Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Why Are They Still Lying To Us About JFK's Death? A Minister Tells Us Why

Of all the great JFK assassination books published last year (to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the assassination), one of the best was written by a Methodist minister named Dr. Lance Moore. Dr. Moore's book, "Killing JFK: 50 Years, 50 Lies--From the Warren Commission to Bill O'Reilly, A History of Deceit in the Kennedy Assassination," is meticulously researched, eloquently stated, and worthy of serious consideration. Yet you have probably never heard of Dr. Moore or his book. That's because the media blackout of all voices critical of the official version (read establishment lies)of the assassination have stifled the purveyors of historical truth. I sympathize with Dr. Moore and other JFK authors/researchers, because I too have been denied access to mainstream media outlets (with the notable exception of my hometown St. Louis Post-Dispatch). Despite this, 75% of Americans know we are being fed a pack of lies by NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and all other corporate-owned conglomerates who have had a long, cozy relationship with the CIA.

In a piece written for OpEd News Dr. Moore condemns the unbalanced media and questions the purpose of continuing the cover-up a half-century after the event. He writes:

"A few days after the 50th Anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, my wife and I chatted with a new acquaintance in an upscale bar in D.C., a spot frequented by Congressmen. Leaning toward us across the table, a dapperly-dressed man confirmed my suspicions about the CIA and a certain magazine. His wife, he confided, works for the internationally-prestigious magazine, and she had told him the CIA frequented her workplace to spy on a nearby embassy--with full cooperation by her employers. I found her story credible, in part because it is now well-established that the CIA infiltrated and influenced a long list of newspapers and magazines.1 Initially, I had been surprised that the magazine in question, an organization with great credibility in the academic community, risked their reputation to broadcast blatant lies about the JFK shooting. Why fib about something that happened half-a-century ago? The answer is astounding: the CIA --fifty years on--still believes it cannot afford the hit to its credibility... it refuses to admit that Lee Harvey Oswald was a company man. And it still has a vise-like grip on the mainstream media.

I am not a kook. Several parchments from prestigious institutions hang on my wall to assure me that I'm not crazy. I'm not a 911 'Truther' or a 'Man didn't land on the moon' conspiracy nut. Yet, when I began promoting my book about the JFK assassination, I observed some curious things. Major news outlets circled their wagons around the 'official' government story that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone nut, nixing any dissenting opinions. Pro-Warren Commission, pro-lone-gunman pundits (a dying breed) were trotted out on CBS, ABC and even PBS. Credible experts who offer proof of government complicity were disinvited. Others in the assassination-research community told me similar stories of how they had been scheduled for cable news/network appearances, but were cancelled at the last minute--without explanation. Even my local city newspaper, which has featured my writing on other topics, refused to print a rebuttal I had written to counter a 'lone-gunman did it' fluff-piece they ran in November 2013.

I have been harassed. Nasty, over-the-top attacks were posted on the Amazon review page of my JFK book (despite four and five star reviews by 95% of readers). Correspondence between myself and Vince Palamara (a Secret Service expert who has been featured on C-SPAN, the History Channel, etc.) was sliced open and contents stolen, apparently with the blessing of the U.S. Postal Service.2 At the 50th anniversary event in Dealey Plaza November 22nd, an ABC-TV cameraman pulled out his iPhone and snapped a picture of my book's cover, saying he was personally interested in it... but made it clear his network was not. A CBS reporter and his cameraman interviewed me, but the footage never aired. At the end of the day, outside the Dallas JFK museum in the Texas School Book Depository, I was assaulted--choked without any provocation--by the bodyguard of former Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, as I tried to shake hands with Hill after his book-signing.3 These are things happening now, not 50 years ago.

But let's back up and look at the long media history. The few times the networks dared examine the topic, the reporting was one-sided. CBS, for example, gave extended screen-time to so-called "conspiracy debunker" Gerald Posner, but allowed only short, benign snippets from lone-gunman critics like Dr. Cyril Wecht (and Dr. Wecht is a top-notch forensic scientist; Posner is not). I challenge doubters to put a stopwatch on any major network's coverage of the JFK assassination and see how much time is afforded the debunkers vs. the conspiracy 'nuts.' Though I am personally convinced that the CIA helped kill Kennedy, I concede there are two sides to this debate. So, mainstream media, give us both sides! The one-sided press coverage should scare the hell out of us."

You can read the full article on opednews.com

http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Thursday, April 10, 2014

How Republican Sociopaths Have Ruined America


Much of what ails society today is the proliferation of sociopaths. I’m not just talking about hardened criminals either; sociopaths are everywhere, in all walks of life. In fact, the traits they possess are the very traits which impel one to succeed and rise to positions of power in a capitalistic society. CEOs, Wall Street billionaires, politicians, military chiefs, intelligence operatives, and right-wing talking heads are among those who have used their sociopathological personality disorders to rule America.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could identify a sociopath before he/she comes to power? Think of how much better our lives and our country would be if only we knew who the conscienceless bastards really were before we voted for them, came under their employ, listened to their cons, fell prey to their manipulation. The problem is, they are not easily identified because they wear masks. They try to fit in by mimicking normal behavior in public. Some are even charming. They seduce us with their outward appearance of normalcy, but inside they are godless devils bent on perverting the greater good for their own means.

In the past 35 years America has slowly been transformed from a nation of common purpose to a nation of the rich, by wealthy, and for the sociopathic few. That’s because many of the people in power (mostly Republicans) have been crass opportunists concerned with self- advancement at the expense of the greater good. In the age of Reagan, the self-centeredness was heightened to a virtue. The 1980s gave rise to a rogue’s gallery of Gordon Gekkos and their “greed is good” philosophy. It wasn’t just Reagan and his policies though, it was the sociopaths he ushered into public service—the Bushes, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Oliver North, William Casey and a whole band of despicable criminals. The country became more selfish, less communal, and more cynical. It was then that we started letting the Almighty buck rule all facets of American life. The more money you had, the more admired you were. Fuck generosity and compassion for the less fortunate.

Since then, sociopaths have started illicit wars, drained the national treasury, raped Mother Nature, ruined the climate, and given rise to Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, et al. There seem to be more sociopaths than human beings in positions of power. Maybe that was the whole point. Now the Extreme Court (uh..er…Supreme Court) has gotten in on the act, by making it easier for sociopathic billionaires to control (read subvert) the democratic process. Smarmy Vegas casino operators (like Shel Adelson) and fascist industrialists (like the Koch brothers) have far more say in how our government operates than 99% of us.

As a public service then, I am herewith giving you tips on how to spot a sociopath. If you recognize them in someone, alert authorities and resist the urge to succumb to their wiles.

Traits of a Sociopath (based on the work of psychologists Robert Hare): While some experts believe that sociopathy has a genetic origin, Hare believed that a sociopath’s behavior “is shaped by social forces and is the result of a dysfunctional environment.” Hare formed a list of traits common to sociopaths. Here are the most prevalent:

--Sociopaths are manipulative and very skilled at taking advantage of the good intentions of others . Allen Dulles, former CIA chief, is a good example. He was appointed by President Eisenhower in 1953 after promising Ike that the CIA could avoid WWIII by overthrowing socialist and communist countries around the globe via bloodless coups. Eisenhower, a decent man shaken by the horrors of the second World War, turned over foreign policy to Allen and his brother Foster. The Dulles brothers, sociopaths of the worst kind, turned America into quasi-fascist Orwellian state by using their enormous power to control the media, murder innocent citizens, evoke hatred of America around the globe, and cover up the assassination of JFK. All the while, the Dulleses were enriching themselves and their corporate partners—the Forbeses, the Browns, the Rockefellers, the DuPonts, the Hunts—the oldest, richest families in the country. And Kennedy haters all.

--They have a grandiose sense of self; they think they are better than everyone else, and if they have more money or power than others they use this to their constant advantage. Moreover, the fact that a sociopath may be wealthier than others or in a position of power over others merely confirms in the sociopath’s mind that he/she is better than others. In the modern age, who feels more entitled than the richest among us? The Koch brothers, desperately trying to buy the government, runs roughshod over the poor, the elderly, minorities, and social safety nets. They care only their own profits. We should have carved a big “S” in their foreheads at birth, just as Brad Pitt marked Christoph Waltz with a swastika in “Inglourious Basterds.” Our lives would be much better if we knew whom we were dealing with upfront.

--They are pathological liars; when they are committing acts that harm the greater good of society, they never tell the truth, even if they are caught in a lie. To this day, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and their lackeys still deny that the Iraq war was about oil, despite all evidence to the contrary.

--They have no remorse or guilt, regardless of how heinous their actions are. When recently asked if he would do anything differently, if he had to do it all over again, Cheney responded, “No.”

--They lack empathy and are callous in their treatment of others. Mitt Romney dismissed 47% of the country with one glib comment.

--They are contemptuous of those who seek to understand them. One of Allen Dulles’s protégés, Frank Wisner, head of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird in the 1950s, once famously bragged, “The press claims to be free and open in America. But they are nothing but my personal puppets. I can pull any string I want and they will follow along.”

--They do not perceive that anything is wrong with them. Even if they are proven wrong, and even if all about them acknowledge their wrongdoing, the sociopath will never admit to wrongdoing. See Dick Cheney quote above.

--They are authoritarians; in many cases, they were raised in authoritarian homes where the appearance of uniformity and conformity far outweighed love, compassion, empathy, and charity as laudable qualities. Henry Kissinger once said of Richard Nixon (a raging sociopath), “Imagine what he could have been if anyone had ever loved him.”

--They are secretive; at all costs they strive to keep their true behaviors and thoughts hidden. Allen and Foster Dulles, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush, Richard Nixon, and Oliver North were nothing if not secretive.

--They are paranoid. Can you imagine anyone more paranoid than Dick Nixon?

--They diligently present a “normal” outward appearance when engaging others. This is what confounds us about all sociopaths. Usually we don’t unmask them until it is too late.

--They experience pleasure from enslaving their victims. And all people they encounter are potential victims, even loved ones. “Loved ones” is a misnomer, because sociopaths are incapable of love. Again, Dick Cheney is the perfect example of someone who seemed to derive pleasure from inflicting pain. Witness the detainees at Guantanamo. Cheney does not consider what he did torture, yet a 600-page nonpartisan report says he did exactly that.

--When they collaborate, they feed off one another, and their actions become even more diabolical. No better example of this than the Cheney-Rumsfeld partnerships during the two Bush presidencies.

http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Sunday, March 30, 2014

PBS Re-Airs Laughable "Cold Case: JFK"

The NOVA series on PBS is usually a reliable, scientific, fact-based program. I generally enjoy their insightful shows. But PBS has severely undermined its credibility by continuing to air "Cold Case: JFK." The show ran again on March 28, and I took a very hard look at it. Propagating the historical lie that Oswald's magic rifle and superhuman bullets killed Kennedy, PBS found pseudo experts (father and son Luke and Mike Haag) to explain to viewers how a bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit 399) that inflicted nine wounds on two human beings could emerge intact. How could PBS sell its journalistic integrity down the river, I asked myself. What prompted its broadcast of such obvious nonsense? I found the answer in the opening credits: "Funded by David Koch."

If you don't know David Koch, let me give you some background. He is one of the richest men in America. He and his brother are right-wing fanatics committed to abolishing Social Security, taxation of the wealthy, Medicare, minimum wages, and voting rights for minorities. He has spent millions trying to prove that Obama is a socialist Muslim who was born in Kenya. He is a lying, tax-dodging, Kennedy-hating, fascist Oligarch. He can buy anything he wants, and the truth is for sale. Always strapped for money, PBS will spread historical lies for a few million. Seen in this context, "Cold Case: JFK" (the smarmy title speaks to PBS's raging envy at the commercial networks' success with fictional crime shows) should be evaluated for what it is: a blatant fairy tale paid for by a billionaire who wants to keep Americans ignorant, placated and duped.

But for those of us who have honestly investigated JFK's murder, "Cold Case: JFK" is a joke. I expose its lies, omissions and wild speculation here.

The show opens with the declaration that "ballistics is the key to cracking the case." Having investigated the case myself for over a half-century, I know with rock-solid certainty that ballistics are NOT the key to unlocking the mystery, because the ballistic evidence is unreliable. But I listened to NOVA's case anyway.

One of the contributors says, "You would think the Kennedy assassination would be easy to solve. It took place in front of many hundreds of witnesses including law enforcement. And it was filmed by several cameras. However, it has turned into one of the most complex murder cases in history." NOVA is apparently oblivious to the fact that this is a very good indication that someone was tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and corrupting law enforcement--all very good indicators of a massive plot.

The ubiquitous sad sack--Secret Service agent Clint Hill--makes a guest appearance and a startling omission, inadvertently proving conspiracy. "The President's blood, brain and skull matter blew out to the rear on the trunk of the car." This indicates definitively that the kill shot came from in front of Kennedy, and not from the rear where Oswald was positioned. Unless, bullets can make U-turns in mid-flight, that is. (I'm surprised NOVA did not try to prove this!)

The NOVA narrator, with his smooth, soothing voice, assures us that, "Back at the crime scene witnesses point to the Texas School Book Depository as police search the building." This is an out-and-out lie. A vast majority of witnesses pointed to the grassy knoll as the source of the shots, and most of them scurried there immediately after the shots were fired.

But most of NOVA's (Koch's) untruths are contained in omissions. I documented ten before losing track:

Omission #1: "Three empty cartridge cases were found on the sixth floor of the TSBD building." They could have been (and were) planted there. This possibility escapes NOVA.

Omission #2: "A 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was found on the same floor." So was a 7.65 German Mauser which quickly disappeared from the official record.

In between Omissions 1 and 2, a funny interlude occurred. The Haag team's Carcano rifle jammed. I suppose they did not even consider that this could have happened to Oswald.

Omission #3: "The case against Oswald was tied up in a couple hours. I give credit to the Dallas Police." To this day it is a mystery how the Dallas Police zeroed in on Oswald as a suspect so quickly. There was not even a roll call of TSBD employees until an hour after Oswald had been arrested.

Omission #4: "Oswald was a communist." NOVA fails to ask why a communist would live and work in the most fanatically right-wing city in America. And why did he associate with CIA covert operatives George DeMohrenschildt and Ruth Paine?

Omission #5: "Ruby came out of nowhere to shoot Oswald." How did Ruby get access to the Dallas Police Headquarters just in time to kill the murder suspect of the century? NOVA offers no explanation, though I'm sure Koch would have paid for one if needed.

Omission #6: "The Secret Service had to draw their guns to get the body out of Parkland Hospital and avoid an autopsy there." Why did the Secret Service refuse to let the coroner, Dr. Earl Rose, perform an autopsy? No explanation is offered by NOVA. My research indicates that agents Roy Kellerman, Emory Roberts, and William Greer, all of whom played a part in the plot to kill JFK, were not about to let an honest autopsy reveal clear evidence of a conspiracy.

Omission #7: PBS's own Jim Lehrer (presumably another of Koch's paid lackeys) says, "Imagine how horrible it was for the Secret Service to lose a president on their watch." How does Lehrer know this? Maybe the Secret Service was delighted that JFK was killed. There is plenty of evidence to indicate that the Secret Service despised Kennedy. One agent joked, "I wouldn't get in the way if someone shot at him." And on November 22, 1963, no agent made any effort to save Kennedy's life. NOVA either does not know or did not care that several members of the President's detail got drunk the night before the assassination. Security was lax the entire Texas trip. SAIC Emory Roberts told other agents to stand down as bullets flew in Dealey Plaza. Limousine driver William Greer slowed the car down and turned to look at JFK twice as the murder occurred. He did not take evasive action until the President's head had been blown off.

Omission #8: "The bullet exited Kennedy's shirt collar near the throat." Exited? That's not what the Dallas doctors said. To a man they were convinced that JFK's throat wound was one of entrance. But NOVA does not mention this.

Omission #9: "The magic bullet was found on Kennedy's stretcher after being dislodged during cardiac massage." Two problems here, NOVA: the bullet should have been found on Connally's stretcher, not Kennedy's, if it had really passed through both men; moreover, the Dallas doctors and nurses saw no back wound on Kennedy.

Omission #10: Luke and Mike Haag go to great lengths to prove that the magic bullet, which supposedly passed through both Kennedy and Connally, could have inflicted nine wounds and still emerged completely undamaged. But they make no mention of how an identical bullet from an identical rifle could shatter into a thousand pieces when striking Kennedy's head. Both bullets supposedly passed through human bone, tissue, and organs. One emerged whole and the other disintegrated. How??

In the end, NOVA's case is preposterous. Nothing more than a disinformation piece, bought and paid for by a power-mad billionaire bent on perpetuating historical lies for his own political ends.

http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X


Saturday, March 22, 2014

Count Halberstam Among The Official Historical Liars

When it comes to JFK and his Vietnam policy, it is maddeningly difficult to separate truth from fiction because there are so many lies propagated by the state's "official historians." Among these propagandists is David Halberstam, an award-winning author whose book "The Best and The Brightest" spread the most despicable misinformation about Kennedy's attitude towards Vietnam. Halberstam, in essence, blames the Vietnam escalation on Kennedy and his cabinet. Putting blinders on and ignoring undeniable facts, Halberstam refuses to acknowledge that Kennedy inherited Vietnam its repressive Diem regime from a CIA that meddled in southeat Asia politics long before JFK was elected. In January 1961, at the time of Kennedy's inauguration, Dwight Eisenhower and defacto POTUS Allen Dulles had already committed 700 advisers to South Vietnam. Subsequently, JFK's military and intelligence advisers clamored loudly for ground troops and a full-fledged war in SE Asia. Kennedy resisted.

John Newman, in his truthful book "JFK And Vietnam," came to a clear conclusion:
“Kennedy turned down combat troops, not when the decision was clouded by ambiguities and contradictions … but when the battle was unequivocally desperate, when all concerned agreed that Vietnam’s fate hung in the balance and when his principal advisers told him that vital U.S. interests in the region and the world were at stake.” [Newman, p. 138]

No mention of this appears in Halberstam's book; instead he concentrated on Kennedy’s issuance of National Security Action Memorandum 111 on Nov. 22, 1961, when Kennedy – even as he turned down the hawks’ request for troops – granted them around 15, 000 more advisers to see if this would fend off the growing insurgency.

Kennedy did something else that Halberstam completely missed or chose to ignore.
Realizing that his advisers opposed him over Vietnam, he decided to go around them on the issue. He sent John K. Galbraith to Vietnam to put together a report that he knew would undercut his military advisers.

We have more than Galbraith’s account to confirm that Kennedy was never going to commit to a war in Vietnam. Roswell Gilpatric, deputy Secretary of Defense, admitted that Kennedy told Gilpatric's boss, Robert McNamara that he was “going to unwind this whole thing.”

By 1963 Kennedy had drawn up preliminary plans for complete withdrawal of American military personnel by 1965. Halberstam missed this memo completely.

http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Friday, March 14, 2014

Article Indicts Jack Ruby As Accessory After The Fact

Political reporter Patrick Howley, writing in The Daily Caller, gives seven ironclad reasons Jack Ruby was part of the JFK assassination plot. His article entitled "Why Jack Ruby Was Probably Part Of The Kennedy Conspiracy" is reprinted here in its entirety.

"Jack Ruby was convicted 50 years ago Friday for the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Ruby, born Jacob Leon Rubenstein in Chicago in 1911, shot Oswald out of some kind of deep-seated love for the president Oswald had just allegedly killed, according to the official version of events. But the real facts of Ruby’s mid-day November 24, 1963 shooting of Oswald on live national television do little to validate the Warren Commission Report.

Here are seven reasons Ruby likely killed Oswald as part of the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy:

1. He said so

'Everything pertaining to what’s happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people had, that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I’m in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world,' Ruby said on film after he shot Oswald.

Asked if these men were in very high positions, Ruby replied, 'Yes.'

2. He even suggested Lyndon Johnson ordered him to do it

'When I mentioned about Adlai Stevenson, if he was vice president there would never have been an assassination of our beloved President Kennedy…Well the answer is the man in office now,' Ruby said in 1963.

3. He was a known gangster

Jack Ruby ate at mafia-world restaurateur Joe Campisi’s Dallas restaurant the night before Kennedy was assassinated.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations found in a 1979 report that Ruby knew Chicago mob boss Sam Giancana, a close Kennedy crony and Fidel Castro assassination plot insider who helped Kennedy win Illinois in the 1960 presidential election. Kennedy and Giancana shared the same mistress, Judith Exner. After Kennedy took office, his brother and attorney general Robert Kennedy used the Justice Department to go after organized crime, even saying, 'I want that dago Sam Giancana put away for good.'

4. Why was Oswald being led through the basement of Dallas Police Headquarters in plain sight, accessible to the crowd?

Ruby had easy access to Oswald and nobody tried to stop him before he ran up to the alleged Soviet sympathizer, who was walking while being held on both sides by Dallas police detectives Jim Leavelle and L.C. Graves.

'Ruby’s shooting of Oswald was not a spontaneous act, in that it involved at least some premeditation. Similarly, the committee believed it was less likely that Ruby entered the police basement without assistance, even though the assistance may have been provided with no knowledge of Ruby’s intentions,' the House Select Committee on Assassinations found in 1979.

'The committee was troubled by the apparently unlocked doors along the stairway route and the removal of security guards from the area of the garage nearest the stairway shortly before the shooting… There is also evidence that the Dallas Police Department withheld relevant information from the Warren Commission concerning Ruby’s entry to the scene of the Oswald transfer,' according to the committee.

5. Oswald was asking to be silenced

'I’m just a patsy' Oswald shouted to reporters while in custody before being briskly taken away.

6. Richard Nixon recognized Ruby, having hired him at Lyndon Johnson’s request years before

'Nixon said, "The damn thing is, I knew this Jack Ruby. Murray [Chotiner] brought him to me in 1947, said he was one of ‘Johnson’s boys’ and that LBJ wanted us to hire him as an informant to the Committee. We did,"' former Nixon operative Roger Stone told The Daily Caller.

'I think Nixon immediately recognized that LBJ was using one his operatives to do ‘clean up’ work on the murder of John Kennedy,' Stone said.

7. The Warren Commission wouldn’t let him talk

'I want to tell the truth, and I can’t tell it here,' Ruby told Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren in June 1964, after Warren and other commission members including Gerald Ford visited Ruby in Dallas. Warren, whose commission was hastily assembled at the behest of President Johnson to quell conspiracy theories, declined to transport Ruby to Washington, D.C. to testify about what really happened."


http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Monday, March 10, 2014

Judge Rules That JFK Researcher Can Sue CIA

An article written by Kevin Lessmiller for Courthouse News Service reports that the Central Intelligence Agency can be sued by Anthony Bothwell, a citizen investigating the murders of John and Robert Kennedy. The CIA, which has withheld sensitive files for over a half-century is finally being brought to court for obfuscating justice.

I have reprinted the article in its entirety below (bad grammar and all). Of particular note is the CIA's arrogant, almost condescending replies to previous attempts at getting the agency to release its files on the murders of the century. The covert operatives suspectged of being involved in JFK's assassination could not have their files released because it would expose "intelligence sources and methods information...and are operation files." Notice that the CIA did not respond, "Hell no, you can't have the files on these individuals because they were not involved in murdering the President." Instead the response was, "Making these records public will expose our secrets."

I contend that if these secrets involve murdering the POTUS, then we ought to do what JFK recommended to his advisors: "Splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the wind."

(CN) - The CIA must face claims over withheld records related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother, Sen. Robert Kennedy, a federal judge ruled.
Anthony Bothwell sued the CIA in November 2013 for denying his records request under the Freedom of Information Act relating to five people who may have been involved in the Kennedy assassinations in 1963 and 1968.
U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Corley on Thursday removed CIA Director John Brennan as a defendant because a FOIA request applies only to agencies and not individuals.
Though Bothwell had failed to name the CIA as a defendant, the San Francisco judge said it must answer the complaint.
"Because the CIA is sufficiently identified in the body of the complaint, plaintiff's failure to name the CIA in the caption does not mandate dismissal of the complaint against the CIA," the nine-page opinion states.
Bothwell's failure to list the CIA in the lawsuit's caption "is merely a technical error" and he properly served "both the United States and the CIA," according to the ruling.
In his complaint, Bothwell described himself as a San Francisco attorney who graduated from the John F. Kennedy School of Law and later taught courses there.
His initial FOIA request sought all records related to three people allegedly connected to JFK's assassination: Johnny Roselli, Jean Souetre and David Morales,
As to RFK's assassination, Bothwell sought records Thane Eugene Cesar and Enrique Hernandez.
The CIA told Bothwell that it no responsive records were generated for the three people possibly connected to the JFK assassination and if such records did exist, they would be FOIA-exempt as "intelligence sources and methods information."
It flat-out denied the records request pertaining to the two individuals allegedly associated with RFK's assassination, saying that the records are "operational files" and are exempt from the FOIA.

http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Saturday, March 8, 2014

Buy The Kindle Version of My Book Today For $1.99

My publisher, Neverland Publishing, has arranged through Kindle to offer a time-based promotional sale of the Kindle version of The President's Mortician. The promotion begins today, March 8th, with the Kindle version of The President's Mortician being made available for sale at the discounted rate of $1.99. The price increment will increase daily by $1 until Monday, March 10th--the last day of the promotion--at which time the price for the Kindle version will be $3.99. Here is the link to Amazon--
http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Mortician-Tim-Fleming/dp/098882907X

Here is a synopsis of The President's Mortician:

Largely unknown to history, John Liggett was one of the most macabre and gruesome figures of the 20th century. A skilled undertaker and body reconstructionist, he was also a contract killer with furtive intelligence connections. One summer night young Conrad “Con” Reese, Jr., while peeping in his neighbor’s window, witnesses one of Liggett’s crimes—the horrifying murder of Nancy Weirshellen. Nancy’s husband, Ed, is wrongly convicted of the murder, and, though Con knows Ed is not the murderer, Con does not come forward to tell his story to authorities.

As he grows older, Con feels deep remorse for letting an innocent man get convicted of murder, and he retains a clear image of the real murderer in his memory. Quite by accident Con eventually comes to learn that the killer is John Liggett. With the help of a journalist friend, Con learns that Liggett has suspicious connections to the JFK assassination.

Liggett’s actions on November 22, 1963, speak to the sinister role he may have played in helping plotters cover up the true nature of the President’s murder. Liggett, considered by many to be the best “reconstruction artist” in his field, abruptly abandoned his duties at Restland Funeral Home in Dallas just minutes after Kennedy was shot. He received a mysterious phone call and immediately took off for Parkland Hospital in a Restland hearse which contained a casket in the back. Liggett was not seen again by his family until the next day, when he returned home disheveled and ashen. Without explanation, he promptly loaded his family into a car and drove off for south Texas. In a motel room the next day, Liggett and family heard of Lee Harvey Oswald’s murder, and Liggett suddenly breathed a sigh of relief, saying, “Everything’s okay now. We can go home.”

But Liggett’s secret work is not done. He is enlisted by powerful forces to murder key witnesses to the truth of the Kennedy assassination. One of his victims is Nancy Weirshellen. Ed Weirhsellen is convicted of the crime and imprisoned, but, with the help of Con and his friend, Abbie Monroe, Ed escapes custody. When Con and Abbie reveal the identity of Nancy’s murderer to Ed, Ed goes on a deadly search for Liggett.

Along the way, the reader learns of the true nature of the plot to kill Kennedy and how the deed was covered up in the most diabolical and clever way imaginable. Ed Weirshellen confronts Liggett in the narrative’s climactic scene.