incidents of which I was aware between Lee and Kerry allowed us to add two
more timeline days, and - once more-filled in some blank spots about the
relations between Thornley and his former Marine buddy.
<QUOTE OFF>------------------------------------
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ac9106a5-ba57-4207...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 3, 8:38?pm, alexfoyle <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > > If Martin had a legitimate source, he would have revealed it right up
> > > front. That's why getting Martin to cite his sources is like pulling
> > > teeth.
>
> > > What's just as sad is that he thought that bit of petty gossip was
> > > noteworthy to begin with.
> > > Dave
>
> > I totally agree, Dave, untrue and irrelevant innuendo, quod erat
> > demonstrandum ..... after this tedious exercise with Martin Kerry
> > Thornley most probably would have said something like:
> > Pffffffffffffrrrrrrrrrtttt!
>
> Martin also claims that Thornley "hooked up" with Lee Harvey Oswald in
> New Orleans in the summer of 1963 and apparently assisted Oswald in
> his pro-Castro activities:
>
> http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/16th_Issue/lho_loner....
>
> And he endorses Judyth Baker's claim that Thornley had an affair with
> Oswald's wife, Marina.
>
> Dave
Dave
alexfoyle
> The printer identified a photo of Thornley as the man who picked up the
> leaflets. You
> can find the information in Weisberg's Oswald in New Orleans.
>
> Martin
You know that Weisberg had the photo of Kerry Thornley altered so that
Kerry would look more like Oswald, do you? Even David Lifton was appalled
at these techniques and wrote extensively on the slandering of Thornley at
the hands of Weisberg and Garrison. Again, Thornley was acquitted of all
the ludicrous charges brought against him by these lying paranoides, that
includes Weisbergs ridiculous supposed identification of Thornley by the
printer of Oswalds leaflets.
Kerry Thornley was always truthful in his testimonies and endless written
statements concerning his knowledge of the assassination, contrary to his
libelous accusers over the years.
That you still cling on to factoids that have long been disproven (in
court!) shows that you tend to rely on completely unbelievable claims
(again and again).
Dave Reitzes
>
> news:e9f1905d-1344-4bda...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 13 2007, 1:59 am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > A New Orleans woman named Jeanne Hack had two interesting boyfriends in
> > 1963:
> > Kerry Thornley
> > Carlos Bringuier
>
> > Martin
>
> I just read one where Robert Oswald and Marina got it on about two
> weeks after the assassination...and that's why Robert ended up siding
> with the 'LHO didit' side.
>
> BTW, Martin. Did you actually read the Al Navis letter from Lee
> Bowers at a Confrence?
>
> CJ
On Jan 6, 5:59 pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Al showed me a photocopy at a Dallas conference after his presentation, yes.
>
> Martin
This is absolutely astounding. As Martin has been told many times, Navis
didn't HAVE the letter he described at the conference OR a photocopy of
it. This led many in attendance at the conference to doubt Navis's story;
Walt Brown wrote an entire article about Navis's failure to produce the
letter (either at the conference or later); and Navis confirmed to me in
an e-mail of December 22, 2003, that Shackelford was wrong -- he had long
since lost the letter prior to the conference in question, and he had no
copy of it. (He didn't think he'd EVER copied it.)
Martin's been informed of all of this, but he keeps claiming to have seen
a document that wasn't there!
The sordid details:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
Uh...Martin?
Barb :-)
Dave Reitzes
>
> Martin
Martin claims it's "smear propaganda" to point out that he makes claims he
can't substantiate and continues to do so even when proved wrong, like
when he claims that Lee Bowers saw a gunman fire from the grassy knoll,
and his "evidence" is a document he says Al Navis showed him -- which Al
Navis denies:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
Dave
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d9acd056-9460-44b0...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 4, 6:08?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > The claim that I "never do" is nonsense, and you know it, Dave.
>
> Martin's record speaks for itself:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.htmlhttp://www.jfk-online.com/shackexcuses.html
tomnln
Supplying a transcript of that "Court" proceeding would go a long to bolster
your Credibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cece7026-235d-41f9...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> My notes at the time reflect that I saw the document, Dave. I stand by that.
>
> Martin
Why wouldn't you? You cite imaginary evidence all the time:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
http://www.jfk-online.com/shackexcuses.html
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cece7026-235d-41f9...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >> "curtjester1" <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Martin Shackelford
Thornley.
The physical description given by the printer didn't match Oswald.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:26718ad4-1f0b-43c0...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c67091f2-cc08-4b34...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> In fact, Al never denied the CONTENT of the letter.
>
> Martin
That's never been the issue, Martin. You've said numerous times that you
SAW a copy of the letter with your own eyes. You say Al Navis SHOWED it to
you.
But Al explicitly told the audience during his conference presentation
that he didn't HAVE the letter to back up his claim -- that he'd lost it
long ago; he told Walt Brown much later that he still hadn't turned up the
letter; he told me years later that he still hadn't turned up the letter,
affirmed to me that he had no letter or copy of it at the conference, and
that he doesn't think he'd ever made a copy. You could have e-mailed Al
anytime over the past years (he's a merchant who lists his e-mail address
quite publicly; I found it with Google in a couple of minutes) and asked
him yourself. You could do so right now if you wanted to.
But, for some reason, you decline.
Newcomers can find complete citations and links regarding this matter
here:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
Dave Reitzes
> On Dec 21 2007, 12:09 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 20, 1:34�pm, "MartinShackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > I accept his claims that have been documented by the journalist who wrote
> > > the story
> > > about him,
>
> > Then show us the documentation you find so compelling, so that we all
> > may be enlightened.
Still waiting for an answer, Martin. Tell us about the journalist who
has documented the fact that your alien autopsy witness, Michael
Riconosciuto, worked for perpetual JFK assassination suspect and all-
around spooky individual Guy Banister; and detail the documentation.
How can you hold back when it comes to such a fascinating witness,
Martin?
Newcomers, click here and scroll down to the bottom to learn about
Martin's astounding witness, a convicted drug dealer who claims to
have worked for the CIA, met personally with Osama Bin Laden, and
attended the autopsy of an actual life form from outer space:
http://www.jfk-online.com/judythshack.html
> > but not his unsupported claims.
>
> > >Martin
So let's see the support, Martin!
> > You accept Judyth's unsupported claims. Why the double standard?
We can come back to this question after you address the more pressing
issue.
> > > "steve" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:e1d86889-b75e-474c...@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > On Dec 18, 10:00 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > >> Dave Reitzes wrote:
> > > >> > On Dec 15, 8:51 pm, "MartinShackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >> Once again, you misrepresent my position on Michael R.
>
> > > >> >>Martin
>
> > > > � what exactly is your position on Michael R?
Dave
Martin Shackelford
that he
didn't have the ORIGINAL letter with him, that it was back home in Canada in
a box,
and that he would try to locate it again. From what you say, he hadn't yet
found it.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4588db1e-c48f-465d...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 7, 10:37?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
Dixie M Dea
BOTTOM POST
Group: alt.assassination.jfk Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2008, 6:19pm (PST+3)
From: drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
On Jan 4, 9:51�pm, gateway...@webtv.net (Dixie M Dea) wrote:
�In regard to Judyth's claims about Kerry Thornley and Marina,
Dixie,
Dave
__________________________________
Dave
Sorry, it took a few days to reply to you!
You may have misunderstood my meaning. I re-posted something that I had
previously posted here, back in 2006, about the change in Judyth's
claims, in her book and also about Kerry Thornley's WC Testimony.
In addition, I mentioned that she had originally claimed Marina's
affair with Thornley, on a forum. But then, when challenged about it,
she admitted she didn't actually know, it was just what Lee had told
her. I do not recall what year she made that claim, nor which forum. We
were both members of several forums and we did have several discussions,
although I don't believe I actually had this specific discussion with
her...I only remember what she claimed at the time, which was different
then she claimed in her book.
Apparently, Martin (In this same thread) was also under the impression
that she didn't actually see anythhing, only what Lee had told her.
Another acquaintance also recalls what Judyth claimed on that forum, but
no longer recalls which forum either. But only making a guess, I would
say it may have been on Simkins forum....although I haven't located it
(yet).
I did find discussion and reference to this, in both this NG as well as
the Consp. NG. However, I did not find where Judyth, herself, actually
posted about it.
Sorry, if I caused a misunderstanding. If I do run across it, I will let
you know where to find it.
__________
Dixie
Dave Reitzes
> BOTTOM POST
>
> Group: alt.assassination.jfk Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2008, 6:19pm (PST+3)
> On Jan 4, 9:51�pm, gateway...@webtv.net (Dixie M Dea) wrote:
>
> �In regard to Judyth's claims about Kerry Thornley and Marina,
Thanks!
Dave
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> What Al told the conference audience, Dave (I was there--you weren't), was
> that he
> didn't have the ORIGINAL letter with him, that it was back home in Canada in
> a box,
> and that he would try to locate it again. From what you say, he hadn't yet
> found it.
>
> Martin
In this article by Walt Brown, Brown specifies that Navis had no
letter -- or copy -- with him at the conference:
http://roswell.fortunecity.com/angelic/96/bowers~1.htm
Here's what Navis told me about it:
<QUOTE ON>-----------------------------------------
Subj: Re: Question from Dave Reitzes
Date: 12/22/03 2:14:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: alma...@rogers.com
To: mailto:Drei...@aol.com
Dave:
I don't think that I ever photocopied any of Lee Bowers replies to my
questions.
[...]
I had all this original correspondence back then, would make notes
about what they said and then would spread the word. I would send a
short communiqu� to a list of other researchers that I had
corresponded with (like Penn Jones, Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meagher,
Joachim Joesten, Josiah Thompson, Mark Lane, Paris Flammonde, etc.). I
thought that I kept the letters, but during various spring cleanings I
may have said to myself, "I've gotten all that I can out of these" and
tossed them.
I know it looks stupid now, but back then...who knew?
[...]
When I was on that panel I paraphrased what Lee Bowers had told me,
pretty much verbatim . . .
<QUOTE OFF>----------------------------------------
But, as usual, Martin insists that everyone else is wrong and he
himself is right: Navis SHOWED him the document; he SAW IT WITH HIS
OWN EYES.
Just like that explosive treasure trove of evidence he promised us all
for years would one day be made public to vindicate his many claims
about Judyth . . , and which turned out, to no one's surprise, to be
every bit as imaginary.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
Well?
Dave
Martin Shackelford
would mean a photocopy. Based on what Al says, it is possible that what I
saw was his transcription of the letter rather than a photo copy--in any
case, an exact copy of the original text. Only Dave Reitzes would turn
this into the crime of the century--and, of course, he doesn't like the
letter's content, so he prefers to dwell on secondary matters, although he
has come very close to suggesting that Al invented the letter.
Martin
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:55461acb-1814-4915...@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 8, 12:46?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> What Al told the conference audience, Dave (I was there--you weren't), was
> that he
> didn't have the ORIGINAL letter with him, that it was back home in Canada
> in
> a box,
> and that he would try to locate it again. From what you say, he hadn't yet
> found it.
>
> Martin
In this article by Walt Brown, Brown specifies that Navis had no
letter -- or copy -- with him at the conference:
http://roswell.fortunecity.com/angelic/96/bowers~1.htm
Here's what Navis told me about it:
<QUOTE ON>-----------------------------------------
Subj: Re: Question from Dave Reitzes
Date: 12/22/03 2:14:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: alma...@rogers.com
To: mailto:Drei...@aol.com
Dave:
I don't think that I ever photocopied any of Lee Bowers replies to my
questions.
[...]
I had all this original correspondence back then, would make notes
about what they said and then would spread the word. I would send a
short communiqu? to a list of other researchers that I had
alexfoyle
> Supplying a transcript of that "Court" proceeding would go a long to bolster
> your Credibility.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are absolutely right. You can find most of the testimony and
statements of Thornley at Joe G. Biles website: http://www.wf.net/~biles/jfk/#thornley
And I was wrong by saying that Thornley was acquitted. Because
actually Garrison never brought Thornleys case to court and Garrisons
successor, Harry Connick, Sr., dropped the charges against Thornley.
It was probably after Thornley offered to have a lie detector test
administered as well as volunteering to take a truth serum that
Garrison decided that his charges against Thornley would not hold up
in a court of law. In any case Garrison didn't pursue the Thornley
matter and concentrated on his ill fated Clay Shaw "case".
alexfoyle
> Alex, I've never seen any evidence that Weisberg altered a photo of
> Thornley.
> The physical description given by the printer didn't match Oswald.
>
> Martin
>
Martin, you can read that up in Adam Gorightly's book which you can find
for free here:
The pages in question are 106 and 128.
On page 128 it says that Weisberg "contracted a California artist to
'touch up' several photos of Kerry to make him look more like Oswald, and
it has been alleged that these photos were used to encourage witnesses to
identify Kerry as the individual impersonating Oswald".
On page 106 it says: "It has also been documented that Garrison
investigator Harold Weisberg had photos of Kerry altered to make him
appear more like Lee Harvey Oswald, photos which were later used to
persuade witnesses to make allegations against Kerry."
Sadly Gorightly does not include sources or footnotes for these specific
claims, but if you drop him a note at his website
http://www.adamgorightly.com/ he probably will come back to you with what
he claims is 'documented', i.e. that Weisberg had the photos of Thornley
'touched up'.
As we know the charges against Thornley were dropped (before Kerry could
take Garrison up on his offer/threat to take a lie detector test - go
figure why Garrison wouldn't let Kerry do the test nor let him take the
truth serum which Thornley also volunteered to take) and even Weisberg
later became disenchanted with Garrisons cloud-cuckoo-land case against
Clay Shaw.
Alex
tomnln
No sense in asking him to address evidence/testimony then.
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:2vhgj.29731$pq....@newsfe24.lga...
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> My conference notes reflect seeing a copy of the letter. Normally that
> would mean a photocopy. Based on what Al says, it is possible that what I
> saw was his transcription of the letter rather than a photo copy--in any
> case, an exact copy of the original text.
Navis said: "When I was on that panel I paraphrased what Lee Bowers
had told me, pretty much verbatim . . ."
Why don't you e-mail Al and ask him if he had a transcription or any
other kind of "exact copy" with him at the conference?
Go ahead; I'll wait. Hell, I've been waiting for years.
Only Dave Reitzes would turn
> this into the crime of the century--
All I did was point out that you'd made a mistake. You're the one who
simply can't admit it, and you keep digging yourself in deeper and
deeper.
and, of course, he doesn't like the
> letter's content, so he prefers to dwell on secondary matters, although he
> has come very close to suggesting that Al invented the letter.
>
> Martin
I have absolutely no reason to believe Al invented the letter, and
I've never implied that he did.
You, however, are the only researcher I've ever seen cite Lee Bowers as an
eyewitness to a grassy knoll gunman based upon Al's claim. If you're going
to make that claim about Bowers, it is incumbent upon you -- not me, not
even Al Navis -- to prove it.
> "Dave Reitzes" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:55461acb-1814-4915...@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 8, 12:46?pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > What Al told the conference audience, Dave (I was there--you weren't), was
> > that he
> > didn't have the ORIGINAL letter with him, that it was back home in Canada
> > in
> > a box,
> > and that he would try to locate it again. From what you say, he hadn't yet
> > found it.
>
> > Martin
>
> In this article by Walt Brown, Brown specifies that Navis had no
> letter -- or copy -- with him at the conference:
>
> http://roswell.fortunecity.com/angelic/96/bowers~1.htm
>
> Here's what Navis told me about it:
>
> <QUOTE ON>-----------------------------------------
>
> Subj: Re: Question from Dave Reitzes
> Date: 12/22/03 2:14:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From: almark...@rogers.com
> To: mailto:Dreit...@aol.com
tomnln
pos;
The Kerry Thornley link doesn't work.
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:b7e27ddd-6ea4-47c2...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
On 7 Jan., 06:58, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
> Supplying a transcript of that "Court" proceeding would go a long to
> bolster
> your Credibility.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
You are absolutely right. You can find most of the testimony and
alexfoyle
> Thornley.
> The physical description given by the printer didn't match Oswald.
>
> Martin
>
he has the documentation to prove his claim that Weisberg had the
photos of Thornley altered.
It is a letter from Weisberg to Fred Newcomb in Sherman Oaks, CA, with
instructions to touch up Thornleys photo to make him look more like
Oswald. Also there is a letter from James Alcock to Newcomb advising
him that Weisberg is not a member of his staff and he also distances
his office from the touching up of the photo.
Adam Gorightly will put up the documents on his website during the
next days. I have them as a PDF file and if anybody wants them
upfront, write me an e-mail (alex...@gmx.de) and I will forward the
letters to you.
Alex
Dave Reitzes
> David Reitzes/Joe Biles websites are NOT official Court Trasnscripts.
My website contains numerous "official Court Trasnscripts [sic]," with
no edits or changes except for the occasional spelling correction.
Newcomers, make Tom angry (well, angrier) and check it out sometime:
Dave \:^)
> pos;
> The Kerry Thornley link doesn't work.
>
> "alexfoyle" <alexfo...@gmx.de> wrote in message
Martin Shackelford
without
any verification of either, isn't evidence that Weisberg showed altered
photos to
witnesses.
Martin
"alexfoyle" <alex...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:5f219f45-733d-49d6...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...