Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Dallas'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome to the Education Forum
    • Forum Information, Development and Communication
    • Biographical Details
    • News, events and member notices
  • Curriculum Subjects
    • ICT
    • Music
    • Media Studies
    • Government and Politics
    • Economics and Business Studies
    • Chinese
    • EFL
    • English
    • Mathematics
    • Design and Technology
    • History
    • Geography
    • Science
    • Modern Languages
    • Social Sciences
    • Art and Design
    • Physical Education
    • Philosophy
    • Dance and Drama
    • Health and Social Care
  • Educational Issues
    • Government Initiatives
    • E-Learning
    • Debates in Education
    • Pastoral Care
    • Special Educational Needs
    • Learning Outside School
    • Cross Curricular Teaching Resources
    • International Schools
    • Non-Academic Discussions
    • Flexible Learning
  • Educational Conferences
    • Schools History Project
    • Learning Technology Conference (LT04)
  • European Virtual School
    • Information
    • Resources
    • Cross Curricular Cooperation
    • History Department
  • International Projects
    • E-Help
    • ENIS
    • Cross Curricular Cooperation
    • Student Collaboration
    • Spring Europe
    • E-HELP
    • E-HELP Seminars
    • Citizenship Project
  • Association of Teacher Websites
    • Information
    • Member Web sites
    • ATW Departments
  • Teacher Training
    • Student Teacher Support
  • European Languages Forum
    • Deutsch
    • Forum en Français
    • Svensktalande
    • Sección en español
    • Nederlands
    • Ellinikos tomeas
    • Italian Speakers
    • Ceská a Slovenská cást fóra.
    • Latin, the Language, the Inscriptions, and the Use
  • Controversial Issues in History
    • JFK Assassination Debate
    • JFK Research
    • JFK Questions
    • JFK Discussions
    • JFK Book Discussions
    • JFK Deep Politics
    • JFK Online Seminars
    • Political Conspiracies
    • 11 September 2001 attacks
    • The Apollo Moon Landings
    • History and Political Books: Debates with Authors
    • Watergate
    • Jack the Ripper
    • Robert Kennedy
    • Cold War
    • Nazi Germany
    • The Death of Marilyn Monroe
    • Martin Luther King and Civil Rights
    • Chappaquiddick
    • Political Discussions
    • TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND PRESIDENCY DISCUSSION
  • Educational Research
    • JFK Debate
    • Environmental Issues
    • Black History
    • Cold War
    • Oral History of the Olympic Games
  • Historical Association
    • News
    • Teaching History
    • Local History
  • Ask an Expert
    • History
    • ICT
  • Online Games
    • Welcome to Online Games
  • Holiday Guide
    • Holiday Recommendations
  • Women's Studies

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

Found 10 results

  1. All thru 1963 Oswald's mail was being monitored and reported upon by numerous USPS informants Dallas T-1, for example was Dorothy Xxxxxx, Info. clerk U.S. Post Office, Forth Worth, Tex. New Orleans T-1 Joseph J. Xxxxx Postal Inspector New Orleans, La. David, How is it that the FBI is not made aware of the delivery of not only a 5' carton from Klein's with a rifle in it, but a REA package from Seaport with a pistol in it? Are we saying that the Dallas Postal-related informants simply missed the largest package ever sent to the man, as well as him picking it up. Same problem with REA. Why doesn't a single report prior to 11/22 show the FBI is aware of what Oswald received in the mail?
  2. I perceive a new interest in the CT that the Radical Right in Dallas was behind the JFK assassination. This would include such WC witnesses as General Walker, Robert Alan Surrey, Revilo P. Oliver, Bernard Weisman, and possibly included Dallas officials, Will Fritz, BIll Decker, Jesse Curry, Buddy Walthers, Harry Holmes, James Hosty, Forrest Sorrels, Earle Cabell and others in their company. Such a theory would attempt to harmonize with Jim Garrison and Joan Mellen's identification of a dozen people in New Orleans, including Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman and Tommy Beckham. Also implied are Rightist elements in the South including Joseph Milteer, Billy James Hargis, Ed Butler, Carlos Bringuier and Kent Courtney. It would also include people who have already confessed, such as Frank Sturgis, Howard Hunt, David Morales, Roscoe White, Loran Hall, Gerry Patrick Hemming and Lee Harvey Oswald. As a starting point, the recent book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015) is presented. Regards, --Paul Trejo
  3. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/155655730851795808/repin/?utm_campaign=networkstorydigest&e_t=3ce42cbb8f6747cd8fd7af5069619314&utm_content=155655730851795808&utm_source=31&utm_term=1&utm_medium=2026
  4. I have the book titled "The Assasssination Story" Printed by American Eagle Publishing Co. & President Robert A. Surrey. As it's been stated, this book was apparently printed in the home of General Edwin. A. Walker. It consists of 100's of newspaper clippings all from both The Dallas Morning News & The Dallas Times Herald from dates as early as November 17, 1963 through Late December of 1963. Apparently there were only 3,000 printed & they had sold 900-1,000 before the Dallas Times Herald ordered a cease & desist against American Eagle to stop printing them. The only place I can find this book even mentioned is in The Warren Commission. The articles are simply amazing to read & have them all pulled together in one book. I'm not sure of "The Truth", as I do not believe the truth will ever be known. However, according to the articles in this book, it's hard to see that LHO was alone in this Assassination. I'm sure all these articles can be discovered on microfilm, however being that Dallas Times Herald closed its doors in 1991, I'm not sure of what happened to the history of their news articles. I'm very curious as to what people make of this book, published by Robert Surrey & obviously General Edwin Walker (even though he isn't listed). He is however mentioned in newspaper clippings.
  5. Walking around in Dallas and New Orleans makes a man hungry and thirsty. In my new blog I wrote about places to visit when in need for a beer or a burger. All places have a relation to key players of the events in November, 1963. I'm curious: who has ever visit The Ozzie Rabbit Lodge, Lee Harvey’s, Campisi’s, Henry’s Uptown Bar and Le Bon Temps Roule? http://threeshotswerefired.com/?p=1290 And who can answer my question: do we know if Oswald was a frequent visitor of bars? The New Orleans bars claim he was a regular. He doesn’t seem like one in my eyes, being a loner with an empty wallet...
  6. Someone may have already started a thread on this, I looked ahead a few and did not see anything. I am trying to get a sense of who will be going for the 50th. Given the hostility of the Dallas powers that be toward the critical community I believe this year it is major that we be there in large numbers. Erick and I will be going to COPA and staying at the Lawrence beginning Thursday. 11/21. -Sunday. Hope to see old friends and new ones. Dawn. Opps, can someone edit the title...typo to WHERE?
  7. Good Day.... FYI.... http://blogs.dallaso...rist_robert.php <QUOTE> JFK Conspiracy Theorist Robert Groden goes 81-0 with Latest Win Against City Censors By Jim Schutze Mon., Feb. 25 2013 at 10:37 AM Categories: Get Off My Lawn Wanted to go ahead and let you know, since apparently nobody else is going to do the story, that Robert Groden, the Kennedy assassination author, has won yet another legal victory in his fight against the city's years-long efforts to muzzle him. And, sorry, certain commenters here, but that's what it is. This isn't about tidying up a park. It's a campaign to shut down free speech on the still sensitive issue of whether John F. Kennedy's murder in Dallas 50 years ago was the work of multiple conspirators. Don't believe me? Still think it's Groden who's the out-of-line wack- job? Groden's virtually unbroken record of judicial exoneration in 81 separate arrests or tickets by the city is now crowned by a recent decision of County Criminal Court of Appeals Judge Kristin Wade. Wade said the same thing a parade of judges have said before: It's the city that's outside the law in this. Wade was ruling on the most recent arrest, which took place June 13, 2010, in which the city charged Groden with ... he was charged with the offense of ... but that's part of the problem, isn't it? The city arrested him in Dealey Plaza where he lectures and sells self- published magazines. They threw him in jail. But then they couldn't quite say what he had done wrong. Wade takes note of the city's vacillation. In her opinion upholding a trial judge's decision to quash the case against Groden, Wade points out that the city changed its mind twice about what Groden had done wrong after they arrested him and put him in jail. And they still couldn't come up with a crime. Know why? There was no crime. There was no city law banning Groden from giving lectures in Dealey Plaza and selling magazines, books and videos that explain his theories. Since then, in a classic case of tardy barn-door closing, the city has enacted an ordinance it thinks would cover Groden's case. Groden's lawyers think the new ordinance, yet to be tested, reeks of violation of free speech. More on this in my column in the newspaper next week. The point is this: Before the 2010 arrest the city of Dallas had 80 instances in which it had been warned by judges that it was harassing Groden in violation of his rights and the law. And yet they did it again. This last time they added some rough treatment during the arrest and a nice long visit to the jailhouse, a clear expression of that hoary adage of official oppression, "You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride." Groden has a federal civil rights lawsuit in the works against the city. That suit has been in legal limbo for two years waiting for this appeals court shoe to fall. I'm not sure how that works. I will explain it in the paper next week. But he tells me this new verdict will open the door for the civil rights case finally to proceed. Groden is a New York Times list best-selling author and in 1978 was the forensic photographic consultant to the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. The select committee was formed after Groden obtained a copy of the Zapruder film, which had been owned and suppressed by LIFE magazine. When Groden got the film aired on television, a shocked national audience saw President Kennedy's head clearly slammed in the opposite direction it would have been pushed by a bullet from the sniper's perch on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository. The final report of the committee stated it had found evidence establishing "a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy." It is this version of things that Groden preaches in Dealey Plaza, often to large crowds of tourists who come from far and wide specifically to explore the facts around the assassination. The efforts by the city to silence him often have been aided and abetted by the Sixth Floor Museum, which has become the official enforcement arm of the no-conspiracy theory in Dallas. Nothing like a "museum" that gets people arrested for disagreeing with it, eh? I do a weekly radio show on KNON at 10 a.m. on Saturdays (yes, I'm plugging along here), and for the past couple of Saturdays we have been talking about Groden, two weeks ago with him as my on-air guest. Last Saturday I confessed my own personal sin here: I have just never been sufficiently motivated to form a personal theory about the JFK killing in Dallas 50 years ago. I think I have always been daunted by the amount of reading I would have to do. But as we roll up on the 50th anniversary observations next November, with the city already planning hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of special security to shut people like Groden out of Dealey Plaza on the big day, I do have to wonder. Is there still somebody around who's got something big to hide on this? Because I can't come up with another explanation. Otherwise, Groden and all the other Warren Commission skeptics would be the best tourist attraction Dallas ever had. Dealey Plaza continues to be our most popular tourist attraction. And Dallas keeps living up to everyone's stereotype by standing down there like some big old 1950s copper slapping his billy club against his leg saying, "Let's move it along now, folks, nothin' to see here, time you been gettin' on home now." Why? Does the city actually want to look guilty? Does it not get that doing stuff like tossing Groden in the slammer over free speech makes the city look guilty? Amazing, really. So very strange. More on this at 10 a.m. on KNON 89.3 next Saturday (plug-plug-plug) and in the paper next week. If nothing else, it's just kind of a weird town, is it not? Groden Verdict.... http://www.scribd.co.../Groden-Verdict DOWNLOAD the judgment.... http://www.google.co...WADJs-5N-j16aWw <END QUOTE> Best Regards in Research +++Don Donald Roberdeau United States Navy U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, plank walker Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly For your key considerations and independent determinations.... Homepage: President KENNEDY "Men of Courage" speech, and Assassination Evidence, Witnesses, Suspects + Outstanding Researchers Discoveries and Considerations.... http://droberdeau.bl...ination_09.html The Dealey Plaza Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations, Witnesses, Films & Photos, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations, in One Convenient Resource.... http://img835.images...updated1111.gif (new info, 2012 updated map) Visual Report: The First Bullet Impact Into President Kennedy: while JFK was Still Hidden Under the "Magic-limbed-ricochet-tree".... http://img504.images...k1102308ms8.gif Visual Report: Reality versus C.A.D. : the Real World, versus, Garbage-in, Garbage-out....http://img248.images...ealityvscad.gif Discovery: "Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, and Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll".... http://educationforu...?showtopic=2394 T ogether E veryone A chieves M ore For the United States: http://www.dhs.gov
  8. US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication by Jim Fetzer Douglas Horne, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009) Douglas Horne, who served as the Senior Analyst for Military Affairs of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), a five-member civilian panel that Congress entrusted with the authority to declassify documents and records related to the death of JFK held by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and other government agencies, where only the President could over-ride its decisions, recently published INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), a five-volume study of the efforts of the board to declassify documents and records held by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and other government organizations related to the assassination of JFK. As a former government official, historian, and author, he is speaking out to disabuse the public of any lingering belief that THE WARREN REPORT (1964), THE HSCA FINAL REPORT (1979), Gerald Posner’s CASE CLOSED (1963), or Vincent Bugliosi’s RECLAIMING HISTORY (2007) represent the truth about what is known about the assassination of our 35th president, even remotely! Indeed, in relation to a new article, “Birds of a Feather: Subverting the Constitution at Harvard Law”, Horne has made a forceful declaration to set the record straight: I know, from my former role as a government official on the staff of the ARRB (from 1995–1998), that there is overwhelming evidence of a government-directed medical cover-up in the death of JFK, and of wholesale destruction of autopsy photographs, autopsy x-rays, early versions of the autopsy report, and biological materials associated with the autopsy. Furthermore, dishonest autopsy photographs were created; skull x-rays were altered; the contents of the autopsy report changed over time as different versions were produced; and the brain photographs in the National Archives cannot be photographs of President Kennedy’s brain—they are fraudulent, substitute images of someone else’s brain. Over and beyond the medical evidence, however, Horne—in Vol. IV of INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), has also demonstrated that the home movie of the assassination known as “the Zapruder film”—and others that correspond to it, such as the Nix and Muchmore films—have been massively edited to remove indications of Secret Service complicity in the crime and to add other events to these films in order to sow confusion and conceal evidence of the true causes of death of John F. Kennedy. For those unfamiliar with this question, see “Kennedy Assassination Questions”, in which I explain how even the consistent testimony of Clint Hill, the Secret Service agent who rushed forward to assist Jackie during the shooting in Dealey Plaza, confirms it. YouTube - Veterans Today - There are many proofs that the film has been fabricated—including that the driver brought the limo to a halt to make sure he would be killed; that his brains were blown out to the left-rear; and that a motorcycle patrolman accompanying the limo rode forward at the time of the stop to inform Dallas Chief of Police Jessie Curry that the president had been hit. But none of these events appears in the extant version of the film, which has been massively edited. That these events occurred has been established by more than 60 witness reports of the limo stop, where the wound to the back of his head was confirmed by 40 witnesses, including virtually all the physicians at Parkland Hospital, who described cerebellum as well as cerebral tissue extruding from the wound. The blow-out to the right-front, as seen in the film, therefore, is not authentic. Indeed, in an appendix to Vol. IV, Horne explains that a copy of the film has now been studied by Hollywood exerts, who found that the blow-out to the back of his head had been painted over in black in an amateurish effort to obfuscate the blow out, which can actually be seen in a few later frames, including 372 and 374. Those who have persisted in defense of the authenticity of the film have offered three major arguments—(1) that the features of the extant film correspond to those of the original processed in Dallas, (2) that there was an unbroken chain of custody, which precluded the film be changed; and (3) that the Dealey Plaza films are not only consistent with themselves but with one another, where the Zapruder could only have been faked if the others had been as well. The following extracts from INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), Vol. IV, demonstrate that all three arguments are fallacious: (1) there are five features of the extant film that differ from those of the original and (2) that different films were brought to the NPIC on consecutive days, which vitiates the chain-of-custody argument. The consistency of the films with one another (3) turns out to be an interesting question, since they all seem to have been edited to remove the turn of the presidential limousine from Houston onto Elm. More significantly, there are subtle inconsistencies between the films and, most importantly, the Zapruder film is not even consistent with itself, which proves that it cannot possibly be authentic! Horne’s new studies thus confirm the previous research that has previously been reported in THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX(2003), “New Proof of JFK Film Fakery” (2007), and “Zapruder JFK Film impeached by Moorman JFK Polaroid” (2008), “Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?” (2009), “The JFK ‘Head Shot’ Paradox” (2010), where more can be found at assassinationscience.com. An especially valuable study, which uses the new enhanced version of the Zapruder film (by removing pincushion and aspect-ratio distortion and adding missing frames and correcting the order of others) has been produce by John P. Costella, Ph.D., as his “JFK assassination film hoax” tutorial. (1) Five features of the original do not match the extant film INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV (2009), p. 1292: Conclusions In his long essay published in 2007 on the Mary Ferrell Foundation website, Josiah Thompson [NOTE: the author of SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS (1967), an early study based on the Zapruder film] told us we should all trust [retired Kodak expert on celluloid] Rollie Zavada’s judgment and defer to his authority: “Roland Zavada has a towering reputation in the field and no conceivable reason for cooking his conclusions.” Now that we have concluded examining his report and Zavada’s changes of mind since that time, it is clear that he has cooked his conclusions. In particular, he has ignored—trashed—key testimony: *That the exposures were not bracketed at the Jamieson lab when the three ‘first day copies’ were struck, meaning that the three ‘first generation’ copies today should not be bracketed copies; *That a ‘full frame’ aperture (picture plus soundtrack) was used when duplicating the Zapruder film, meaning that the intersprocket images should be present on the ‘first generation copies’; *That the edge printer light was turned off when the original film was developed, meaning that there a double registration of processing edge prints in the family scenes on the extant ‘first generation’ copies; and, *That the camera original film was slit at the Kodak plant in Dallas, meaning that the 16 mm wide, unslit black-and-white copies in existence today cannot have originated from the camera original film, and are instead indirect evidence that a new ‘original’ was created as an unslit 16 mm, double 8 movie (just as Homer McMahon’s expert testimony to the ARRB indicates). Furthermore, Zavada’s opposition to the shooting of a control film in Zapruder’s actual camera in Dealey Plaza—which was inexplicable and extremely frustrating when it occurred in 1997—now takes on a very different taint, one of possibly intentional sabotage of the authentication effort by the ARRB staff. An incredible charge, you say? Not necessarily. Read more on pages 1292 through 1294 as well as 1243 to 1292. And this does not take into account that the numbers on the extant film are not punched in the same location as the original. Read Horne to appreciate the depth of Zavada’s deception. (2) Different films were brought to the NPIC on consecutive days Not only has Doug Horne demonstrated that the strips of film—the actual celluloid—of the film that was processed in Dallas and the extant “Zapruder film” are not the same, but he has demonstrated that David Wrone has misled his audience and distorted the evidence about the chain-of-custody, where one film—apparently the original, was brought to the NPIC on Saturday, 23 November 1963, which was an 8mm, slit version, the processing of which Bruno Brugioni, Chief of the NPIC Information Branch, supervised, which even required opening a camera store to purchase an 8mm projector, which the NPIC did not possess, while a second, 16mm unslit version, was brought to the NPIC on Sunday, 24 December 1963, by Secret Service Agent “William Smith,” which was handled by Homer McMahon and by Ben Hunter, who had not been present the night before, and a very different film. INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, pages 1226 and 1227: Analysis: First of all, we can now say with certainty that the NPIC never copied the Zapruder film as a motion picture, even though for years the NPIC notes had mislead some researchers into believing that it had. However, Homer McMahon’s rock-solid certainty that the film brought to him was an original, unslit 16 mm wide, double 8 movie—and that it came from a classified CIA photo lab run by Kodak at Rochester—implies that McMahon and Hunter were not working with the true camera original developed in Dallas, but were instead working with a re-created, altered film masquerading as ‘the original.’ I suspected in 1997, and I am more certain than ever today at this writing in 2009, that ‘Bill Smith’ told the truth when he said that the film he couriered to NPIC was developed in Rochester—after all, how could he possible make a mistake about something so elementary, since he brought it from Rochester to Washington, D.C. himself? He was only lying about one thing: it could not have been the original film exposed inside Abe Zapruder’s camera, because we know from the Dallas Affidavit trail, and from the interviews Rollie Zavada conducted with the surviving personnel from the Dallas Kodak lab, that the original film was indeed developed in Dallas on Friday, November 22, 1963. If McMahon was correct that he had viewed an original, 16 mm wide, unslit double 8 movie film the weekend of the assassination, and if it was really developed in Rochester at a CIA lab run by Kodak (as he was unambiguously told it was), then the extant film in the Archives is not a camera original film, but a simulated ‘original’ created with an optical printer at the CIA’s secret film lab in Rochester. The critical information published in the ARRB call and meeting reports about our interviews with McMahon and Hunter in 1997 was published in full by Jim Fetzer in the year 2000 in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA, but was subsequently ignored by Josiah Thompson in a 2007 essay posted on the Mary Ferrell website (note 14) and was intentionally under-reported and misrepresented by David Wrone in his 2003 book on the Zapruder film. This is what many advocates of a specific hypothesis or a historical position resort to when the heat is on and their longstanding positions on key issues are threatened by new evidence: all too often they either ignore the argument of their opponents as if they do not exist, or they will misrepresent them, intentionally setting up a false ‘straw man,’ and then knock it down. In the case of the serious chain-of-custody implications of the McMahon interviews, Thompson chose to ignore the problem in 2005 and again in 2007, while David Wrone has not only misreported/misrepresented their import, but he has overstated the case for authenticity, as I shall demonstrate below. In his 2003 book THE ZAPRUDER FILM: REFRAMING JFK’S ASSASSINATION, Wrone fails to report the specific content of the Homer McMahon interviews (nor does McMahon’s name even appear in Wrone’s index), and then completely misreports what I have said about them (on page 127), as follows: Similarly spurious is Douglas Orme’s charge (yes, he misspelled my name, too) that Time, Inc. allowed the film to be altered. In MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA, Horne argues that Time, Inc. permitted the film to be taken by Federal Officials for doctoring. [This statement was followed by endnote 36, which simply refers to page 319 of MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA, without telling the reader what is on page 319. Page 319 is the interview report I wrote of the Homer McMahon interview of July 14, 1997 at the National Archives.] Like Zapruder, however, Time knew it had a treasure in the Zapruder film, and it would do nothing to endanger the flow of revenue it expected from those 26 seconds of film. [boldface added by author] Shame on you David Wrone! There are so many things wrong with this short paragraph that I hardly know where to begin. First of all, and most importantly, Wrone never mentioned in his text that the Head of the Color Lab at NPIC, the world’s pre-eminent photo interpretation lab in 1963, claimed that he had [had] delivered to him by the Secret Service, prior to the President’s funeral, a 16 mm wide, unslit original double 8 film of the Kennedy assassination that was developed in Rochester, the location from which the courier brought him the film!!! So David Wrone’s first sin is that of intellectual dishonesty—hiding facts from his readers which might have contradicted his own thesis that the extant film in the Archives today is authentic and unaltered. His second sin is that of putting words in my mouth: it is simply not true that I said anywhere in Fetzer’s book that Time, Inc. had allowed the film to be altered! The editor of the anthology, Jim Fetzer, published only my call reports and meeting reports of what the witnesses told the ARRB staff, and no one used that language in their interviews with us. So Wrone set up a straw man here which he attempted to knock down with a private enterprise profit motive, while all the time ignoring facts about C.D. Jackson’s long standing associations with the CIA and the national security establishment during the decade of the 1950s. If Wrone had been intellectually above-board, he would have talked honestly about the content of the McMahon/Hunter interviews, and then stated why he did not find these eyewitness recollections persuasive, if that was the case; instead, he took the coward’s way out and intentionally failed to report what McMahon had said. . . . Note 14: The name of the lengthy 3-part essay is “Bedrock Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination,” and is based upon a somewhat shorter version delivered by Thompson on November 19, 2005 at a conference sponsored by Jim Lesar’s Assassination Archives and Research Center (ARRC) and the Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law. (3) The Zapruder film displays inconsistencies with other films and with itself INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, pages 1336 to 1337: The Alteration of the Zapruder Film was Rushed and Imperfect Because there are physical limitations to what can be altered in a film—particularly on a tight schedule and when faced with time pressure—the alteration of the Zapruder film was imperfect, and it therefore had to be suppressed as a motion picture even after its gross alteration to conceal what the forgers had been unable to remove. My working hypothesis postulates that because the cabal that killed the president (and which was feverishly covering up the crime that weekend) did not yet know, on the weekend of the assassination, what type of investigation(s) would be conducted of the crime, or by which governmental bodies, speed was of the essence. By late Sunday afternoon—after discussing the limitations to the film’s alteration with the technicians at “Hawkeyeworks” in Rochester—they would have known that while the car stop had been removed from the film, and the exit debris leaving the back of President Kennedy’s skull had also been removed, that a serious problem remained: the so-called ‘head snap,’ or violent movement of the President’s head and upper body to the left and rear, in response to the frontal head shots. This was a simple and persuasive demonstration of the law of conservation of momentum that even a layperson without a physics degree could viscerally understand, and the public could not be permitted to see it, or the lone assassination cover story would not sell . . . The film’s imperfect alteration was revealed in other ways aside from the ‘headsnap.’ As later discovered by Josiah Thompson, Ray Marcus, and other researchers, and as written about in scores of books now and as mentioned in hundreds of lectures, the extant film contains evidence of a very serious ‘timing problem’: President Kennedy and Governor Connally react to separate shots that occur too close together to have been fired in succession by the rather slow mechanism of the alleged murder weapon. The Warren Commission staff expressed great concern about this internally, and ultimately dealt with it dishonestly by concluding that the same bullet had hit both men, and that Connally had unaccountably exhibited a ‘delayed reaction’ to his very severe and painful wounds. What we do not know today is whether the ‘timing problem’ is an artifact of frame removal, or whether those frames of the film prior to the headshot were not tampered with, and reflected the true reality of the assassination farther up Elm Street in the vicinity of the Stemmons Freeway sign. Either possibility is [better: could be] true. Given what we know about the robust evidence in favor of alteration of the Zapruder film, it would be imprudent for JFK researchers to continue to claim that the ‘timing problem’ is the primary evidence of conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination. It isn’t. Given the overwhelming evidence that the camera original has been altered, the ‘timing problem’ should now be demoted to simply being ‘possible evidence’ of conspiracy. Eyewitness and earwitness testimony from Dealey Plaza alone, and the behavior of the impact debris after the head shots, are the true ‘bedrock evidence’ that proves conspiracy, not the ‘timing problem,’ which is inevitably suspect now, because of the overwhelming evidence that the camera original Zapruder film was altered on Sunday, November 24, 1963. One final and undeniable mistake by the forgers was their failure to black out the real exit wound(s) in the posterior skull in all frames. I believe one of two exit wounds can been seen today, with proper magnification, in frames 335 and 337 of the extant film [NOTE: and in frames 372 and 374, where a comparison between David Mantik’s study of “Area P” in the lateral cranial X-rays and the blow-out to the back of the head can be viewed in “Dealey Plaza Revisited,” Chapter 30 of JOHN F. KENNEDY: HISTORY, MEMORY, LEGACY (2009), which can be downloaded here.] The best images of this to date have been published in HIGH TREASON (the color plate in the cloth edition, opposite page 387), in [Harrison Livingston’s] THE HOAX OF THE CENTURY: DECODING THE FORGERY OF THE ZAPRUDER FILM (on page 264) and in [Robert Groden’s] THE KILLING OF A PRESIDENT (on page 38). While the forgers were ‘successful’ in superimposing rather poor aerial imaging artwork of an enormous head wound on the top and right side of President Kennedy’s head in the Zapruder film—a head wound which is grossly inconsistent with the localized posterior blowout observed at Parkland Hospital, and only roughly consistent with the autopsy photos taken after clandestine post mortem surgery at Bethesda Naval Hospital—they failed to properly execute their most basic task, which was to hide all evidence of posterior exit wounds in the back of JFK’s head. Persons in the government were clearly aware of this problem, for the last frame of the Zapruder film published in volume XVIII of the Warren Commission’s 26 supporting volumes was frame 334, the frame immediately prior to those which show one of the two exit defects in the back of the head. ‘Coincidences’ like this are not worthy of belief, and the fact that the Warren Commission stopped publishing at frame 334 strongly implies that someone on the staff—presumably Specter and Rankin—knew they had a problem in frames 335 and 337, and so simply decided not to publish those frames. For them, discretion was the better part of valor. . . . INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), Vol. IV, pages 1317 to 1320 (in part): If the Zapruder Film is an Alteration, Doesn’t This Mean That Other Films of the Assassination Must Have Been Altered Also? Also, Are There Inconsistencies Between Other Films and the Zapruder Film? Absolutely—alteration of the Zapruder film does indeed imply that in a perfect conspiracy, that other films would have been altered also, and in the same way as the Zapruder film. If they were not altered and the Zapruder film was, this would have left undeniable evidence in the photographic record that “the” pre-eminent record of the assassination is indeed an alteration. In fact, what we do find in the evidence is one suggestion of identical alteration; and numerous indications of disagreement between various Dealey Plaza films and the Zapruder film. The Turn from Houston Onto Elm May Have Been Removed from the Zapruder Film, the Nix Film, and the Muchmore Film First, let us examine the suggested identical alteration of the Zapruder film, the Nix film, and the Muchmore film. Neither the Nix film, the Muchmore film,nor the Zapruder film show the Presidential limousine turning left from Houston Street onto Elm Street. Orville Nix told Mark Lane (on film) in 1966 that his film has initially been ‘lost’ by the processing plant and that when the FBI returned his film to him, some of the frames had been ‘damaged’ and were missing. The originals of both the Nix film and the Muchmore film (taken from the opposite side of thje plaza from which Zapruder was shooting his film, and from much farther away) are missing today. How convenient. The absence of first-frame overexposure in frame 133 of the Zapruder film suggests, but in my view does not prove, that the limousine’s turn from Houston onto Elm was removed when the film was altered and recreated, using an optical printer. The fact that the originals of the Nix and Muchmore films are missing is extremely suspicious; they may have been removed from circulation to prevent detection of their alteration—specifically, removal of the limousine’s turn onto Elm from Houston and of the car stop during the assassination. If ever found, one of the first things that should be checked is to see if the limousine’s turn onto Elm Street in these two films has been excised—either crudely, with splices, or via reprinting those films in an optical printer. Clint Hill’s Interactions with Jackie Kennedy on the Trunk of the Limousine Appear to be Inconsistent in the Nix Film and the Zapruder Film There is also significant disagreement between the Nix film and the Zapruder film. In Harry Livingstone’s 2004 book about the Zapruder film, he discusses differences between the images of Clint Hall and Jackie Kennedy on the trunk of the limousine in the Nix film, versus what is shown in the Zapruder film. Livingstone correctly points out that in the Nix Film, Clint Hill appears to place his left arm around Jackie Kennedy’s right shoulder and push her back into her seat—where as in the Zapruder film, he barely touches her with his right hand, and is not seen embracing her with his left arm at all. (See pages 250–251 of Livingstone for the pertinent Nix frames, and the MPI video of the Zapruder film for comparison. A projected version of the portion of the Nix film showing Clint Hill on the trunk of the limousine can been seen in the 1973 film “Executive Action,” and it can be seen in its entirety in the Groden DVD JFK Assassination Films: The Case for Conspiracy.) Is the “Headsnap” Different in the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore films? The ‘headsnap” in the Nix film appears to be slightly slower, and less violent than in the Zapruder film; in the Muchmore film, there appears to be no ‘headsnap’ visible at all, but this may be inconclusive because of the camera angle at the time of the headshot(s) and because the line of sight to the President’s head is obstructed by Dealey Plaza bystanders immediately afterwards. (See episode 3 of “The Men Who Killed Kennedy” for footage oft he headshot(s) in both the Nix and the Muchmore films; both films can also been seen in their entirety in Robert Groden’s DVD JFK Assassination Films: The Case for Conspiracy.) The perceived differences between the headshot(s) in the Zapruder, Nix, and Muchmore films suggests that when debris exiting from the back of President Kennedy’s head was removed from the three films, that it was not done uniformly, resulting in three slightly different versions of the motion of the President’s head caused by the fatal shot(s). This has not been conclusively proven, but is worthy of further investigation. . . . Concluding Reflections There is much more, but the Addendum, “The Zapruder Film Goes to Hollywood,” pages 1352 to 1363, is of special interest, where highly qualified experts on film restoration viewed a digital version of the forensic copy of the Zapruder film obtained from the National Archives and found that the massive blow out at the back of the head had been painted over in black, which was a stunning confirmation of the observation of Roderick Ryan, reported in Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), that the bulging out of brains—called the “blob”—and the blood spray visible in frames 314 and thereafter had also been painted in, where Ryan would receive the Academy Award in 2000 for his contributions to cinematography, where his area of specialization was special effects. As of this date, seven Hollywood film experts—eight, if we include Ryan—have agreed that the fakery used to cover up the blow out to the back of the head by painting it over in black was very primitive and highly amateurish, a finding that they have based upon a 6k version of the forensic copy of the Zapruder film obtained from the National Archives. David Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has verified these artifacts using the 4×5 slides created by MPI when it produced a digital version of the film—which are archived at The 6th Floor Museum—the inadequacies of which are explained in “Which Film is ‘the Zapruder Film’?,” by me and Scott Lederer, THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003), page 31, which is now available on-line as the first of the (total of) 66-segments of The Duluth Conference on YouTube (under “Zapruder Fakery” or “JFK Zapruder Hoax”). The creation of this visual deception was an elaborate undertaking but contained the elements of its own refutation. “Chapter 14: The Zapruder Film Mystery” is an astonishing achievement. For Horne to have assimilated and synthesized such a complicated and technical assortment of arguments and evidence impresses me beyond words. This chapter alone is worth the price of the whole. No matter what reservations or differences I may have with any other parts of his work, what he has done on the film is extraordinary. He was my featured guest on “The Real Deal” on Wednesday, 13 January 2010, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); and then again on Wednesday, 24 February 2010, with “Post-Mortem Surgery”, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); “Witnesses were Present”, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); “Humes and Boswell Lied”, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); “How to Sort Things Out”, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); and then again on Wednesday, 31 March 2010, INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. V, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009); and, most recently, on Friday, 18 November 2011, "On Switching the Films", INSIDE THE ARRB (2009). In addition, I have published a three-part blog about him and his work, which can be found at there: Part I, Part II, and Part III. Those who want to pursue these fascinating and historic developments in JFK assassination research are welcome to pursue these leads. Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and maintains an on-line research journal with John P. Costella at http://assassinationresearch.com.
  9. Good Day.... FYI.... http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2013/02/17/jfk-assassination-newseum-lee-harvey-oswald/1918279/ <QUOTE> JFK Assassination Artifacts to get First Public Viewing More than 100 artifacts are included in an exhibit at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. PHOTO: Lee Harvey Oswald was wearing this shirt, seen in this Nov. 22, 1963, photo, when he was arrested and charged in the death of President John F. Kennedy. STORY HIGHLIGHTS Newseum exhibit of Lee Harvey Oswald items opens April 12 The exhibit contains more than 100 artifacts Collection of photos, Newseum-produced film also showing WASHINGTON — An off-white jacket. A casual long-sleeve shirt. A turquoise-and- orange wool blanket. A wallet that contains a Social Security card and family snapshots. While these relics from the early '60s sound like everyday items, they are priceless pieces of history tied to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Beginning April 12, visitors to the Newseum in the nation's capital will have the rare chance to view these never-before-displayed artifacts belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald, the presumed gunman, as part of an exhibit marking the 50th anniversary of JFK's death. Oswald, who wore the shirt and carried the wallet when he was arrested on Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas, was himself shot and killed two days later by Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby, a crime that was caught live on TV. The jacket was found at a gas station near the Texas Theater, where Oswald was captured. Oswald's rifle, which was kept wrapped in the blanket in a friend's garage, was found at the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas shortly after JFK was shot. "This is a pretty incredible opportunity to work with the National Archives and be able to display these pieces," says Carrie Christoffersen, Newseum curator and director of collections. Christoffersen says the purpose of "Three Shots Were Fired," an exhibit of more than 100 artifacts, including the first UPI report about the attack on the presidential motorcade, "is to tell the story of how news media responded and how it fulfilled its responsibility to the public. It was a unique time in American and journalism history. The shooting led to unprecedented TV coverage over four days on the networks commercial-free. This was at a time when nightly newscasts had only just expanded from 15 minutes to a half-hour." A collection of photos, "Creating Camelot: The Kennedy Photography of Jacques Lowe," as well as a Newseum-produced film, A Thousand Days, will bring to life the youthful glamour that the first family brought to the White House, as well as newsworthy moments of JFK's short presidency. The exhibit, which runs through Jan. 5, 2014, will include an interactive feature that allows visitors of all ages to share the defining "JFK moment'' in their life, whether it was the bombing at Pearl Harbor or memories of 9/11. <END QUOTE> Best Regards in Research ++++Don Donald Roberdeau United States Navy U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, plank walker Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly For your key considerations and independent determinations.... Homepage: President KENNEDY "Men of Courage" speech, and Assassination Evidence, Witnesses, Suspects + Outstanding Researchers Discoveries and Considerations.... http://droberdeau.bl...ination_09.html The Dealey Plaza Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations, Witnesses, Films & Photos, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations, in One Convenient Resource.... http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3966/dppluschartsupdated1111.gif (new info, 2012 updated map) Visual Report: The First Bullet Impact Into President Kennedy: while JFK was Still Hidden Under the "Magic-limbed-ricochet-tree".... http://img504.images...k1102308ms8.gif Visual Report: Reality versus C.A.D. : the Real World, versus, Garbage-in, Garbage-out....http://img248.images...ealityvscad.gif Discovery: "Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, and Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll".... http://educationforu...?showtopic=2394 T ogether E veryone A chieves M ore For the United States: http://www.dhs.gov
  10. As it happens, Larrie Schmidt turned out to offer nothing more than information already known. Presuming that he's telling the truth and not covering for his old Dallas contacts and memories, his memoirs remain for me so much useless trivia. I have far more interest now in Bernard William Weissman (Bernie), who was one of those who testified before the Warren Commission. His testimony is interesting, and in light of the naivete exhibited by Mr. Schmidt, I now suspect that Bernie Weissman was the one member of CUSA who had any real brains -- or any real honesty. The members of CUSA are public knowledge -- all listed by the Warren Commission (and to a lesser extent in the January 1965 LIFE Magazine article that told the story about the CUSA). Bernie Weissman's sworn testimony gave us the true character of these few. Of them all, Larrie was the only member that Bernie looked up to -- somewhat. But Bernie would hold things back even from Larrie. CUSA was set up by five liberal Army guys -- nothing right-wing about them -- who had black and Jewish friends, and who read Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative and decided that they could take over the right-wing in the USA when they got back to the States -- if they wanted to. Larrie Schmidt was their leader because he actually finished Ayn Rand's, Atlas Shrugged. He was the intellectual of the group. But he wasn't a trained politician -- he wasn't even a poli-sci student -- he was a journalist by education, and an Advertisement copy writer by trade. As a follower of Ayn Rand, as an atheist Objectivist, Larrie conceived the notion of CUSA as a means to take over the rightist political parties in the USA from the top -- from their headquarters. All his underlings liked the idea -- it was great fun. But Larrie was in love with the idea. When he got out of the Army in October 1962 (this is all part of that LIFE article and also part of the Warren Commission testiomony) he went straight to Dallas and planned to get married -- yet the day before he got married in early November 1962, he had already convinced the NIC (National Indignation Convention) of Dallas to given him control of their headquarters. So, Larrie made the start, and wrote back to Bernie Weissman and Larry Jones in the US Army in Germany that he was preparing things for them when they got out of the Army. They were amused and even intrigued, but nowhere near as motivated as Larrie Schmidt. Over the course of 1963, Larrie's contacts in the right-wing in Dallas gradually grew, and he found a job for his brother Robbie when Robbie was discharged from the Army -- Robbie was going to be the chauffeur of ex-General Edwin Walker. During all this time, Larrie kept writing letters of encouragement to his Army buddies, telling them how great CUSA was progressing in Dallas. By this time, Larrie had also taken over the YAF (Young Americans for Freedom), and was expanding his influence among the John Birch Society in Dallas. This is where it started to get hairy. Later, during October, 1963, the John Birch Society -- and especially its most perhaps exhibitionistic Dallas member, ex-General Edwin Walker, chose to set up a US-Day event the night before Adlai Stevenson's UN-Day Event (using the same venue, the Dallas Memorial Auditorium). As Chris Cravens amply documented, Walker and the John Birch Society used the entire night to plan their relentless heckling of Adlai Stevenson's speach planned for the following evening. They were to buy up as many tickets as they could afford, and bring Halloween noisemakers, and in general make it impossible for Adlai to get a message across. They were to picket all day and night. Larrie Schmidt was one of the volunteers in that organization, as he admitted in one of his letters to Bernie Weissman. When the scandal of the Dallas treatment of Adlai Stevenson hit the national newspapers, Bernie Weissman decided that Larrie Schmidt had really become a powerful person in Dallas -- he must have had tremendous social influence amongst the right-wing in Dallas to lead this national scandal. Bernie chose to move to Dallas right away. When Bernie got to Dallas, he found a different situation than he expected. Rather than having a paying job in the NIC or the YAF, Bernie was expected to get any old job, and support himself and work for CUSA on the side. Larrie didn't have any unusual influence in Dallas at all. Actually, contrary to appearances, Larrie Schmidt was a roadie in the orchestration of the Adlai Stevenson heckling scandal. Larrie brought some college kids to the event to carry signs outside the Auditorium before the speech, but those kids left early. That was basically it. Then, the day after the scandal, Larrie Schmidt stepped up to the Dallas Times Herald newspaper and spoke as an eye-witness defending the protesters -- they were peaceful, he claimed, and the stories about misbehavior were grossly exaggerated. Yes, this did earn him extra points among the John Birch Society leaders. How many points would become apparent to Bernie Schwarz two weeks after he arrived in Dallas. Larrie had been working the Joe Grinnan of the John Birch Society to draw up a newspaper ad to criticize JFK, and suggest that he was a Communist. Well, Larrie's expertise was newspaper advertising, and so he took the job, as a volunteer, and he also volunteered CUSA member Bernie Weissman to add his name to the advertisement. Bernie told the Warren Commission he did not know where the text came from for the advertisement, except that he himself struggled to change one of the sentences. Larrie may have changed a sentence or two -- but the actual and original source of the copy text for the ad was unknown to Bernie. It seemed, however, that the people paying for the ad would send in their demands for a new item, or to change an existing item, on a daily basis for two weeks up until the finalization of the ad. But Bernie never knew their names. All he saw was that Larrie and Joe would back anything the funders wanted. Who actually provided the text for the ad? Bernie honestly doesn't know, and probably Larrie didn't know either -- he claims that he didn't know. Joe Grinnan of the John Birch Society was the middle-man between the Real Creators of the black-bordered ad, and the mere mechanics -- Larrie, Bernie and the Dallas Morning News advertising desk. The Warren Commission and the FBI dug deeper -- they found the names of the funders who had given all of the money to Joe Grinnan. All were members of the John Birch Society. But at that point they let the topic drop. Thus, in two weeks, on the morning of 22 November 1963, the Dallas Morning News published a full page advertisement, for one siingle day, at the cost of $1,600 (which is about $16,000 in today's dollars). Bernie's main contribution (except for that one sentence that he amended) was his recommendation of a much thicker black-border on the ad than usual. The black-bordered ad was published anonymously as far as the Real Creators of the ad were concerned -- but to the public, the name of Bernard Weissman would capture their imagination for a long time. Anonymity of the Real Creators was assured, since Bernie Weissman only knew Larrie Schmidt, and Larrie Schmidt only Joe Grinnan, and Joe Grinnan could be relied upon to keep quiet. This was probably the main reason for choosing Bernie Weissman as the alleged author of the black-bordered ad. The second reason, as Larrie Schmidt had suggested to LIFE magazine, was to put a Jewish name on the ad to prove that the right-wing also had Jews on their side. Anyway, the black-bordered ad will never be forgotten as a historical icon of the JFK assassination. Its twin handbill of the day, attached to the Dallas Morning News externally, and also passed around Dallas during the daytime, is the infamous "WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK" handbill. When asked about this, Bernie Weissman swore that he had nothing to do with it -- but that he did see at least one copy of that handbill -- perhaps a stack -- in the back floorboard of ex-General Walker's automobile that Robbie Schmidt had been driving that day. When the Warren Commission asked Bernie what he first thoughts were regarding the JFK assassination, he admitted his first thought was that he fervently hoped that General Walker's people had nothing to do with the killing, otherwise, all of the members of CUSA faced the possibility of serious prison sentences. The connection with ex-General Walker (not retired, but resigned from the US Army) with the events of Dallas on 22 November 1963 has never been fully explored by anybody -- not the Warren Commission, not Jim Garrison and not the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations). Today, the only person left standing who can tell us more about these daily Dallas activities is, IMHO, Bernie Weissman. He will turn 75 next month. He was living in New Rochelle about 50 years ago. Where is he today? Does anybody know? Best regards, --Paul Trejo, MA <edit typos>
×