Not trying to cause trouble but I think Horne misses the point that the issues stem more from concern that serious deep political events were being wrongly construed and therefore doing damage equal to that done in the Kennedy case by the enemy. Even worse there's good reason to believe that the shadow elements involved in the Lennon assassination were very likely involved in the RFK assassination and other assassinations as well. So it's not so much people with too much internet time who only offer negative input as much as concern for important deep events that may be more connected than Horne realizes.
In any case I look forward to reading any discussion of the Clifton Tapes.
Bill Kelly Wrote:If you or Alan disagree, and insist on bringing up Horne's other quotes taken out of context and basing an opinion of Horne on those other quotes, then that's a very narrow mind at work, and since the opinion is that Horne's analysis is not worth paying attention to, then don't pay attention to it. Don't try to change the subject and knock the topic off course.
If you don't want to further the discussion on the topic of the AF1 tapes and want to discuss McVeign, Chapman, Frome and Horne's opinion of them, then start another thread and discuss them till you'r heart's content.
1. Jan did not take Horne's "other quotes" out of context. Horne foolishly made the references. In doing so, he and he alone instituted the opportunities for misdirection. What did he gain by making those references to Matthews? Why did he show his throat? There was not the slightest rhetorical need to do so.
2. From from indicating the reasoning of a narrow mind, Jan's observations reflect the mind of a seasoned, mature, deeply thoughtful deep political scientist -- one who realizes the implications of Horne's foolhardy (my adjective) decision to throw in dismissive references to mysterious, likely conspiratorial-in-nature deep political events to a discussion of an extremely important matter.
I cannot overstate the value I place on Doug Horne's research. And, for that matter, on your own. When, however, Horne makes a critical mistake as described above, he needs to be taken to task for it. That you have run to Doug and, to use schoolyard vernacular, "told on us," is as distressing as is the fact that you come here as a highly valued and welcome guest and act like a moderator or forum owner.
Neither Jan nor I are attempting to change the subject. And neither Doug Horne nor any other researcher is above reproach -- including Jan, you, and me.
CD
Well, since I have been dealing regularly with Doug Horne for many years and didn't know if the quotes attributed to him were correct, I passed them on to him for his reaction, which I posted here, and his reaction is the same as mine - why aren't we discussing the topic of this thread - the Clifton AF1 Tape?
I didn't "squeal on you" like a school kid to a teacher, as you suggest, I merely asked him, as Jan asked me, if the remarks attributed to him are true.
And I don't like being treated like an unruly student by a founder and/or moderator who are not beyond reproach and should be responsible for keeping the threads on track and on subject.
I never accused you or Jan of trying to change the topic, that accusation rests with the person who brought up Horne's alleged opinions of the McVeigh, Lennon and Squkey Fromme cases, which have no bearing what so ever on the AF1 radio tapes.
You want to take Horne to task for what he believes on those issues, then take him to task on a thread addressed to those issues. And I will stay away from them.
You want to talk about the Clifton AF1 tapes and Doug Horne's Memo, chapter in his book, recent transcript and analysis or Black Op Radio show, as I do, then let's do that.
You want to talk about Doug Horne's opinions on UFOs, then I won't contribute.
Albert Doyle Wrote:Not trying to cause trouble but I think Horne misses the point that the issues stem more from concern that serious deep political events were being wrongly construed and therefore doing damage equal to that done in the Kennedy case by the enemy. Even worse there's good reason to believe that the shadow elements involved in the Lennon assassination were very likely involved in the RFK assassination and other assassinations as well. So it's not so much people with too much internet time who only offer negative input as much as concern for important deep events that may be more connected than Horne realizes.
In any case I look forward to reading any discussion of the Clifton Tapes.
Thank you Albert, and I related your concerns to Doug, and I too look forward to any deep discussion of the Clifton tapes, if anybody wants to do so.
I decided a long time ago that I can't solve more than one homicide at a time, and leave it to others to look into RFK, McVeigh, Frome, et al., and focus my research strictly on JFK, though I wish those who delve into the other cases well.
Bill Kelly Wrote:I decided a long time ago that I can't solve more than one homicide at a time, and leave it to others to look into RFK, McVeigh, Frome, et al., and focus my research strictly on JFK, though I wish those who delve into the other cases well.
The mention of Chris Matthews elicits the baring of teeth reserved for a Quisling, a Judas, the little Nazi snitch in Sound of Music. Conceding anything to Matthews is confession in Lucifer's kiosk.
Great admiration for the year Doug Horne devoted to attaining the position, and his Herculean patience and prudence in keeping that position amid the willing handmaidens of the coup.
I have his volumes and am amazed Jeremy Gunne didn't simply go Charles Laughton on James Humes in the nauseating reiterations of the latter's Mickey the Dope routine.
LeMay and the Seven Days in May is one axis. Another is Horne's Appendix 77 in which he sees Hoover blackmailing LBJthis warrants discussion, the December 1, 1966, memo asserting KGB believes LBJ did it.
Horne describing Blakey to Osanic as "despicable" is a good start. Blakey perjured himself, obstructed justice, and there is no statute of limitations in a murder case.
Doug Horne encountered some outrageous blowback to his publication and retired in reaction. There's a vast difference between that and the present desire that he amplify his painstaking decades of work by dollying back for a wide shot.
Thom Robinson filling the entry with "a little wax"oh, but there were no smoking guns, the woman board member claimed.
The day before the Nixon inaugural, January 19, 1969, a permitted parade dubbed the Nixon Counterinaugural moved past Justice, Mark Rudd's Maoists in their red armbands jogging, chanting "Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh! The NLF is gonna win!" One of their number peeled off to bang the iron knocker on the big steel door of DOJ. The shirtsleeved lawyers at the second-floor windows gave their unidigital salute with rictus grin.
Doug Horne doubts a government investigation will take action.
This was not a regime change. It was a concentration of antibodies attacking a new vision.
The peacemaker.
Necessary was the censored chatter of ambulances and helos, as the body comes and goes.
The AF1 tapes, like the x-rays and the photossign this secrecy oaththe truth is Unspeakable.
Phil Dragoo Wrote:Have been listening to Doug Horne and Len Osanic on Black Op Radio in the archived show from last night. Highly recommended.
Phil, I must respectfully disagree with you regarding Doug Horne's appearance on this show. For a man of his vast knowledge, including his stint on the ARRB, his message communicated lacked clarity from Dallas to Andrews and then onto the "Madness at Bethesda". He displaying no understanding of the "character of the man" who was Richard Lipsey and made no mention of him until after I emailed Len to prompt a respond of his account. He was vague on his understanding of Custer but good research towards an understanding of his so called "varying" accounts beyond the offical transcripts, can be made clear. Horne did not do this and in my minds eye, just didn't cut the mustard correctly.
A solid researcher knows that this case is solved through the accounts of David, Custer and Lipsey and with the other "Fellas from Bethesda" filling the cracks, this case is "cinched". Horne did not deliver what he most certainly should have.
What Horne did was good enough for me. I never re-read or re-listen but I'm going to do it tonight with this show. What Horne has done here is located a piece of the jigsaw puzzle that perfectly fits the ongoing theories.
It just struck me like lightning that Lt Commander Pitzer filmed the aluminum casket pre-autopsy and caught the bastards red-handed. That's why the CIA murdered him and it's why Dennis David was able to see the wounds from the front so clearly.
This is it, man. The evidence is breaking wide-open right now.
Albert Doyle Wrote:What Horne did was good enough for me. I never re-read or re-listen but I'm going to do it tonight with this show. What Horne has done here is located a piece of the jigsaw puzzle that perfectly fits the ongoing theories.
Albert.. Thank you for responding to my post, I much appreciate it. Jigsaw... yes, but of course we had the necessary information to get the body off AF 1 through Lipsey even before this new stuff came out. The only thing I hear in the NEW tapes, is what I see as a misunderstanding of "The First Lady", I believe strongly this is code. This was the body of JFK... from there Lipsey's account takes over. The "that as others see as sloppy" on Horne's part, is only that which has been created and continued into, as the result of his misinterpreting this KEY aspect. Understanding Lipsey, the witness who saw the body come off AF 1 from the front, brings you through the door of obfuscation. Lipsey was a rookie in the autopsy but he does confirm seeing the head being cut... if i remember correctly, he said "the doctors".
Understanding Lipsey is the KEY, Custer cuts through the mustard.
