Cliff Varnell Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 "I saw President Kennedy's wounds at Parkland Hospital and during the autopsy at the Bethesda Naval Hospital. There was no difference in the nature of the wounds I saw at Parkland Hospital and those I observed at the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital." -- George Burkley; 11/28/78 And you're ready to sign off on the "verified" death certificate he filled out describing those wounds, David? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) Burkley didn't measure anything when it came to JFK's wounds, Cliff. He didn't perform the autopsy. So why would anybody accept his approximations over the autopsy report? Edited February 2, 2012 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 O'Donnell's testimony is hogwash. Jackie didn't know anything about an autopsy? Why did she think they wanted to take the body to the Walter Reed or Bethesda hospital? To try to revive it? Wouldn't a funeral home be a more logical destination for a person declared dead and in a casket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) The President's widow selected the location of the autopsy herself. And anyone who wants to doubt that fact is going to have to call one of JFK's best friends, Kenneth P. O'Donnell, an outright xxxx. And I doubt if there are even many hardcore conspiracy theorists who have a desire to do that. O'Donnell's testimony is hogwash. I guess I was wrong. People do exist in this world who are silly enough to call Kenny O'Donnell an outright xxxx. Isn't that special? Edited February 2, 2012 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 People do exist in this world who are silly enough to call Kenny O'Donnell an outright xxxx. O'Donnell could have been telling the truth, and Jackie was simply an utter moron. JFK married the idiot for her looks. BTW, if my memory serves me correctly, it was O'Donnell who years later told Tip O'Neill, according to O'Neill's book, that he thought a shot came from the front, but he went along with the official story because he didn't want to rock the boat. Such silence wouldn't make him an outright xxxx, just despicable, and I wouldn't consider any of his testimony on the case to be worth a plug nickel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) Burkley didn't measure anything when it came to JFK's wounds, Cliff. He didn't perform the autopsy. So why would anybody accept his approximations over the autopsy report? Ron, regarding your remark about a funeral home being more appropriate - "O'Donnell's testimony is hogwash. Jackie didn't knowanything about an autopsy? Why did she think they wanted to take the body tothe Walter Reed or Bethesdahospital? To try to revive it? Wouldn't a funeral home be a more logicaldestination for a person declared dead and in a casket?" if you listen to the AF1 radio tapes or read the transcript, you will hear them discuss the fact that they need to do an autopsy "as required by law" and while they discuss Walter Reed, from those on board (as DVP notes) we learn that they let Jackie make the decision and she decided Bethesda over Walter Reed because JFK was a Navy man. The problem is, they only performed a regular autopsy, the purpose of which is to determine the cause of death - gunshot to the head, while a forensic autopsy would have created evidence (photos and x-rays and reports) that could have been used in a court of law if the perpetrators were ever to be tried for murder. The Bethesda autopsy material lost all its provenance and could not be used as evidence. JFK still needs a forensic autopsy and the 50th anniversary would be good time to do it. And DVP's reference to Burkley saying the wounds at Parkland and Bethesda were the same fails to note that he later concluded there was evidence of conspiracy, but his family has refused requests for his letters and papers concerning this be turned over to NARA. And David, the problem with the AF1 tapes isn't that it is wrong to conclude they indicate conspiracy, it is wrong to conclude that there's nothing wrong with the fact that the original tapes are missing and that what's being with held and/or destroyed is okay. BK JFKcountercoup Edited February 2, 2012 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 if you listen to the AF1 radio tapes or read the transcript, you will hear them discuss the fact that they need to do an autopsy "as required by law" and while they discuss Walter Reed, from those on board (as DVP notes) we learn that they let Jackie make the decision and she decided Bethesda over Walter Reed because JFK was a Navy man. I know that. O'Donnell's hogwash was his saying that Jackie didn't know anything about an autopsy. According to him, they let her decide whether to take the body to Walter Reed or to Bethesda for, oh, whatever. I guess she figured that every Navy man should visit Bethesda at least once, even if he's dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 ... LeMay was at an air base in Canada at the time of the assassination and flew back to DC - landing at DC National in disregard of orders to land at Andrews. He was in the air at the same time as AF1. ... What was the alleged reason LeMay was at an air base in Canada? Also, do you recall where you learned that? Hi Myra, At the time the USA had a joint USA/Canada defense plan against USSR air/missile attack across the north pole, with radar stations and Strategic Air Command air bases positioned throughout North America. We learned of LeMay's location that day from the Andrews AFB Log that was ordered destroyed but salvaged from the trash and turned over to the ARRB. JFKcountercoup: General Curtis LeMay on 11/22/6 JFKcountercoup: Andrews AFB Log 11/22/633 BK JFKcountercoup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 At the time the USA had a joint USA/Canada defense plan against USSR air/missile attack across the north pole, with radar stations and Strategic Air Command air bases positioned throughout North America. As you've pointed out, according to his biography he was on vacation in Michigan (I think with his in-laws). One reason he might go to a Canadian air base while on vacation is that it would be a lot easier to catch a plane there, in case something "unusual" were to happen that day, than from wherever he was staying in Michigan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 At the time the USA had a joint USA/Canada defense plan against USSR air/missile attack across the north pole, with radar stations and Strategic Air Command air bases positioned throughout North America. As you've pointed out, according to his biography he was on vacation in Michigan (I think with his in-laws). One reason he might go to a Canadian air base while on vacation is that it would be a lot easier to catch a plane there, in case something "unusual" were to happen that day, than from wherever he was staying in Michigan. I don't believe he was in Michigan. I believe the Andrews Log and AF1 tape that he was at the Canadian Air Base - and the Michigan story is bogus. BK JFKcountercoup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) I'm not going to hijack the thread -- just a few comments that will logically (or so I will argue) lead back to the subject at hand -- the 11/22/63 AF1 radio transmissions. Burkley didn't measure anything when it came to JFK's wounds, Cliff. He didn't perform the autopsy. So why would anybody accept his approximations over the autopsy report? Because his description of the back wound followed proper military autopsy protocol; the autopsy report violated proper military autopsy protocol. Kennedy autopsist Col. Pierre Finck to the ARRB: "JFK's spine, a fixed landmark, was the correct and only point of reference to determine the accurate location of this posterior wound." Burkley followed proper protocol and located the wound "about the level of the third thoracic vertebra." This was signed off as "verified" -- also according to proper military autopsy protocol. The autopsy report -- which Finck signed off on knowing it was "incorrect" -- lists two different locations: 1) "just above the upper border of the scapula" and 2) "14cm below the right tip of the mastoid process". Just above the upper margin of the scapula is consistent with T2; 14cm below the mastoid process is consistent with C7/T1. The death certificate -- along with the properly prepared portions of the autopsy face sheet -- help establish the too-low back wound and thus the fact of conspiracy in JFK's murder. Properly prepared evidence logically trumps improperly prepared evidence. Once this cardinal fact is understood the next step in any logical investigation of the case (imo) is an examination of how this conspiracy was covered up, which brings us to the AF1 radio transmissions. From Vincent Salandria's "THE TALE TOLD BY TWO TAPES" http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4186&pid=31073&mode=threaded&start=#entry31073 In November of 1966, I read Theodore H. White's The Making of the President, 1964... [O]n page 33 I read the following about the flight back to Washington, D.C. from Dallas: "On the flight the party learned that there was no conspiracy, learned of the identity of Oswald and his arrest; and the President's mind turned to the duties of consoling the stricken and guiding the quick." ...* The Situation Room of the White House first fingered Oswald as the lone assassin when an innocent government, with so much evidence in Dealey Plaza of conspiracy, would have been keeping all options open. Therefore this premature birth of the single-assassin myth points to the highest institutional structure of our warfare state as guilty of the crime of killing Kennedy. Such a source does not take orders from the Mafia nor from renegade elements. But such a source is routinely given to using the Mafia and supposedly out-of-control renegade sources to do its bidding. * McGeorge Bundy was in charge of the Situation Room and was spending that fateful afternoon receiving phone calls from President Johnson, who was calling from Air Force One when the lone-assassin myth was prematurely given birth. (Bishop, Jim, The Day Kennedy Was Shot, New York & Funk Wagnalls, 1968), p. 154) McGeorge Bundy as the quintessential WASP establishmentarian did not take his orders from the Mafia and/or renegade elements. Does this establish as a fact that it was McGeorge Bundy who informed LBJ that the lone assassin was captured? No, not yet. We need the tape of the actual transmission. That's why these tapes are critically important! We need to hear what William Manchester heard when he quoted from the AF1 transmission: "Ted Clifton talked to Bundy, too, asking again whether an international plot was emerging. .... Bundy replied crisply that the Pentagon was taking its own steps." David, there is no evidence that the Pentagon took any steps toward determining the existence of an "international plot." Indeed, it wasn't the Pentagon who absolved the Soviets of any role in the conspiracy -- it was the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs W. Averell Harriman, who arrived at the White House ten minutes after LBJ the evening of 11/22/63 and informed the new President that it was the unanimous opinion of the USG's top Kremlinologists that the Soviets were innocent of the crime. How can this be understood as anything but sinister? Imagine if President Obama were gunned down in Dallas and the police soon captured a man who had spent a couple of years in Iran and was known to espouse Islamic fundamentalist beliefs, a man who had recently, in a third world country, met with a top assassination specialist of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Imagine if the current Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William J. Burns told President Biden less than 6 hours after the killing that the USG's top experts on Iran were unanimous in the belief that Iran was not involved. Biden would likely fire the guy on the spot! There is no way that Harriman -- the USG's top Kremlinologist in '63 -- could have legitimately made the determination of Soviet innocence in less than six hours. David, I know it's your job to pooh-pooh anything "conspiratorial," but surely even you see the problems here. No? Edited February 2, 2012 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) [...] We need to hear what William Manchester heard when he quoted from the AF1 transmission: "Ted Clifton talked to Bundy, too, asking again whether an international plot was emerging. .... Bundy replied crisply that the Pentagon was taking its own steps." David, there is no evidence that the Pentagon took any steps toward determining the existence of an "international plot." [...] What about the mysterious phone call and cable from Ft. Sam Houston to MacDill AFB which caused planes from Ft. MacDill to go screaming towards Cuba? Could this be what Bundy meant when he said that the Pentagon was "taking its own steps"? From an excellent post by Steve Thomas on another thread ("How did the police first learn of 1026 N. Beckley?"): [...] In the National Archives, there is a message dated November 26, 1963 from the Commanding General, U.S. Continental Army Command re-transmitting a message dated November 23, 1963 from someone at Fort Sam Houston, in San Antonio to CINC U.S. Strike Command at McDill Air Force Base in Florida. The November 23rd message summarizes a telephone conversation between a Captain Saxton in Strike Command and a Lieutenant Colonel Fons, Deputy Chief of Staff, Intelligence at 4th Army Headquarters at Fort Sam Houston that took place on November 23, 1963. In the middle of this summary, there is this passage: “ASSISTANT CHIEF DON STRINGFELLOW, INTELLIGENCE SECTION, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, NOTIFIED 112TH INTC GP, THIS HQ, THAT INFORMATION OBRAINED FROM OSWALD REVEALED HE HAD DEFECTED TO CUBA IN 1959 AND IS CARD CARRYING MEMBER OF COMMUNIST PARTY EVALUATION B-3 (FOUO) DCSI COMMENT , FBI, DALLAS, TEXAS, AND SAN ANTONIO LIGHT NEWSPAPER STATED OSWALD TRAVELED TO MOSCOW, USSR, IN 1959. POSSIBILITY EXISTS THAT OSWALD MAY HAVE TRAVELED TO USSR VIA CUBA, IN VIEW OF ABOVE INFORMATION UNCOVERED BY DALLAS POLICE.” In November, 1963 Leonard Don Stringfellow was a Detective in the Criminal Intelligence Section of the Dallas Police Department Special Services Bureau, headed by Captain W. P. Gannaway. What is interesting about this document is that is says that Detective Stringfellow “notified 112th Intelligence Group, this Headquarters…” I believe that this message was the one Col. Robert Jones, formerly of the 112 Military Intelligence Group in San Antonio was asked about during his testimony before the HSCA on April 20, 1978. (History Matters Archive – Unpublished testimony of Robert Jones, pp. 55-57. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...jones_0055a.htm Jones told the HSCA that while he did not know who prepared the cable, the cable was prepared by Mr. Arthur Nagle on the staff of the Chief of Staff, Intelligence, Fort Sam Houston. The From line on the original cable reads: FM CGASARFOUR FTSAMHOUSTON TEX. This could be Commanding General, Assistant Secretary, Fourth Army Headquarters Fort Sam Houston. He also definitely said that the original cable had not been prepared by the 112th. The RIF for this document reads as follows: AGENCY INFORMATION AGENCY : USA RECORD NUMBER : 197-10002-10369 RECORDS SERIES : HEADQUARTERS FILES, PENTAGON TELECOMMUNICATIONS CENTER DOCUMENT INFORMATION ORIGINATOR : COMMANDING GENERAL US CONTINENTAL ARMY COMMAND FROM : TO : CINC, US STRIKE COMMAND TITLE : INFORMATION ON FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE DATE : 11/26/1963 PAGES : 3 DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT SUBJECTS : MILITARY DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE (SECURITY RISKS/COUNTERINTELLIGENCE); MILITARY DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE (FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE); LEE HARVEY OSWALD; COLLINS, BARBARA; GIBSON, RICHARD; OSWALD, HARVEY LEE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION, CONNECTION WITH COMMITTEE; MEMBER OF COMMUNIST PARTY; TRAVEL TO USSR, CUBA; OSWALD, MARINA NIKOLAEVNA: SPOUSE; STRINGFELLOW, DON: ASST CHIEF, INTELLIGENCE SECTION, DALLAS POLICE DEPT; MILITARY INTELLIGENCE LIAISON WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT (DALLAS POLICE) CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL CURRENT STATUS : OPEN DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/30/1996 COMMENTS : COPY ATTACHED Ironically, several of the individuals referenced in the original cable were with President Kennedy four days before his assassination when he visited MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa on November 18th. In an article published by Frank DeBenedictis entitled: FOUR DAYS BEFORE DALLAS: JFK IN TAMPA http://www.lib.usf.edu/ldsu/digitalcollect...v16n2_94_57.pdf, DeBenedictis writes: While Suncoast residents moved into their stadium and motorcade viewing spots, the Presidential party was landing at MacDill Air Force Base for a military welcome. On hand to greet Kennedy were General Paul D. Adams, Commander in Chief U.S. Strike Command; Lieutenant General Bruce K. Holloway, Adams’ deputy; General Walter Sweeney, Commander of TAC and headquartered at Langley A.F.B., Virginia; and General John K. Waters, Commander in Chief Continental Army Command, Ft. Monroe, Virginia [...] Steve Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------ And this fine post by Larry Hancock on the "Ask an Expert" part of the Forum: Steve, I've heard of Stringfellow in general but the only DPD name I see associated with intel SPOT reports out of Dallas is DPD Captain Dowdy. By the weekend, Lt. Col. Boyd of the Dallas 112th office had been assigned to be on site with DPD to get reports directly; he was Deputy Commander of Region II which included Dallas. His superior in Dallas was Lt. Col. Roy Pate. Either Pate or Boyd would have been the correct people to have questioned about what the 112th was doing in Dallas on Nov. 22, not Jones who is listed as S2 Intelligence Officer. The other candidates would have been Lt. Col Stanley Greer who was actually the Operations officer or his boss the Group Commander Col. Williard Mize; both located at 112th headquarters in San Antonio. .....Larry --Tommy ( emphasis added ) P.S. Anyone know why all the "links" in the Steve Thomas post are dead? Thanks. Edited February 2, 2012 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 [...] We need to hear what William Manchester heard when he quoted from the AF1 transmission: "Ted Clifton talked to Bundy, too, asking again whether an international plot was emerging. .... Bundy replied crisply that the Pentagon was taking its own steps." David, there is no evidence that the Pentagon took any steps toward determining the existence of an "international plot." [...] What about the mysterious phone tall and cable from Ft. Sam Houston to MacDill AFB which caused planes from Ft. MacDill to go screaming towards Cuba? Could this be what Bundy meant when he said that the Pentagon was "taking its own steps"? Indeed, it may have been. Terrific post, Tommy! I think the Pentagon was certainly ready to react to the determination that there was an international plot -- whether that is the same thing as investigating the possibility of an international plot is another matter. Whomever in the White House Situation Room told LBJ that the lone assassin had been captured was heading off, intentionally or not, any military strike on Cuba. Bundy "crisply" replying that the Pentagon was "taking its own steps" belies the steps in an opposite direction taken by Bundy (possibly) and Harriman (definitely) -- that is, Oswald acted alone, the Soviets were not involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I think that the Pentagon was "taking its own steps" that day in Dallas, though that may not have been what Bundy meant. It was quite a choice of words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) I think that the Pentagon was "taking its own steps" that day in Dallas, though that may not have been what Bundy meant. It was quite a choice of words. Ron, Since Bundy said, "The Pentagon is taking its own steps," he could have meant that the Pentagon started doing something a short time before Bundy made the statement, and was still doing it. If your interpretation is correct, then Bundy should have said, "The Pentagon has been taking its own steps", i.e. Investigating LHO's background since around 2:00 PM Dallas time. A more sinister answer would have been, "The Pentagon has taken its own steps." --Tommy Edited October 18, 2013 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now