David Josephs

and that most every doctor to look at the brain photos going back to the 1960's had specifically ruled out that there was a bullet track heading upwards in the brain starting at this location.

Pat... BRAIN photos from the autopsy... the evidence related to the Brain, like the autopsy, is that neither are authentic... neither are original... and neither has to do with what happened to JFK.

So these are the photos you use as supporting evidence?

What convinces YOU that the photos showing the brain you are using to describe JFK is indeed JFK's brain?

You make the same surprised comments about what we read in the autopsy report... as if THAT accurately describes what happened in Dallas as opposed to what HUMES did to the skull....

Why do you accept so much evidence ...evidence that was created to leave its mark on history and tell a story that BECOMES about a lone shooter high and to the rear...

in favor of of it being reflective of the situation....

I just don't get it...

Do you see this hole, which is at the 1 0'clock position from the brain matter by the hairline, or not?

Pat offers the 3d Morph of the BOH images - I wanted to be sure which spot he was talking about... this is a spot well below the acknowledged "hovering hair" portion of the image...

Do YOU see a hole?

Touche Robert....

I've read Pat's conclusions... he appears to be defending the medical evidence as authentic and representatvie of the rear hitting shots and the blow out of the frontal bone. It's as if the ARRB never happened.

Shot #1.Approximate firing time: Zapruder frame 188.

Hit Kennedy in back around 190, fell out in limousine. (Possibly a hand-loaded bullet.)

From: the sixth floor window of the TSBD.

Shot #1 he suggests may have been what becomes CE399... hitting at z190 (hmmm, just the same as what LIFE says that not a single person at NPIC agrees with... ?? Nor could they understand how LIFE arrived at the frames for the 1st or 2nd shot... (see the CIA450 pages from NPIC). They simply do not agree with the conclusions offered by LIFE in ANY respect..

Does Pat forget that CE399 was never in Dallas? That there is no way to get it TO Dallas? and there is no indications anywhere that CE399 came into contact with anything human until Rowley hands it to Todd?

There is NO Z224 (or Z222) in ANY scenario... that makes sense to the NPIC. But Z242 is very high on their list.... here are the Zframes the NPIC and LIFE say shots hit their target....

"Shot or shots #2.Approximate firing time: Zapruder frame 222.

Hit Kennedy in hairline at frame 224, exited his throat. Connally wounded in his chest, wrist, and thigh. Wounds seem instantaneous, but it seems likely they were created by separate bullets rapid-fired from a semi-automatic weapon.

From: most likely the upper floors or roof of the Dal-Tex Building."

So those who have actually viewed the film repeatedly tell us that they see no evidence of a shot between 213 and 242... Are they looking at the same film as we are?

Z264?? I am posting the first couple pages of the NPIC evidence below to see that determining which frames had shots was a MATH PROBLEM and not a VISUAL one...

As you can see below, the "starred" column from the NPIC has the shot sequence 213-242-312

He has the SECOND SHOT from BEHIND, exiting his throat - when that flies in the face of all reality and testimony from those who actually see the wound. ER professionals who know much less about it than you or I or Pat does... idiots charged with saving people's lives under intense pressure requiring the correct triage and treatment of gunshot victims... Obviously PAT would know better what they saw and thought...

From an executive meeting we have the following Rankin exchange with Boggs... maybe PAT or ANDRIC can copy/paste that statement from the autopsy report.... in essence, an AUTOPSY REPORT that was changed or destroyed (as there is no reference to this injury as described in the extant report) suggests a fragment thru the neck yet not a bullet... nor another hole higher up... the repeated HOPE that shots were fired from behind other than the back wound (which O'Connor tells us was removed from the intercostal muscles on the right side of the ribcage)...

The SS tells of a bullet ledged behind JFK's ear... which the FBI would also acquire (Belmont to Tolson 11/22 learned about DURING the autopsy).. maybe THAT was the throat bullet...

Yet to continue to disregard ANY of the reliable evidence in determining the time and location of the shots... ??

Mr. Rankin:

Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time.

We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through. So that how it could turn, and --

Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went in a finger's length.

Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said

Shot #3. Approximate firing time: Zapruder frame 310-311.

Hit Kennedy near the temple at frame 313. Bullet fragmented. One piece of its core seems to have continued on to chip the concrete near Tague around 319.

From: the sixth floor window of the TSBD

First off I MUST say that Pat has done amazing work and willingly shares his thoughts and conclusions for all to see (and attack)

I simply disagree with the offered conclusions, as does the vast majority of the authenticated evidence (regardless of WHEN the NPIC pages where created, they represent the work of NPIC pros in trying to analyze the film to find evidence of shots hitting their target. There is no justification for wither NPIC or LIFE to have ignored a shot between 213 and 242... there is NO SHOT at 264, unless the frame numbers are terribly off between what they saw and what we have... and even the photos used for Homer's panels jump from 331 to 380-something... NO ONE except the FBI as I posted elsewhere (WCD298), would deal with anything between 331/2 and the end of the film.

I for one would love an answer to how the fragments wind up above and suspended in thin air when there is no bullet hole up there and the reliable witnesses prior to USG intervention all state the injury was to the right rear of the skull... and what all the activity and evidence is from behind that fence...

Thanks

DJ

Thanks Vince.... It would be one thing if, with the manipulation of the image, the rest of the blacks got crushed like that... but they don't.

If anyone has a bigger and better version of that frame I would greatly appreacite an email with the file attached at full size and resolution...

Regarding the EXIT...

Is it possible to have removed a trail of particles similar to those on the xray that would have led to the lower right rear? I ask since it is obvious the bullet hitting him in the right temple area completely fragmented to a level beyond that which is possible from a FMJ bullet at that speed...

The bullet speed of the MC is simply not high enough to cause the fragmentation we see in the xray... even at 3200+fps we do not get a micro dust trail of particles..

Since the throat was never properly opened during the autopsy... is it possible for a shot there to blow out the lower back of the head? While the temple shot simply adds to the damage? Those particles on the xray are very puzzling.

Could the reason we do not have the neck region in either of these xrays (or any xray I have seen) be becuase there WAS a trail of particles from the throat wound to the rear blow-out and when HUMES destroyed the evidence he simply could not remove all the particles? Dr. Mantik's conclusion that the blow out area is artificially covered in the copied xrays and the removal of most if not all the brain matter that may ahve held these perticels and shown this path is the reason why the brain had to disappear.

TOO MANY WITNESSES describe and draw a hole in the right rear... Bone was missing from this spot, not only avulsed OUT... there is obviously something being hidden at the right temple... the LEFT side of the skull is pretty messed up too by this time... again, another conflict...

The xrays and photos not only conflict, but are mutually exclusive. Where from behind could a shot have entered to leave those fragments and leave a wound as seen at Parkland? It couldn't.

EVERYONE in DALLAS, the SS and the FBI all put the wound at the right rear... everything from the storming out with the body of JFK is a stage play... I doubt there are more than a handful of authentic pieces of evidence related to the medical situation... and nothing that would reveal what actually happened.

KNOWLEDGE : The classical definition, described but not ultimately endorsed by Plato,^[3] specifies that a statement must meet three criteria in order to be considered knowledge: it must be justified, true, and believed.

"True" seems to be the only stumbling block here... yet according to history, the WCR is knowledge whose "truth" has been vigorously defended for over 50 years. In the absence of another justified and believed TRUTH... well you get it...

DJ

Dr. PERRY - Yes. Once the transverse incision through the skin and subcutaneous tissues was made, it was necessary to separate the strap muscles covering the anterior muscles of the windpipe and thyroid. At that point the trachea was noted to be deviated slightly to the left and I found it necessary to sever the exterior strap muscles on the other side to reach the trachea.
I noticed a small ragged laceration of the trachea on the anterior lateral right side. I could see the endotracheal tube which had been placed by Dr. Carrico in the wound, but there was evidence of air and blood around the tube because I noted the cuff was just above the injury to the trachea.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20949

Since this thread should concentrate on OSWALD LEAVING THE TSBD, I started a thread about potential trajectories and WCD 298

DJ

I've posted this before yet I do not think the implications of such a display have been fully appreciated...

The FBI created a scale model of DP as well as the DPD basement to "re-enact" the shootings via 3D model.

When seeing this WCD entitled: "Commission Document 298 - FBI Letter from Director of 20 Jan 1964 with Visual Aides Brochure"

One has no idea what treasure lies within...

Under Hoover's name we are told that this model of DP is so good that there is no need to go to DP at all - this model explains it all

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10699&relPageId=6

"These 3d models will assist eye witnesses in clearly demonstrating their recollection of the events...."

The FBI puts a shot :

Mr. LIEBELER - You also testified that you were standing perhaps no more than 15 feet away when the President was hit in the head and that you are absolutely certain that there were no shots fired after the President was hit in the head?
Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir; that's correct.

CE875:

The photographs in the album are to be viewed in their relationship with the attached survey report dated December 5,1963 . In each case the rear bumper is above the point referred

to a picture was taken at each point from 0+00 to the 6+25 mark,except no picture was taken at 5+00 mark as this was about 4 feet from impact of the third shot .

These pictures have been made to scale so as to show the same perspective as the human eye when held at a distance of about 16 inches from the eye .

Photographs showing the camera arrangement used to take the pictures and the moving pictures of these scenes are included in this album .

(commission exhibit 875 con't)

DJ: 4 feet from 5+00 is 4+96... whereas the plat and legends put the shot at 4+65, 30 feet further UP ELM. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0464b.htm

4+65 is the location of the "X" on the street for Z313... when in fact the WCR puts the shot at a variety of locations (headshot) .

Mr. LIEBELER - So, you were standing about where I placed the "X" on photograph No. 18 of Commission Exhibit No. 875.

<snip>

Mr. HUDSON - Yes; so right along about even with these steps, pretty close to even with this here, the last shot was fired - somewhere right along in there.

Based on seeing the base of the lamppost in the background of z375 and the best guess estimate of the line of sight thru the car modeled as the LAST shot, I estimated z375 give or take some frames.

This, like so much contained in the WCDocs never sees a commissoner or the light of day until uncovered years later.

The EVIDENCE states that a shot was fired before the first one in this model - ignored

The EVIDENCE states that a shot missed, hit a curb, and wounded Tague - ignored

The EVIDENCE states that a shot missed entirely and hit a manhole cover and was retrieved from the grass - ignored

The EVIDENCE contradicts when the LAST SHOT was taken... with a definitive statement in CE875 putting this last shot EXACTLY where the FBI puts it in this model

This last shot - last chance before the Trade Mart team got all the action - could very well have been from the WEST windows... There has been discussion that the man in the white T in Dillard in the SW window was LEE, the man walking past Mrs Reid, and in my opinion the one who gets into the Rambler...

If a shot really was fired at that point, 30 odd feet down the road... one begins to see how and why the FBI and WCR stopped their analysis at z334...

If we could ascertain

And just a quick note saying that I do not endorse RW as the BYP stand-in...

I am aware of others who could have been involved with the BYP... yet it is hard to dismiss RW and Stovall having the 3rd pose... which matches the ghost cut-out and FBI/DPD re-enactments...

... even though the photo (and therefore THAT pose) does not turn up for years and years....

Why aren't the ghost and reenactments of one of the two photos Rose/Stovall found and submitted as evidence?

Didn't 133-C only come into awareness just before the HSCA?

btw - the only microscopic analysis was of the line across the chin... I am not aware of analysis on other areas of the photo to detect addtional "pastes".

Thanks Ken...

yet what really chaps me is that the supposed HOLLYWOOD 7 has amazing versions of these frames and the expertise to back the obvious conclusion..

Why are we not seeing this most obvious of alterations in poster size at a press conference with Stone, and any and all others who can lend credibility to it???

What are "they" waiting for?

DJ

Hey there Blair...

Hopefully you are alerted to this post http://www.baylor.edu/lib/poage/shaw/index.php?id=85336

http://www.baylor.edu/content/imglib/1/5/4/3/154358.jpg

I tried to find photos of those trees specifically and finally have... from the next day or two...

The polaroid lens was maybe 114mm (most seemed to be) with a 1/1200 sec shutter speed - so that's why everything is in "focus" yet the 'Land Camera 80' as her camera is described as, was really a model 800 it appears. and why it appears we are closer to the building than she was....

The tree limbs match while the image on the right was probably taken with a standard 35mm...

- yet, where is the light pole in Moorman?

Good find, David. The photo on the right looks like it may have been taken a few feet West of Moorman's position. Gives an excellent illustration of the tree line against the TSBD. I am curious who took it and what day they snapped the photo.

Regarding the Light pole, if you look at the uncropped Moorman photo, there is something that resembles the light pole near the right side of the photo.

Thanks Richard - I see that now...

Amazing how the angles on things change so much about their perceived appearance and location.

That has to be one of the worst polaroid photos ever taken! I find it nearly impossible to believe THAT was how it came out.

DJ

btw - the few photos I have of the flowers in the middle grass area do not tell me where I got them, sadly.

Andric...

It's right there, under the magic marker square that was painted in to cover the wound... prettu amazing how we see what appears to be straight lines across the top and down each side of that black square...

Tell you what Andric... how about you proving where 0183 was from about 9pm friday until Stolley picks up a film cannister with who knows what inside...

or explaining the Phillips memo which contradicts the SS and Zapruder as to where copies were...

How about the 16mm version Homer et al works on after it is brought in on Sunday... versus the 8mm - different briefing boards - film from Sat night that has disappeared to history?

Or the movement of JFK's head between 157 and 158... Greer between 302 and 303... the lack of 0183 on this "authentic, original film"

What we SEE is not the only evidence - but here you go as you ask... no matter what the exposure or contrast, the same dark areas on Jackie or JC do not result in what looks like a black square hovering over the head...

YES the generation and version are not top quality... if you can find a version of the frame where this does not appear, please post....

Thanks

btw - in many of the frames between 320 and 360 we can see the effect on the rest of the head... yet I think this image tells all that we need about the authenticity of the zfilm....

the frames that had to be left in were still not acceptable... so some were fixed...

Thanks Robert...

You may find what you seek under "REPORTS TO CURRY" in boxes 2 and 5... the ones in box 14 are regarding the murder of OSWALD...

and on reports titled "Report on Officer's Duties"... most are in Box 3.

Hope it helps

DJ

(but they are not from the 22 or 23... they were submitted later in Dec, after they all got their stories straight...

03 03 002 Report On Officer's Duties date unknown E. R. Beck Original Report on officer's duties in regards to the President's murder

https://harveyandlee.net/~harveyan/Unraveling/Unravels.htm

This will give you some of the basics...

John goes much farther than that lost soul Larry Dunkel.... the key remains the manner in which the DPD and FBI organzied the evidence... the W-2's that were returned by the FBI was never sent to the FBI or in the possession of the DPD

"Among the additional items inventoried and photographed were W-2 forms from Dolly Shoe (1955), Tujague's (1955/56), JR Michaels (1956) and the Pfisterer Dental Lab (1956). But not one of these W-2 forms has the initials of a Dallas Police officer. None of these W-2 forms are on the DPD handwritten lists. None of these W-2 forms are on the lists typed at DPD headquarters (Stovall A & B, Turner 1). And none of these W-2 forms appear in photographs of Oswald's possessions spread out on the floor of the Dallas Police Department on November 23. But all of these W-2 forms have the initials of FBI Lab Technician Robert Frazier (FBI headquarters, Washington, DC). The evidence clearly suggests that these W-2 forms were created, initialed by Frazier, and added to Oswald's possessions while in FBI custody between November 23-26. In fact over 200 items of evidence were added to Oswald's possessions while in FBI custody. The W-2 forms were not found by the Dallas Police. They were created in Washington, DC for the purpose of altering the dates of Oswald's employment in the mid-1950s. It is pretty hard to imagine that a 16 or 17 year old teenager would keep 1955 and 1956 W-2 forms during his 3 years in the Marine Corps, 2-1/2 years in the Soviet Union, and year and a half moving from Dallas to New Orleans and back to Dallas. Why would Oswald keep 8-year-old W-2 forms and yet not keep W-2 forms, copies of tax returns, or any employment information from his work in 1962 and 1963?"

Other than 61-62 LHO had earnings in 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959 (he earns Marine Pay until Sep), 1960-June 1962...(Russia) July 1962-Nov 1963 (Reilly, Jaggars, Welding, TSBD)

Yet the earnings for Marina's SS benefit stops at his return from USSR... only the earning of HARVEY OSWALD are ever used...

John asks:

"The amount shown under the heading "Total Earnings" is, according to the Social Security Administration, Oswald's total earnings from 1951 (First Base Yr. or Starting Date) through 1963 (Last Base Yr. or Closing Date). Oswald's SSA records were safely tucked away in their files for up to eight years prior to November 22, 1963. Yet within two months following the assassination the SSA failed to include any of Oswald's pre-1962 earnings from his employment at Dolly Shoe (1955), Tujague's (1955-56), J.R. Michaels (1956) and the Pfisterer Dental Lab (1957-58) in the Determination of Award given to Marina Oswald in 1964. Why?"

Here I do not agree as much - Logic tells me that only the wages OSWALD EARNED while he was married to Marina would count toward her award, not earnings prior.... for HIS award I can see using ALL his earnings.

So if that be the case, the SSA ignoring anything pre Marina makes sense. Not sure why 1951 is the base year, an 11-12 year old wouldn't earn too much.... yet the real problem remains regarding the earlier W-2's and the lack of a Chain of possession until it hits the FBI Lab and RF... just like CE399.

I have the index in a spreadsheet and checked for any type of affidavit... unless they are in another batch of reports, there are no DPD affidavits other than what are listed....

Baker, Weitzman - both affidavits contradicted the official story as well as their testimony...

Curious - where/how did you find the 17 Sheriff reports? thanks

DOC_DATE PRIMAUTH QUALITY

11/22/63 Barbara Jeanette Davis Original Signed

11/22/63 Billy Nolan Lovelady Original Signed

11/23/63 Bonnie Ray Williams Original Signed

11/22/63 Buell Wesley Frazier Original Signed

11/22/63 Buell Wesley Frazier Original Signed

11/22/63 Cecil J. McWatters Original

11/22/63 Cecil J. McWatters Original Signed

11/22/63 Charles D. Givens Original Signed

11/22/63 Danny Garcia Arce Original Signed

11/22/63 George Jefferson Applin, Jr. Original Signed

11/23/63 Gladys Shastid Original Signed

11/22/63 Helen Markham Original Signed

11/22/63 Jack E. Dougherty Original Signed

11/23/63 James Earl Jarman, Jr. Original Signed

11/23/63 James Richard Worrell, Jr. Original Signed

11/22/63 Lee E. Bowers Original Signed

11/22/63 Linnie Mae Randle Original Signed

11/22/63 M. L. Baker Original

11/22/63 Marina Oswald Original Signed

11/23/63 Mary E. Bledsoe Original Signed

11/23/63 Michael Paine Original Signed

11/23/63 Mrs. R. A. Reid Original Signed

11/22/63 Roy S. Truly Original

11/23/63 Roy S. Truly Original Signed

11/22/63 Ruth Hyde Paine Original Signed

11/22/63 Sam Guinyard Original Signed

11/23/63 Seymour Weitzman Original

11/23/63 Seymour Weitzman Original

11/22/63 Ted Callaway Original Signed

11/22/63 Virginia Davis Original

11/22/63 Virginia Davis Original Signed

11/23/63 W. W. Scoggins Original Signed

11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original

11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original

11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original Signed

11/23/63 William Wayne Whaley Original Signed

Grand Count 36

And from the witness listing those wither in the Sheriff Depart or DPD:

Baker, Marrion WC Testimony, 11/22/63 Affidavit, 8/11/64 Affidavit Member, Dallas Police Department. Witness at assassination scene.

Curry, Jesse Edward WC Testimony 1, 2, 3, 8/10/64 Affidavit Chief, Dallas Police Department.

Day, J.C. WC Testimony 1, 5/7/64 and 6/23/64 Affidavits Lieutenant, Dallas Police Department.

Dhority, C. N. WC Testimony, 5/12/64 Affidavit Member, Dallas Police Department.

Fritz, John Will WC Testimony 1, 2, Affidavit Captain, Dallas Police Department

Martello, Francis L. WC Testimony, Affidavit Lieutenant, New Orleans Police Department.

I tried to find photos of those trees specifically and finally have... from the next day or two...

The polaroid lens was maybe 114mm (most seemed to be) with a 1/1200 sec shutter speed - so that's why everything is in "focus" yet the 'Land Camera 80' as her camera is described as, was really a model 800 it appears. and why it appears we are closer to the building than she was....

The tree limbs match while the image on the right was probably taken with a standard 35mm...

- yet, where is the light pole in Moorman?

We ought to rememebr that M3 was taken in the street, closer to the TSBD, and therefore the trees would indeed appear much taller than from other angles.

Some things of concern:

- How, with a polaroid, is the motorcycle and background in focus as the motorcycles is moving and would be blurred if she was not panning, or the background should be very blurry...

- Why is the quality so much worse than the other Moorman photos?

I also wanted to see about the 3 wise men's 5th floor WEST windows... which are now open at 12:40.... along with the the 6th fllor WEST end windows...

David - I always have a hard time seeing what others see in looking at short closeup sections of the Z film. What I am sure of is that the, or perhaps one of, the fatal head shots clearly come from in front, as did an earlier shot to the throat. So it does seem strange that the film would be doctored in other ways while leaving clear evidence of a frontal shot intact. Somebody argued that the people that altered the film did what they could in a short amount of time. Maybe that's true, and maybe the alterations you and others point out had the affect of hiding evidence of complicity on the part of Greer or someone else. It is suspicious indeed that no provably original film exists, if that is in fact true. Even though I have read a ton over 50 years, I am not nearly an expert.

If by some miracle a new Congressional or even privately funded investigation was begun, I would prefer that its initial energies were spent on the yet to be released files of intelligence agencies rather than on post assassination coverup. Sure its all important - call it who, how, and why. I want to know who. I feel I already know why, and of course I want to know how the conspirators pulled this off.

I'll concede that sometimes the devil is in the details. But when I talk to non-believers and relatively disinterested friends their eyes glaze over when I start talking about fake autopsy photos or altered Z film.

By design Paul, by design...

The workings and imagination required to create and execute a plan of this nature are far beyond that which the mere mortal understands. It is literally not fair to ask that the plan make sense, be logical, or not have included within the planning the cover-up itself.

Altering the dead body of the president to CREATE history... WHO would believe it?

Can we believe the 75" (6'3") of film (out of 33 feet) surrounded by splices and black film with no origin... with no identifying marks... and a very dubious chain of possession...

- A KNOWN copy to the Secret Service that night... and the mention of at least one extra copy either with Zapruder or the SS

- Virtually NO RECORD of those who saw the film that weekend with regards to what they saw... specifically... (Dino claims the headshot and result he saw was much longer than the few frames in the existing film) but there are no good interviews where the question was asked of the KODAK personnel, the JAMIESON personnel, or anyone else who may have seen the film prior to Sat night.)

I did a little research into what consitutes "knowledge" of something - in virtually all cases, the WRITTEN WORD is usually accepted as KNOWLEDGE based on Plato's principles: "it must be justified, true, and believed"

We all know in 1964 the WCR was "justified" and was "believed"... and by default accepted as TRUTH and in turn constituting KNOWLEDGE of the assassination. Undoing a supported and accepted TRUTH, especially the governement's, has always been virtually impossible.

We have 50 years and over 2/3 of the people STILL not believing the WCR is TRUTH... yet since there is no WRITTEN TEXT to takes its place... KNOWLEDGE does not change... the complexities of undoing the TRUTH is simply too much for the common person to understand, nor is there the desire to spend the time and energy to reach a place where it could be understood...

This remains one of the biggest and boldest lies in the history of man.... Lies so big that exposing them only makes the task MORE difficult... as one lie reveals 100 that require just as much understanding to even percievce them, let alone explain and understand them.

---

Regarding WHO Paul...

WHO saw fit to enlist the help of Gen Cabell from the CIA in mid 1960 to determine whether a textile asset-stripping conglomerate should buy a failing helicopter company. This little conglomerate, soon to be connected with the defense industry, is backed by an interesting group of companies and people including Sun Assurance of London, Sun Life of Canada, the Bank of Boston, Prudential, Hancock Life, the law form of Cravath, Swaine and Moore among others and the financial empires of Rothschild, Astor and Morgan....

WHO ordered the admirals to play games with the arrival of the two caskets? WHO can get the Surgeon General of the Navy, the ranking rear admiral of Bethesda and the POTUS' physician to hide the fact JFK was at the morgue over an hour before they said he was?

WHY does HOOVER send men to STRIPLING JHS in Ft Worth on Sat 11/23 at 7am to retrieve the 7 year old records of a boy who supposedly never attended there? This is less than 8 hours since Oswald was even CHARGED with the crime.

----

The CIA, again imo, was just as much a scap goat as Oswald, the SS and the FBI... they were/are the first line of defense and still, to this day, maintain camouflage for the WHO that benefitted most and run things in this world.

IMO we know HOW... the Historical record was falsified to contain KNOWLEDGE which although not believed, has been accepted as the truth with nothing of substance yet to take its place

Why? That is for each of us to reconcile... at the core - he was the greatest threat to the Status Quo that had ever come along... a Status quo extending back hundreds and hundreds of years.

my .02

Once understood - there is simply no way that anything accurately reflecting what occurred that day, remains... other than the poorly refuted witness testimony.

The devil is indeed in the details Paul... and the details of the Zfilm scream alteration.

Some of the most obvious signs the film is altered... FRAMES are missing from both of these sequences...

The movemnt of both JFK's head at 157-158 and Greer at 203-303 are physically impossible in the single frame they occur..

Studies done on 302/303 suggest the limo had not moved at all...

The break at 157 is 1.5 frames.

Under that is Hickey reacting to "something" as they finish the turn... except he completely ignores THIS movement to his LEFT in favor of one to his right rear...

He doesn't turn right until just before Altgens 6.... wonder what he was looking at around z150-z170

George W. Hickey, Jr. Special Agent, U.S.S.S.
Just prior to the shooting I was seated in the rear of SS-679-X on the left side. As IOO-X made the turn and proceeded a short distance I heard what seemed to me that a firecracker exploded to the right and rear. I stood partially up and turned to the rear to see if I could observe anything.

Instead of telling us that you THINK the zfilm is original... PROVE IT. What is it that appears on the extent film that convinces you it is the camera original as opposed to an altered film exposed in Zaps camera and replaced.

If one of the copies remained in 16mm format while the original was sent to DC Friday night in 8mm format... it's just a thought... we of course have no idea what actually happened.

But to claim what we are shown in Z is what occurred that afternoon is to disregard mountains of conflicting evidence...

David Joseph said it is obvious from the ZFilm that a shot was fired from the right front... which has been "explained" as jet-effect or muscle spasms, etc... since a good number of the frames surrounding 313 were removed to hide the ejecta from the back of the head... what was left was covered via plate painting... How is McC thrown under the bus by not agreeing with alteration here Andric? or Mr Ward for that matter.... there are too many problems with the zfilm in a number of areas for it NOT to be altered... including its current condition at the archives... there is nothing on that film that proves it as an original, THE original 0183... nothing. the film FROM its original form has been heavily altered... whether it was refilmed and replaced.. I believe so and very, very early that weekend...

So the conflict is ???

You said the film was made at the speed you specified "so that an alteration could be done quickly and easily to remove whatever may be objectionable," yet at the same time you believe that the film clearly shows a shooter from the right front.

But isn't a shooter from the right from one of the most--if not the most--, "objectionable" things imaginable to the alleged film fakers? How could the alteration have been done "easily" if the presence of a shooter from this position was "obvious" (in your opinion) at the end?

Another question. Why did McClelland --with all his alleged expertise on gunshot wounds-- have to wait for the Zapruder film to conclude that more than one shooter was involved, if the drawing commissioned Josiah Thompson's drawing of McClelland's wound description is correct? I mean, doesn't the drawing show a huge wound at the back of the head? And if we couple the drawing with the alleged small wound McClelland saw in the left temple (and if we assume he meant "right temple,") shouldn't that information alone be an obvious indication to him that at least 2 shooters were involved? Or did McClelland think (prior to watching the film) that the small entrance was an exit and the huge wound was an entry?

At this point all I have is, REALLY?

You can still post comments like that about the Zfilm... "since it was altered there MUST NOT be any evidence of a frontal shot"... do you even hear yourself?

"the most objectionable thing" they did the best they could in the time allowed to do it... movement was removed, plates painted over... what we have left was hidden for 12 years BECAUSE they did such a bad job and knew it would spark controversy... but then, it was too late.

I'd suggest going to any of the MANY threads on a variety of forums where I've had this conversation. Even HORNE talks about how 48fps during certain sequences would have aided... and how it was just a flip of the switch away... the end result copied and recopied would take years before it was found... when was the "original" finally analyzed Andric? and found to be totally and completely lacking of identification related to an "original"...

---

I said that if filmed at 48fps during these scenes, altering the film would be MUCH easier than if taken at the camera's setting of 16.

The frames removed add to the "back and left" movement by making it appear twice as fast as it was....

Holland, the footprints, bumper, cigarettes butts, Bowers, the other GK witnesses... are you at this point still claiming no frontal shot?

And with regards to your other incredibly naive questions Andric... why would a Dr at Parkland who had seen what REALLY happened be scared to open his mouth?

His report said it all and he was told to go away, he was wrong.

First there is the context of the times... they were TOLD that they were WRONG, and here's the autopsy... no Zfilm for 12 years...

stone walls, silence and death meet those who think 2 shooters out loud...

Everything shown to these people contradicted what they saw...

If there is a large hole in the right rear and you look inside, would you not be looking at the right cerebral hemisphere, if it was there? If the occipital is gone it would be easy to determine if the right or left brain was injured or MISSING... no?

I'm finding what appears to be pseudo-amazement at this conversation and your comments as indicative of someone who has not looked into the situation at all... nor consider the context of the times.

The US Government, military, informs you how wrong you were about your initial assessment,how it REALLY happened or at least how the story would go...in 1963.

What do you expect these people to do if they KNEW it didn't go down like that... but are told otherwise with the power and force of the FBI and US military...

You that brave Andric?

I realize it is not the popular yet I am going with the theory that ZFILM was at least partially filmed at 48fps if not entirely so that an alteration could be done quickly and easily to remove whatever may be objectionable...

Earlier in the thread, Mr. Ward gave up on his Zapruder-alteration views upon learning that McClelland said that watching the Zapruder Film is what made him turn into a CT.

Ward had to throw either his altertionist views or McClelland under the bus, and he chose the former. Do you still maintain that the film was both "quickly and easily" removed unwanted elements in order to bolster the lone-nutter theory, while at the same time convincing McClelland of the opposite?

Ward Wrote:

McClelland has since found himself at odds with official versions of what happened at Dealey Plaza. He says he was troubled immediately with the wounds. While the one to the President’s neck seemed to come from behind and was likely the work of Lee Harvey Oswald, it appeared the fatal shot to the back of the President’s head was an exit wound. And later when he closely examined the classic Abraham Zapruder film, he decided there had to be a second gunman. “That he (Kennedy) was shot from the front, from the picket fence,” adjoining the plaza.

McClelland knows this runs counter to the accepted, lone gunman reports, but he claims we will likely never know just what happened that day.

I do not see how this statement is in conflict with anything... He felt the wound he saw was an exit wound... it is obvious from the ZFilm that a shot was fired from the right front... which has been "explained" as jet-effect or muscle spasms, etc... since a good number of the frames surrounding 313 were removed to hide the ejecta from the back of the head... what was left was covered via plate painting... How is McC thrown under the bus by not agreeing with alteration here Andric? or Mr Ward for that matter.... there are too many problems with the zfilm in a number of areas for it NOT to be altered... including its current condition at the archives... there is nothing on that film that proves it as an original, THE original 0183... nothing. the film FROM its original form has been heavily altered... whether it was refilmed and replaced.. I believe so and very, very early that weekend...

So the conflict is ???

David,

An interesting picture.

The quality of the image does not allow certainty, but it appears to me that no windows on the 4th floor of the west side are open. The middle window may be the one members are thinking about. I believe the TSBD windows did not open flush, i.e. only the divider being seen when the lower window is fully open. When the lower window was opened fully the lower edge of the window could still be seen Although hard to see, we can see part of the lower window wood ribs between the panes, suggesting the window is actually closed. We can see a person standing behind the south 4th floor window. However the sixth floor south window is open. Not very wide, but it is open.

James

The important thing is that the 6th floor WEST facing window is open - the corner Dillard catches that person... a step to the right and that person is at this other window...

RE: the 4th floor - I always go back to Sawyer and his strange movements from 12:34-12:37

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? You went inside the building, is that correct?

Mr. SAWYER. We immediately went inside the building. I took--I believe Sgt. Harkness may have gone with me. I am not positive of that.

Mr. BELIN. Was the elevator on the first floor when you got there, or did you have to wait for it to come down?

Mr. SAWYER. Best of my recollection, it was there.

Mr. BELIN. You got to the elevator, went up, looked around back there. How long did you spend up there at the top floor that the elevator took you to? (DJ - THE ELEVATOR THEY TOOK ONLY WENT TO THE 4TH FLOOR)

Mr. SAWYER. Just took a quick look around and made sure there was nobody hiding on that floor. I doubt if it took over a minute at the most.

Mr. BELIN. To go up and look around and come down?

Mr. SAWYER. To look around on the floor. How long it took to go up, it couldn't have been over 3 minutes at the most from the time we left, got up and back down.

Mr. BELIN. Then that would put it around no sooner than 12:37, if you heard the call at 12:34?

Mr. SAWYER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Then you got down and what did you do?

Mr. SAWYER. I asked the Sergeant to double check the security around the building, and then I took two patrolmen and stationed them at the front door and told them, with instructions not to let anybody in or out. (THEY DIDN'T LISTEN OR IMPLEMENT THIS ORDER)

Mr. BELIN. And then what did the officers tell you?

Mr. SAWYER. That their information was that the shots had come from the fifth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.

Mr. BELIN. Did any officers give you any other information about the source of the shots other than the fact that it came from the Texas School Book Depository, at that particular time?

Mr. SAWYER. I can't say whether it was officers or who, but there was a reference also made to the overpass

Richard:

Your suspicion of a shooter(s) in a West-facing window makes sense, of course, and perhaps I should not dismiss such a strategic position. I'm making the classic mistake of trying to put myself in the plotters' "shoes" and applying my own logic to something that's unfortunately so speculative 50 years later. Whenever I take the entire assassination story up to 1,000 feet, I'm always left with an over-arching conclusion that the people who set this up were expert in such matters, and therefore had contingency plans in place, along with ground-level precautions such as using police (and "sweepers") to control evidence and eyewitnesses. Therefore, the TSBD becomes (for me) a place to draw attention and to incriminate Oswald ... a pure head fake or diversionary measure (like the stalled pickup truck, the ambulance, canyon fire, Tippit's murder). Someone once posted an intelligence strategy akin to magic, where such slight-of-hand and illusionary tactics are applied to an operation like this. That's why I have difficulty in allowing actual shooters to be positioned in the TSBD.

I do still like David's idea that we need to think in terms of two Oswald's in trying to unravel this story. One excellent outfall of this thread is that I no longer take as gospel the lunchroom legend, or the written statements about Baker, Truly, and the coke... as David put it so well, the eyewitness accounts are accurate but none of the "evidence" seems to hold water. And if Prayer Man is indeed Oswald, then this becomes a real game-breaker.

Gene

Gene - I've been spending the last 6 months or so pulling Armstrong's H&L apart and creating a side-by-side timeline which easily illustrates the H&L conflicts... After I am done and I check it thru with John I will be ready to put forth a paper - like Cliff notes - to the mass of info he pulled together. No One has gone to the extent as John has... and in most cases the Baylor collection has copies of original docs in their entirety...

Something to remember is the "editing" job the WCR writers/lawyers performed for the commissioners... the WC's only got to see what they were shown... if at all. Conclusions were drawn based on incomplete, altered, created and forged docs done systematically by the FBI... I doubt they were even shown this affidavit.

---

As one reads his handwriting... that TRULY "knows this person" yet does not name him at the time or subsequently, and is NEVER asked about the situation or the man Baker describes is to me, well amazing. Between this and the two rifle affidavits - which are instruments of legal evidence which in turn constitutes perjury.

An individual who lies about the content within an affidavit may be sued for perjury and can also be subject to the sentence given to others who lie under oath if he or she is convicted of perjury - See more at: http://court.laws.com/affidavit#sthash.xTivxHlV.dpuf

The Zfilm does not match the recollections of those there (the evenly spaced shots).. there is no explanation for the missed shots, or even the "1st" shot, while suggesting as strongly as possible the SBT is supportable....

May I suggest that it is not the case that most witnesses have described the shots as being evenly spaced?

Sorry Andric if I didn't state that clearly... on the ZFILM we have three fairly evenly spaced shots... about 160, about 225 and 313... when most everyone tells of the 2nd and 3rd shots being virtually on top of each other... and that JFK and JC are hit with two different shots between z200 and z235.

I realize it is not the popular yet I am going with the theory that ZFILM was at least partially filmed at 48fps if not entirely so that an alteration could be done quickly and easily to remove whatever may be objectionable...

The painted frames between 313 and beyond are just that... they hide a frontal entry and rear blow-out... among other things.

Muchmore/Nix are missing frames as well - where debris would have been ejected out the back of the head...

With regards to that drawing... you are sure it was done BY McClelland and not just reviewed by him? It seems to me, even with the way they've tilted his head back in the color version, that all three fit pretty well. and that the wound is about level with the ears as well as above and below..

Ken...

Those who saw a different version of the Zfilm say that the shot(s) literally lifted him up out of the seat...

Yet the Newman's afidavits relate to the shot to his back just before the stemmons sign... the JUMP UP you are describing is related to the arms flying up and his reaction...

Those that saw the other ZFILM say it was the headshot that lifts him up and then over to the left...

Mr Newman tells us it appeared the shot hit him just above the right ear... he appears to be in a very good position to tell.

By posting the text we remove all doubt as to what she said... HE said JFK was standing, not her - at least not in the affidavit.

The fact that they are arguing about ER staff not knowing where a wound is, is getting absurd. Dozens of people have to be wrong for the US GOVERNMENT to be right... without any proof.

and grown people ARGUE about this! Amazing.

Mrs: When President Kennedy's car was about ten feet from us. I heard a noise like a firecracker going off. President Kennedy kind of jumped like he was startled and covered his head with his hands and then raised up. After I heard the first shot, another shot sounded and Governor Connally kind of grabbed his chest and lay back on the seat of the car

Mr: We were standing at the edge of the curb looking at the car as it was coming toward us and all of a sudden there was a noise, apparently gunshot [sic]. The President jumped up in his seat, and it looked like what I thought was a firecracker had went off and I thought he had realized it. It was just like an explosion and he was standing up. By this time he was directly in front of us and I was looking directly at him when he was hit in the side of the head.

I thought the shot had come from the garden directly behind me