Remembering

Knowing the truth about the Kennedy Assassination is understanding America today.

Moderators: Bob, Phil Dragoo, Dealey Joe, kenmurray, dankbaar

Bear Trap

Postby Dan » Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:44 pm

Bob,

The Dean Nixon discussion was about Kalmbach paying Sullivan to find out dirt on Chappaquiddick. The bear trap they refer to is if the watergate investigation got Kalmbach's bank records then they would see a private detective in New York was paid from Kalmbach's account. If the Watergate investigator's would eventually interview Sullivan then the dirt on Kennedy would be public and the whole investigation would turn around. In other words - if the democrats started a line of inquiry into Kalmbach's bank records it would be a trap sprung that would ensnare Kennedy.

The dumocrats aren't that dumb. Have you ever seen or heard of Sullivan's investigation? Did they ever dig deeply into the Kalmbach and Sullivan relationship? Of course not! That would have revealed the murderous, lying scumbag that is Ted Kennedy.

Don't believe everything you read on those George Soros sites (like ratical.org) - look for the real truth and not the anit-american eurotrash version of history.
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Bob » Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:58 pm

Dan,

No matter what REALLY happened at Chappaquiddick, I still firmly believe that Nixon, Bu$h and others of that ilk were in on the JFK and RFK assassinations. Therefore, I do not discount their (the CIA) POSSIBLE involvement regarding the facts about Chappaquiddick. The bottom line is that even if it was an accident, Ted Kennedy did not purposely murder Mary Jo Kopechne. Just as Laura Bu$h did not purposely kill another driver when she ran a stop sign when she was younger.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5766
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Postby Dan » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:01 pm

Bob wrote:Here is an interesting theory by a political prisoner regarding what may have happened at Chappaquiddick. I'm not saying I believe it, but the CIA is capable of anything as we all know.....


None of that theory is in line with the eyewitness statements or the physical facts.

Why is it so hard to acknowledge that Ted Kennedy killed a woman while driving (most probably drunk)?
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Dan » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:06 pm

Ted Kennedy most certainly left Mary Jo Kopechne in that automobile.

Ted Kennedy most certainly didn't summon help when she could have been saved.

Ted Kennedy most certainly didn't inform authorties that there was an accident and that a woman was still trapped in the vehicle.

As George Killen , the State Police Detective-Lieutenant who investigated the accident, said - Senator Kennedy "killed that girl the same as if he put a gun to her head and pulled the trigger."
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Bob » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:45 pm

Here is another theory from Robert Cutler, who wrote "You the Jury".

Here is what happened according to Cutler's analysis of the evidence. The Group hired several men and at least one woman to be at Chappaquiddick during the weekend of the yacht race and the planned party on the island. They ambushed Ted and Mary Jo after they left the cottage and knocked Ted out with blows to his head and body. They took the unconscious or semi-conscious Kennedy to Martha's Vineyard and deposited him in his hotel room. Another group took Mary Jo to the bridge in Ted's car, force fed her with a knock out potion of alcoholic beverage, placed her in the back seat, and caused the car to accelerate off the side of the bridge into the water. They broke the windows on one side of the car to insure the entry of water; then they watched the car until they were sure Mary Jo would not escape.

Mary Jo actually regained consciousness and pushed her way to the top of the car (which was actually the bottom of the car -- it had landed on its roof) and died from asphyxiation. The group with Teddy revived him early in the morning and let him know he had a problem. Possibly they told him that Mary Jo had been kidnapped. They told him his children would be killed if he told anyone what had happened and that he would hear from them. On Chappaquiddick, the other group made contact with Markham and Gargan, Ted's cousin and lawyer. They told both men that Mary Jo was at the bottom of the river and that Ted would have to make up a story about it, not revealing the existence of the group. One of the men resembled Ted and his voice sounded something like Ted's. Markham and Gargan were instructed to go the the Vineyard on the morning ferry, tell Ted where Mary Jo was, and come back to the island to wait for a phone call at a pay station near the ferry on the Chappaquiddick side.

The two men did as they were told and Ted found out what had happened to Mary Jo that morning. The three men returned to the pay phone and received their instructions to concoct a story about the "accident" and to report it to the police. The threat against Ted's children was repeated at that time.

Ted, Markham and Gargan went right away to police chief Arena's office on the Vineyard where Ted reported the so-called "accident." Almost at the same time scuba diver John Farror was pulling Mary Jo out of the water, since two boys who had gone fishing earlier that morning had spotted the car and reported it.

Ted called together a small coterie of friends and advisors including family lawyer Burke Marshall, Robert MacNamara, Ted Sorenson, and others. They met on Squaw Island near the Kennedy compound at Hyannisport for three days. At the end of that time they had manufactured the story which Ted told on TV, and later at the inquest. Bob Cutler calls the story, "the shroud." Even the most cursory examination of the story shows it was full of holes and an impossible explanation of what happened. Ted's claim that he made the wrong turn down the dirt road toward the bridge by mistake is an obvious lie. His claim that he swam the channel back to Martha's Vineyard is not believable. His description of how he got out of the car under water and then dove down to try to rescue Mary Jo is impossible. Markham and Gargan's claims that they kept diving after Mary Jo are also unbelievable.

The evidence for the Cutler scenario is substantial. It begins with the marks on the bridge and the position of the car in the water. The marks show that the car was standing still on the bridge and then accelerated off the edge, moving at a much higher speed than Kennedy claimed. The distance the car travelled in the air also confirms this. The damage to the car on two sides and on top plus the damage to the windshield and the rear view mirror stanchion [3] prove that some of the damage had to have been inflicted before the car left the bridge.

The blood on the back and on the sleeves of Mary Jo's blouse proves that a wound was inflicted before she left the bridge.[4] The alcohol in her bloodstream proves she was drugged, since all witnesses testified she never drank and did not drink that night. The fact that she was in the back seat when her body was recovered indicates that is where she was when the car hit the water. There was no way she could have dived downward against the inrushing water and moved from the front to the back seat underneath the upside-down seat back.

The wounds on the back of Ted Kennedy's skull, those just above his ear and the large bump on the top indicate he was knocked out. His actions at the hotel the next morning show he was not aware of Mary Jo's death until Markham and Gargan arrived. The trip to the pay phone on Chappaquiddick can only be explained by his receiving a call there, not making one. There were plenty of pay phones in or near Ted's hotel if he needed to make a private call. The tides in the channel and the direction in which Ted claimed he swam do not match. In addition it would have been a superhuman feat to have made it across the channel (as proven by several professionals who subsequently tried it).

Deputy Sheriff Christopher Look's testimony, coupled with the testimony of Ray LaRosa and two Lyons girls, proves that there were two people in Ted's car with Mary Jo at 12:45 PM. The three party members walking along the road south toward the cottage confirmed the time that Mr. Look drove by. He stopped to ask if they needed a ride. Look says that just prior to that he encountered Ted's car parked facing north at the juncture of the main road and the dirt road. It was on a short extension of the north-south section of the road junction to the north of the "T". He says he saw a man driving, a woman in the seat beside him, and what he thought was another woman lying on the back seat. He remembered a portion of the license plate which matched Ted's car, as did the description of the car. Markham, Gargan and Ted's driver's testimony show that someone they talked to in the pitch black night sounded like Ted and was about his height and build.

None of the above evidence was ever explained by Ted or by anyone else at the inquest or at the hearing on the case demanded by district attorney Edward Dinis. No autopsy was ever allowed on Mary Jo's body (her family objected), and Ted made it possible to fly her body home for burial rather quickly. Kennedy haters have seized upon Chappaquiddick to enlarge the sexual image now being promoted of both Ted and Jack Kennedy. Books like "Teddy Bare" take full advantage of the situation.

Just which operatives in the Power Control Group at the high levels or the lower levels were on Chappaquiddick Island? No definite evidence has surfaced as yet, except for an indication that there was at least one woman and at least three men, one of whom resembled Ted Kennedy and who sounded like him in the darkness. However, two pieces of testimony in the Watergate hearings provide significant clues as to which of the known JFK case conspirators may have been there.

E. Howard Hunt told of a strange trip to Hyannisport to see a local citizen there about the Chappaquiddick incident. Hunt's cover story on this trip was that he was digging up dirt on Ted Kennedy for use in the 1972 campaign. The story does not make much sense if one questions why Hunt would have to wear a disguise, including his famous red wig, and to use a voice-alteration device to make himself sound like someone else. If, on the other hand, Hunt's purpose was to return to the scene of his crime just to make sure that no one who might have seen his group at the bridge or elsewhere would talk, then the disguise and the voice box make sense.

The other important testimony came from Tony Ulasewicz who said he was ordered by the Plumbers to fly immediately to Chappaquiddick and dig up dirt on Ted. The only problem Tony has is that, according to his testimony, he arrived early on the morning of the "accident", before the whole incident had been made public. Ulasewicz is the right height and weight to resemble Kennedy and with a CIA voice-alteration device he presumably could be made to sound like him. There is a distinct possibility that Hunt and Tony were there when it happened.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5766
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Postby Billy Boggs » Thu Nov 23, 2006 7:55 pm

Thank you Dan. Because of your misguaded intentions we now know a little more about the game.

Who do I work for? Well, first off, I wont answer a question with a question, which is diversionary in nature. Your answer will follow.

First, Im one of those people who were deeply traumatized by the event. I was sitting in the 3rd grade classroom when the news came over the PA system. Instantaniously the whole room, including the principal who was informing us, and the teacher in the room broke into tears. For years after that I had a reoccuring dream that President Kennedy was alive in his grave and needed rescue. I felt so helpless that in the dream I couldnt do anything for him. As time went on the dream slowly faded away, but never completly leaving my memory.

Dan, a dream can be a very powerful thing. Depending on the source of that dream it can relate fantesy or fact. I have had other dreams as well but this isnt the forum for such things.

Dan, I work for that dream. The dream that America can become what it is suppose to be, a becon for not only this world, but a becon that shines brightly back to that which all things come. If I die tommorow, 100, 1000, ect, will take my place. Can you say the same?

It is true that the Kennedy family was given its power from the dark side. Joe, being a devout catholic, in essence, sold his soul and the souls of his children for his position in the higherarchi of the illuminati. His children payed for his sin. And yes, Ted decided to go back to his owners rather than to try to continue the fight his brothers started. A fight that only faded from memory, not completly forgotten. Is it this you hold against him?

Dan, you are to be commended for your persuit of justice, but your method has much to be desired. I already know who you work for, and it is them that do the most to block the ultimate justice. To them it is nothing more than a game. They enjoy moving the game pieces about the board and dont really concern themselves with the outcome. Dont you think there is a reason for this? I suspect that is because no matter what they say, they dont really want the game to end. Otherwise, it would have been over long, long, ago. Or for that matter, if there was a real sincere effort today, it could all be over in a couple of weeks.

As a side note, did you know that the movie "V for Vendetta" was written by a satanist (Illuminati)? If you havent seen it, please do. Its their plan for the future. dont misunderstand me, Im all for the outcome of the plot. Its just that the name should be changed "V for Victory". There is no need for vedetta, only justice.

V was very correct about all of us being connected, and that an idea (dream) is bullet proof.

Have a Happy Thanks Giving.
Billy Boggs
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:25 pm

RE:

Postby bobwc » Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:39 pm

Billy % Bob, great words. I have always believed that Ted was setup. Another Kennedy the "good guys" would not have to worry about.
Billy, you are 1000% right on about the "GAME" With all the evidence that independant researchers such as our own Wim have turned up, the only explaination for this going on 50 years soon, is the plain and simple fact that
were the truth to come out, the American government, as we know it now, would be totally destroyed.

bobwc
bobwc
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 10:12 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Billy Boggs » Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:37 am

Thank you Bobwc. Thank you for understanding, and caring enough to reply.

So if the truth about the U.S. Government was to be exposed, that would cause its downfall? No bobwc, I dont think I agree with that. After all, the corruption isnt the government, an inanimate tool of the people. Our govenment is a piece of hemp paper over 200 years old, I doubt the truth would trouble it much.

I think you mean to say that the people in the secret organizations that are actually running the government, would be destroyed. Well, Bobwc, I just for the life of me cant see that as a bad thing.

All our piece of hemp paper needs is to be cleaned up, and dusted off. Maybe lose some of the rules and regs, and adopt some new ones to safeguard the next 200 years.

Well, there might be a few changes as to where the new capital would be located. Somewhere in the middle of the country would be nice. That would cut down on the travel expenses of the STATE PAYED servants.

No matter what comes our way, it will definatly start with a dream :)
Billy Boggs
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:25 pm

Ted is the Babushka Lady

Postby Dan » Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:32 pm

Bob wrote:Here is another theory from Robert Cutler, who wrote "You the Jury".

Here is what happened according to Cutler's analysis of the evidence. The Group hired several men and at least one woman to be at .....


Bob, Since you are posting theories that turn this forum into the comedy of the absurd:

Has Ted Kennedy and the Babushka Lady ever been filmed together? Just where was Teddy on November 22, 1963? Doesn't Ted and the Babushka Lady have similar body shapes? Do you really think she is holding a camera - no, it is a bottle of booze. Ted Kennedy is the Babushka Lady! Mary Jo found his babushka outfit in the backseat of the car - that is why she was killed!!!!!
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Bob » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:28 pm

Dan, this IS a forum. A forum is a place to share points of view and discuss and debate those thoughts. You obviously have one take on Teddy Kennedy and Chappaquiddick. I just pointed out that there are other viewpoints out there regarding the matter. I'm not saying I believe them, but then again, if the CIA is involved, anything goes. I do know this...I firmly believe that the CIA was directly involved in several political assassinations and assassanation attempts over the last 40+ years. That would include JFK, RFK and MLK. The Bu$hes are the CIA and STILL run the CIA. Let me pose a question to you Dan, do you or do you not believe that George H.W. Bu$h had anything to do with the assassination of JFK?
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5766
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Bear Trap

Postby Jim Thompson » Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:17 pm

Bob wrote:I firmly believe that the CIA was directly involved in several political assassinations and assassination attempts over the last 40+ years.


Hey Bob, did you forget that the CIA "offed" Nixon as well? A dirty trick on Tricky Dickie! :arrow:

H. R. Haldeman, The Ends of Power (1978:

I was puzzled when he (Nixon) told me, 'Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans is tied to the Bay, of Pigs.'

After a pause I said, 'The Bay of Pigs? What does that have to do with this?'

But Nixon merely said, 'Ehrlichman will know what I mean,' and dropped the subject.

After our staff meeting the next morning I accompanied Ehrlichman to his office and gave him the President's message. Ehrlichman's eyebrows arched, and he smiled. `Our brothers from Langley? He's suggesting I twist or break a few arms?'

'I don't know. All he told me was "Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans is tied to the Bay of Pigs".'


Ehrlichman leaned back in his chair, tapping a pencil on the edge of his desk. 'All right,' he said, 'message accepted.'

'What are you going to do about it?'

'Zero,' said Ehrlichman. 'I want to stay out of this one.'

He was referring to an unspoken feud between C.I.A. Director Richard Helms and Nixon.. The two were polar opposites in background: Helms, the aloof, aristocratic, Eastern elitist; Nixon the poor boy (he never let you forget it) from a small California town. Ehrlichman had found, himself in the middle of this feud as far back as 1969, immediately after Nixon assumed office. Nixon had called Ehrlichman into his office and said he wanted all the facts and documents the CIA had on the Bay of Pigs, a complete report on the whole project.

About six months after that 1969 conversation, Ehrlichman had stopped in my office. 'Those bastards in Langley are holding back something. They just dig in their heels and say the President can't have it. Period. Imagine that! The Commander-in-Chief wants to see a document relating to a military operation, and the spooks say he can't have it.'

'What is it?'

'I don't know, but from the way they're protecting it, it must be pure dynamite.'

I was angry at the idea that Helms would tell the President he couldn't see something. I said, 'Well, you remind Helms who's President. He's not. In fact, Helms can damn well find himself out of a job in a hurry.'

That's what I thought! Helms was never fired, at least for four years. But then Ehrlichman had said, 'Rest assured. The point will be made. In fact, Helms is on his way over here right now. The President is going to give him a direct order to turn over that document to me.'

Helms did show up that afternoon and saw the President for a long secret conversation. When Helms left, Ehrlichman returned to the Oval Office. The next thing I knew Ehrlichman appeared in my office, dropped into a chair, and just stared at me. He was more furious than I had ever seen him; absolutely speechless, a rare phenomenon for our White House phrase-makers. I said, 'What happened?'

'This is what happened,' Ehrlichman said. 'The Mad Monk (Nixon) has just told me I am now to forget all about that CIA document. In fact, I am to cease and desist from trying to obtain it.'

When Senator Howard Baker of the Evrin Committee later looked into the Nixon-Helms relationship, he summed it up. 'Nixon and Helms have so much on each other, neither of them can breathe.'

Apparently Nixon knew more about the genesis of the Cuban invasion that led to the Bay of Pigs than almost anyone. Recently, the man who was President of Costa Rica at the time - dealing with Nixon while the invasion was being prepared - stated that Nixon was the man who originated the Cuban invasion. If this was true, Nixon never told it to me.

In 1972 I did know that Nixon disliked the CIA Allen Dulles, the CIA Director in 1960, had briefed Jack Kennedy about the forthcoming Cuban invasion before a Kennedy-Nixon debate. Kennedy used this top secret information in the debate, thereby placing Nixon on the spot. Nixon felt he had to lie and even deny such an invasion was in the works to protect the men who were training in secret. Dulles later denied briefing Kennedy. This betrayal, added to Nixon's long-held feeling that the agency was not adequately competent, led to his distrust and dislike.

And now that antipathy was to emerge again on June 23, 1972, when Nixon would once again confront and pressure the CIA

This time the CIA was ready. In fact, it was more than ready. It was ahead of the game by months. Nixon would walk into what I now believe was a trap. :shock:
Jim Thompson
 

Dulles

Postby Dan » Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:39 am

Great Post Jim!

I will have to read Haldeman's book.

There is no doubt in my mind that Allen Dulles was involved in the JFK hit -and may have been the reason Kennedy assumed room temperature - his forced resignation was the last straw. A fine selection for the Warren Commission.

Dulles was the younger brother of John Foster Dulles, Eisenhower's Secretary of State, and the grandson of John W. Foster, another U.S. Secretary of State and brother to diplomat Eleanor Lansing Dulles. His uncle (by marriage) Robert Lansing also was a U.S. Secretary of State.

And yes, Dulles was a Republican!

We ought to rename that crappy airport in Virginia.
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Jim Thompson » Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:49 pm

Dan wrote:Ted Kennedy most certainly left Mary Jo Kopechne in that automobile.

Ted Kennedy most certainly didn't summon help when she could have been saved.

Ted Kennedy most certainly didn't inform authorties that there was an accident and that a woman was still trapped in the vehicle.

As George Killen , the State Police Detective-Lieutenant who investigated the accident, said - Senator Kennedy "killed that girl the same as if he put a gun to her head and pulled the trigger."


Hey Dan, What is your opinion of this account? :arrow:



Through the years the most common question of all has been: "If there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, why didn't Robert Kennedy find out about it and take some action? And if there was a conspiracy in the RFK assassination why haven't Ted Kennedy and Ethel Kennedy done something about it?" No one except the Kennedys know the answers to these questions for sure. However, there are plenty of clues and some other Power Control Group actions to provide the answers to us.
First of all, thanks to Jackie Kennedy Onassis' butler in Athens, Greece, Christain Cafarakis, we know why Jackie did nothing after her husband's death. In a book published in 1972, Cafarakis tells about an investigation Jackie had conducted by a famous New York City detective agency into the assassination of JFK in 1964 and 1965.[1] It was financed by Aristotle Onassis and resulted in a report in the spring of 1965 telling who the four gunmen were and who was behind them. Jackie planned to give the report to LBJ but was stopped by a threat from the Power Control Group to kill her and her children. Ted, Bobby and other family members knew about the report and the threat.
The second clue is Chappaquiddick. A careful examination of the real evidence in this event shows that Ted Kennedy was framed in the killing of Mary Joe Kopechne and then his life and his children's lives threatened if he ever told the truth about what happened. The facts in the case and the conclusions that can be drawn from them are contained in a book by Boston researcher Robert Cutler.[2]
The third clue is Ted's withdrawal from the presidential race in November 1975. It is a fact that all of his and Robert's children were being protected by the Secret Service for five days in November 1975. A threat had been made against the children's lives unless he officially announced his withdrawal. He made the announcement and has stuck to it ever since. The Secret Service protection ended the day after he made the announcement.
It does not seem likely that Senator Kennedy would withdraw from the race because of a threat from a lone nut or from some obscure group. He remembers the 1965 threat and Chappaquiddick very well. He knows about the Power Control Group and he knows their enormous capability. He knows what they did to his brothers. He has no choice but to hope that somehow, sometime, the Group will be exposed. But he dares not let them believe he would ever have anything to do with it. Publicly he will always have to support the Warren Commission and continue to state that he will not run for president. Privately he is forced to ask his closest friends and his relatives not to get involved with new investigations, and to help protect his children. Some of them know the truth. Others do not, and are puzzled by his behavior. They go along with it under the assumption that he has good and sufficient reasons not to open the can of worms represented by the conspiracies in his brother's deaths.
The Power Control Group faced up to the Ted Kennedy and Kennedy family problem very early. They used the threat against the Kennedy children's lives very effectively between 1963 and 1968 to silence Bobby and the rest of the family and friends who knew the truth. It was necessary to assassinate Bobby in 1968 because with the power of the presidency he could have prevented the Group from harming the children. When Teddy began making moves to run for president in 1969 for the 1972 election, the Group decided to put some real action behind their threats. Killing Teddy in 1969 would have been too much. They selected a new way of eliminating him as a candidate. They framed him with the death of a young girl, and threw sexual overtones in for good measure.
Here is what happened according to Cutler's analysis of the evidence. The Group hired several men and at least one woman to be at Chappaquiddick during the weekend of the yacht race and the planned party on the island. They ambushed Ted and Mary Jo after they left the cottage and knocked Ted out with blows to his head and body. They took the unconscious or semi-conscious Kennedy to Martha's Vineyard and deposited him in his hotel room. Another group took Mary Jo to the bridge in Ted's car, force fed her with a knock out potion of alcoholic beverage, placed her in the back seat, and caused the car to accelerate off the side of the bridge into the water. They broke the windows on one side of the car to insure the entry of water; then they watched the car until they were sure Mary Jo would not escape.
Mary Jo actually regained consciousness and pushed her way to the top of the car (which was actually the bottom of the car -- it had landed on its roof) and died from asphyxiation. The group with Teddy revived him early in the morning and let him know he had a problem. Possibly they told him that Mary Jo had been kidnapped. They told him his children would be killed if he told anyone what had happened and that he would hear from them. On Chappaquiddick, the other group made contact with Markham and Gargan, Ted's cousin and lawyer. They told both men that Mary Jo was at the bottom of the river and that Ted would have to make up a story about it, not revealing the existence of the group. One of the men resembled Ted and his voice sounded something like Ted's. Markham and Gargan were instructed to go the the Vineyard on the morning ferry, tell Ted where Mary Jo was, and come back to the island to wait for a phone call at a pay station near the ferry on the Chappaquiddick side.
The two men did as they were told and Ted found out what had happened to Mary Jo that morning. The three men returned to the pay phone and received their instructions to concoct a story about the "accident" and to report it to the police. The threat against Ted's children was repeated at that time.
Ted, Markham and Gargan went right away to police chief Arena's office on the Vineyard where Ted reported the so-called "accident." Almost at the same time scuba diver John Farror was pulling Mary Jo out of the water, since two boys who had gone fishing earlier that morning had spotted the car and reported it.
Ted called together a small coterie of friends and advisors including family lawyer Burke Marshall, Robert MacNamara, Ted Sorenson, and others. They met on Squaw Island near the Kennedy compound at Hyannisport for three days. At the end of that time they had manufactured the story which Ted told on TV, and later at the inquest. Bob Cutler calls the story, "the shroud." Even the most cursory examination of the story shows it was full of holes and an impossible explanation of what happened. Ted's claim that he made the wrong turn down the dirt road toward the bridge by mistake is an obvious lie. His claim that he swam the channel back to Martha's Vineyard is not believable. His description of how he got out of the car under water and then dove down to try to rescue Mary Jo is impossible. Markham and Gargan's claims that they kept diving after Mary Jo are also unbelievable.
The evidence for the Cutler scenario is substantial. It begins with the marks on the bridge and the position of the car in the water. The marks show that the car was standing still on the bridge and then accelerated off the edge, moving at a much higher speed than Kennedy claimed. The distance the car travelled in the air also confirms this. The damage to the car on two sides and on top plus the damage to the windshield and the rear view mirror stanchion [3] prove that some of the damage had to have been inflicted before the car left the bridge.
The blood on the back and on the sleeves of Mary Jo's blouse proves that a wound was inflicted before she left the bridge.[4] The alcohol in her bloodstream proves she was drugged, since all witnesses testified she never drank and did not drink that night. The fact that she was in the back seat when her body was recovered indicates that is where she was when the car hit the water. There was no way she could have dived downward against the inrushing water and moved from the front to the back seat underneath the upside-down seat back.
The wounds on the back of Ted Kennedy's skull, those just above his ear and the large bump on the top indicate he was knocked out. His actions at the hotel the next morning show he was not aware of Mary Jo's death until Markham and Gargan arrived. The trip to the pay phone on Chappaquiddick can only be explained by his receiving a call there, not making one. There were plenty of pay phones in or near Ted's hotel if he needed to make a private call. The tides in the channel and the direction in which Ted claimed he swam do not match. In addition it would have been a superhuman feat to have made it across the channel (as proven by several professionals who subsequently tried it).
Deputy Sheriff Christopher Look's testimony, coupled with the testimony of Ray LaRosa and two Lyons girls, proves that there were two people in Ted's car with Mary Jo at 12:45 PM. The three party members walking along the road south toward the cottage confirmed the time that Mr. Look drove by. He stopped to ask if they needed a ride. Look says that just prior to that he encountered Ted's car parked facing north at the juncture of the main road and the dirt road. It was on a short extension of the north-south section of the road junction to the north of the "T". He says he saw a man driving, a woman in the seat beside him, and what he thought was another woman lying on the back seat. He remembered a portion of the license plate which matched Ted's car, as did the description of the car. Markham, Gargan and Ted's driver's testimony show that someone they talked to in the pitch black night sounded like Ted and was about his height and build.
None of the above evidence was ever explained by Ted or by anyone else at the inquest or at the hearing on the case demanded by district attorney Edward Dinis. No autopsy was ever allowed on Mary Jo's body (her family objected), and Ted made it possible to fly her body home for burial rather quickly. Kennedy haters have seized upon Chappaquiddick to enlarge the sexual image now being promoted of both Ted and Jack Kennedy. Books like "Teddy Bare" take full advantage of the situation.
Just which operatives in the Power Control Group at the high levels or the lower levels were on Chappaquiddick Island? No definite evidence has surfaced as yet, except for an indication that there was at least one woman and at least three men, one of whom resembled Ted Kennedy and who sounded like him in the darkness. However, two pieces of testimony in the Watergate hearings provide significant clues as to which of the known JFK case conspirators may have been there.
E. Howard Hunt told of a strange trip to Hyannisport to see a local citizen there about the Chappaquiddick incident. Hunt's cover story on this trip was that he was digging up dirt on Ted Kennedy for use in the 1972 campaign. The story does not make much sense if one questions why Hunt would have to wear a disguise, including his famous red wig, and to use a voice-alteration device to make himself sound like someone else. If, on the other hand, Hunt's purpose was to return to the scene of his crime just to make sure that no one who might have seen his group at the bridge or elsewhere would talk, then the disguise and the voice box make sense.
The other important testimony came from Tony Ulasewicz who said he was ordered by the Plumbers to fly immediately to Chappaquiddick and dig up dirt on Ted. The only problem Tony has is that, according to his testimony, he arrived early on the morning of the "accident", before the whole incident had been made public. Ulasewicz is the right height and weight to resemble Kennedy and with a CIA voice-alteration device he presumably could be made to sound like him. There is a distinct possibility that Hunt and Tony were there when it happened.
The threats by the Power Control Group, the frame-up at Chappaquiddick, and the murders of Jack and Bobby Kennedy cannot have failed to take their toll on all of the Kennedys. Rose, Ted, Jackie, Ethel and the other close family members must be very tired of it all by now. They can certainly not be blamed for hoping it will all go away. Investigations like those proposed by Henry Gonzalez and Thomas Downing only raised the spectre of the powerful Control Group taking revenge by kidnapping some of the seventeen children.
It was no wonder that a close Kennedy friend and ally in California, Representative Burton, said that he would oppose the Downing and Gonzalez resolutions unless Ted Kennedy put his stamp of approval on them. While the sympathies of every decent American go out to them, the future of our country and the freedom of the people to control their own destiny through the election process mean more than the lives of all the Kennedys put together. If John Kennedy were alive today he would probably make the same statement.
John Dean summed it up when he said to Richard Nixon as recorded on the White House tapes in 1973: "If Teddy knew the bear trap he was walking into at Chappaquiddick. . . ."[5]




__________

The fabulous Jackie -- Christian Cafarakis -- Productions de Paris -- 1972

You the Jury -- Robert Cutler -- Self Published -- 1974

A rope attached to the stick which held the Oldsmobile throttle wide open caught the drivers rear view mirror and tore it loose so that it was hanging by the rear bolt. There was no other mark on the left side of the car.

A sliver of glass from two broken windows no doubt caused this bleeding since Mary Jo was already face down and unconscious in the rear seat. Since there was no autopsy this clean cut went unnoticed by the embalmers.

On page 121, White House Tapes Paperback Edition, published by New York Times
Jim Thompson
 

I don't buy any of it!

Postby Dan » Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:15 am

Jim,

That is worse than any LHO lone nutter theory. The Ted Kennedy case is simple, clean and easy to understand - see YTEDK.com. Ted Kennedy was drunk and misjudged the bridge. He had an accident! But the accident morphed into homicide when he let Mary Jo die...why did he let her die in only a few feet of water (the pond barely covered the car)... because he was drunk - he couldn't get help because they would know he was driving drunk - he had to hide until his blood alcohol returned somewhat to normal (he contacted his attorney then hid for 10 hours - it would have been longer but the police found him). He was up for re-election in only 4 months - Mary Jo died to save Edward's career (you would think her death would end his career).

Why did Ted pay the Kopechne family to not have an autopsy performed? Because it would show she was alive for quite some time after the accident (maybe 2 hours) and she could have survivied if he sought help - or as some believe - he didn't want an autopsy beause she was pregnant!

You or I would not have gotten away with it - but Teddy did - and the sheep keep putting him in office!
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Postby Dan » Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:36 am

Billy Boggs wrote:Thank you Dan. Because of your misguaded intentions we now know a little more about the game.

Who do I work for? Well, first off, I wont answer a question with a question, which is diversionary in nature. Your answer will follow.

...


Billy - please don't be offended, but you say answering a question with a question is diversionary - perhaps - but what about answering a different question than the one asked? I asked who do you work for - you answered with what you work for - is that diversionary or deceptive?
Dan
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:28 am

Previous

Return to Who shot JFK, and why?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron