Deathbed confession? FBI Doyle Williams planted CE399-?

[David Lifton]

13 hours ago, David Andrews said:

d. Everything I have described above is recorded on film.

It would be great to see that Doyle Williams film sometime, David.

Yes, I would like that, too.  Unfortunately, all my material (from that period) was recorded on hi 8, and was "pre-digital." So that:

(a) I have to dig it out of storage; and. .

(b) Do the conversion to digital. . and then. .

(c ) Edit it properly, to focus on the relevant excerpt(s).

I really do need assistance --financial and human--to embark on this project of how to deal with all my filmed interviews, which took place at a time when the technology was changing rapidly.  Meanwhile, I've got to complete Final Charade.  Sorry I don't "have a staff," or I'd simply assign the work to someone, and say "Do it." 

Stay tuned. . I'll try and do something. .

DSL

 

[David Lifton]

On 5/30/2017 at 7:27 PM, George Sawtelle said:

Why would someone plant a bullet w/o knowing the extent of the injuries to the victims? Makes no sense at all.

George:

To the contrary, it makes plenty of sense--if you know, from the outset, that you are "controlling the body."

This issue you have raised is dealt with, in considerable detail, in Chapter 14 of Best Evidence. Title: "Trajectory Reversal: Blueprint for Deception."

I cannot afford to spend time "re-litigating" a matter so central to the issue of whether "body alteration" was "planned in advance"--that is, whether it was part of the original scheme (It was). Suffice it to say that all it takes is to punch a shallow hole in the body, and place a bullet either "inside" that defect, or on a stretcher (and then claim that it "fell out').  Surely you are aware that the original FBI reporting states exactly that;  that the bullet "fell out". 

Another matter: its not possible to discuss this without dealing with another closely related issue: that the Dallas medical records--the nurses reports, the medical reports, etc.--make no mention of any back wound.  None at all: not in the back, not in the neck, not in the head.  The supposed "frontal entry"  is not reported --at the Dallas end of the line--until the Dallas doctors were shown the Bethesda autopsy report on December 11, 1963.  Further, and this is very important: the first report --from Dallas--that JFK was "shot in the back" was in a Dallas times Herald story--front page--published on Thursday, December 12th.  It was written by the paper's science editor, Bill Burrus.

In 1978, i hunted down the author--Bill Burrus--and spent several hours with him in New York City, in a taped interview.  I'll be publishing this in Final Charade, and there you will learn, for the first time, the backstory of how this front page story --published on 12/12--came to be.  Its an account that will curl your hair. Burrus gets a phone call very late on Wed night, from a mysterious high level VIP, who --supposedly--has the results of the Bethesda autopsy, which he wants published in the next day's newspaper. . and so that's how all of this begins--the first time any story is published, anywhere in the U.S., that the bullet entered "above" the shoulder blade.

Skipping many intermediate details, let me cut to the chase.

IMHO: (a) THe back wound is phony; and (b) a bullet was planted to "match" that wound. (And it didn't matter in which order these two events occurred  2 x 3 = 6; but so does 3 x 2 = 6.  In math, one says that the two operations "commute."   the same with the planting of that "nearly perfect" bullet, and the shallow wound.  The sequence of planting and wound creation is really irrelevant.  Again, see Chapter 14. Read it carefully, and understand that what I've laid out there, on the page, is the description of the algorithm--I repeat that word "algorithm"-- that was used to shoot the president,and then, immediately afterwards, alter the body.

Of course, "they" are shooting at JFK's head, but the precise complicating details to which you are alluding are not a real problem as long as he is shot from the "opposite side" of the body than the phony sniper's nest.  (Again, see ch 14).

Yes, its the most "radical" part of Best Evidence, but rest assured, that's the key as to why "body alteration" could be  "planned in advance."

As a friend of mine used to say, President Kennedy wasn't just shot; he was shot "carefully."

DSL

6/1/2017 - 12:30 a.m.PDT

Los Angeles, California

[David Andrews]

5 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Yes, I would like that, too.  Unfortunately, all my material (from that period) was recorded on hi 8, and was "pre-digital." So that:

(a) I have to dig it out of storage; and. .

(b) Do the conversion to digital. . and then. .

(c ) Edit it properly, to focus on the relevant excerpt(s).

I really do need assistance --financial and human--to embark on this project of how to deal with all my filmed interviews, which took place at a time when the technology was changing rapidly.  Meanwhile, I've got to complete Final Charade.  Sorry I don't "have a staff," or I'd simply assign the work to someone, and say "Do it." 

Stay tuned. . I'll try and do something. .

DSL

 

Grant funding?  University archives donation plan with digitization and DVD release of some materials written into contract?

[Joe Bauer]

Just a brief question that I know has been asked many times but still leaves me wondering:

Wouldn't an almost intact bullet having traversed through and damaged so much internal human body tissue have at least some blood on it's surface after it worked itself out?

Enough that the first person finding and handling it would probably have at least a little blood on their fingers from doing so?

I mean if I were that person I am certain I would have eventually noticed this and it would be a most indelible realization that I had JFK's actual blood on my fingers.

But, if there was no visually perceptible blood on that bullet when first sighted and handled ( and by physical laws there should be ) one is forced to at least ponder how this was so?

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Joe Bauer

[Joe Bauer]

This thread inspired me to revisit some past Vince Palamara/SS related You Tube videos.

One was an interview by CNN's Brian Lamb of Clint Hill and Gerald Blaine about their Palamara countering book.

Vince Palamara's 22 page letter to Hill was a major talking point and Lamb asked whether this letter had anything to do with Hill and Blaine's book co-written  ( come on - she wrote the book ) by Lisa McCubbin.

Hill said it didn't and he didn't even remember much of the Palamara letter and had just tossed it out.

But listening carefully to the statements of Hill and Blaine in the entire interview, it was obvious that Palamara's letter and other public comments were probably the main reason for their SS defending view book.

But what struck me was the incredible lameness of both Hill's and Blaine's answers and explanations when asked by Brian Lamb to respond to the JFK protection speculations in Palamara's work.

One in particular was the Hill explanation as to the true reason the agents were called back off JFK's limo as it was leaving Love Field.

And the meaning of the 3 times arm extending exasperation shown by the agent called off.

Hill gave some vague and innocuous reason for the call off and even added that his fellow agent mock tauntingly yelled back at his boss something like ...Okay, I'm going to lunch then.??? Please.  

Blaine ( who wasn't even in Dallas at the time) was equally preposterous. In one part of the interview he kept commenting on the super human effort and achievement of Hill running down the limo which Blaine kept saying never slowed down from it's 11 mph speed.

And a film clip is shown as Hill climbs the back of the limo which does show it going this fast. What you don't see is the previous scene where the Limo driver Greer does a 180 degree head turn to look back at JFK just before and through the time when JFK's head explodes, and Greer in the least lifts off the speed pedal  ( if not actually hitting his back lighted brakes ) to do so.

Hill was running to the limo starting "before" that almost stopping slowdown.

Just mentioning this type of Palamara countering media effort to remind us of what we could expect if Vince ever finds something new and relevatory in his area of research.

 

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by Joe Bauer

[Vince Palamara]

Chris-

 

I am skeptical about this "neighbor's" story.

[Vince Palamara]

Joe- thanks! You are spot on. You must get my new (third) book--you will find several items VERY interesting, indeed.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Not-So-Secret-Service-Agency-Kennedy-Assassination/dp/1634241207/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1477961936&sr=1-5

[George Sawtelle]

David

Kennedy was shot in the back. The bullet entered about 5/6 inches below the neck. The bullet entered back end first, was dented as it hit bone and stopped. It stayed in Kennedy's back and fell out as doctors and nurses tried to resusitate him. A round, bloody hole in Kennedy's is seen in a photo while Kennedy is still at Parkland. The hole could not have been punched into his back by the FBI simply because the FBI did not have access to Kennedy's body at this point.

Blur analysis by Hartmann and Scott and BBN acoustics analysis in the area of the intersection of Elm and Houston indicate a loud, sharp sound similar to a rifle shot occurred as the limo made the turn from Houston onto Elm.

Taking all four pieces of evidence into account, blur analysis, acoustics analysis, the photo showing a bloody hole in Kennedy's back, the dent on the back end of the bullet, all lead me to believe Kennedy was shot in the back. The shot produced a low velocity round whose sound was attenuated probably because of a misfire. And that's probably why the round only entered 2/3 inches into his back and stopped after hitting the back of the rib cage.

I believe the bullet fell out of his back as he was attended in the ER of the hospital. The stretcher would not have remained inside the ER since it was bloody with pieces of brain matter all over the front end. It was probably cleaned and rinsed and then placed outside in the hallway.

[David Andrews]

16 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

David

Kennedy was shot in the back. The bullet entered about 5/6 inches below the neck. The bullet entered back end first, was dented as it hit bone and stopped. It stayed in Kennedy's back and fell out as doctors and nurses tried to resusitate him. A round, bloody hole in Kennedy's is seen in a photo while Kennedy is still at Parkland. The hole could not have been punched into his back by the FBI simply because the FBI did not have access to Kennedy's body at this point.

Blur analysis by Hartmann and Scott and BBN acoustics analysis in the area of the intersection of Elm and Houston indicate a loud, sharp sound similar to a rifle shot occurred as the limo made the turn from Houston onto Elm.

Taking all four pieces of evidence into account, blur analysis, acoustics analysis, the photo showing a bloody hole in Kennedy's back, the dent on the back end of the bullet, all lead me to believe Kennedy was shot in the back. The shot produced a low velocity round whose sound was attenuated probably because of a misfire. And that's probably why the round only entered 2/3 inches into his back and stopped after hitting the back of the rib cage.

I believe the bullet fell out of his back as he was attended in the ER of the hospital. The stretcher would not have remained inside the ER since it was bloody with pieces of brain matter all over the front end. It was probably cleaned and rinsed and then placed outside in the hallway.

Do you believe this bullet is CE399?

[Chris Newton]

20 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

I am skeptical about this "neighbor's" story.

Ok. I defer anything on this matter to your good judgement Vince.

[George Sawtelle]

David

Yes.

Tomlinson said he found the bullet on the stretcher that was near another stretcher. Tomlinson said he had brought down one of the stretchers from an ER that was one floor up. He said he found the bullet on the other stretcher, meaning he did not find the bullet on Connally's stretcher.

Edited June 3, 2017 by George Sawtelle

[Pat Speer]

22 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

David

Kennedy was shot in the back. The bullet entered about 5/6 inches below the neck. The bullet entered back end first, was dented as it hit bone and stopped. It stayed in Kennedy's back and fell out as doctors and nurses tried to resusitate him. A round, bloody hole in Kennedy's is seen in a photo while Kennedy is still at Parkland. The hole could not have been punched into his back by the FBI simply because the FBI did not have access to Kennedy's body at this point.

Blur analysis by Hartmann and Scott and BBN acoustics analysis in the area of the intersection of Elm and Houston indicate a loud, sharp sound similar to a rifle shot occurred as the limo made the turn from Houston onto Elm.

Taking all four pieces of evidence into account, blur analysis, acoustics analysis, the photo showing a bloody hole in Kennedy's back, the dent on the back end of the bullet, all lead me to believe Kennedy was shot in the back. The shot produced a low velocity round whose sound was attenuated probably because of a misfire. And that's probably why the round only entered 2/3 inches into his back and stopped after hitting the back of the rib cage.

I believe the bullet fell out of his back as he was attended in the ER of the hospital. The stretcher would not have remained inside the ER since it was bloody with pieces of brain matter all over the front end. It was probably cleaned and rinsed and then placed outside in the hallway.

What photo?

[George Sawtelle]

Pat

campbellmgold.com/archive_general/jfk_autopsy_photos.pdf

Refer to photo with caption "BACK WOUND".

[Pat Speer]

29 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

Pat

campbellmgold.com/archive_general/jfk_autopsy_photos.pdf

Refer to photo with caption "BACK WOUND".

I think that's a dead link.

My point was that you seem to be claiming a post-mortem photo of Kennedy was taken at Parkland. The only known post-mortem photos of JFK's body were taken at Bethesda.

 

 

[Micah Mileto]

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I think that's a dead link.

My point was that you seem to be claiming a post-mortem photo of Kennedy was taken at Parkland. The only known post-mortem photos of JFK's body were taken at Bethesda.

 

 

http://campbellmgold.com/archive_general/jfk_autopsy_photo.pdf

 

It's just the regular back wound photo.