On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics

[Scott Kaiser]

It really all depends on how one would interpret what Frank is saying, bottomline is we all know who had the photos.

"In Realist #117 Paul Kangas quoted from an interview with Frank Sturgis that never took place. I went to the library and looked the fucker up and it was not there. In 1977 Sturgis was involved with E. Howard Hunt in a lawsuit against me and would never have said the reason we burglarized the Watergate was because Nixon was interested in stopping news leaks relating to the photos of our role in the assassination of President John Kennedy. ' I was being sued for saying the same thing, and I would have called him as a witness."

I sent a copy of Weberman's letter to Kangas. He called and promised to mail me the interview with Sturgis, something I should have insisted on originally. He sent an article from the Houston Post of May 5, 1977, a UPI dispatch datelined Dallas, which stated:

"Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis said Wednesday the CIA planned the break-in because high officials felt Richard Nixon was becoming too powerful and was overly interested in the assassination of John Kennedy. . . . Several times the President asked [CIA director] Richard Helms for the files on the Kennedy assassination but Helms refused to give it to him, refused a direct order from the President,* Sturgis said.

I believe Nixon would have uncovered the true facts in the assassination of President Kennedy and that would have taken off the heat in Watergate. Because Nixon wanted files, the CIA felt they had to get rid of him.' Asked if Nixon ever was in danger, Sturgis replied, Tes, absolutely. Nixon was lucky he wasn't killed assassinated like President Kennedy. ' "

CIA documents say my father had the photos, they also mention how my father stole from the government. In order to get the story as to how my father got a hold of these photos I had to question those who seen the photos and took my father to the CIA's headquarters in Miami.

If Frank came out with this story just months after killing my father and not at any time during Watergate then it is conclusive proof to me who killed my father and why this is the point I'm trying to make regardless of what Frank said, it's when Frank said it.

Amazing how Frank also brings up the assassination plot regarding Nixon, but I won't tell you I told you so.

Soon enough you'll read all about it.

[Scott Kaiser]

Note, Frank said Nixon wanted the files on Kennedy's assassination, he didn't say the Bay of Pigs.

Interpreting what Frank is really saying here is solely up to the reader's discretion bottom line Ed Kaiser had these photos we all speak of and not a single person can ever discredit that evidence.

Evidence that's even backed by proof from those who seen them, these are the facts.

[Scott Kaiser]

I don't know who this site belongs to, I believe Cliff had something to do with this research, he may have written this up, something I should have done. There is no excuse as to why I didn't do it.

I did take the material at Spartacus at face value where I thought Mr. Simkin would post not just the source, but the truth. I also discovered the same material at a site owned by a Tom Flaco never heard of him. When multiple people are saying the same thing I assumed there was some truth to it. It was also originally printed in my first book, but now it's removed. It does pay to look into researchers accusations. As I've said, this is all very new to me, and I'm learning.

https://archive.org/stream/nsia-RealistT...4_djvu.txt

[Scott Kaiser]

And, I would like to further say the following verbiage "Nixon and H.R. Haldeman, his chief of staff, on June 23, 1972, a week after the break-in. Haldeman stated:

"And it [the FBI Investigation] goes in some directions we don't want it to go. Ah, also there have been some things, like an informant came in off the street to the FBI in Miami, who was a photographer or has a friend who is a photographer who developed some films through this guy, Barker, and the films had pictures of Democratic National Committee letterhead documents and things."

There were only three men who went in the store to develop these photos, Barnard Barker, Frank Sturgis and my father. The informant Haldemen is discussing here is my father, no one but those three men went to develop these films, and only these three knew where they went to have them developed.

The photographer that Haldemen is talking about is Richardson, this is how the FBI was led to Richardson to interview him where he ID Barnard and Frank in a photo line up, but because my father was unknown in the Watergate investigation Richardson was not shown a photo of my father other then my father being questioned by the FBI. Richardson gave a description of my father to the FBI. It wasn't until my father reached out to Liebengood that my father would provide a little more information.

[Tracy Riddle]

Further down on the Spartacus page, it says the interview from SF Chronicle is from 1990, not 1977. I can't access the SF archive because I'm not a subscriber. I would like to see the actual article. Do you have the whole thing, Scott?

On May 7, 1990, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Frank Sturgis acknowledged:[/FONT]
"The reason why we robbed in Watergate was because (Richard) Nixon was interested in stopping the news leaks related to the photos of our role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."[/FONT]

[LR Trotter]

When the Watergate Hotel Break-In story began to be a news item, my reaction was, what is it all about? As I recall, although the US was still engulfed in the civil war in VietNam, otherwise things were going along pretty well. And, negotiations were ongoing for a peace agreement between North VietNam and South VietNam.
The upcoming '72 Presidential Election did not appear to be, and wasn't close. And, the shortage of available oil was still in the future, all of which made it all far beyond my understanding. As years went by, movies were made and stories told, but still without a clear understanding of the why, I began to somewhat believe the expressed thoughts of it being a "get Nixon" event.
::

[Scott Kaiser]

Further down on the Spartacus page, it says the interview from SF Chronicle is from 1990, not 1977. I can't access the SF archive because I'm not a subscriber. I would like to see the actual article. Do you have the whole thing, Scott?

On May 7, 1990, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Frank Sturgis acknowledged:[/FONT]
"The reason why we robbed in Watergate was because (Richard) Nixon was interested in stopping the news leaks related to the photos of our role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."[/FONT]

I have not seen the artical, I took the information there as I've said at face vaule beliving that's what Frank said, like I said Frank already knew who had the photos, and if Frank did say that, then I have to say, that is NOT what watergate was about, everyone knows, we all know the real reason for Watergate was to fund another run into Cuba and try to recapture Cuba from Castro.

I didnt know what the truth is to what Frank said to the SF Chronicle, but if he said it I am merely pointing out the fact that Frank could have said what he said anytime before my father was killed.

As I said, Frank knew who had the photos.

[Scott Kaiser]

As years went by, movies were made and stories told, but still without a clear understanding of the why

I shed light on it now and why proving Jack Anderson's role in Watergate, who the sixth burglar was and his role in Watergate and who was the "big boss", this and so much more.

Watergate was an operation that required multiple operations, in other words it didn't just require breaking in Watergate to later set up the president, there were multiple operations to Watergate.

[Scott Kaiser]

For example, tapping Ted Kennedy's phone line to dig up dirt on Ted, use it against him as a bribe for more funds towards raids on Cuba, another was to set up George McGovern as a drug pusher receiving drugs from Fidel Castro. I know it's absurd, but these were the missions.

Another was to hijack a vessel on high seas off the coast of Cuba, these, and many more opertaions were going on and ALL of them were under the Watergate operations.

Hope I was able to clear this up for you.

[Mark A. O'Blazney]

For example, tapping Ted Kennedy's phone line to dig up dirt on Ted, use it against him as a bribe for more funds towards raids on Cuba, another was to set up George McGovern as a drug pusher receiving drugs from Fidel Castro. I know it's absurd, but these were the missions.

Another was to hijack a vessel on high seas off the coast of Cuba, these, and many more opertaions were going on and ALL of them were under the Watergate operations.

Hope I was able to clear this up for you.

Gosh, Scott…… I wonder what kind of dirt 'they' were trying to dig up on Teddy?