Date: 12-06-92 (06:44) Number: 3801 of 4255 To: ALL Refer#: NONE From: JOHN DINARDO Read: (N/A) Subj: Part 26, PACIFICA RADIO I Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Conf: US_JFKCONSPIR (193) Read Type: GENERAL (+) From: jad@Turing.ORG (John DiNardo) Subject: Part 26, PACIFICA RADIO Investigates the Murder of President Kennedy Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1992 23:24:18 GMT I made the following transcript from a tape recording of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station WBAI-FM (99.5) 505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl. New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (continuation) JIM MARRS: By the way, I want to extend my compliments to Jerry Policoff. Jerry, I have read your articles for years and years and years, and I have used them very extensively in my research. My compliments to you, sir. JERRY POLICOFF: Thank you. GARY NULL: Gentlemen, you're going to find out something brand new about the Kennedy Assassination. Next week, and on that show -- because you've both made substantial contributions of new information recently -- I will have you conferenced in to listen to the new information. And it's going to shake people up when they hear this information, never before discussed or written about. No one has found out about it. That is coming up. And I think it will put a cap on this whole thing. Whether anything is ever done about it -- who knows. It's an amazing thing. You write a story. You research. You think it's really revolutionary. It will give new insights which should conduct new investigations. And then it comes, and the media doesn't do a thing. And it all goes by the bye. But we're going to do it in any case. By the way, I was just handed a note by our producer who has been working non-stop. I mean, he's putting in like 100-hour weeks on this [investigation]. He is Kevin McCrary, and he says that L. Fletcher Prouty is going to appear on our program later this week. So, he'll be able to tell us, in his own words, what he knows and what new information he knows, and new information which he has not revealed before. And I'm going to ask you, Jim Marrs if you'll make yourself available tomorrow, because we did not get to part two, which was the means, the motives and the opportunities ..... JIM MARRS: Okay. Can I make one quick comment about the Garrison thing. At the time that the Garrison investigation and trial of Clay Shaw was going on, I was watching it very, very closely as a newsman. I was trying to be objective and I was trying to really look at it and see what was happening. And, of course, he said: "I've got a conspiracy by the tail. I've got individuals here. I'm filing charges on them. I'm taking them before a grand jury." In other words, he was taking them through the normal processes of law. Well, the national media elements within there, and even the Attorney General of the United States, were saying: "This guy is a nut. He's a fantacist. There's nothing there. He hasn't got a case." And, quite frankly, I didn't know who to believe. Today, you've got twenty years of hindsight, and you look back and you can see that MOST of what Jim Garrison ..... and I'm like Jerry Policoff. I do not want to just blanketly defend Garrison, because there were a lot of problems with his prosecution in New Orleans, not all of which was his own doing. But, you look back after twenty years of hindsight and we find that most of what he was telling us: Guy Bannister, David Ferrie, the connection to Oswald, the anti-Castro Cubans and the plotting that was going on in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 -- all of that has held up. It's historical fact. Even the House Select Committee on Assassinations was forced to conclude that most of that was substantiated. So now we KNOW who was telling the truth and who was lying. GARY NULL: Well, in point of fact, the judge and the jury said that when Clay Shaw won his case and Garrison was, in effect, put into the closet forever after that, and told to shut up, and the media did a hatchet-job on him, he didn't know that eleven members of his own staff were CIA plants. JIM MARRS: That's right. GARY NULL: He didn't know that Clay Shaw's counsel had every note, everything that they [Garrison] needed. And also, Clay Shaw lied. The man perjured himself. And he did so with the help of his CIA contacts, because later it did come out that Clay Shaw did, in FACT, work for the CIA. That is a matter of historical FACT. And the jury said that they would have convicted him had they known that. So... JIM MARRS: That's right. Also, he lied when he said that the did not know David Ferrie and had had no contact with him, because there is now, circulating among the research community, photographs of Clay Shaw and David Ferrie together at a party in New Orleans. GARY NULL: Yes. So, clearly, Garrison was right. The media was wrong. The Government participated in the massive cover-up at that level, and one very courageous prosecuting attorney was, unfortunately, disgraced at the time. And the American Public should know that. The man whom he brought to trial was a LIAR and was complicitous in much of the plot, and the Government knew it AT the time. And so, we have to be aware of this. I want to thank you very much, Jerry Policoff and Jim Marrs, for being with us. This has been a continuation of our series, Hidden Agendas: Conspiracies, Cover-ups and Lies. (to be continued) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention, please assist in disseminating it by posting it to other bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus. As evidence accrues concerning the corporate mass-media's thirty-year cover-up of the corporate CIA's coup d'etat against the People of the United States, the need for citizen reportage becomes ever more striking. John DiNardo Date: 12-06-92 (06:45) Number: 3802 of 4255 To: ALL Refer#: NONE From: Read: (N/A) Subj: SUPPORT FOR SCHUCK Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Conf: US_JFKCONSPIR (193) Read Type: GENERAL (+) Date: Friday, 4 Dec 1992 17:17:15 CST From: Subject: SUPPORT FOR SCHUCK In his battle with Grant and Todd (or is that Elvis?), Schuck argues that by closely inspecting the Zfilm, one can discern that JFK is not hunched forward enough to line up for the SBT shot proposed by the WC and the HSCA. I have an enhanced copy of the Zfilm obtained from Lifton. It is 17 minutes of the Zfilm shown at different speeds and with different focus areas (mainly magnifying the limo area). Why I do not directly enter into these arguments is that none of the segments on this video is frame marked from one beginning to end, therefore I can't use frame numbers to base detailed arguments. I only want to say that in looking at the frames just before the limo passes behind the sign and the frames when the limo comes from behind the sign, I see *no* indication that JFK is hunched forward. It is quite clear. He begins with his arm resting on the side of the car and straight backed against the seat. This position changes only *slightly* after coming from behind the sign. On this particular aspect, I endorse Schuck 100%. ALAN ROGERS **** U54778@UICVM.UIC.EDU * I speak only for myself as a * VMKRAFT INC. 708-675-8615 * citizen of the UNIVERSE, not * * as an employee of Vmkraft nor* * as a user of U of I Services.*