Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?

[Greg Burnham]

There was indeed a modified Colt .45 (1911-A) employed by the agency to fire Flechette darts that carried 46-40 to instantaneously paralyze the target. Originally, we used this to render attack/guard dogs immobile BEFORE they could sound an alarm (bark). The chemical and the delivery agent (dart) are both soluble within the body and leave no discernible trace without intense forensic examination. The dart was later modified to carry an extremely high explosive. The dart was powered by "solid rocket fuel" and was initiated by an ignition, as opposed to an explosion (such as a firing cap).

Hey Monk,

Were your ears burning? I posted re your COPA presentation same time as you chimed in. Thanks!

On fire!

I believe what they call that Church committee bit was a limited, modified hang-out.

No kidding! Yep, partly a sham / partly a confession / partly a series of (non-sexual) Freudian-like slips...to be sure. When questioned as to whether the purpose of developing such a weapon was intended for use on humans, I particularly find Sensensey's reply (about a chemical and delivery agent being designed to defeat the scrutiny of an autopsy) very telling since autopsies are not generally ever performed on DOGS!

[Cliff Varnell]

a pre-dupe

Edited January 17, 2011 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff,

I don't want to break thread integrity here, but I look forward to your thoughts and observations about that subject.

Under the Cliff Varnell Unified Theory of JFK research it's all connected ergo we cannot, by definition, be "off topic"...no, wait, you're right, Monk...I've much more research to do..."bridge document" intriguing construct...Count the Harrimanites...

Let's shift back to the Zapruder film. I've discussed this topic with Jack White, Paul Rigby, Jim Fetzer, and John Costella: is there any reason to believe that Z186 thru Z255 is anything but a faithful rendering of what occurred in the motorcade?

The Betzner photo (Z186), Willis #5 (Z202), and Altgens #6 (Z255) mesh with the testimonies of the people closest to JFK, like Nellie Connally, Jackie, Linda Willis and Clint Hill.

It is during that time frame that JFK was struck and seized up paralyzed in about two seconds.

I don't care what they did to the Z film after Z255 -- take out the stop, blot the head wound, etc -- it should not detract from the important evidence contained in that film Z186 - Z255.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Cliff Varnell

[Greg Burnham]

My short answer is: YES! Even without reviewing the exact or specific content of those particular frames, I must defer to a common instruction issued by judges to juries throughout our country (and many foreign countries). That is [paraphrased]: "If a 'witness' has committed perjury on even ONE occasion then it is wise to seriously question the veracity of the remainder of their testimony". Indeed it is permissible to REJECT the remainder of the testimony especially if same is being used to defeat otherwise undisputed independent testimony to the contrary.

Now, all things being equal, you know my stance on the Zapruder Film. However, you also know my stance on the Flechette dart. Those positions are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that the Zapruder film "evidence" supports the use of such technology, but such evidence is rightly inadmissible due to internal inconsistencies (perjury). Sometimes a perjurious testimony can still contain elements of the truth. The frames you sited may well indeed reveal evidence that is truthful. Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing for sure.

*I should clarify my last statement:

If there is scientific PROOF--provided by a qualified expert, such as Costella, for instance, and verified by other experts--that those frames are indisputably authentic, then I would be more inclined to consider the possibility that same are a reliable basis upon which to draw a conclusion. However, in general terms, I believe that relying on the Zapruder film is a slippery-slope.

*edit: for clarification

Edited January 18, 2011 by Greg Burnham

[Ron Ecker]

There was indeed a modified Colt .45 (1911-A) employed by the agency to fire Flechette darts that carried 46-40 to instantaneously paralyze the target.

Interesting. It was my impression from the Church testimony that exotic or innocent-looking things like umbrellas were used for delivery of the darts. If there was an actual gun that could be used, so much for the Umbrella Man!

[Greg Burnham]

There was indeed a modified Colt .45 (1911-A) employed by the agency to fire Flechette darts that carried 46-40 to instantaneously paralyze the target.

Interesting. It was my impression from the Church testimony that exotic or innocent-looking things like umbrellas were used for delivery of the darts. If there was an actual gun that could be used, so much for the Umbrella Man!

Ron,

As a matter of logic: that an alternate delivery system to the "umbrella system" existed--does not preclude the "umbrella system" from having been used. I'm not necessarily arguing for or against any "theory" here, but your reasoning in this regard is flawed, IMO.

[Ron Ecker]

As a matter of logic: that an alternate delivery system to the "umbrella system" existed--does not preclude the "umbrella system" from having been used. I'm not necessarily arguing for or against any "theory" here, but your reasoning in this regard is flawed, IMO.

I don't think my reasoning is flawed at all. If you were going to use a dart and had a choice, I guess you could have a guy with an umbrella practice shooting darts out of it several times and then hope he can hit a moving target when he gets to Elm Street, but give me a marksman with a Colt. I wouldn't even have to think about it.

[David Andrews]

I've never believed in the frontal dart to the throat by TUM. If at all, a flechette rifle would have made the back wound.

An umbrella weapon would only work at close quarters between pedestrians. We're looking at kill shots on Elm Street.

I believe that Elm Street is a workplace for riflemen, with landmarks to hit Kennedy and Connally by. There's no room for testing drawing-board weapons science.

Edited January 18, 2011 by David Andrews

[Bernice Moore]

you've undoubtably seen this before shown at the Church Com...b

[Ron Ecker]

Bernice,

Yes, I've seen that photo before, but didn't associate it with dart launchers. I just thought it was some special assassination weapon that Church had dug out of the CIA's dirty laundry.

Is that a photo of the aforementioned Colt?

[Guest Tom Scully]

I've never believed in the frontal dart to the throat by TUM. If at all, a flechette rifle would have made the back wound.

An umbrella weapon would only work at close quarters between pedestrians. We're looking at kill shots on Elm Street.

I believe that Elm Street is a workplace for riflemen, with landmarks to hit Kennedy and Connally by. There's no room for testing drawing-board weapons science.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17239

Mr. Jenner stated that a series of extraordinary coincidences made it seem most likely that the assassination of President Kennedy was the work of one man — Lee Harvey Oswald.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62459&relPageId=193

http://books.google.com/books?um=1&q=A...nG=Search+Books

The Musician: America's leading magazine for musicians, music-lovers ...‎ - Page 46

Biography & Autobiography - 1932

Ana Drittell, young cellist, made her Town Hall debut, presenting music of Bach,

Beethoven- Mozart, Locatelli, Jean Hure, Faure, Turina, Hindemith and U.

For Jim Root to consider:

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=Ana...n&scoring=a

John B. Hurt, Retired Aide Of National Security Unit

- New York Times - Aug 9, 1966

Mr. Hurt is survived by his widow, Mrs. Ana Dritfell Burt, a Russian-born cellist; his mother, Mrs. Anna Hurt of Wytheville, Va.; two sisters and three ...

Edited January 18, 2011 by Tom Scully

[Greg Burnham]

Bernice,

Yes, I've seen that photo before, but didn't associate it with dart launchers. I just thought it was some special assassination weapon that Church had dug out of the CIA's dirty laundry.

Is that a photo of the aforementioned Colt?

Yes. It's the same one I posted earlier. The man holding it is Charles Sensensey of the NSA during his testimony.

[Ron Ecker]

The man holding it is Charles Sensensey of the NSA during his testimony.

Looks like Frank Church to me. With John Tower sitting beside him.

[Greg Burnham]

I've never believed in the frontal dart to the throat by TUM. If at all, a flechette rifle would have made the back wound.

An umbrella weapon would only work at close quarters between pedestrians. We're looking at kill shots on Elm Street.

I believe that Elm Street is a workplace for riflemen, with landmarks to hit Kennedy and Connally by. There's no room for testing drawing-board weapons science.

This was not "drawing-board weapons science" David! This was a device imagined by the CIA and developed by the NSA through funds provided by the US Military. Its effectiveness is without dispute. That said, still we have no concrete proof that it was employed in Dallas. However, even if it wasn't, the reason had nothing to do with it being an unknown or untested product. It was tested, tweaked, and perfected...and it worked very effectively within limited scenarios.

[Greg Burnham]

The man holding it is Charles Sensensey of the NSA during his testimony.

Looks like Frank Church to me. With John Tower sitting beside him.

I stand corrected, Ron. It's past my bedtime.