Anthony Thorne Wrote:I read Jim's article. A very good, informative piece.
Funnily enough, Ron Pataky is on Facebook, though he hasn't posted for a couple of years. He links to a couple of books he wrote, posts some poetry, and tells passers by to dig through his photos. "I met and photographed hundreds of celebrities, and even dated one or two." Sure enough, included without further comment is a photo of him and Kilgallen.
Anthony: Facebook has different settings. Pataky is posting in hidden mode. You have to be a "friend" to see it.
His outwardness is part of his guilty conscience pattern and ghoulishly fits the profile of a CIA killer. Ironically, his pattern of semi-public exposure and giving of hints is similar to Monika Dannemann, the German woman who was involved in the covert murder of Jimi Hendrix by means of deceptively-applied barbiturates.
Now Janney is saying that Mitchell had nothing to do with the Mary M case?
I was not aware of that. When did he write it?
I think I was aware of that giant prevarication to that audience in Santa Barbara.
Nice work.
Here you are again Jim. You're crediting Tom but you're not answering the point. While accusing others of distorting the evidence, what Tom is doing is taking what is probably a legal move on Janney's behalf, whose design and purpose is probably to keep Janney from being sued, and dishonestly using it to avoid the general implications of Mitchell himself that still don't disappear because of Tom's tricks. What Tom is doing is using a difficulty in legal proof on Janney's behalf to discredit Janney's entire thesis, but he does so by avoiding the implications of Mitchell himself that Janney has credibly established. That is totally disingenuous on Tom's behalf and leads away from a correct Deep Political understanding. Instead of criticizing it, like you would do with anything else, you credit Tom for it, but as anyone can see Tom hasn't rushed back to answer the real evidence I posted and neither have you. It's a double standard that you would never let anyone else get away with Jim. So while saying "nice work" to Tom you are helping him get away with not answering that there was a real Mitchell out there that Janney found good evidence against that still hasn't been answered. That's not exactly honest of you.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:As per Doyle, OMG, I was not talking about comparing Kilgallen to Janney. I was comparing Kilgallen to Mary M. Jesus, can't you even read straight on this?
Jim, you're a smart man. Do I really need to explain how your above answer doesn't make any attempt to respond to what is actually being written? You know as well as I do that you referred to Janney as uncredible in your piece on Kilgallen. I've shown evidence that, contrary to what you and Tom write, there is good reason to think Janney has merit. There's a weird thing going on in the assassination research world. Jim DiEugenio, who is generally a sharp-witted destroyer of dubious research, is openly endorsing the ROKC pariah group and joining them in their attacks on real assassination conspiracy victims and therefore violating the Deep Political ethic of responsibility towards correct evidence. That's something I would never be allowed to get away with and, in my opinion, is damaging to the important standard this site practices (or used to anyway). It is actually myself who is offering the better analogy here since both Kilgallen and Mary Meyer are CIA assassination victims killed exactly because of their dangerous knowledge of the conspiracy behind JFK's killing. You're on the wrong side of this Jim, as your evasive answers show.
Oh, by the way. You once again avoided answering for Davidson's metadata, which proves my point that you don't answer to facts...
04-02-2017, 09:45 PM (This post was last modified: 05-02-2017, 03:49 AM by Jim DiEugenio.)
Oh my aching back.
Dorothy Kilgallen was a very experienced reporter who did a lot of work in covering controversial trials. Her record on the Sheppard case is quite interesting and commendable.
She had a proven interest in the JFK case and worked with other interested parties like Mark Lane and Thayer Waldo.
She then journeyed to New Orleans to meet with a private source. She had planned at the time of her death, two more investigatory trips, one to Dallas and one to New Orleans. Her phone lines she felt were bugged by the FBI, so she went ahead and called Lane via pay phones.
She actually did have an outlet of 185 papers in syndication that she was communicating her doubts about on the JFK case.
How on earth does any of that compare to Mary M? Mary was an art student. And one of the worst parts of Janney's confection is when he tries to turn her into Vince Salandria. In fact, that part is a bit ludicrous. Actually novelistic.
You don't have to make any of that up with Kilgallen.
And if Janney is afraid of being sued by Mitchell, maybe he should have never done what he did in the first place?
I note, now he does not even mention the conversation he had with him at his doorstep? He says his maid or someone encountered him at a the door?
Talk about overplaying your hand.
BTW, he never replied to my critique of his book. Although he implies he did.
Dorothy Kilgallen was a very experienced reporter who did a lot of work in covering controversial trials. Her record on the Sheppard case is quite interesting and commendable.
She had a proven interest in the JFK case and worked with other interested parties like Mark Lane and Thayer Waldo.
She then journeyed to New Orleans to meet with a private source. She had planned at the time of her death, two more investigatory trips, one to Dallas and one to New Orleans. Her phone lines she felt were bugged by the FBI, so she went ahead and called Lane via pay phones.
She actually did have an outlet of 185 papers in syndication that she was communicating her doubts about on the JFK case.
How on earth does any of that compare to Mary M? Mary was an art student. And one of the worst parts of Janney's confection is when he tries to turn her into Vince Salandria. In fact, that part is a bit ludicrous. Actually novelistic.
You don't have to make any of that up with Kilgallen.
The whole idea that Janney has to satisfy an invalid premise like the above is exactly what I'm talking about. All you are doing is creating a specious pretext that has no validity or bearing on what we are talking about. Because Dorothy Kilgallen had a better journalistic background than Mary Meyer does not negate or cancel out her very real victimhood. Nor does it remove her very real association with JFK on a personal basis. I think you tend to guard JFK from the personal bad habits he might have had (like anybody) in order to prevent the inroad some of the "second assassination of JFK" writers access in order to present a false history. Because of this I think you might be denying some very real interactions Mary Meyer had with JFK that made her both aware of what happened to JFK and why, and also a very real threat to the conspiracy that was resolved by covert assassination. So while you have covered the differences between Mary Meyer and Kilgallen you haven't covered their most relevant and important similarities. Jim, you're a smart man. You have to understand what I'm saying here. So I can only interpret your avoidance of it as deliberate. With that in mind your last reply only proves my point and shows that your line of reasoning is consciously, purposely evasive of the real evidence which is counter to the understood purpose of this board. When research reasoning denies a certain amount of real facts it becomes demagoguery and damaging to an understanding of the real truth. If you examine this discussion you have used a specious analysis of Kilgallen's journalistic background to, once again, avoid answering some very real incriminating evidence Janney produced. In my opinion valid research follows all leads of good evidence. If this discussion follows the same course as previous ones you and Tom will stick with your inadequate entries, wait a while, and then return with your negative dismissal of Janney.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:And if Janney is afraid of being sued by Mitchell, maybe he should have never done what he did in the first place?
I note, now he does not even mention the conversation he had with him at his doorstep? He says his maid or someone encountered him at a the door?
Talk about overplaying your hand.
BTW, he never replied to my critique of his book. Although he implies he did.
That omission is probably due to Tom's cherry-picking.
It is my opinion that the present moribund state of the JFK research world is directly due to certain researchers becoming given, unchallenged sources and catering to their own need to fill their conspiracy research venues rather than practice strict objective analysis. The need to be sources for new groundbreaking discoveries and conversations has surpassed careful scrutiny of content leading to reckless claims that diminish the credibility of assassination research. The establishment of James Gordon and ROKC as determinative controlling sources has directly led to the dubious state of present JFK research and a new lowering of standards. One where researchers are encouraged to ignore truths like Davidson's metadata in order to conduct false conversations.
On a side note, I scoffed at Bauer's suggestion that Kilgallen had been knocked-out with a mickey and then given the fatal dose after she was unconscious. However, his suggestion made me realize it wasn't so far-fetched since the barbiturates in question were bitter and the amount that would have overdosed Kilgallen would have been detectable if they were mixed in to a cocktail. Anyone ingesting an overdose amount of those barbiturates mixed in with a cocktail would immediately draw back and say "What the hell is in that?"
05-02-2017, 11:28 PM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2017, 12:01 AM by Tom Scully.)
Tom Scully Wrote:.......
One cold fish.......
Quote:https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/44016021/
July 5, 1972
The Salina Journal from Salina, Kansas · Page 8
After o fashion i f Time is the 2nd greatest gift, says Anne Debutante' 'lS Salina Journal Page 9 By Marian, Christy NEW YORK - Bikinied, 100-pound designer Anne Fogarty was lying on a chaise lounge sunning on the elegant rooftop of her 5,-story East Side tqwnhouse and observing that time was man's 2nd greatest gift -- after health. "Even money is useless if you don't have time to spend it wisely," says rich widow Anne whose 2nd husband, Richard Kollmar, once was married to columnist Dorothy Kilgallen. The chic townhouse, which Anne is redesigning in white-brown and steel, once belonged to Richard and Dorothy. People always are asking Anne if she isn't haunted by memories indigenous to that house. Richard dropped dead there on Christmas Eve 4 years ago while decorating the banisters with holly. And Anne had attended many posh parties there when she was divorced from her first husband and Dorothy and Richard were concerned about her "aloneness." Enjoying cling "Time has made it very clear that I'm comfortable in this environment," says Anne who was born in Pittsburgh and got started in fashion as a model. "Allthe memories are pleasant and I'm enjoying the cling." Anne is hepped up about the element of time these days because she is creating a small gold watch collection ($75-$200) for Marvin Co. of Switzerland which will be in stores coast to coast by Christmas. "Time really rules life," says Anne who'll only wear Dick's watch, a Patik Phillippe face which she had set in a wide band of nail- head-punctuated brown suede. There are no large timepieces in the townhouse. "Time is the inevitable route between life and death," says Anne with profound simplicity. She and millions like her prefer not to have grim reminders of disappearing days looming around. Household timepieces are in her future -and will be designed in offbeat ways. "There's no reason why a timepiece can't be a conversation piece," she says. One idea Anne is working on is a small clock that is a telephone attachment and rings automatically when a 3-minute conversation is terminated. Anne hates long conversations that say nothing. "The art of direct conversation must be perfected by Americans who waste time littering and listening to nonsense," says Anne. "This device will help them use time wisely." , The other Fogarty clock is portable and set in lucite. This number doubles as a paperweight and can be transported to strategic places in a home. "Sometimes a person wants to forget that time is running out," says Anne. "When Time on her m i n d Anne Fogarty designs the gingham check lucite cube watch, above, and the safety pin watch, below. that's the mood, the portable clock can be ditched somewhere and forgotten." Signature Elegantes who have worn Anne Fogarty clothes know that her signature is a safety pin. It started when she was modeling and the button burst off her bouffant petticoat. She instantly pinned it on and pirouetted superbly. She's convinced the pin in time saved her career. With her first pay check, she bought a solid gold safety pin and wore it as jewelry. Eventually, when she started designing, she'd put costume jewelry safety pins on collars. "I always figured a girl could use a safety pin if a zipper burst or a button went. It's practical ornamentation. Women understood," - The first Anne Fogarty watch on the market will be a solid-gold safety pin with the clock set in the head and the bracelet a thin band of gold curving around the wrist. "People always have connected me with the safety pin," she says and gives her old mark a new twist. Uniform companies have succeeded in getting Anne to create fashionable career apparel for banks, waitresses and key punch operators. In an effort to simplify work clothes, Anne plans to attach a waterproof- shatterproof watch to the uniform so that it becomes an integral part of the fashion. "A watch, which represents time, becomes a part of you." says Anne. "In the morning, you don't ask yourself first which »A fcJti^Jfa^J».v)^il,.l,. hing in life to wear are 1/3 off at Downtown Store Hours: Weekdays 9-5 Thurs. 9-6 ring or bracelet shall I wear? You think: Where in heaven's name is my watch?" Despite all her concern with time, Anne is notorious for being late for meetings, dates, dinnerparties. Sometimes time should not figure in life's scheme of things -- especially when a woman is planning an important evening on the town. Anne hates watches with evening clothes. , "When I go out at night, I stay up late and want no reminder of pressures -- time included." Anne really has lots of "time" stories in ' store and, because she's designing watches, she's mulling them over. Recently she went to the opening of a 2nd Avenue pub called Hazard Powder Co. but the furniture hadn't arrived in time. The enterprising young owners invited everyone to sit on the carpeting and drink the bubbly. The invitation was so successful that there's still no furniture in thejilace. People come to sit on the floor Arab-style. "Sometimes when time runs out, it's for the best," is Anne's punchline. But, on the other side of the coin, she has regrets about decisions which, in retrospect, turned out to be time "wasted." When she returned from a Mexico trip, Richard Kollmar met her at the airport and proposed. He wanted to get married that day. Anne said no and pleaded to wait 5 weeks so she could design a beautiful pink wedding gown. "Now I think we could have had 5 more weeks together," is the hindsight remark. SU11 time slips away. Last week she was in Ogunquit, Me., with television model Julie Meade. The 2 friends got to talking about the pros and cons of Women's Liberation and pretty soon it was time for breakfast. "I never look at a watch if the company is pleasant and the dialogue is one-to-one," says Anne.
59 weeks after Dorothy's sudden death..... Kollmar publicly escorts Fogarty
19 months after Dorothy's sudden death..... Kollmar and Fogarty are honeymooning
Fogarty had two children with her first husband, Tom Fogarty. They were married for over 17 years, with Tom Fogarty working as an art teacher at Pratt Institute, New York.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP][16][/SUP] The marriage ended in divorce.
In 1967, Anne Fogarty married Richard Kollmar, Dorothy Kilgallen's widower. According to a 1971 interview Fogarty did with the syndicated newspaper columnist Marian Christy, Kollmar broke his shoulder in an accident at home on New Year's Day 1971, which caused a blood clot to develop, and he died "a month later" on Anne's birthday.[SUP][4][/SUP] The New York Times, The Washington Post and other newspapers, however, ran obituaries for Kollmar on January 9 and 10 of that year.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP] The Post reported on January 10 that Kollmar had "died in his sleep late Thursday [January 7]."[SUP][18][/SUP]
Fogarty was married a third time in 1977, to Wade O'Hara, but this marriage ended in divorce.[SUP][19][/SUP] She died of a heart attack in New York on January 15, 1980.[SUP][11][/SUP]
Consider the following, especially if you believe that the residence in which Kilgallen's corpse was recovered was a crime scene.
July 27, 1966, less than nine months after Dorothy's sudden death, her spouse since 1940, Richard T. Kollmar, was selling their 45 E. 68th St. townhouse.... the sale transaction in the Manhattan realty records indicates that by July 27, 1966 widower Kollmar was already residing four blocks north on E. 72nd St.
The buyer of 45 E. 68th St., on February 2, 1968 : (Not only did Kollmar and his new wife want to live in the house in which Dorothy's body was found, they wanted to live there badly enough to pay a 25 percent premium!)
Manhattan realty records indicate Manya Kahn during her brief ownership of the townhouse Kilgallen was found dead in borrowed through multiple, smaller additional mortgage liens to a degree that infers she was living off of the frequent secondary mortgages, the last lien ( link ) in exchange for cash in October, 1967.
(I predict some will suspect Kollmar knew Dorothy's Jack Ruby file was still hidden in the townhouse.... or Kollmar was part of the crime or the cover up and had reason to regain control of the crime scene... )
....and Jim, this linked page appears to display an admission by Peter in Sept., 2014, followed up in the third edition of the book released last fall. (see mid-article http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/05/the...hot-meyer/ )
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.
![[Image: KilgallenTownhouseKahnToFogarty2Feb1968.jpg]](http://trumpnormal.com/images/KilgallenTownhouseKahnToFogarty2Feb1968.jpg)