Doug Horne

[Cliff Varnell]

A MESSAGE FROM DOUG HORNE ABOUT HIS FORTHCOMING BOOK

I’m pleased to report that my book about the medical coverup in the Kennedy assassination, Inside the ARRB, is finally completed, and will be published in the near future, hopefully in December of 2009.

The only real certainty we are left with about the events in Dallas in 1963 is that there was a massive coverup, and that the two official explanations about what happened --- offered up by the Warren Commission and the HSCA --- cannot be true. So much physical evidence was destroyed, and so much tainted evidence was introduced into the official record, that I am convinced the reason the evidence in the Kennedy assassination “doesn’t come together” like a normal homicide case is because there is fraud in the evidence.

Hasn't this fraud been readily identified well before the ARRB?

It's been obvious since the late 70's that there are two kinds of medical evidence

in the JFK assassination: 1) medical evidence prepared according to proper military

autopsy protocol; and 2) medical evidence NOT prepared according to proper military

autopsy protocol.

Why not throw out the autopsy photos, the head x-rays, and the final autopsy

report -- none of which was prepared according to proper autopsy protocol -- and

deal with what's left?

The properly prepared evidence relating to the back and throat wounds is consistent

with physical evidence (JFK's clothing), the witnesses in Dealey Plaza/Parkland/Bethesda,

and the Dealey photographic evidence.

Throw out anything related to the head wound(s) and the case becomes

clear as any homicide in history, imo.

To continue to assume that all of the evidence held by the U.S. government is sacrosanct, and should be accepted at face value, will only guarantee that there will never be a consensus about what happened. Much of the evidence processed by the Federal government is suspect, and tainted.

If the tainted evidence can be identified, and separated from the more trustworthy evidence, we stand a much better chance of understanding the nature of both the murder, and more importantly, the coverup. The coverup tells us more about the assassination than endless arguments about how many shooters there were, or where they were located in Dealey Plaza.

The official cover-up tells us nothing about the assassination, which was

clearly designed to appear as a Castro conspiracy.

In order to bolster his argument for super-duper-massive evidence fraud Horne

mistakenly assumes the official cover-up was planned, rather than improvised.

I felt compelled to attempt to unravel the mystery surrounding the medical evidence by taking a serious look at how much evidence was destroyed in 1963, and which evidence in the official record is likely tainted, and cannot be trusted (and why). It was no easy task; but neither was it an impossible endeavor.

The FBI autopsy report -- a properly prepared investigative document -- records

Humes observation of pre-autopsy surgery to the head. This observation renders

"tainted" every piece of evidence regarding the head wounds, a conclusion bolstered

by Horne's own work on the "two brains."

The HSCA concluded that the autopsy photos were not properly prepared, and the

ARRB established that there was no chain of possession of these photos.

The final autopsy report locates the back wound improperly.

Throw all that out -- what's the big deal?

What's left? Burkley's death certificate, the contemporaneous notes of the

Parkland doctors, the autopsy face sheet, the neck x-ray, the FBI autopsy

report, FBI SAs O'Neill and Sibert's sworn affidavits to the HSCA.

JFK sustained wounds to the throat and back between Z186 and Z255. The throat wound

reaction described by witnesses with clear views of JFK (Nellie Connally, Clint Hill, Linda Willis)

have him "grasping" or "clutching" his thoat, which is exactly what we see in the Z-film.

In his zeal to prove fraud in the Zapruder film Doug Horne ignores the obvious

conclusions readily drawn from this "data base" of reliable evidence.

Additionally, I closely examined the statements and testimony of key Parkland hospital and Bethesda autopsy witnesses over the years to see who had been consistent in describing events, and who had changed his testimony as time passed. I acted as a very curious citizen-detective, and made no starting assumptions about the presumed authenticity of any particular item of evidence.

What one believes about JFK’s assassination depends upon which data base one relies upon; there is so much conflicted evidence that one can “cherry pick” the evidence in the official record and come to almost any conclusion about the facts of the shooting. I attempted to examine the broad range of virtually all of the medical evidence, and tried very hard to avoid the limited and selective use of evidence, a mistake made by both the Warren Commission and the HSCA.

My conclusions are that neither the autopsy report (a document rewritten at least twice), nor the autopsy photographs and x-rays (which present dishonest and intentionally misleading images of the head wounds), can be relied upon to determine the reality of the event in Dealey Plaza, and that the original observations of the treating physicians and nurses at Parkland hospital remain the best single guide to the actual wounds sustained by President Kennedy --- but that they still must be judiciously married to certain other key facts, to ascertain what likely happened.

Once one accepts that JFK was killed by a crossfire, the focus shifts to the who and the why, and my book attempts to deal with this subject as well, for the assassination can only be understood in terms of the context in which it took place: at the height of the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.

The assassination can only be understood in terms of the context in which it took place:

a false flag attack designed to implicate Castro and ignite a US invasion of Cuba. The

official cover-up was not designed by the killers themselves, although it certainly

involved accessories before and after the fact.

Edited February 21, 2010 by Cliff Varnell

[William Kelly]

Doug Horne IARRB - Chapter 15

Secret Service Agents Viewed President Kennedy as a Dangerous Communist Appeaser,

Who Was ‘Soft on Communism’

As discussed in detail in Chapter 7, Secret Service agent Elmer Moore unburdened himself to University of Washington graduate student James Gochenaur in May of 1970, and in doing so revealed that many of the Secret Service agents sworn to protect President Kennedy had strong feelings of disloyalty toward him because they disagreed with, and were frightened by, his foreign policy initiatives. (Moore was not only the Secret Service agent who briefed the Parkland treating physicians in December of 1963 about the results published in the Bethesda autopsy report, and who ‘leaned on’ Dr. Malcolm Perry prior to that (in late November of 1963) to get him to stop describing the wound seen in the President’s throat as an entry wound, but he also interviewed Jack Ruby in jail in December of 1963, and furthermore, Arlen Specter revealed at Cyril Wecht’s conference in Pittsburgh in 2003 that Elmer Moore was also the agent who surreptitiously showed him an alleged autopsy photo of JFK’s back wound during the Warren Commission’s re-enactment of the assassination in Dallas, in the late Spring of 1964.38) Moore began his law enforcement career in 1939 and then served briefly with the Coast Guard before joining the Secret Service in 1942. Most members of the Secret Service, like Elmer Moore, either held local law enforcement jobs before joining the Secret Service, or were prior-enlisted members of the Armed Forces.

James Gochenaur provided information on Secret Service agent Elmer Moore to the Church Committee—specifically to Subcommittee Chair Senator Richard Schweiker—in the summer of 1975, and submitted to a tape recorded interview with HSCA staff member Howard Gilbert on May 10, 1977, from which a transcript was produced by the HSCA staff. The relevant portions of that long HSCA telephone interview relevant to Secret Service attitudes about President Kennedy’s foreign policy are reproduced below:

Gilbert: OK. Now, what did your conversations with him [Moore] pertain to?

Gochenaur: Ah, basically, him venting his anger at Kennedy, and ah—

Gilbert: What was the anger based on? Did he say?

Gochenaur: Well, he said he was a traitor. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He said Kennedy was a traitor?

Gochenaur: Yeah.

Gilbert: This is what Elmer Moore said?

Gochenaur: Right.

Gilbert: Now, why [did] he say—how did he explain that? What did he mean?

Gochenaur: Well, he prefaced it by saying that, ah, well, he said, you know, no matter how

strange things get here, we’ve got it better than they do. But he was giving everything

away to them. That’s what he was saying. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He was saying Kennedy was giving things away?

Gochenaur: Yeah, to the Russians. OK? [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: All right.

Gochenaur: And, ah, he said, ah, he says: “It’s a shame that people have to die, but you know, maybe it was a good thing. A lot of people thought he was a traitor and sometimes I think that, too.” [emphasis added]

Gochenaur then went on to recount how Moore had then confessed to badgering Dr. Perry into silence about the entry wound in President Kennedy’s neck, and had admitted that the Secret Service agents investigating JFK’s assassination had been told they had to investigate the case in accordance with instructions, or they would “get their heads cut off.” Moore denied all of this to the Church Committee in August of 1975, but significantly, did admit to meeting with Gochenaur three or four times, to purchase surveillance photographs of protestors. Clearly, the two men did have a relationship in 1970 which might have been conducive to Moore unburdening himself. I have always found Gochenaur’s story persuasive, and credible.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Bill,

I was sent this post by Pat Speer from the Lancer Forum, where he is attacking Doug Horne. Since you and I are both

staunch supporters of Doug--whose work, in my view, represents a turning point in JFK assassination research by virtue

of his standing as a member of the ARRB and the thorough, detailed and meticulous character of his research--yet Pat is

attacking him there. His doubting of Sandra Spencer's memory because it was thirty years old is about as ridiculous an

objection as I have encountered. David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., for example, in his chapter on the medical evidence in

MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), also points out that Spencer could be so certain that these were not the photos she

had processed because they were on the wrong kind of paper, which she had not used. On page 241, Mantik explains

that Spencer had brought to her deposition a JFK photograph that had been developed ten days before his death. By

comparing the identifying marks on this photo to the autopsy photos, she was able to conclude that she had developed

none of extant autopsy photos. That would appear to be definitive evidence. Yet Speer dismisses it as mere "silliness"!

He also attacks Horne for being a "Liftonite". Whatever he may mean by that, I have discerned a fierce independence

of thought in Doug Horne. He is no body's disciple, including not Lifton's. I would observe that, while I differ from him

(Lifton) on several key points, including his belief that all of the shots were fired from the same direction, when I read

his BEST EVIDENCE (1980), I learned more about the case than I had from any other source. I am likewise skpetical

that Greer shot JFK but, since the issue is out there, I also regarded it as important enough to include in my four-and-

a-half hour documentary, "JFK: The Assassiation, the Cover-Up, and Beyond" (1994), which I have recently converted

into a DVD. I presented the evidence in its support and also explained why I do not believe it is necessary for Greer to

have shot JFK to account for all the wounds. Pat might as well dismiss me as a "Liftonite" for having such high regard

for Lifton's research, much of which--including the casket switch and the surgery to the head--has been borne out by

Doug Horne's research. There is an excess of silliness here, but none of it comes from Lifton, Horne, Mantik, or me.

Jim

86580, RE: Boswell's ARRB Skull

Posted by Pat Speer, Wed Dec-31-69 06:00 PM

Saundra Spencer torpedoes my ship? Classic. I am a relative newbie to the case. As a result, I had no ship prior to my reading ALL the HSCA and ARRB medical interviews, including O'Donnell, Knudsen, Spencer, etc. I didn't reject Spencer's silliness out of my seeing her as a threat, but out of putting her statements in their proper context.

I mean, can you imagine anything as SILLY as taking the statements of a photo developer over THIRTY years after he or she had developed some photos, and using their recollections of these photos as the basis for assuming there was a second set of photos developed? Because, for me, that's right up there with the silliest things I've ever heard.

There's something you need to understand. Horne was a Liftonite. The people the ARRB questioned, and the questions they were asked, were the fulfillment of Horne's quest to prove Lifton's theories true. Jeremy Gunn, who was, in fact, Horne's boss, allowed this to take place, but came away convinced most of the ARRB's witnesses were too old, and that the events had taken place too long before, for anyone to draw much from their statements. He approached the case with an open mind, and came away unconvinced.

Not so Horne. Having failed to win much of anyone over, and having been attacked by Bugliosi in his book, Horne decided to align the erratic statements and testimony of the ARRB witnesses to SELL a GRAND UNIFIED CONSPIRACY theory whereby Greer shoots Kennedy AND shots were fired from the knoll, whereby the Zapruder film is faked, and so are the autopsy photos, etc.

To do this, he props up the recollections of some senior citizens as utterly reliable, and others as questionable due to their giving in to pressure, etc. It's a circus ride, with him at the controls.

Now, for me, his failure to admit that, oh yeah, Joe O'Donnell was not just erratic in his ARRB interview, but later proven to have been utterly unreliable and suffering from dementia at the time of the interview, is a near fatal error, the equivalent of Garrison's putting a delusional man on the stand to testify against Clay Shaw.

But feel free to defend this "over-sight" if you like. Only ask yourself this--would you defend Vincent Bugliosi's forgetting to mention that, oh yeah, one of his key witnesses, let's say Helen Markham, was later shown to have been suffering from dementia at the time she said she saw Oswald kill Tippit? I'm betting you would not.

Doug Horne IARRB - Chapter 15

Secret Service Agents Viewed President Kennedy as a Dangerous Communist Appeaser,

Who Was ‘Soft on Communism’

As discussed in detail in Chapter 7, Secret Service agent Elmer Moore unburdened himself to University of Washington graduate student James Gochenaur in May of 1970, and in doing so revealed that many of the Secret Service agents sworn to protect President Kennedy had strong feelings of disloyalty toward him because they disagreed with, and were frightened by, his foreign policy initiatives. (Moore was not only the Secret Service agent who briefed the Parkland treating physicians in December of 1963 about the results published in the Bethesda autopsy report, and who ‘leaned on’ Dr. Malcolm Perry prior to that (in late November of 1963) to get him to stop describing the wound seen in the President’s throat as an entry wound, but he also interviewed Jack Ruby in jail in December of 1963, and furthermore, Arlen Specter revealed at Cyril Wecht’s conference in Pittsburgh in 2003 that Elmer Moore was also the agent who surreptitiously showed him an alleged autopsy photo of JFK’s back wound during the Warren Commission’s re-enactment of the assassination in Dallas, in the late Spring of 1964.38) Moore began his law enforcement career in 1939 and then served briefly with the Coast Guard before joining the Secret Service in 1942. Most members of the Secret Service, like Elmer Moore, either held local law enforcement jobs before joining the Secret Service, or were prior-enlisted members of the Armed Forces.

James Gochenaur provided information on Secret Service agent Elmer Moore to the Church Committee—specifically to Subcommittee Chair Senator Richard Schweiker—in the summer of 1975, and submitted to a tape recorded interview with HSCA staff member Howard Gilbert on May 10, 1977, from which a transcript was produced by the HSCA staff. The relevant portions of that long HSCA telephone interview relevant to Secret Service attitudes about President Kennedy’s foreign policy are reproduced below:

Gilbert: OK. Now, what did your conversations with him [Moore] pertain to?

Gochenaur: Ah, basically, him venting his anger at Kennedy, and ah—

Gilbert: What was the anger based on? Did he say?

Gochenaur: Well, he said he was a traitor. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He said Kennedy was a traitor?

Gochenaur: Yeah.

Gilbert: This is what Elmer Moore said?

Gochenaur: Right.

Gilbert: Now, why [did] he say—how did he explain that? What did he mean?

Gochenaur: Well, he prefaced it by saying that, ah, well, he said, you know, no matter how

strange things get here, we’ve got it better than they do. But he was giving everything

away to them. That’s what he was saying. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He was saying Kennedy was giving things away?

Gochenaur: Yeah, to the Russians. OK? [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: All right.

Gochenaur: And, ah, he said, ah, he says: “It’s a shame that people have to die, but you know, maybe it was a good thing. A lot of people thought he was a traitor and sometimes I think that, too.” [emphasis added]

Gochenaur then went on to recount how Moore had then confessed to badgering Dr. Perry into silence about the entry wound in President Kennedy’s neck, and had admitted that the Secret Service agents investigating JFK’s assassination had been told they had to investigate the case in accordance with instructions, or they would “get their heads cut off.” Moore denied all of this to the Church Committee in August of 1975, but significantly, did admit to meeting with Gochenaur three or four times, to purchase surveillance photographs of protestors. Clearly, the two men did have a relationship in 1970 which might have been conducive to Moore unburdening himself. I have always found Gochenaur’s story persuasive, and credible.

[Cliff Varnell]

Bill,

I was sent this post by Pat Speer from the Lancer Forum, where he is attacking Doug Horne. Since you and I are both

staunch supporters of Doug--whose work, in my view, represents a turning point in JFK assassination research by virtue

of his standing as a member of the ARRB and the thorough, detailed and meticulous character of his research--yet Pat is

attacking him there. His doubting of Sandra Spencer's memory because it was thirty years old is about as ridiculous an

objection as I have encountered. David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., for example, in his chapter on the medical evidence in

MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), also points out that Spencer could be so certain that these were not the photos she

had processed because they were on the wrong kind of paper, which she had not used. On page 241, Mantik explains

that Spencer had brought to her deposition a JFK photograph that had been developed ten days before his death. By

comparing the identifying marks on this photo to the autopsy photos, she was able to conclude that she had developed

none of extant autopsy photos. That would appear to be definitive evidence. Yet Speer dismisses it as mere "silliness"!

I find Pat's work on the medical evidence disposable.

Like other "high back wound" pet theorists Speer must conduct jihad against

the witnesses. Everyone who saw the low back wound got it wrong.

Pat's claims are based on the notion that improperly prepared medical evidence

trumps properly prepared medical evidence.

As I say, readily disposable.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Cliff Varnell

[David G. Healy]

Bill,

I was sent this post by Pat Speer from the Lancer Forum, where he is attacking Doug Horne. Since you and I are both

staunch supporters of Doug--whose work, in my view, represents a turning point in JFK assassination research by virtue

of his standing as a member of the ARRB and the thorough, detailed and meticulous character of his research--yet Pat is

attacking him there. His doubting of Sandra Spencer's memory because it was thirty years old is about as ridiculous an

objection as I have encountered. David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., for example, in his chapter on the medical evidence in

MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), also points out that Spencer could be so certain that these were not the photos she

had processed because they were on the wrong kind of paper, which she had not used. On page 241, Mantik explains

that Spencer had brought to her deposition a JFK photograph that had been developed ten days before his death. By

comparing the identifying marks on this photo to the autopsy photos, she was able to conclude that she had developed

none of extant autopsy photos. That would appear to be definitive evidence. Yet Speer dismisses it as mere "silliness"!

He also attacks Horne for being a "Liftonite". Whatever he may mean by that, I have discerned a fierce independence

of thought in Doug Horne. He is no body's disciple, including not Lifton's. I would observe that, while I differ from him

(Lifton) on several key points, including his belief that all of the shots were fired from the same direction, when I read

his BEST EVIDENCE (1980), I learned more about the case than I had from any other source. I am likewise skpetical

that Greer shot JFK but, since the issue is out there, I also regarded it as important enough to include in my four-and-

a-half hour documentary, "JFK: The Assassiation, the Cover-Up, and Beyond" (1994), which I have recently converted

into a DVD. I presented the evidence in its support and also explained why I do not believe it is necessary for Greer to

have shot JFK to account for all the wounds. Pat might as well dismiss me as a "Liftonite" for having such high regard

for Lifton's research, much of which--including the casket switch and the surgery to the head--has been borne out by

Doug Horne's research. There is an excess of silliness here, but none of it comes from Lifton, Horne, Mantik, or me.

Jim

86580, RE: Boswell's ARRB Skull

Posted by Pat Speer, Wed Dec-31-69 06:00 PM

Saundra Spencer torpedoes my ship? Classic. I am a relative newbie to the case. As a result, I had no ship prior to my reading ALL the HSCA and ARRB medical interviews, including O'Donnell, Knudsen, Spencer, etc. I didn't reject Spencer's silliness out of my seeing her as a threat, but out of putting her statements in their proper context.

I mean, can you imagine anything as SILLY as taking the statements of a photo developer over THIRTY years after he or she had developed some photos, and using their recollections of these photos as the basis for assuming there was a second set of photos developed? Because, for me, that's right up there with the silliest things I've ever heard.

There's something you need to understand. Horne was a Liftonite. The people the ARRB questioned, and the questions they were asked, were the fulfillment of Horne's quest to prove Lifton's theories true. Jeremy Gunn, who was, in fact, Horne's boss, allowed this to take place, but came away convinced most of the ARRB's witnesses were too old, and that the events had taken place too long before, for anyone to draw much from their statements. He approached the case with an open mind, and came away unconvinced.

Not so Horne. Having failed to win much of anyone over, and having been attacked by Bugliosi in his book, Horne decided to align the erratic statements and testimony of the ARRB witnesses to SELL a GRAND UNIFIED CONSPIRACY theory whereby Greer shoots Kennedy AND shots were fired from the knoll, whereby the Zapruder film is faked, and so are the autopsy photos, etc.

To do this, he props up the recollections of some senior citizens as utterly reliable, and others as questionable due to their giving in to pressure, etc. It's a circus ride, with him at the controls.

Now, for me, his failure to admit that, oh yeah, Joe O'Donnell was not just erratic in his ARRB interview, but later proven to have been utterly unreliable and suffering from dementia at the time of the interview, is a near fatal error, the equivalent of Garrison's putting a delusional man on the stand to testify against Clay Shaw.

But feel free to defend this "over-sight" if you like. Only ask yourself this--would you defend Vincent Bugliosi's forgetting to mention that, oh yeah, one of his key witnesses, let's say Helen Markham, was later shown to have been suffering from dementia at the time she said she saw Oswald kill Tippit? I'm betting you would not.

Doug Horne IARRB - Chapter 15

Secret Service Agents Viewed President Kennedy as a Dangerous Communist Appeaser,

Who Was ‘Soft on Communism’

As discussed in detail in Chapter 7, Secret Service agent Elmer Moore unburdened himself to University of Washington graduate student James Gochenaur in May of 1970, and in doing so revealed that many of the Secret Service agents sworn to protect President Kennedy had strong feelings of disloyalty toward him because they disagreed with, and were frightened by, his foreign policy initiatives. (Moore was not only the Secret Service agent who briefed the Parkland treating physicians in December of 1963 about the results published in the Bethesda autopsy report, and who ‘leaned on’ Dr. Malcolm Perry prior to that (in late November of 1963) to get him to stop describing the wound seen in the President’s throat as an entry wound, but he also interviewed Jack Ruby in jail in December of 1963, and furthermore, Arlen Specter revealed at Cyril Wecht’s conference in Pittsburgh in 2003 that Elmer Moore was also the agent who surreptitiously showed him an alleged autopsy photo of JFK’s back wound during the Warren Commission’s re-enactment of the assassination in Dallas, in the late Spring of 1964.38) Moore began his law enforcement career in 1939 and then served briefly with the Coast Guard before joining the Secret Service in 1942. Most members of the Secret Service, like Elmer Moore, either held local law enforcement jobs before joining the Secret Service, or were prior-enlisted members of the Armed Forces.

James Gochenaur provided information on Secret Service agent Elmer Moore to the Church Committee—specifically to Subcommittee Chair Senator Richard Schweiker—in the summer of 1975, and submitted to a tape recorded interview with HSCA staff member Howard Gilbert on May 10, 1977, from which a transcript was produced by the HSCA staff. The relevant portions of that long HSCA telephone interview relevant to Secret Service attitudes about President Kennedy’s foreign policy are reproduced below:

Gilbert: OK. Now, what did your conversations with him [Moore] pertain to?

Gochenaur: Ah, basically, him venting his anger at Kennedy, and ah—

Gilbert: What was the anger based on? Did he say?

Gochenaur: Well, he said he was a traitor. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He said Kennedy was a traitor?

Gochenaur: Yeah.

Gilbert: This is what Elmer Moore said?

Gochenaur: Right.

Gilbert: Now, why [did] he say—how did he explain that? What did he mean?

Gochenaur: Well, he prefaced it by saying that, ah, well, he said, you know, no matter how

strange things get here, we’ve got it better than they do. But he was giving everything

away to them. That’s what he was saying. [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: He was saying Kennedy was giving things away?

Gochenaur: Yeah, to the Russians. OK? [author’s emphasis]

Gilbert: All right.

Gochenaur: And, ah, he said, ah, he says: “It’s a shame that people have to die, but you know, maybe it was a good thing. A lot of people thought he was a traitor and sometimes I think that, too.” [emphasis added]

Gochenaur then went on to recount how Moore had then confessed to badgering Dr. Perry into silence about the entry wound in President Kennedy’s neck, and had admitted that the Secret Service agents investigating JFK’s assassination had been told they had to investigate the case in accordance with instructions, or they would “get their heads cut off.” Moore denied all of this to the Church Committee in August of 1975, but significantly, did admit to meeting with Gochenaur three or four times, to purchase surveillance photographs of protestors. Clearly, the two men did have a relationship in 1970 which might have been conducive to Moore unburdening himself. I have always found Gochenaur’s story persuasive, and credible.

seems that Pat Spear/Speer has been trying to usurp David Lifton and his authority for at least the past 7 years.... D. Horne's 5 volume set (recently released) just adds to Pat's *none evidence insider* frustration...to the best of my knowledge Spear has not made headway with his particular brand of naysay flavor, not here, not JFKReasearch, not aaj and certainly not acj, there's only one place left to go, and that's LANCER---land of the none-film/photo alteration crowd, where many lone nuts pose as CTer's....

[William Kelly]

Bill,

I was sent this post by Pat Speer from the Lancer Forum, where he is attacking Doug Horne. Since you and I are both staunch supporters of Doug--whose work, in my view, represents a turning point in JFK assassination research by virtue of his standing as a member of the ARRB and the thorough, detailed and meticulous character of his research--yet Pat is attacking him there. His doubting of Sandra Spencer's memory because it was thirty years old is about as ridiculous an objection as I have encountered....

Jim, Pat Speer should know better, but he is married to his theories and will only have to adapt them when there is a forensic autopsy and the questions are all properly answered rather than speculated over.

We've delt with Pat's bug about Spencer right here, and Doug mentions in my interview with him why such technicians are more believeable than other witnesses.

Doug also addresses the idea Greer was gunslinging while driving, and his analysis includes all possiblities that witnesses brought to the table, yet Pat - is that Pat saying Horne has an all ecompasing grand unified conspiracy theory that includes Greer shooting? That's Pat talking, not Doug.

Doug Horne's analysis of the medical evidence includes hundreds of witnesses, each weighted according to Doug's values, and Spencer's is only one, so you can throw that out and it still won't affect Doug Horne's conclusions that the assassination was a coup.

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/01...-questions.html

There's also internet idiots like David Von Pain who right off the bat questions the established facts that surgery was performed on JFK's head wound prior to the autopsy, as the autopsy doctor announced before beginning and as quoted by FBI agents Sibert & O'Neill in their report.

While DVP ridicules Horne for acknowledging that fact, it is the autopsy doctor and the FBI agents who establish it, not Horne.

DVP also thinks it farfetched that two brains were examined as part of the autopsy, a fact estabished over a decade ago by the official records and reported by AP and the Washington Post at that time, but DVP is just learning about it from reading Horne.

That's why DVP's an idiot, who also thinks the greatest assassin in history was a loser, rather than the Lone Patsy.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspir...e2e36113ce98e6b

Doug even tried, at first, to respond to serious criticism at Amazon and at some of the newsgroups, but it isn't worth while to follow these chumps around and trying to correct their nonsense.

From what I understand, there are a number of serious challenges to Doug's work underway, mainly from the CT side, some of which will criticize him for waiting ten years to write his book, and that he is an ONI pawn, etc. The worst is yet to come, but if what he is saying wasn't so dangerous, it would be just ignored.

As Jack White advises, all we can really say is for people to read Doug Horne's IARRB.

BK

Edited March 8, 2010 by William Kelly

[Michael Hogan]

Interesting video and accompanying story on Hugh Cart, who worked on the top-secret Corona Project: http://www.latimes.c...rack=lanowpicks

CORONA PROJECT

A project that----began over forty five years ago and lasted fourteen years.

A project that----did not allow you to do any work at home.

A project that----survived twelve failures prior to "getting-it-right".

A project that----required teamwork but no motivation.

A project that----provided vital information for the "well being" of all mankind.

A project that----was kept secret for forty five years after its first success.

Speaker Bio Don H. Schoessler worked at Eastman Kodak Company for 37 years until his retirement in 1986. After nearly a decade in the Kodacolor Division he moved to the Government Systems Division as a Senior Development Engineer. In 1995 the National Reconnaissance Office honored him with the Conora Pioneer Award and this year he received the Charles Stark Draper Prize from the National Academy of Engineering.

http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/imint/corona.htm

CORONA is the name for the first operational space photo reconnaissance satellite. President Dwight David Eisenhower approved the project in Febuary 1958. The project was conceived to take pictures in space of the Soviet Bloc countries and de-orbit the photographic film for processing and exploitation.

President Clinton signed an Executive Order on 22 February 1995, directing the declassification of intelligence imagery acquired by the first generation of U.S. photo-reconnaissance satellites; the systems code-named CORONA, ARGON and LANYARD. The order provides for the declassification of more than 860,000 images of the Earth's surface, collected between 1960 and 1972.

CORONA spacecraft were built from 1959-72 by Lockheed Space Systems under Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. Air Force contracts spanning 145 launches that provided intelligence the government has called "virtually immeasurable."

CORONA's payload was a vertical-looking, reciprocating, 70-degree panoramic camera developed by Itek that exposed Eastman Kodak film by scanning at right angles to the line of flight. Resolution in early flight years was in the range of 35 to 40 feet. By 1972, CORONA delivered resolutions of six to 10 feet, routinely. In the 1970s, flights could remain on orbit for 19 days, provide accurate attitude, position, and mapping information, and return coverage of 8,400,000 nm2 per mission.

http://www.eng.umd.edu/ihof/inductees/miller_plummer.html

The historic contributions of Edward Miller and James Plummer to satellite technology, and to the security of the United States, have earned them an honored place among engineering's greatest practitioners. Both worked on the top-secret Corona Project (1959 to 1972). Miller received his bachelor's degree from the university in 1950 in mechanical engineering, and Plummer received his master's degree in electrical engineering from Maryland in 1953.

The Corona Project created the field of satellite surveillance, providing vital photographic information that permitted the United States to gauge the nuclear threat posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War and pursue more effective foreign policies. The contributions of Miller and Plummer to the Corona Project lay in accomplishing the first successful recovery of a man-made object from earth orbit.

The Lockheed Corporation took the lead on Corona. Plummer was Corona program manager for Lockheed's missiles and space division and served as the overall systems engineer for Corona. He and a few other Lockheed engineers came up with the initial design of the satellite, which they were tasked with completing and launching within eleven months. Plummer was responsible for the development of payload applications, communications and the power supply for the satellite. Among the many technical aspects of the satellite Plummer's team tackled were the ascent guidance and on-orbit stabilization systems. The National Reconnaissance Office has credited Plummer as the one person responsible for the success of the Corona Project.

Major subcontractors also engaged in the project, including General Electric (GE) for the recovery capsule, Itek Corporation for the camera, and Eastman Kodak Company for the film development.

Miller's responsibilities as GE's project engineer and program manager included the design, manufacture, deployment, operation, and retrieval of Corona's satellite recovery vehicle. The design had to withstand many known and unknown difficulties: hostile loads during launch, acoustic noise during exit from the atmosphere, vacuum and low temperatures in orbit, and high temperatures and vibrations during re-entry. His previous work on experimental reentry vehicles and an intercontinental ballistic missile launch vehicle for the U.S. Air Force proved vital to the Corona Project.

Their efforts culminated in the first successful recovery of a man-made object from space—Discoverer 13 in 1960. A complex system of heat shields, radio communications, retrorockets, cold gas spin jets and parachutes allowed the capsule to safely jettison itself back through the atmosphere and into the Pacific Ocean, where it was retrieved. Discoverer 14, launched later that year, also was successfully recovered—this time in mid-air—and provided the first photography recorded from space, including pictures of Mya Schmidta Air Field, a Soviet base located near Alaska that the United States had never photographed before.

Miller was designated a Pioneer of Space Technology in 1985 by the Central Intelligence Agency and was honored in 1995 for his role as a Corona Pioneer. He also received the Army Distinguished Civilian Service Decoration for his work as Assistant Secretary of the Army (1975-77). Research led by Miller during that time resulted in such advanced weapons systems as the Apache and Blackhawk helicopters, the Abrams M1 Tank, and the Patriot High Altitude Air Defense System.

Plummer went on to serve as under secretary of the U.S. Air Force, chairman of the National Research Council's Space Applications Board, vice president of Lockheed Corporation, and chairman of The Aerospace Corporation. He was designated as a Space and Missile Pioneer by the U.S. Air Force in 1989 and was also honored as a Corona Pioneer in 1995. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and Honorary Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.