Article in today's Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-...ignificant.html
His son, the future President John F. Kennedy is said to have inherited his father's umbrellaphobia. This prompted a man called Louis Steven Witt to take an umbrella to Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, with the intention of opening it as the President's car passed and thereby poking fun at him.
We will never know whether President Kennedy noticed the umbrella. If he did, it would have been the last thing he ever noticed, because just as his car passed, he was shot dead.
Ever since, the so-called 'Umbrella Man' has been a bogeyman for Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists; they have convinced themselves that he was part of the conspiracy, placed there to let the gunman know, by opening his umbrella, whether the target had been successfully hit.
For years, the Umbrella Man remained unidentified, but then he came forward.
In 1978, Louis Steven Witt explained to the House Select Committee investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy that: 'In a coffee break conversation, someone had mentioned that the umbrella was a sore spot with the Kennedy family.
Being a conservative-type fellow, I sort of placed him in the liberal camp and I was just going to kind of do a little heckling.'
'You were opening the umbrella to use it as a symbol to catch the President's eye?' asked his inquisitor.
'Yes, sir.' Needless to say, when Oliver Stone came to make his 1991 film about the assassination of JFK, he chose to ignore this testimony. Instead, his hero, studying the cinefilm of the assassination, concludes: 'The umbrella man is signalling, "He's not dead. Keep shooting." '
Full Version: Louis Steven Witt : Umbrella Man
I'm sure Witt originally claimed it was an oblique reference to Chamberlain and appeasement, ie JFKs climb down over the Bay of pigs.
When Johnson ran against JFK for the 1960 presidential nomination, he called Joe Kennedy "a Chamberlain umbrella man." So maybe having an umbrella man in Dealey Plaza was LBJ's idea.
I believe there's many on this forum who still actually believe 'umbrella man' was a part of the conspiracy. Incredible!!
Hi Dennis,
Yes I'm one of those who still believes " UM " was part of the assassination .
Its not what he said he did but more what he did after the shots were fired.
While others were hitting the deck and running for cover " UM " calmly sat down on the curb and speaks with the "DC " man before walking out of history , exit stage right. Then coming forward 15 years later. If he had raised a cigar in the air as a signal there could be found an incidence in history to match his action.
He had no reason to fear the flying bullets-he knew where they were coming from!
And i am not convinced the real " UM " was the one that showed up at the hearings.
IMHO
jim
Yes I'm one of those who still believes " UM " was part of the assassination .
Its not what he said he did but more what he did after the shots were fired.
While others were hitting the deck and running for cover " UM " calmly sat down on the curb and speaks with the "DC " man before walking out of history , exit stage right. Then coming forward 15 years later. If he had raised a cigar in the air as a signal there could be found an incidence in history to match his action.
He had no reason to fear the flying bullets-he knew where they were coming from!
And i am not convinced the real " UM " was the one that showed up at the hearings.
IMHO
jim
QUOTE (Jim Feemster @ Oct 8 2009, 11:13 PM) 
Hi Dennis,
Yes I'm one of those who still believes " UM " was part of the assassination .
Its not what he said he did but more what he did after the shots were fired.
While others were hitting the deck and running for cover " UM " calmly sat down on the curb and speaks with the "DC " man before walking out of history , exit stage right. Then coming forward 15 years later. If he had raised a cigar in the air as a signal there could be found an incidence in history to match his action.
He had no reason to fear the flying bullets-he knew where they were coming from!
And i am not convinced the real " UM " was the one that showed up at the hearings.
IMHO
jim
Yes I'm one of those who still believes " UM " was part of the assassination .
Its not what he said he did but more what he did after the shots were fired.
While others were hitting the deck and running for cover " UM " calmly sat down on the curb and speaks with the "DC " man before walking out of history , exit stage right. Then coming forward 15 years later. If he had raised a cigar in the air as a signal there could be found an incidence in history to match his action.
He had no reason to fear the flying bullets-he knew where they were coming from!
And i am not convinced the real " UM " was the one that showed up at the hearings.
IMHO
jim
Hi Jim, UM "calmly sat down on the curb" or sat down in a state of shock? I guess we'll never really know will we? And IMO if UM was part of the plot he would never have sat down to have a chat, he would have got away from the scene as quickly and discreetly as possible. One question Jim, do you not think a signaler would have found a more discreet way to signal? Waving an umbrella around in the air has always seemed a little too flamboyant to me, for some one who wouldn't want to draw attention to themselves.
Denis.
I think Umbrella Man and his "Latin" companion are the least shocked-appearing persons in DP. These guys do not look like a pair of bystanding strangers slumped together in mutual horror - that seems like a studied appearance that they're trying to present.
I'll note that, in the pre-desegregation South (or even in the North before the Civil Rights movement succeeded), it would be odd for two strangers of different skin tone to allow even the greatest upset to throw them into sympathetic physical proximity. That's just a politically semi-correct impression of the 1960s US that I grew up in.
Another studied aspect to these two is their walking off in opposite directions. I could go on about the "Latin," but other people have noted the same things that I see.
I recognize the "Chamberlain umbrella man" line in Ron's post from one of LBJ's campaign speeches. It's possible that the incongruous and suspicion-arousing umbrella is both a spotter's signal and a cruel signature to the assassination - what else is UM doing there, unmolested by police or other security? I don't believe, though, that the umbrella is any kind of projectile-firing weapon.
I also don't believe the HSCA's Louis Steven Witt was the UM. Physical resemblance between images in period photos makes UM look far more like that certain incorrigible government agency schemer and all-around provocateur that UM is frequently identified as. The resemblance is as convincing as the most arresting resemblances of persons on the Main-Houston corner to suspicious non-Dallasites.
I'll note that, in the pre-desegregation South (or even in the North before the Civil Rights movement succeeded), it would be odd for two strangers of different skin tone to allow even the greatest upset to throw them into sympathetic physical proximity. That's just a politically semi-correct impression of the 1960s US that I grew up in.
Another studied aspect to these two is their walking off in opposite directions. I could go on about the "Latin," but other people have noted the same things that I see.
I recognize the "Chamberlain umbrella man" line in Ron's post from one of LBJ's campaign speeches. It's possible that the incongruous and suspicion-arousing umbrella is both a spotter's signal and a cruel signature to the assassination - what else is UM doing there, unmolested by police or other security? I don't believe, though, that the umbrella is any kind of projectile-firing weapon.
I also don't believe the HSCA's Louis Steven Witt was the UM. Physical resemblance between images in period photos makes UM look far more like that certain incorrigible government agency schemer and all-around provocateur that UM is frequently identified as. The resemblance is as convincing as the most arresting resemblances of persons on the Main-Houston corner to suspicious non-Dallasites.
Here is relevant testimony Witt gave to the HSCA:
"I think I went sort of maybe halfway up the grassy area (on the north side of Elm Street), somewhere in that vicinity. I am pretty sure I sat down....(When the motorcade approached) I think I got up and started fiddling with that umbrella trying to get it open, and at the same time I was walking forward, walking toward the street....Whereas other people I understand saw the President shot and his movements; I did not see this because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open."
HSCA Vol. IV, p. 432f
That description doesn't tie in with the photograph here. The umbrella is clearly above his head, he is standing still. Whoever is holding that umbrella had a perfect view.
"I think I went sort of maybe halfway up the grassy area (on the north side of Elm Street), somewhere in that vicinity. I am pretty sure I sat down....(When the motorcade approached) I think I got up and started fiddling with that umbrella trying to get it open, and at the same time I was walking forward, walking toward the street....Whereas other people I understand saw the President shot and his movements; I did not see this because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open."
HSCA Vol. IV, p. 432f
That description doesn't tie in with the photograph here. The umbrella is clearly above his head, he is standing still. Whoever is holding that umbrella had a perfect view.
Hey,
I don't think it has to be a signal to the shooters that the target was hit or missed, the very idea that there really was a political, historic and coded meaning behind the umbrella man's moves, is pretty astonishing to me.
It wasn't just raining, or a coincidence, it did take place for a meaning, and has a message behind it.
Get it?
BK
I don't think it has to be a signal to the shooters that the target was hit or missed, the very idea that there really was a political, historic and coded meaning behind the umbrella man's moves, is pretty astonishing to me.
It wasn't just raining, or a coincidence, it did take place for a meaning, and has a message behind it.
Get it?
BK
Sorry using this thread to expound my theory, but this is my first post and I have to start somewhere!
For me, the Umbrella man is / might be signalling to someone inside the limo; either Kellermann or Greer, both of whom have the President fixed in their rear view mirrors and either of whom may be waiting for the signal to fire a weapon concealed within the car itself. (see photos of limo parked at Parkland and reflection from Greer’s rear view mirror showing Presidents seating position. Also, Kellerman`s fixation throughout the shooting with his side door, rear view mirror)
The depth of the throat wound (no exit wound), the discovery of a missile (not a bullet) during the autopsy described by the two FBI witnesses O`Neill and Siebert, lead me to the conclusion that a low velocity missile, low powered weapon was used to incapacitiate or freeze the President from close range, (maybe a device similar to that described by Douglas Bazata, which he says he used in a failed assassination attempt on Patton in `45)
I can’t believe that the UM could possibly fire a dart or anything else with any accuracy, considering his stance and posture and his distance from the limo. And, from the available photos of the shooting, taken from various perspectives, there appears to be no other person within range poised to shoot a weapon, at the time the first wounding occurs.
Looking at photos of the car taken in the Whitehouse garage later that night, there is a picture showing the side panelling drape or covering embossed with the Presidential creast ***, hanging open on the Presidents side door. This is where I believe the weapon could have been hidden.
From the pictures of the interior of the car and the configuration of the Connelly jump seats, it is possible to reconstruct the sequence in which the photos were taken. The sequence shows that at some stage before the car had been cleaned and evidence destroyed, the side panelling or drapes were opened, indicating to me that something was being sought and possibly removed from the interior of the door. Confirmation that someone had at least looked there is seen from the later photos in the sequence showing that the panelling/drape has been replaced in its original position.
Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I haven’t been able to find it.
*** Dark blue broadcloth lap robes with gray plush lining and hand-embroidered presidential seals in special door pockets
For me, the Umbrella man is / might be signalling to someone inside the limo; either Kellermann or Greer, both of whom have the President fixed in their rear view mirrors and either of whom may be waiting for the signal to fire a weapon concealed within the car itself. (see photos of limo parked at Parkland and reflection from Greer’s rear view mirror showing Presidents seating position. Also, Kellerman`s fixation throughout the shooting with his side door, rear view mirror)
The depth of the throat wound (no exit wound), the discovery of a missile (not a bullet) during the autopsy described by the two FBI witnesses O`Neill and Siebert, lead me to the conclusion that a low velocity missile, low powered weapon was used to incapacitiate or freeze the President from close range, (maybe a device similar to that described by Douglas Bazata, which he says he used in a failed assassination attempt on Patton in `45)
I can’t believe that the UM could possibly fire a dart or anything else with any accuracy, considering his stance and posture and his distance from the limo. And, from the available photos of the shooting, taken from various perspectives, there appears to be no other person within range poised to shoot a weapon, at the time the first wounding occurs.
Looking at photos of the car taken in the Whitehouse garage later that night, there is a picture showing the side panelling drape or covering embossed with the Presidential creast ***, hanging open on the Presidents side door. This is where I believe the weapon could have been hidden.
From the pictures of the interior of the car and the configuration of the Connelly jump seats, it is possible to reconstruct the sequence in which the photos were taken. The sequence shows that at some stage before the car had been cleaned and evidence destroyed, the side panelling or drapes were opened, indicating to me that something was being sought and possibly removed from the interior of the door. Confirmation that someone had at least looked there is seen from the later photos in the sequence showing that the panelling/drape has been replaced in its original position.
Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I haven’t been able to find it.
*** Dark blue broadcloth lap robes with gray plush lining and hand-embroidered presidential seals in special door pockets
QUOTE (Brian O Connor @ Oct 10 2009, 03:16 PM)
Sorry using this thread to expound my theory, but this is my first post and I have to start somewhere!
For me, the Umbrella man is / might be signalling to someone inside the limo; either Kellermann or Greer, both of whom have the President fixed in their rear view mirrors and either of whom may be waiting for the signal to fire a weapon concealed within the car itself. (see photos of limo parked at Parkland and reflection from Greer’s rear view mirror showing Presidents seating position. Also, Kellerman`s fixation throughout the shooting with his side door, rear view mirror)
The depth of the throat wound (no exit wound), the discovery of a missile (not a bullet) during the autopsy described by the two FBI witnesses O`Neill and Siebert, lead me to the conclusion that a low velocity missile, low powered weapon was used to incapacitiate or freeze the President from close range, (maybe a device similar to that described by Douglas Bazata, which he says he used in a failed assassination attempt on Patton in `46)
I can’t believe that the UM could possibly fire a dart or anything else with any accuracy, considering his stance and posture and his distance from the limo. And, from the available photos of the shooting, taken from various perspectives, there appears to be no other person within range poised to shoot a weapon, at the time the first wounding occurs.
Looking at photos of the car taken in the Whitehouse garage later that night, there is a picture showing the side panelling drape or covering embossed with the Presidential crest, hanging open on the Presidents side door. This is where I believe the weapon could have been hidden.
From the pictures of the interior of the car and the configuration of the Connelly jump seats, it is possible to reconstruct the sequence in which the photos were taken. The sequence shows that at some stage before the car had been cleaned and evidence destroyed, the side panelling or drapes where opened, indicating to me that something was being sought and possibly removed from the interior of the door. Confirmation that someone had at least looked there is seen from the later photos in the sequence showing that the panelling/drape has been replaced in its original position.
Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I haven’t been able to find it.
For me, the Umbrella man is / might be signalling to someone inside the limo; either Kellermann or Greer, both of whom have the President fixed in their rear view mirrors and either of whom may be waiting for the signal to fire a weapon concealed within the car itself. (see photos of limo parked at Parkland and reflection from Greer’s rear view mirror showing Presidents seating position. Also, Kellerman`s fixation throughout the shooting with his side door, rear view mirror)
The depth of the throat wound (no exit wound), the discovery of a missile (not a bullet) during the autopsy described by the two FBI witnesses O`Neill and Siebert, lead me to the conclusion that a low velocity missile, low powered weapon was used to incapacitiate or freeze the President from close range, (maybe a device similar to that described by Douglas Bazata, which he says he used in a failed assassination attempt on Patton in `46)
I can’t believe that the UM could possibly fire a dart or anything else with any accuracy, considering his stance and posture and his distance from the limo. And, from the available photos of the shooting, taken from various perspectives, there appears to be no other person within range poised to shoot a weapon, at the time the first wounding occurs.
Looking at photos of the car taken in the Whitehouse garage later that night, there is a picture showing the side panelling drape or covering embossed with the Presidential crest, hanging open on the Presidents side door. This is where I believe the weapon could have been hidden.
From the pictures of the interior of the car and the configuration of the Connelly jump seats, it is possible to reconstruct the sequence in which the photos were taken. The sequence shows that at some stage before the car had been cleaned and evidence destroyed, the side panelling or drapes where opened, indicating to me that something was being sought and possibly removed from the interior of the door. Confirmation that someone had at least looked there is seen from the later photos in the sequence showing that the panelling/drape has been replaced in its original position.
Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I haven’t been able to find it.
Welcome to the forum Brian, can I just get this straight, or you seriously suggesting Kellermann or Greer shot the President? If you are then may I remind you they were being filmed or photographed by several people and were within a couple of feet of Mrs Kennedy and the Connolly's. I'm kinda thinking someone may have noticed. Apologises if I misunderstood your post. Denis.
QUOTE (Brian O Connor @ Oct 10 2009, 02:16 PM)
Looking at photos of the car taken in the Whitehouse garage later that night, there is a picture showing the side panelling drape or covering embossed with the Presidential crest, hanging open on the Presidents side door. This is where I believe the weapon could have been hidden.
Brian,
Can you post this photo, or provide a link to it?
Amazing how the researchers make little progress...and I begin to think there are those on these forums who's job it is to make sure this is so. The Umbrella Man was part of the assassination and was definitely not Witt. He was a patsy post facto for the real Umbrella Man. Yes, watch the actions of the UM and DCM after the shooting...it they weren't part and parcel, neither was anyone.
Hi Denis and and yes, I am suggesting that one or other of Greer or Kellerman might have secretly activated a weapon concealed in the side door to the Presidents right hand side. I believe that its possible to have done this using the mirrors as an aiming device.
Hi Ron,
The photos from the Whitehouse garage I took off the net and hope that I am allowed to post them here. But, if one examines these, one can see that before the jump seats have been moved, the door paneling is intact and tucked in correctly, with the chrome bordering at the bottom of the door visible. The disc shape of the presidential creast is fully visible.
Later in the sequence is a picture of the Presidents door opened (jump seats still in place) and with the drape unrapped, and hanging down to cover the chrome border. Later again, comes a photo of the drape replaced, however here, part of the presidential creast is hidden from view behind the horizontal band.
It is possible to order the sequence in which the photos were taken by following the jump seat positions and the position of white cloth or possibly remnants of Jackies bouquet, which begins in the left hand corner of the presidents seating and moves in later photos to the middle.
Here too, is a photo of the limousine from Parkland and another blown up shot of Greer`s rear view mirror, which I believe shows the Presidents seating position to the rear right hand side.
I am not sure why the Kellerman mirror shows the odd trapezoid shape in the reflection rather than a fully circular mirrored reflection.
Sorry, but I havent ordered the photos below and according to the correct sequence.
Hi Ron,
The photos from the Whitehouse garage I took off the net and hope that I am allowed to post them here. But, if one examines these, one can see that before the jump seats have been moved, the door paneling is intact and tucked in correctly, with the chrome bordering at the bottom of the door visible. The disc shape of the presidential creast is fully visible.
Later in the sequence is a picture of the Presidents door opened (jump seats still in place) and with the drape unrapped, and hanging down to cover the chrome border. Later again, comes a photo of the drape replaced, however here, part of the presidential creast is hidden from view behind the horizontal band.
It is possible to order the sequence in which the photos were taken by following the jump seat positions and the position of white cloth or possibly remnants of Jackies bouquet, which begins in the left hand corner of the presidents seating and moves in later photos to the middle.
Here too, is a photo of the limousine from Parkland and another blown up shot of Greer`s rear view mirror, which I believe shows the Presidents seating position to the rear right hand side.
I am not sure why the Kellerman mirror shows the odd trapezoid shape in the reflection rather than a fully circular mirrored reflection.
Sorry, but I havent ordered the photos below and according to the correct sequence.
QUOTE (Peter Lemkin @ Oct 10 2009, 04:40 PM)
Amazing how the researchers make little progress...and I begin to think there are those on these forums who's job it is to make sure this is so. The Umbrella Man was part of the assassination and was definitely not Witt. He was a patsy post facto for the real Umbrella Man. Yes, watch the actions of the UM and DCM after the shooting...it they weren't part and parcel, neither was anyone.
"and I begin to think there are those on these forums who's job it is to make sure this is so."
Yet more thinly veiled accusations Peter? Whose the dis-info agent meant to be this time, me? LOL I would have hoped you might of stopped all that nonsense by now, what with you being a highly respected moderator and all.
[quote name='Brian O Connor' date='Oct 10 2009, 05:00 PM' post='173107']
Hi Denis and and yes, I am suggesting that one or other of Greer or Kellerman might have secretly activated a weapon concealed in the side door to the Presidents right hand side. I believe that its possible to have done this using the mirrors as an aiming device.(quote)
Interesting hypothesis Brian, Ian Fleming would have been proud of that one. Good luck. Denis.
Hi Denis and and yes, I am suggesting that one or other of Greer or Kellerman might have secretly activated a weapon concealed in the side door to the Presidents right hand side. I believe that its possible to have done this using the mirrors as an aiming device.(quote)
Interesting hypothesis Brian, Ian Fleming would have been proud of that one. Good luck. Denis.
Interesting hypothesis Brian, Ian Fleming would have been proud of that one. Good luck. Denis.
[/quote]
I agree, but maybe not so far fetched considering Flemings previous employment.
But, to clarify the mirrors idea; all that would be required here is a marker point on the mirror to show that the President was sitting in the correct line of trajectory from a fixed firing device concealed in the door.
[/quote]
I agree, but maybe not so far fetched considering Flemings previous employment.
But, to clarify the mirrors idea; all that would be required here is a marker point on the mirror to show that the President was sitting in the correct line of trajectory from a fixed firing device concealed in the door.
Hard to believe, but have just come accross these two items on Ebay. Two blankets from the side door pockets of the Dallas assassinantion car.
Per a December 18, 1963 memo (stored at the National Archives) the lap robes were in the rear seat area of JFK's limousine when it was returned from Dallas to the White House garage on November 22, 1963.
TWO (2) AUTHENTIC DARK BLUE JFK LIMOUSINE (X-100) BROADCLOTH LAP ROBES/BLANKETS
Here is a unique opportunity to obtain a set of ultra-rare historical collectibles from John F. Kennedy's presidential limousine (code named X-100). We have in our possession both of the dark blue broadcloth lap blankets / robes that were made especially for the limousine and used by the President during chilly open-air rides.
These lap robes are the only two that are known to exist for that presidential limo. When not being used, the blankets were each stored snuggly in the inside pocket of each rear door (see photo for depiction).
The heavy blankets are dark blue on one side with the presidential seal hand sewn into them. The back side of each blanket features a soft gray plush lining. The blankets were each made with 10 button/snaps, used to attach it to the inside paneling of the car or to each other. Two of the snaps are missing in one of the blankets per photographs. The other blanket has all snaps in tact.
*
Each blanket measures 51" long by 41.5" wide
* Hand embroidered Presidential Seal on the front of each blanket measures 6.75" in diameter, reads - "Seal of the President of the United States", and features the traditional American Eagle in the center (with arrows and olive branch)
*
Button snaps marked RAU-Fastener Co.
Per a December 18, 1963 memo (stored at the National Archives) the lap robes were in the rear seat area of JFK's limousine when it was returned from Dallas to the White House garage on November 22, 1963.
The auction includes a letter of authenticity from the current owner that describes how he obtained the blankets.
Per a December 18, 1963 memo (stored at the National Archives) the lap robes were in the rear seat area of JFK's limousine when it was returned from Dallas to the White House garage on November 22, 1963.
TWO (2) AUTHENTIC DARK BLUE JFK LIMOUSINE (X-100) BROADCLOTH LAP ROBES/BLANKETS
Here is a unique opportunity to obtain a set of ultra-rare historical collectibles from John F. Kennedy's presidential limousine (code named X-100). We have in our possession both of the dark blue broadcloth lap blankets / robes that were made especially for the limousine and used by the President during chilly open-air rides.
These lap robes are the only two that are known to exist for that presidential limo. When not being used, the blankets were each stored snuggly in the inside pocket of each rear door (see photo for depiction).
The heavy blankets are dark blue on one side with the presidential seal hand sewn into them. The back side of each blanket features a soft gray plush lining. The blankets were each made with 10 button/snaps, used to attach it to the inside paneling of the car or to each other. Two of the snaps are missing in one of the blankets per photographs. The other blanket has all snaps in tact.
*
Each blanket measures 51" long by 41.5" wide
* Hand embroidered Presidential Seal on the front of each blanket measures 6.75" in diameter, reads - "Seal of the President of the United States", and features the traditional American Eagle in the center (with arrows and olive branch)
*
Button snaps marked RAU-Fastener Co.
Per a December 18, 1963 memo (stored at the National Archives) the lap robes were in the rear seat area of JFK's limousine when it was returned from Dallas to the White House garage on November 22, 1963.
The auction includes a letter of authenticity from the current owner that describes how he obtained the blankets.
I'd rather have the model limo. Maybe it shoots projectiles like Corgi's old 007 Aston Martin (with ejector seat!)
Hi David, I suppose that having proposed a particular theory I should defend it, but my purpose here is to offer a plausible explanation of a conundrum which doesn’t seem to have been resolved satisfactorily up to now.
I don’t agree with the idea that the umbrella man could have fired the shot which caused the throat wound, but I am grateful to the people who have explored the possibility and laid out their evidence supporting the proposition. Otherwise, I would have had to do the work myself.
Maybe my idea is a bit “elastic bands and lollypop sticks,” but I think one has to explore every avenue, even if it leads to a dead end. Eventually we will discover the solution; waiting for the assassins to explain how they did it, doesn’t seem to me to be a viable alternative. (I am not inferring that your criticism suggests this either)
On the other hand maybe my scheme is not so outlandish considering toxic cigars, expoding molluscs, contaminated diving suits etc etc and other fiendishly cunning plans proposed by the CIA`s finest.
See Channel 4 documentary 638 Ways to Kill Castro.
All the same, I think that its pretty extraordinary that evidential material which belongs in a forensic lab (or maybe not considering how other evidence has been destroyed) can be offered for sale on the internet. Isn’t this the property of the state? Assuming that it got out during the refurbishment of the car, isn’t there a case to have it impounded or if it was sold to find out who received the proceeds?
It may well be that the rugs were removed that night from the garage, in which case, I would be interested knowing why.
I don’t agree with the idea that the umbrella man could have fired the shot which caused the throat wound, but I am grateful to the people who have explored the possibility and laid out their evidence supporting the proposition. Otherwise, I would have had to do the work myself.
Maybe my idea is a bit “elastic bands and lollypop sticks,” but I think one has to explore every avenue, even if it leads to a dead end. Eventually we will discover the solution; waiting for the assassins to explain how they did it, doesn’t seem to me to be a viable alternative. (I am not inferring that your criticism suggests this either)
On the other hand maybe my scheme is not so outlandish considering toxic cigars, expoding molluscs, contaminated diving suits etc etc and other fiendishly cunning plans proposed by the CIA`s finest.
See Channel 4 documentary 638 Ways to Kill Castro.
All the same, I think that its pretty extraordinary that evidential material which belongs in a forensic lab (or maybe not considering how other evidence has been destroyed) can be offered for sale on the internet. Isn’t this the property of the state? Assuming that it got out during the refurbishment of the car, isn’t there a case to have it impounded or if it was sold to find out who received the proceeds?
It may well be that the rugs were removed that night from the garage, in which case, I would be interested knowing why.
Hi Dennis,
I don't know but its awful funny that two fellows are standing very close together while one raises his umbrella and one raises his hand in the air at a certain point { read Hash Mark } at the same time.
DAL TEX SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
RECORD BUILDING SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
WEST CORNER TSBD SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
I don't know the shot sequences when our fellows are signaling [ does anyone on this forum know ? ]
of course these thoughts are just my opinion and not facts but i strongly feel both these guys are dirty.
JIM
I don't know but its awful funny that two fellows are standing very close together while one raises his umbrella and one raises his hand in the air at a certain point { read Hash Mark } at the same time.
DAL TEX SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
RECORD BUILDING SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
WEST CORNER TSBD SHOOTER FIRE AGAIN!
I don't know the shot sequences when our fellows are signaling [ does anyone on this forum know ? ]
of course these thoughts are just my opinion and not facts but i strongly feel both these guys are dirty.
JIM
I submit the function of the man and the umbrella was simply to serve as a distraction. The incongruous site of a man holding an open umbrella on a fine day would have had the SS looking at him and not at the man a short distance away with his hand in the air.
Subtle slight of hand, nothing more.
FWIW.
James
Subtle slight of hand, nothing more.
FWIW.
James
One thing is certain. Witt was not the man with the umbrella.
Jack
Jack
hobrad.angelfire.com/umbrella.html
But there is a problem with Witt's HSCA testimony. The photographic evidence plainly contradicts Witt's description of his actions during the moments ...
CHRIS DAVISON'S GIF...SORRY CHRIS YOURS DID NOT WORK..PERHAPS YOU HAVE IT HANDY...
Umbrella Man & Dark-Complected Man .......AND JACK'S INFORMATIVE COMP..THANKS..IN BRONSON DCMAN IS OFF THE CURB..
Plus Jim Hicks....
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=NB-TLTWAh6s&...feature=related
B..
But there is a problem with Witt's HSCA testimony. The photographic evidence plainly contradicts Witt's description of his actions during the moments ...
CHRIS DAVISON'S GIF...SORRY CHRIS YOURS DID NOT WORK..PERHAPS YOU HAVE IT HANDY...
Umbrella Man & Dark-Complected Man .......AND JACK'S INFORMATIVE COMP..THANKS..IN BRONSON DCMAN IS OFF THE CURB..
Plus Jim Hicks....
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=NB-TLTWAh6s&...feature=related
B..
QUOTE (Jack White @ Oct 13 2009, 02:54 AM)
One thing is certain. Witt was not the man with the umbrella.
Jack
Jack
I agree. He had over a decade to get his story straight and got it completely wrong. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Witt testified to the HSCA that he was walking toward the motorcade trying to get his umbrella open and didn't see the shooting.
Well, the photographic evidence available doesn't back up his story. Precisely the opposite. It reveals a man standing still with an umbrella open, well above his eyeline, an un-obstructed view just before the President was shot.
Umbrella Man had a perfect view.
I don't know what the man was doing with an umbrella but there's every reason to believe it isn't Witt. Which begs the question. Why did he come forward ?
If he was part of a conspiracy surely he would have been given a cover story that matched up with photos seen here in this thread ? Perhaps he was just seeking publicity. It's plausible that the 'anonymous phone caller' who named Witt as Umbrella Man was none other than Witt himself.
QUOTE (Mark Haley @ Oct 12 2009, 11:56 PM)
QUOTE (Jack White @ Oct 13 2009, 02:54 AM)
One thing is certain. Witt was not the man with the umbrella.
Jack
Jack
I agree. He had over a decade to get his story straight and got it completely wrong. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Witt testified to the HSCA that he was walking toward the motorcade trying to get his umbrella open and didn't see the shooting.
Well, the photographic evidence available doesn't back up his story. Precisely the opposite. It reveals a man standing still with an umbrella open, well above his eyeline, an un-obstructed view just before the President was shot.
Umbrella Man had a perfect view.
I don't know what the man was doing with an umbrella but there's every reason to believe it isn't Witt. Which begs the question. Why did he come forward ?
If he was part of a conspiracy surely he would have been given a cover story that matched up with photos seen here in this thread ? Perhaps he was just seeking publicity. It's plausible that the 'anonymous phone caller' who named Witt as Umbrella Man was none other than Witt himself.
SOME FROM THE HSCA AND A COUPLE FURTHER OF JACK'S STUDIES.... B
I see that the discussion has moved on and maybe my original post would have been better placed elsewhere, but here is a little more info on Mr Douglas Bazata who claimed to have made a failed assassination attempt on Gen Patton.
His description of the device that he maintains to have used in the attempt was that it worked on a spring and compressed air mechanism and could fire almost anything, even a tea cup. They found that the best projectile was a small cube shaped missile. I mention it to show that 18 years before Dallas a weapon of this type may have been available.
"Bazata's confident claims that a special weapon made in Czechoslovakia was used to strike Patton in the head. The weapon was designed to propel seemingly innocuous objects like metal or rocks at terrific force. This weapon, fired at about 10 yards away, allegedly caused the severe head wound and broke Patton's neck."
Douglas Bazata from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6...g4.html?cat=37:
One of the most intriguing theories that Patton was the target of a plot comes from an ex-U.S. intelligence agent who claimed he was paid to kill Patton. Douglas Bazata started his espionage career in 1926 and continued it for over 50 years in the Marine Corps and OSS. Bazata told 450 guests at the Hilton Hotel in Washington D.C. on September 25, 1979, that he was solicited by OSS head Bill Donovan to kill Patton for money.[i]
Bazata told the Hilton Hotel audience, "For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."[ii]
The story was reported in the Washington Star and The Spotlight magazine.[iii] Bazata claimed he was commissioned to kill Patton in a series of eight meetings with Donovan. The Washington Star reported that Bazata's interview was analyzed by a Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE), a polygraph machine that measures stress in the voice, and reported that Bazata is telling the truth. Bazata said he was paid a total of $10,800 on two occasions by Donovan. He accepted the money and told Donovan that he would kill Patton, but in reality had no intention of trying. He said he worked with Donovan on the surface only because he feared for his life if he didn't. Soon after he was paid, Bazata was confronted by a confident and told that he too had been contracted to kill Patton. Who had hired the other man, Bazata never knew. Why Donovan wanted Patton dead was unclear to Bazata. Donovan could have been the only instigator, or been the mouthpiece for another individual or group"
His description of the device that he maintains to have used in the attempt was that it worked on a spring and compressed air mechanism and could fire almost anything, even a tea cup. They found that the best projectile was a small cube shaped missile. I mention it to show that 18 years before Dallas a weapon of this type may have been available.
"Bazata's confident claims that a special weapon made in Czechoslovakia was used to strike Patton in the head. The weapon was designed to propel seemingly innocuous objects like metal or rocks at terrific force. This weapon, fired at about 10 yards away, allegedly caused the severe head wound and broke Patton's neck."
Douglas Bazata from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6...g4.html?cat=37:
One of the most intriguing theories that Patton was the target of a plot comes from an ex-U.S. intelligence agent who claimed he was paid to kill Patton. Douglas Bazata started his espionage career in 1926 and continued it for over 50 years in the Marine Corps and OSS. Bazata told 450 guests at the Hilton Hotel in Washington D.C. on September 25, 1979, that he was solicited by OSS head Bill Donovan to kill Patton for money.[i]
Bazata told the Hilton Hotel audience, "For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."[ii]
The story was reported in the Washington Star and The Spotlight magazine.[iii] Bazata claimed he was commissioned to kill Patton in a series of eight meetings with Donovan. The Washington Star reported that Bazata's interview was analyzed by a Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE), a polygraph machine that measures stress in the voice, and reported that Bazata is telling the truth. Bazata said he was paid a total of $10,800 on two occasions by Donovan. He accepted the money and told Donovan that he would kill Patton, but in reality had no intention of trying. He said he worked with Donovan on the surface only because he feared for his life if he didn't. Soon after he was paid, Bazata was confronted by a confident and told that he too had been contracted to kill Patton. Who had hired the other man, Bazata never knew. Why Donovan wanted Patton dead was unclear to Bazata. Donovan could have been the only instigator, or been the mouthpiece for another individual or group"
QUOTE (Brian O Connor @ Oct 13 2009, 10:45 AM)
I see that the discussion has moved on and maybe my original post would have been better placed elsewhere, but here is a little more info on Mr Douglas Bazata who claimed to have made a failed assassination attempt on Gen Patton.
His description of the device that he maintains to have used in the attempt was that it worked on a spring and compressed air mechanism and could fire almost anything, even a tea cup. They found that the best projectile was a small cube shaped missile. I mention it to show that 18 years before Dallas a weapon of this type may have been available.
"Bazata's confident claims that a special weapon made in Czechoslovakia was used to strike Patton in the head. The weapon was designed to propel seemingly innocuous objects like metal or rocks at terrific force. This weapon, fired at about 10 yards away, allegedly caused the severe head wound and broke Patton's neck."
Douglas Bazata from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6...g4.html?cat=37:
One of the most intriguing theories that Patton was the target of a plot comes from an ex-U.S. intelligence agent who claimed he was paid to kill Patton. Douglas Bazata started his espionage career in 1926 and continued it for over 50 years in the Marine Corps and OSS. Bazata told 450 guests at the Hilton Hotel in Washington D.C. on September 25, 1979, that he was solicited by OSS head Bill Donovan to kill Patton for money.[i]
Bazata told the Hilton Hotel audience, "For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."[ii]
The story was reported in the Washington Star and The Spotlight magazine.[iii] Bazata claimed he was commissioned to kill Patton in a series of eight meetings with Donovan. The Washington Star reported that Bazata's interview was analyzed by a Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE), a polygraph machine that measures stress in the voice, and reported that Bazata is telling the truth. Bazata said he was paid a total of $10,800 on two occasions by Donovan. He accepted the money and told Donovan that he would kill Patton, but in reality had no intention of trying. He said he worked with Donovan on the surface only because he feared for his life if he didn't. Soon after he was paid, Bazata was confronted by a confident and told that he too had been contracted to kill Patton. Who had hired the other man, Bazata never knew. Why Donovan wanted Patton dead was unclear to Bazata. Donovan could have been the only instigator, or been the mouthpiece for another individual or group"
His description of the device that he maintains to have used in the attempt was that it worked on a spring and compressed air mechanism and could fire almost anything, even a tea cup. They found that the best projectile was a small cube shaped missile. I mention it to show that 18 years before Dallas a weapon of this type may have been available.
"Bazata's confident claims that a special weapon made in Czechoslovakia was used to strike Patton in the head. The weapon was designed to propel seemingly innocuous objects like metal or rocks at terrific force. This weapon, fired at about 10 yards away, allegedly caused the severe head wound and broke Patton's neck."
Douglas Bazata from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6...g4.html?cat=37:
One of the most intriguing theories that Patton was the target of a plot comes from an ex-U.S. intelligence agent who claimed he was paid to kill Patton. Douglas Bazata started his espionage career in 1926 and continued it for over 50 years in the Marine Corps and OSS. Bazata told 450 guests at the Hilton Hotel in Washington D.C. on September 25, 1979, that he was solicited by OSS head Bill Donovan to kill Patton for money.[i]
Bazata told the Hilton Hotel audience, "For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."[ii]
The story was reported in the Washington Star and The Spotlight magazine.[iii] Bazata claimed he was commissioned to kill Patton in a series of eight meetings with Donovan. The Washington Star reported that Bazata's interview was analyzed by a Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE), a polygraph machine that measures stress in the voice, and reported that Bazata is telling the truth. Bazata said he was paid a total of $10,800 on two occasions by Donovan. He accepted the money and told Donovan that he would kill Patton, but in reality had no intention of trying. He said he worked with Donovan on the surface only because he feared for his life if he didn't. Soon after he was paid, Bazata was confronted by a confident and told that he too had been contracted to kill Patton. Who had hired the other man, Bazata never knew. Why Donovan wanted Patton dead was unclear to Bazata. Donovan could have been the only instigator, or been the mouthpiece for another individual or group"
THANKS BRIAN FOR THE FURTHER AND VERY INTERESTING INFORMATION........SEE BELOW FROM CUTLER AND SPRAGUE ://jfkresearch.com/forum3/index.php/topic,3276.40.html
1.08 INCH PUSH ROD FLECHETTE
1.08 INCH STING RAY FLECHETTE
1.1 INCH COATED BEE HIVE FLECHETTE
1.2 INCH COATED FLEX FLECHETTE
WEAPONS LAW LINK...Bill Number: SB 578
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/...9_enrolled.html
http://www.bombsecurity.com/CABO/caboweap3.html
Brian - no offense. If you look on the internet, though, you'll find that there already has been a limo-gun theory floated, related to the two projections on the trunk of the limo, behind the death seat. (Forgive me, but I've forgotten what the function of those two projections was.)
I, myself, have had a hard time tracing the head shot path back to a forward location, and once stayed up until 3 a.m. trying to rationalize it in these pages, a fool's errand.
+++
Umbrella Man - he'd make a great Novel, though...
Click to view attachment
I, myself, have had a hard time tracing the head shot path back to a forward location, and once stayed up until 3 a.m. trying to rationalize it in these pages, a fool's errand.
+++
Umbrella Man - he'd make a great Novel, though...
Click to view attachment
Dealy Plaza is such a big place, and all things considered, I wonder why the UM would choose that particlar place to stand rather than say, accross the road , well out of harms way, and in clear view of the Book depository, the grassy knoll, the Daltex building, somone down in the drains, the Stemmons freeway bridge etc.
Cause` the place he choose looks to me to be a pretty awful choice, if he were trying to signal someone say on on the knoll, or someone hunkered in the drains for example, obscured as he was, by a great big TRAFFIC SIGN! And, why do they erect traffic signs and where do they get placed? They give directions, and they are set up where they in clear view of the road and easily seen by the drivers passing by. So, pumping his umbrella in the air in front of a great big road sign, who would be most likely to see it first?
Cause` the place he choose looks to me to be a pretty awful choice, if he were trying to signal someone say on on the knoll, or someone hunkered in the drains for example, obscured as he was, by a great big TRAFFIC SIGN! And, why do they erect traffic signs and where do they get placed? They give directions, and they are set up where they in clear view of the road and easily seen by the drivers passing by. So, pumping his umbrella in the air in front of a great big road sign, who would be most likely to see it first?
QUOTE (David Andrews @ Oct 13 2009, 11:22 PM)
Brian - no offense. If you look on the internet, though, you'll find that there already has been a limo-gun theory floated, related to the two projections on the trunk of the limo, behind the death seat. (Forgive me, but I've forgotten what the function of those two projections was.)
I, myself, have had a hard time tracing the head shot path back to a forward location, and once stayed up until 3 a.m. trying to rationalize it in these pages, a fool's errand.
+++
Umbrella Man - he'd make a great Novel, though...
Click to view attachment
I, myself, have had a hard time tracing the head shot path back to a forward location, and once stayed up until 3 a.m. trying to rationalize it in these pages, a fool's errand.
+++
Umbrella Man - he'd make a great Novel, though...
Click to view attachment
Hi David, absolutely none taken, and thanks. I have a theory about the back or shoulder wound but I will leave it till another day!
See you
Brian
The UM and the DCM gave the "fire away" signal - nothing more, nothing less.
How many other umbrellas are observable in Dallas from earlier parts of the parade route?
Was waving an umbrella a popular form of deriding JFK?
To shoot a poison dart at JFK, one would have to aim it and pull off a great shot to hit him in the throat area.
The UM doesn't look like he's aiming the umbrella - he is just pumping it.
I agree that Witt isn't the UM, but instead someone the CIA coached into perjuring himself for the benefit of the HSCA.
How many other umbrellas are observable in Dallas from earlier parts of the parade route?
Was waving an umbrella a popular form of deriding JFK?
To shoot a poison dart at JFK, one would have to aim it and pull off a great shot to hit him in the throat area.
The UM doesn't look like he's aiming the umbrella - he is just pumping it.
I agree that Witt isn't the UM, but instead someone the CIA coached into perjuring himself for the benefit of the HSCA.
[quote name='Brian O Connor' date='Oct 13 2009, 05:30 PM' post='173202'
Dealy Plaza is such a big place, and all things considered, I wonder why the UM would choose that particlar place to stand rather than say, accross the road , well out of harms way, and in clear view of the Book depository, the grassy knoll, the Daltex building, somone down in the drains, the Stemmons freeway bridge etc.
Cause` the place he choose looks to me to be a pretty awful choice, if he were trying to signal someone say on on the knoll, or someone hunkered in the drains for example, obscured as he was, by a great big TRAFFIC SIGN! And, why do they erect traffic signs and where do they get placed? They give directions, and they are set up where they in clear view of the road and easily seen by the drivers passing by. So, pumping his umbrella in the air in front of a great big road sign,[b] who would be most likely to see it first?
[/quote/b]
hi brian ...''who would be most likely to see it first?'' I imagine only those perhaps who were watching for the signal.if as some say lho could see from the tsbd 6th floor window past signs people and all i imagine those who were ready and waiting could also...you bring up another thought why was the sign taken down after, some did say a shot hit it..and it showed a bullet hole...B
[/quote/b]
Dealy Plaza is such a big place, and all things considered, I wonder why the UM would choose that particlar place to stand rather than say, accross the road , well out of harms way, and in clear view of the Book depository, the grassy knoll, the Daltex building, somone down in the drains, the Stemmons freeway bridge etc.
Cause` the place he choose looks to me to be a pretty awful choice, if he were trying to signal someone say on on the knoll, or someone hunkered in the drains for example, obscured as he was, by a great big TRAFFIC SIGN! And, why do they erect traffic signs and where do they get placed? They give directions, and they are set up where they in clear view of the road and easily seen by the drivers passing by. So, pumping his umbrella in the air in front of a great big road sign,[b] who would be most likely to see it first?
[/quote/b]
hi brian ...''who would be most likely to see it first?'' I imagine only those perhaps who were watching for the signal.if as some say lho could see from the tsbd 6th floor window past signs people and all i imagine those who were ready and waiting could also...you bring up another thought why was the sign taken down after, some did say a shot hit it..and it showed a bullet hole...B
[/quote/b]
QUOTE (Christopher Hall @ Oct 13 2009, 10:51 PM)
I agree that Witt isn't the UM, but instead someone the CIA coached into perjuring himself for the benefit of the HSCA.
I half agree with you Christopher... I don't believe Witt was the Umbrella man. I'll fully agree with you if you can explain why the CIA coached him into saying completely the wrong story.
Umbrella man is clearly standing still with the Umbrella open Yet he told the HSCA "I think I got up and started fiddling with that umbrella trying to get it open, and at the same time I was walking forward, walking toward the street".
He has a clear view of the President. yet he told the HSCA he didn't see "because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open".
Why would the CIA coach someone to tell completely the wrong story ?
'He has a clear view of the President. yet he told the HSCA he didn't see "because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open".'
Contempt of Congress?
Contempt of Congress?
I have no real problem with accepting Witt may not be the original UM. I just see no reason to believe there was anything sinister in that. Some people will confess to anything...even murder, to get publicity. I also dont accept there was anything sinister in the original UM actions on the day of the assassination for the same reasons I posted earlier i.e. A member of an assassins team would never act so conspicuously, why would he have to? A simple raising of the arm, waving a hat or lifting a placard welcoming the president would have done the job just as well and gone completely unnoticed. Can anyone explain that away? Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.
I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.
QUOTE (Ron Ecker @ Oct 13 2009, 08:37 PM)
I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.
thanks ron.......IF UM WAS NOT A PART OF SOMETHING THAT DAY..THOUGH I BELIEVE WITT STATED DCM WAS A STRANGER..WHOMEVER ......HE SITS BESIDE SOMEONE WHO HAD A RADIO ON HIM, WALKIE OR WHATEVER TYPE, AND DID SPEAK INTO SUCH SHOWN IN A PHOTO AFTER..THE ASSASSINATION AND THEN DCM WALKS AWAY WITH THE AERIAL SHOWING STICKING UP ON THE BACK OF HIS JACKET...SO I AM THINKING HE IN SOME WAY MUST HAVE KNOWN DCM OR OF HIM..AS A CONTACTAND WAS THERE AS A PART......B...
QUOTE (Ron Ecker @ Oct 13 2009, 08:37 PM)
I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.
thanks ron.......IF UM WAS NOT A PART OF SOMETHIMG THAT DAY..THOUGH I BELIEVE WITT STATED DCM WAS A STRANGER..WHOMEVER HE SITS BESIDE SOMEONE WHO HAD A RADIO ON HIM, WALKIE OR WHATEVER TYPE, AND DID SPEAK INTO SUCH SHOWN IN A PHOTO AFTER..THE ASSASSINATION AND THEN DCM WALKS AWAY WITH THE AERIAL IS SHOWING STICKING UP ON THE BACK OF HIS JACKET...SO I AM THINKING HE IN SOME WAY MUST HAVE KNOWN DCM OR OF HIM..AS A CONTACTAND WAS THERE AS A PART......B...
QUOTE (Denis Pointing @ Oct 14 2009, 12:20 AM)
Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.
Discussing somebody holding an umbrella above his head, standing a few feet away from the President Of The USA as he gets shot is hardly meaningless, especially when the HSCA apparently ignores obviously flawed evidence given by a man purporting to be him. Why did they disregard it?
While I personally don't believe Witt was part of a conspiracy, you're referring to Umbrella Man. In my opinion 2 entirely different men. It's hard to have any "facts or reason" when the original character was allowed to simply walk away un-challenged never to be heard of again.
With Witt's testimony easily blown out of the water, surely believing Umberella Man might have been part of a conspiracy is as valid as believing he isn't. There's no 'facts or reason' either way...just a man standing within a few feet of a doomed President jigging an umbrella about above his head.
Here you go, Bernice.
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
QUOTE (Denis Pointing @ Oct 14 2009, 12:20 AM)
I have no real problem with accepting Witt may not be the original UM. I just see no reason to believe there was anything sinister in that. Some people will confess to anything...even murder, to get publicity. I also dont accept there was anything sinister in the original UM actions on the day of the assassination for the same reasons I posted earlier i.e. A member of an assassins team would never act so conspicuously, why would he have to? A simple raising of the arm, waving a hat or lifting a placard welcoming the president would have done the job just as well and gone completely unnoticed. Can anyone explain that away? Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.
I stand by the fact stated in post #7, paragraph 2. Having grown up in the 1960s, I could elaborate - Lenny Bruce would have elaborated had he seen the tableau of these odd companions. I'm surprised that the image, if innocent, wasn't exploited in period magazines.
Unless photos were altered, and I don't believe these were, the radio and antenna on the "Latin" or "Cuban" look very compelling. Might there be facts proving this guy was a Kennedy protector, not a JFK-killer?
Scenario: The "Cuban" is there to give a "simple raising of the arm," telling Cuban hit team members or radio coordinators that a fatal wound is not delivered by that logistical point ahead of the front team. Umbrella man is there as a partner, to allow the non-Cuban hitters to discern the "Cuban" from any stray Mexican male in the Texas street - "He's the guy in white, next to the guy holding the black umbrella!"
The umbrella is a signature directed toward Kennedy and his crew, and supporters of the assassination: This coup is authored by the military and its partners in intel, who will not countenance appeasement in Cuba or SE Asia. SE Asia is especially connected to the umbrella by WW II. These guys see SE Asia as a policy hangover from the Japanese surrender and the subsequent lamented loss of China.
One fact is that we are responding to incongruities that we don't fully understand: A dark man in a light coat. A light man in a dark coat. Together.
So this is a theory of congruity based on a situational fact of xenophobia (post #7, paragraph 2) that, in its negative form, explains presence and propinquity in the curbside photos.
QUOTE (Chris Davidson @ Oct 14 2009, 12:49 PM)
Here you go, Bernice.
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
Thanks Chris.
Very nice little GIF
Numerous times i have heard different people refer to the umbrella as twirling.
To my eyes the umbrella doesn't so much twirl but appears to be tilted back up over Um's head so as to give him an unobstructed view of the Limo.
After looking at this for years i have come to the conclusion that there is nothing sinister in there actions.
Um wasn't the only one carrying an umbrella that day, in Lee Forman's Rickerby/Cancellare scan we see the black lady on the knoll steps also carrying an umbrella.
.jpg)
Also i beleive the shape in DCM'S jacket to be a folded up newspaper which he is later seen to have in his back pants pocket.
QUOTE (Chris Davidson @ Oct 13 2009, 11:19 PM)
Here you go, Bernice.
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
MANY THANKS CHRIS...I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOURS THAT I TRIED TO UPLOAD WOULD NOT BUT THEN THAT IS ABOUT ALL I CAN DO WITH THEM BUT I DO ENJOY COLLECTING SUCH....I WOULD VENTURE TO THINK IT THE UMBRELLA APPEARS TO BE ON IT'S WAY AND STRAIGHTENING BACK UP......FROM A QUICK LOOK.......THANKS AGAIN YOU DO MAKE THEM THE BEST ALWAYS...IMO...TAKE CARE B...
Bronson Crop.
QUOTE (David Andrews @ Oct 13 2009, 11:37 PM)
QUOTE (Denis Pointing @ Oct 14 2009, 12:20 AM)
I have no real problem with accepting Witt may not be the original UM. I just see no reason to believe there was anything sinister in that. Some people will confess to anything...even murder, to get publicity. I also dont accept there was anything sinister in the original UM actions on the day of the assassination for the same reasons I posted earlier i.e. A member of an assassins team would never act so conspicuously, why would he have to? A simple raising of the arm, waving a hat or lifting a placard welcoming the president would have done the job just as well and gone completely unnoticed. Can anyone explain that away? Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.
I stand by the fact stated in post #7, paragraph 2. Having grown up in the 1960s, I could elaborate - Lenny Bruce would have elaborated had he seen the tableau of these odd companions. I'm surprised that the image, if innocent, wasn't exploited in period magazines.
Unless photos were altered, and I don't believe these were, the radio and antenna on the "Latin" or "Cuban" look very compelling. Might there be facts proving this guy was a Kennedy protector, not a JFK-killer?
Scenario: The "Cuban" is there to give a "simple raising of the arm," telling Cuban hit team members or radio coordinators that a fatal wound is not delivered by that logistical point ahead of the front team. Umbrella man is there as a partner, to allow the non-Cuban hitters to discern the "Cuban" from any stray Mexican male in the Texas street - "He's the guy in white, next to the guy holding the black umbrella!"
The umbrella is a signature directed toward Kennedy and his crew, and supporters of the assassination: This coup is authored by the military and its partners in intel, who will not countenance appeasement in Cuba or SE Asia. SE Asia is especially connected to the umbrella by WW II. These guys see SE Asia as a policy hangover from the Japanese surrender and the subsequent lamented loss of China.
One fact is that we are responding to incongruities that we don't fully understand: A dark man in a light coat. A light man in a dark coat. Together.
So this is a theory of congruity based on a situational fact of xenophobia (post #7, paragraph 2) that, in its negative form, explains presence and propinquity in the curbside photos.
hi david again...... thanks for your input and opinion..it is what makes forums successful....i have been trying to present somewhat of a model simply attempting to account for the data.and research that has been done over time...I am simply trying to present what data has been processed on dcm and tum from in the past....all will make up their own minds.....to me the possibility of four men seen with radios before during and after the assassination raises questions..why at a presidential motorcade when they certainly were not fbi nor ss that day.......one of whom was with umbrella man..... see within photos that i have posted.thanks ..B ..robin...thanks for the photo..showing dcm in the street..
It is possible that James' suggestion [that TUM was a distraction] was true, but I'm more inclined in his also signaling something. His behavior during and with DCM after are more than suspicious. Both sat and cooled their heels while others [not aware of/part of the hit] ran hither and yon....they looked off in opposite directions while sitting right next to each other. Both with very suspicious objects on their person or under their clothes...then wandered off slowly into the mists of time. Witt was NOT TUM and that was a show for the public staged by those who pulled-off the hit in DP. Pointing's point that only the Government can speculate is specious. The research community has made much progress and those who believe TUM and DCM weren't evidence of a conspiracy [and complex one too!] please contact me for good price on a bridge here! Anyone who believes Witt was TUM is also playing 'Emperor's New Clothes' IMO. This endless return to the faux facts and fiction of the official version in order to stymie any advance in the research is often part of the cover-up, or newbees, or those severely uninformed - despite having looked at (selective) information. The whole scenario of the events of 11/22/63 [official version] are a big ****ing lie and that lie is still being 'sold' by those who would benefit from its perpetuation and loose their position and form of society (sic - oligarchy) should the truth of that and many subsequent and/or related events come to the fore of Public consciousness. TUM being just a bystander or just protesting on his own is in the league with the Magic Bullet; LHO as a lone-nut and left-wing Castro fan [he was none of those - quite the opposite!]; autopsy photos are OK along with the autopsies (all three of them); no one was killed to silence what they knew about Dallas etc....forget it.... Conspiracy and coup d'etat...that continues! TUM was an operative and DCM was an Anti-Castro Cuban working with those who pulled-off the hit. Perhaps they were not key to the events, but they were part of the magic show.
Hats off to Bernice for all the photos. Bernice, when is your book of photos and docs being published
?
Hats off to Bernice for all the photos. Bernice, when is your book of photos and docs being published
?
Peter,
There are no doubts that DCM and UM had a working relationship, one in fact that went back to late 1962. This involved a revolutionary group that operated under the direction of Dr. Julio Garceran who continued his anti-Castro activities well into 1963.
These two guys were seasoned warriors who had varying degrees of success in the world of hit and run into Cuba.
DCM was of course signalling. What is telling here is not that the umbrella was open when the limo passed, but that not long after the shooting, it was closed.
James
There are no doubts that DCM and UM had a working relationship, one in fact that went back to late 1962. This involved a revolutionary group that operated under the direction of Dr. Julio Garceran who continued his anti-Castro activities well into 1963.
These two guys were seasoned warriors who had varying degrees of success in the world of hit and run into Cuba.
DCM was of course signalling. What is telling here is not that the umbrella was open when the limo passed, but that not long after the shooting, it was closed.
James
QUOTE (Chris Davidson @ Oct 14 2009, 04:19 AM)
Here you go, Bernice.
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???
chris
Thanks for posting the gif Chris. Very helpful
On first viewing I thought the Umbrella was twirling but, having increased the size and taken a good long repeated look at the visible frames, it seems to go down at the very start of the clip, then up.
Focusing on one point on the rim of the Umbrella reveals it barely twirls at all.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.