David Josephs

Cliff, I am going to have to assume that there were a number of military personnel in that room who do not have anyone who will VOUCH they were there for a number of reasons. But how about Major Gen Wehle who is listed on the autopsy attendee sheet from I believe the S&O report

LIPSEY: So, we watched the autopsy. Once again, my hours are a little fuzzy. The autopsy lasted approx. , if I'm not mistaken, approx. 3 - 4 hours. After that we stayed in the room. When the men from the funeral home came in, because, by this time when Gen Wehle had come back down, but he was in and out. He was still making a lot of arrangements, but he would come in occasionally for a couple of minutes to let me go out and take a little break. Then the men from the funeral home came in and we sat there while they more or less put him back together and made the cosmetic, made the different cosmetic changes that had to be made on the body.

Yes, Kellerman is describing the right temple wound to the RIGHT OF THE EAR in the hairline. Just yet another wound location not listened to or recorded by the WCR… Lipsey is in good company

Cliff – that they describe a frontal shot after a SHOOTING EVENT is no real stretch now is it? Then the hole was sliced thru… THEN it was obliterated… what we see on the Zfilm – IF THE THROAT WOUND WAS CAUSED BY A FRAGMENT – is his reaction to the shot in the back which even if it only went in a inch or so could and would cause pain to the throat area AND cause the arms to raise…. The reaction is fine… that you believe it was caused by a paralyzing ice dart is still a stretch. Hearing “My God, I’m hit” and the number of fragments, a very small 2-3mm fragment could have easily caused that hole.

So yes, it is possible that they were wrong about the throat wound.

Again Cliff… they were in an ER dealing with a gunshot victim. It was a VERY SMALL HOLE so either you have your ice dart… or it was an exiting fragment. Maybe if they dissected the wound – or let Rose do the autopsy – we’d know.

The MEDICAL EVIDENCE is inauthentic Cliff… not the Parkland witnesses. They saw a gunshot entry, which as I say, is expected. But even by their standards it was a VERY SMALL HOLE for a bullet. Besides… if you are going to foster the ice bullet/flechette idea please remember that they were designed to leave no mark, enter undetected thru clothing… If the throat would can be considered “undetected” the CIA must have gone back to the drawing board…

“Cause no one was hit” – so hearing a shot, seeing the dust… means the SS should what… slow the car down further?

The back shot occurs at about z220. The 143 frames prior I discuss is 313-143 = z190 so it really should be 113 frames earlier…. I hypothesize that the “FIRE” command came over a radio and up to three people fired simultaneously…

The delay in seconds you attribute to the toxin working is AGAIN, not how it was designed. If you are going to argue hi-tech CIA weapons… then get what they do correct please. This toxin was instantaneous… as designed. What good would shooting a dog with a weapon that took seconds to work… BARK BARK. The 6 second delay thing is not applicable IF the wound was a fragment… The BACKWOUND could have caused the same paralysis and still allow him to speak. How would YOU FEEL with a bullet lodged in your back?

Your description of JFK trying to loosen his tie is absurd Cliff… and of course the BACKSHOT comes after the FIRST SHOT… the FIRST SHOT occurs at z160 to many… z190-220 for others like JC who know it hit JFK before he was hit by a separate shot. Jackie describing JFK as “quizzical” is nice and all but it is just an adjective… So Cliff, he’s shot in the throat at what 190? And we so no blood, no realization of blood by Jackie who is looking right at him, nothing seen by Nellie…

Now take a look at the FRONT of JFK’s shirt… Good luck with that as the only image I have of the FRONT is the closeup of the button and lapels… there was a bullet hole not an inch from this button and collar… where’s all the blood from this wound?

They got it wrong – possibly – because all they saw was the entrance hole… and then it is lost to history.

I am still going to disagree with your premise that the throat wound MUST have been caused by a shot… not because anyone at Parkland was so wrong… they just went on instinct… SMALL ENTRY LARGE EXIT was what they saw… TINY entrance and the head blown out in the occip….

All I am saying is there is also evidence that contradicts the autopsy findings that a fragment MAY have caused the throat wound and the related trauma surrounding it… a fragment coursing thru JFK would cause a number of the upper chest wounds that were recorded.

I repeat, I cannot say one way or the other based on the available evidence whether the throat wound was NOT a fragment exiting. I can also say that a frontal shot to accomplish what you suggest is possible… but not necessarily the ONLY solution to the throat wound.

I do not see his reaction at 225+ as having to be in response to a throat wound as opposed to a back one which in turn makes your 6 second argument moot. IF there was no throat shot… the fragment theory makes perfect sense.

And I appreciate the restraint… I do not think any less of you as a person for believing in ice bullets and self-propelled flechettes…. Because I think you make valid points presented well I enjoy the conversation… I will leave some room for a throat shot if you leave some room for other possibilities.

Cheers Cliff

DJ

I believe I addressed your post but want to clarify...

I am not arguing against the T3 wound - no matter how you slice it the SBT is not possible.

Now, whether the damage you described was actually seen at the autopsy - again, how would we know if they did not write it down?

Check the autopsy report... there is simply no mention of the condition of JFK's head, mouth, sinus, neck, throat... http://jfklancer.com/autopsyrpt.html

so we could not know whether those areas were damaged or not.

With regards to the findings of the Parkland Doctors and the throat wound... it LOOKED like a small entry wound...

Rankin tells us that AN AUTOPSY REPORT informs them that that hole was caused by a fragment... this HAD to be written somewhere for him to quote it.

And it had to have been changed to what the autopsy says today.

Do you have info that they did look at these areas you name and concluded something from that examination? your #d) no evidence from Bethesda does not mean it was not there, it simply means it was not even looked at... a BIG difference.

Cheers

DJ

David,

O.k. lets discuss this. First can you point me to the Rankin quote. I am not familiar with it.

Lets assume that the throat wound is an exit wound, as you suggest.

So I can think this through, before replying are we agreed that this throat wound occurred before Z 225. Or are you contesting that, that is not the moment.

In which case when do you suggest this wound happened?

James.

Ok... sounds good

From the Jan 27 1964 Exec Session.

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcexec/wcex0127/html/WcEx0127_0069a.htm

Mr. Rankin:

....We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably

a fragment came out the front of the neck...

For the throat wound to be of exit it would have to be a result of the bone and bullet fragments from a head shot... and depending on who you believe this was either at 313 or 343 (there is very good evidence that the WCR pushed the location of 313 from 4+65 to 4+95 feet... 30 feet further down the road)

So no, if the wound is as Rankin says the Autopsy described as a fragment exiting... it could not be before 225 and Kellerman was correct when he heard JFK speak after the back wound. I believe they were most afraid of an autopsy in TX that would reveal the frontal shot(s) as well as to find bullets that were written about but are no longer around.

If you look at the Frazier/Todd/Rowley/Cunningham bullet trail... it is obvious there are more bullets than accounted for.

Cheers

DJ

I believe I addressed your post but want to clarify...

I am not arguing against the T3 wound - no matter how you slice it the SBT is not possible.

Now, whether the damage you described was actually seen at the autopsy - again, how would we know if they did not write it down?

Check the autopsy report... there is simply no mention of the condition of JFK's head, mouth, sinus, neck, throat... http://jfklancer.com/autopsyrpt.html

so we could not know whether those areas were damaged or not.

With regards to the findings of the Parkland Doctors and the throat wound... it LOOKED like a small entry wound...

Rankin tells us that AN AUTOPSY REPORT informs them that that hole was caused by a fragment... this HAD to be written somewhere for him to quote it.

And it had to have been changed to what the autopsy says today.

Do you have info that they did look at these areas you name and concluded something from that examination? your #d) no evidence from Bethesda does not mean it was not there, it simply means it was not even looked at... a BIG difference.

Cheers

DJ

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 --

James...

That is what they TELL us... Sorry, but the FBI's track record with regards to this case's physical evidence is pathetic.

Does that little crescent look as if anything was taken from there as opposed to the lower hole...

Shouldn't we have seen fibers from the jacket and shirt in his backwound and on the bullet?

And there are those that testify to a hole thru JFK right about at that spot on the jacket.

David I have never examined the jacket, however Humes did examine it on Monday March 16th before he went on to testify. On P. 365 it appears that Specter wanted Humes to say that this upper hole is the back entrance wound through the jacket. There is a superb moment when asked by Specter does this hole go all the way through the jacket, Humes initially says yes. Then he pauses for a moment and says this hole is not quite as clear as the damage to the lower hole. Then, when asked directly by Specter does this hole go all the way through the jacket, Humes says no. The damage does not go all the way through.

However it is not just the appearance of a hole in this region of the jacket, it is that there is no corresponding hole in the body that coincides with this damage to the jacket. I may argue that the back hole seen in the autopsy image is unlikely to be around T3, I feel it may be nearer T2. But what is certain is that this hole is also nowhere near where you believe this damage to the jacket is. Let alone the fact that Humes, who did examine the jacket, is on record stating that it is not a through hole through the complete jacket.

There is little if any reason to shoot JFK in the throat from the front with such a small round.

It is MUCH MORE LIKELY that a fragment of bullet or bone exited there (the embalmers notes include 2-3 small holes in the cheeks where "shrapnel" is said to have exited.

There is a logic to this idea, but it does not stack up. Aside from the fact that the embalmers note refers to small damage to the cheek and not inside the mouth. Putting aside that this happens too early in the assassination it is not possible. It is not just that damage has to be inside the mouth the following have also to be damaged.

a) there has to be a hole in the roof of the mouth to allow these fragments into the mouth.

there also has to be hole in the floor of the mouth to allow these fragments to move into the trachea

c) there also has to be a means whereby these same fragments can now exit the trachea.

d) there is no evidence that this kind of damage was discovered at Bethesda.

AND all this has to be done in such a way as to fool experienced Parkland doctors into thinking what they are seeing is a bullet wound of entrance.

The problems involved for this to happen are so complex, they make it an impossibility.

I concur that there is a logic to your idea but practically speaking the requirements for it to happen far outweigh the possibilities.

James

='Cliff Varnell' date='18 April 2012 - 03:07 AM' timestamp='1334711223' post='250682']

='David Josephs' date='17 April 2012 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1334706576' post='250680']

And there are those that testify to a hole thru JFK right about at that spot on the jacket.

Who testified to a "wound thru JFK" at the base of his neck? How is it, David, that everyone who saw

JFK's low back wound and everyone who saw his throat entrance wound got it wrong in the same way?

Mass hallucination?

Gimme a break...

============

No Cliff... just a few people who saw things differently... Except ANYTHING at Bethesda has to be taken on faith as we reallt have no idea what occurred between Parkland and that table.

LIPSEY: Alright, as I remember them there was one bullet that went in the back of the head that exited and blew away part of his face. And that was sort of high up, not high up but like this little crown on the back of your head right there, three or four inches above your neck. And then the other one entered at more of less the top of the neck, the other one entered more of less at the bottom of the neck.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Entry into this man's head was right below that wound, right here.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the bottom of the hairline immediately to the right of the ear about the lower third of the ear?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right. But it was in the hairline, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. In his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Near the end of his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the size of that aperture?

Mr. KELLERMAN. The little finger.

='David Josephs' date='17 April 2012 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1334706576' post='250680']

CLIFF:

It is also possible that Rankin was correct when he said he was looking at an autopsy report....

There is little if any reason to shoot JFK in the throat from the front with such a small round.

I disagree most vigorously.

They had the capacity to paralyze a target before the kill shot -- to insure a kill shot, to avoid the

possibility that a non-lethal first shot might cause JFK to duck down. JFK seized up paralyzed in about 2 seconds,

utterly consistent with known testing by the CIA.

They had the capacity to fire a blood soluble toxin with the second shot.

These capacities existed. It's a fact. Why do you think they wouldn't use the technology available to them?

==========

I am of the opinion that he DID speak since the backwound was a shallow, non-transitting one, and the throat wound comes after the headshot.

Since the autopsy was not properly done we have no idea what the head, skull, mouth, or any other thing actually looked like at the time of the shooting.

I am willing to agree to disagree about the throat shot Cliff... I do not want to get into a shouting match over something that is masked by inauthentic evidence.

ANY shot prior to the kill shot would be cause for alarm, if alarms were on people's minds... they weren't. We have a shot just after the turn onto Elm... there is plenty of corroboration for this shot "sounding like a firecracker or backfire" (ground level sounds) and causing cement to kick up beside the limo.... Why weren't the alarms raised at this point... plus, it is 143 z frames after the back shot before 313... are you saying that his being paralyzed in turn cause the SS agents to be paralyzed? cause Jackie not to pull him down, Greer to speed off?

I do not accept your premise as to WHY a paralyzing shot would even be taken, and especially so far before the killzone... No Cliff... I am going to stick with the throat wound NOT being a bullet but a fragment along with other fragments... and themedical evidence we have is simply not complete enough to say ne way or the other....

Mr. KELLERMAN. As we turned off Houston onto Elm and made the short little dip to the left going down grade, as I said, we were away from buildings, and were there was a sign on the side of the road which I don't recall what it was or what it said, but we no more than passed that and you are out in the open, and there is a report like a firecracker, pop. And I turned my head to the right because whatever this noise was I was sure that it came from the right and perhaps into the rear, and as I turned my head to the right to view whatever it was or see whatever it was, I heard a voice from the back seat and I firmly believe it was the President's, "My God, I am hit," and I turned around and he has got his hands up here like this.

='David Josephs' date='17 April 2012 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1334706576' post='250680']

It is MUCH MORE LIKELY that a fragment of bullet or bone exited there (the embalmers notes include 2-3 small holes in the cheeks where "shrapnel" is said to have exited.

So JFK started reacting to a wound in his throat before he suffered a wound in his throat? And all the people

at Parkland who spoke of a throat entrance wound suffered the same mis-impression?

No, I don't find either of those scenarios likely at all, to put it mildly.

==========

Again Cliff...it's all how you want to see it. IF there was no frontal shot... AND we know the back shot did not go thru the throat... the only other possibility is a fragment of bullet or bone. IF there WAS a frontal shot I am willing to entertain your theories... I am just not yet convinced of this throat shot when there are other explanations as well as contradictions with Kellerman's testimony.

='David Josephs' date='17 April 2012 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1334706576' post='250680']

Sadly, since the evidence with which we are given to work is such crap... completely inauthentic, proving what happened is futile.

There is nothing inauthentic about the statements of the witnesses to the low back wound and the throat entrance wound.

You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater -- and indirectly engaging in the same witness bashing we get from LNers.

==========

Maybe you misunderstand... there WAS a lower back wound... and yes, the throat hole was considered an entrance wound from a bullet at Parkland, no argument there.

But you have to address the 143 frames or so where JFK had been shot at least once in the back... and whether paralyzed or not, NOBODY - save Hill - comes to his aid...

NOBODY speeds away, Nobody moves heaven and earth to cover up and save the president...

Whether the hole was an ice dart or not has no bearing on that travesty or the FACT the final shot(s) were from the front.

='David Josephs' date='17 April 2012 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1334706576' post='250680']

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

What was said FIRST, and later corrected to implicate Oswald more completely... MAY be the real clues to the mystery... If a bullet worked its way out AND a fragment exited the throat...

we have very simple answers for very strange happenings.... While I still think ANYTHING is possible including the ice bullet idea... our disagreement does not detract at all from the conclusion...

Cheers

DJ

Rankin struggling to put the evidence into a 3-shot scenario is amusing. And ridiculous. The witnesses

with the best view of JFK describe him reacting to throat trauma from the first shot, which is what the

Zapruder film also shows.

Do you really think JFK started reacting to throat trauma before he was struck in the throat?

I don't.

And I see no reason to impeach the testimony of the throat and back witnesses in favor of such capricious scenarios.

======

A fragment of bone exiting the throat is NOT a capricious scenario... in fact, are you sure you mean "capricious"?

ca•pri•cious  adjective

1. subject to, led by, or indicative of caprice or whim; erratic: He's such a capricious boss I never know how he'll react.

2. Obsolete . fanciful or witty.

What JFK is doing with his hands can be interpreted a number of ways... I see him being pushed forward slightly AFTER his arms raise from behind the sign.

Plus, wouldn't we expect to see some blood on JFK if he has a hole in his throat? Looking at Altgens and Z255-260... not so much. Yet I have reached no conclusion on this matter.

All I do know is that while either scenario is possible as the technology was available.... I don't know how we can resolve the holes left in each.

Cheers

DJ

David:

There has been a lot written on this forum about Dulles.

I mean not just by me either. Most people think he is on the short list of suspects in this case.

Not just because of the WC, although there is a lot to talk about there.

But his actions in deceiving Kennedy about the Bay of Pigs. And then trying to cover this up at the hearings and also in the press.

This is something I am going to deal a lot with in the first part of my rewrite.

Since I think this is crucial to understanding the case.

Agree 100% Jim....

But jumping on the man - who if you notice has been a member a while - cause he only has a few posts and asks a decent enough question (albeit covered in the past) is indicative of the OTHER forums where freedom to express oneself is crushed from so many directions.

Your response just caught me by surprise I guess.... Dulles is an amazing subject and worthy of many discussions...

I hope I did not overreact here... a little sensitive from the other forums I'm sure.

DJ

John et al... thanks for all that you do to keep this available.

Also thanks to the mods for keeping this place civil

James...

That is what they TELL us... Sorry, but the FBI's track record with regards to this case's physical evidence is pathetic.

Does that little crescent look as if anything was taken from there as opposed to the lower hole...

Shouldn't we have seen fibers from the jacket and shirt in his backwound and on the bullet?

And there are those that testify to a hole thru JFK right about at that spot on the jacket.

One possible explanation includes the finding of the Bell bullet, the finding of the bullet in JFK's clothes at Bethesda, the two bullets discussed in two separate SS reports as posted and the Murray photos of out favorite blond man taking something from where Foster says a bullet lodged.

Let's make this plain as Day - the FBI and SS made evidence disappear. Pieces of the jigsaw puzzle are gone forever so that we will never see the whole picture. That there was a conspiracy if no longer an issue. Why it is continuing to this day to be glossed over is a different subject entirely... one that NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY will help you understand.

CLIFF:

It is also possible that Rankin was correct when he said he was looking at an autopsy report....

There is little if any reason to shoot JFK in the throat from the front with such a small round.

It is MUCH MORE LIKELY that a fragment of bullet or bone exited there (the embalmers notes include 2-3 small holes in the cheeks where "shrapnel" is said to have exited.

Sadly, since the evidence with which we are given to work is such crap... completely inauthentic, proving what happened is futile.

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

What was said FIRST, and later corrected to implicate Oswald more completely... MAY be the real clues to the mystery... If a bullet worked its way out AND a fragment exited the throat...

we have very simple answers for very strange happenings.... While I still think ANYTHING is possible including the ice bullet idea... our disagreement does not detract at all from the conclusion...

Cheers

DJ

Yo Jim... 6 or 6000... what does it matter if a question is asked in good faith with a reasonable expectation of an answer?

I'd have to search, but are you aware of any works that detail Allen's activities from his firing to his inclusion on the WC?

Was he being watched by the FBI? Anyone else?

I am simply not that up on Allen's activities in this time period and would think if he was involved, it would be fairly easy to pinpoint suspicious activity...

Then again, if the JOKE is that he was on the WC and was able to remove evidence of ANY of his activities... then ok, funny joke.

But if there is a piece written on this time period - I would like to see it.

thanks

DJ

Been reading about Baggett, Hawkins, Hutson and the lists of officers who all subdued Oswald.

What we do not have are the names of the rest of the officers in the alley... or do we?

and were any of them called to testify? If he was back there when Oswald was let out the front

he would have to have seen the OTHER Oswald taken away. No?

thanks

Gee James...

Where could it have possibly gone?

Most local tv/cable stations will still have a beta machine... if finding one gets tough

fwiw

DJ

Mike,

The Military DID it ...

Peace

DJ

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military.

Peace to you as well,

M.

Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA....

With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy...

the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted..

If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned.

I look forward to your response

DJ

David,

Oddly enough None Dare Call It Conspiracy was the first book I ever read on this subject. In 1973, was loaned to me by a college friend as I was talking about the JFK conspiracy to him.

I'd like to read it again, but I recall it was quite from a John Bircher bent.

Dawn

Hey there Dawn...

Would like to know what you mean by "Bircher bent"

thanks

DJ

Mike,

The Military DID it ...

Peace

DJ

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military.

Peace to you as well,

M.

Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA....

With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy...

the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted..

If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned.

I look forward to your response

DJ

Yes, under the Act, the CIA "had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted." But that's the point. The CIA got anything it wanted. The Act gave it unlimited access to military resources for its own purposes without accountability under certain circumstances, which it could (and often did) fabricate. The Act allowed the CIA to call the shots and not even the JCS would know what it was doing. That's a coup in itself: a secret agency obtaining use of all U.S. military power.

Biography: http://educationforu...st&p=235641

I will grant you that the Act made the CIA much more powerful and less accountable... yet all the Military Intelligence acronyms were in existence well before and imo the line between the CIA and Military was virtually invisible. The Military had the budget, manpower, equipment and history... I think the CIA simply took the most evil and cunning of the Military intelligence... added European spy networks and more Evil... added other "personnel" with very little care other than their ability to destroy...

and the CIA was born.

Curious... Anthony Frank used to post here often and had a POV that stated the KGB had so infultrated the CIA by then that this and other assassiantions were all part of a KGB plan... he says that in the 1984 closed sessions, hundreds of KGB were identified within the CIA... he wrote an interesting book on the subject that he let me read the drafts of, yet it seemed to me to stop short of the required proof... just wondering if you had come across his posts

DJ

Mike,

The Military DID it ...

Peace

DJ

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military.

Peace to you as well,

M.

Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA....

With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy...

the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted..

If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned.

I look forward to your response

DJ

A very valid point Martin...

But since the DPD Homicide Division did not see clear enough to want to use a stenographer for Oswald's interrogation...

I get the feeling the DETAILS were really not all that important, as in "we're helping with the frame-up so all the details have to work" was NOT a train of thought...

What was ? Getting the (Ozzie/Hidell) rifle to the 6th floor FROM Irving the day before..... If they didn't need his interrogation in court... what use would there be for all the other "evidence"?

It would make sense that those who dropped the hulls and rifle would also leave the bag... and this presupposes that Oswald was TOLD to go home on Thurday for whatever reason that was needed.

Now, if Oswald had Irving Sports Shop mount a scope in Novemeber... and this was OUR OSWALD

how are the BYP authentic with a scoped rifle in March?

That morning FBI Agent Emory Horton arrived at Dial Ryder's house in Irving

at 10:30a m. Commission atorney Liebeler asked, "How did Horton know to come

out to the sports shop?" Ryder replied, "Actually, I don't know .... .I told him I had a ticket

with the name Oswald, no date, no address, just for drilling and tapping and

boresighting-no address, or name; he didn't say he'd like to see the ticket ..... we went

up to the Irving Sports Shop and I opened it up and got the ticket and showed him."78

Liebeler asked, "Did you give the tag to Mr. Horton?" Ryder replied, "No; he told us

to hold on to it, keep it and they would probably get it later on and they did."79

Ryder told agent Horton there was no record of selling mounts for the scope and

this indicated to him that the customer (allegedly Oswald) brought the scope and mounts

with his gun. Ryder said the only work he would have performed was the labor to drill,

tap, and bore sight the rifle.

When shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, Ryder said that he associated

Oswald's picture with that of an individual who brought in an Argentine made rifle about

two weeks ago and had a scope attached to the gun.80 But Ryder explained that an Argentine

rifle has a different bolt assembly than did the gun found on the 6th floor of the

TSBD. The FBI neither asked Ryder for the name and address of the man who brought in the

Argentine rifle, nor did they review the shop's repair tickets, nor did they make any attempt to learn

if the individual ever existed.

According to Armstrong (page 17)

NOTE: After the assassination Dallas Police detectives found a document that has been

incorrectly identified as Oswald's birth certificate. This document is listed as item #448

in Warren Commission Exhibit 2003 and identified as "Birth Certificate# 17034." This

document is NOT a birth certificate nor is it the "Declaration of Birth" mentioned above.

Item #448 is merely an acknowledgment by the New Orleans Parish Office of Records of

Births, Marriages and Deaths that Oswald's birth was recorded in Book 207, Folio

1321. 52-03 Upon payment of a small fee, anyone can obtain such a certificate.

The orinal "Declaration of Birth" has never been found, nor was a copy published in

the Warren Volumes. The FBI obtained a Copy of this document from an unknown source,

which was released by the FBI along with thousands of other J F K related documents in

1978.

So still no Birth Certificate for Oswald...

question - if they were going to invent the paper bag in response to pressure like this - why did they not come up with something more convincing and/or consistent with something that could contain a rifle? Why did they describe something with dimensions that made no sense? I would a assume that a story concocted with and for the police would have devised something more plausible than a bag that was too small.

The bag was needed to get the rifle to the TSBD... there NEVER was a bag in Wesley's car...

In fact, the bag may have been brought in by the man Yates gives a ride and drops off right outside the TSBD...

with a 3-4 foot package.

The bag also was never in the corner of the TSBD... an interesting mystery inside the mystery...

Read the testimony of Studebaker, Day, Montgomery... and try to find out who and how that bag gets from that corner, to the photos of Monty holding the bag out front...

I'veposted it before... it is very telling...

Enjoy

DJ

Trying to find WHEN Rose/Stovall could have picked up his rifle and WHY?

Here are the first references to a 30-30...

12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) The type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester.

12:44 Dispatcher 9, it was a rifle?

12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) A rifle, yes.

12:44 Dispatcher 9, any clothing description?

12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds.

12:47 Dispatcher Signal 19, involving the President. Suspect: white male, thirty, slender build, five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty-five pounds, believed to have used 30 caliber rifle. Believed to be in the old School Book Depository, Elm and Houston, at this time.

And some proof that a poly was done....

Mr. BALL. Okay, that will be fine. We will do this. Thanks very much.

Mr. ROSE. Let's see, there was something else I was going to tell you now, I wanted to mention--we did run Wesley Frazier on the polygraph, did you know that?

Mr. BALL. I know you did--we know about that.

If shots were fired within that building... why do we see over and over the DPD letting citizens BACK IN right afterward?

Representative FORD - Did any of the policemen interfere with your efforts to go into the Building and eventually down into the basement where you had your lunch?

Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; they didn't.

I found Rose's report about going back and searching Wesley's place... The last page has them taking Wesley home and then getting a call and turning around...

I thought maybe Dowdy did the report but there's nothing in the database authored by him.... and only one poly from Lewis...

We all know (incl DPD) that a polygraph wasn't all that reliable... what was so important that Wesley HAD to be shown to be telling the truth? The Bag??

DJ

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box3.htm Folder 1 - #3

That certainly seems plausible David. Given that Frazier was apparently under extreme duress with the possibility of being charged with the murder of the President looming, it seems likely he would have said whatever was needed to get himself out of that situation.

Yet his rifle and ammo was STILL taken from him...

How can this possibly be related if the rifle was at Wesley's place?

And why would Rose and Stovall even bother with him AND HIS RIFLE on the 22nd? unless to intimidate?

Confiscated Evidence??

Cheers

DJ

I apologize if this has been posted before. A quick search did not reveal it.

In the video, Frazier says he was arrested by two detectives at his home, who then told Fritz that he was being honest and didn't know anything, but that this was not accepted. Frazier then reveals the police tried to force him to sign a confession admitting he assisted in the assassination.

http://www.primecollective.com/buell-frazier/

Had not seen that Josh, thanks

Do you get the feeling he "un"says that they were going to charge him and miraculously the paper bag is born... and coroborrated by family...

and no one else.

Mr. BALL - Did he come in with anybody?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - No.

Mr. BALL - He was alone?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone.

Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did.

Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time.

Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so.

Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door?

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.

Completely agree... yet I get the feeling LBJ was more "opportunist" than planner...

And with as much hate as there was against JFK at the time... STEERING the hate was more important than anything else... Aren't the best plans those that dont look like plans at all?

"Making it easier" could have been the plan of the reluctant conspirators... yet as Harry Dean mentions, there HAD to be something pretty substantial to keep EVERYONE from saying something and going along...

I simply do not believe that people in 2012 can grasp the electricity in the air in Dallas, the USA and the World in 1963. Secrecy, Fear... this was when it STARTED.... not where we are now where Fear and Secrecy are the expected norm... corruption and scandal - expected...

In 1963 the great ole USA could do no wrong in the minds of its people... and its government was believed, period. That we come to find something different as the years peel away the lies goes to show that history will forever repeat itself as long as WE THE PEOPLE let it.

Nelson and David Rockefeller may have had nothing to fear... but they the same token Lyndon Johnson was within days of personal and political destruction by the Kennedys.

I am a lot more sure of the Lyndon Johnson/Texas oil men angle than I am of the Rockefellers. The testimonies of Madeleine Brown, Barr McClellan and Billie Sol Estes are are permanent indictment of Lyndon Johnson in the JFK assassionation.

I will agree with many if not most JFK researchers that military intelligence did the actual killing of JFK. But Lyndon Johnson had a knack for micro-managing details and he was long experienced at plots as well as killing people (killing Henry Marshall, getting Malcolm Wallace out of jail despite a murder *conviction* in 1952 in Austin.

Lyndon Johnson and his Texas oil men (Murchison, H.L. Hunt) used their military intelligence connections to murder John Kennedy.

If Allen Dulles and Gen. Ed Lansdale were involved, it really makes me think Nelson and/or David Rockefeller were also giving a green light to the JFK assassination.

Most people had no idea how "in bed" LBJ was with the Rockefellers, the CIA and the CFR. LBJ was the appropriator for the military-industrial complex for all of the 1950's. LBJ was one of a handful of senators and congressmen with oversight of the newly created CIA. LBJ and his aide Walter Jenkins had Q-clearance, which is an extremely high level of intelligence clearance. At that level, one can look at any of the nation's atomic secrets.

Most JFK researchers don't know that Clint Murchison went dove hunting in Mexico in the summer of 1963 with John J. McCloy, the chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1953-1970. Clint Murchison was LBJ inner circle; McCloy was Rockefeller inner circle. Read Kai Bird's biography on McCloy; it discusses the McCloy-Texas oil man connection.

The Rockefellers left fewer fingerprints in the JFK assassination; but if Dulles, Lansdale and yes, LBJ, were involved, then they most likely were involved, too.

John Kennedy was estranged from both the Western "Cowboys" of Texas oil men and military contractors AND the Eastern "Yankees" as denoted by Rockefellers, CFR, and CIA.

And Lyndon Johnson? He was plugged into all those groups: BFF with Nelson Rockefeller to boot!

"Lyndon Johnson, one of the key players in the JFK assassination,"

Hey there Robert...

It was refreshing to read this post of yours where you seem to be taking a step back from LBJ all powerful MASTERMIND of the assassination... which he wasn't..

He was indeed, a "player" and benefitted enormously (hint: read as "highly motivated")

Do you really see this as David or Nelson sitting at the dining room table mapping out an assassination strategy? or more likely those wishing to remain on the "King's"

good side and maybe even pull that thorn from his paw... made it happen?

If one believes Harry Dean... the mechanics were equally as crazed right wing militia ready to literally die for the purity of their country. The Rockefellers MAY have pushed that pebble down the mountain.... but that's the great part of being one of "THEM" - no direct connection, no risk, all reward.

LBJ could have been taken out just as easily and he knew it...

David and Nelson had nothing to fear... ever.

Dulles had their protection

Hoover might have had some of their fears so he was kept on place

And Dillon? Not sure but I feel as if the SS Senior Staff did not let this one go to Dillon... yet it was not as if he wasn't in the Rockefeller embrace...

Flyod Boring and E. Roberts more likely as well as Rowley...

Through the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, established by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. in 1918 and named after his mother, the family shifted the focus of philanthropy into the social sciences, stimulating the founding of university research centres and creating the Social Science Research Council. This memorial fund was subsequently folded into the foundation in a major reorganization in 1928/9.

John D. Rockefeller, Jr. became the foundation chairman in 1917. One of the many prominent trustees of the institution since has been C. Douglas Dillon, the United States Secretary of the Treasury under both Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. The foundation also supported the early initiatives of Henry Kissinger, such as his directorship of Harvard's International Seminars and the early foreign policy magazine Confluence, both established by him while he was still a graduate student.[15]

Nelson Rockefeller certainly is a very fine candidate for involvement in the JFK assassination. And possibly David Rockefeller, too.

McGeorge Bundy was originally invited to his first Bilderberger conference by Dean Rusk, JFK's hawkish Secretary of State who was a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1950 to 1961. From 1952 to 1961 he was the president of the Rockefeller Foundation.

David Rockefeller was a very big presence at Bilderberger meetings for decades and well as having huge influence in the Council on Foreign Relations.

McGeorge Bundy is the one who as JFK's national security advisor, who was running the Situation Room on the day of 11/22/63, immediately and unreasonably, and contrary to the emerging evidence, adopts the lone nutter view.

The Council on Foreign Relations for decades has been the point of the spear in the cover up of the JFK assassination.

Allen Dulles was the president of the CFR in 1949; his secretary of the CFR at that time was McGeorge Bundy. Allen Dulles is the one who performed so outrageously on the Warren Commission farce.

Allen Dulles: “that little Kennedy. . .he thought he was a god.”

Lyndon Johnson, one of the key players in the JFK assassination, secretly supported Republican Nelson Rockefeller for president in the spring of 1968, after LBJ had withdrawn from the race. I consider that highly significant and related to the cover up of the JFK assassination. Lyndon Johnson and Lady Bird also used to vacation with Lawrence Rockefeller.

Robert Dallek on the LBJ/Nelson Rockefeller alliance:

“Johnson’s choice as his successor was New York’s Republican Governor Nelson Rockefeller. The two men had a high regard for each other. Johnson saw Rockefeller as a sensible moderate who, in Lady Bird’s words, “was a good human being, a person who was for the disadvantaged, who was a man of compassion, with a capable and effective mind, and capable of being effective, getting things done.” He also believed that Rockefeller was the one man who could beat Bobby Kennedy, no small asset in Johnson’s mind.

Rockefeller reciprocated Johnson’s feelings. He saw the President as “a great statesman and great American patriot.” Rockefeller said later: “He was a tremendous guy.” They and their wives enjoyed a warm personal relationship. Nelson recalled how frank his wife Happy could be with Lyndon, telling him at the ranch not to drive so fast or drink too much. “She was successful in getting him to slow down, which I don’t think most people were.” …

Toward the end of April [1968], Johnson invited the Rockefellers to the White House for dinner, where he urged the governor to declare for the Republican nomination. “He was very friendly about ’68, and very supportive of me for ’68,” Rockefeller said. Johnson also told him he would never campaign against him. Happy Rockefeller remembered how during that evening Johnson urged Rockefeller to run. “He did want Nelson to be President,” she said. Johnson encouraged others to back Rockefeller as well. On April 7, after Irwin Miller, a prominent member of “Republicans for Johnson” in 1964 had asked whether the president would object to his chairing a Draft Rockefeller Committee, LBJ have Miller “a full speed go-ahead.”

Rockefeller did not need much prodding. On April 10, following a brief conversation with Johnson at New York’s St. Patrick’s Cathedral, where they attended Archbishop Terence Cooke’s installation, Rockefeller announced his “availability” for the Republican nomination. On April 30, after the White House evening, Rockefeller declared himself a candidate for the presidency.” [p. 545, A Flawed Giant, Robert Dallek]

I've always thought this passage rang true:

From Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, 3rd edition 1998 p. 638-639]:

“The Role of deep-cover CIA officer, Trenton Parker, has been described in earlier pages, and his function in the CIA's counter-intelligence unit, Pegasus. Parker had stated to me earlier that a CIA faction was responsible for the murder of JFK … During an August 21, 1993, conversation, in response to my questions, Parker said that his Pegasus group had tape recordings of plans to assassinate Kennedy. I asked him, "What group were these tapes identifying?" Parker replied: "Rockefeller, Allen Dulles, JOHNSON of Texas, GEORGE BUSH, and J. Edgar Hoover." I asked, "What was the nature of the conversation on these tapes?"

I don't have the tapes now, because all the tape recordings were turned over to [Congressman] Larry McDonald. But I listened to the tape recordings and there were conversations between Rockefeller, [J. Edgar] Hoover, where [Nelson] Rockefeller asks, "Are we going to have any problems?" And he said, "No, we aren't going to have any problems. I checked with Dulles. If they do their job we'll do our job." There are a whole bunch of tapes, because Hoover didn't realize that his phone has been tapped. Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, p. 638-639]

Let's not forget that if Gen. Ed Lansdale was at Dealey Plaza supervising the JFK assassination, then it is highly likely that both Allen Dulles and Nelson Rockefeller were involved in the JFK assassination.

And then there is the matter of the Rockefeller Commission, with his chief counsel David Belin, and which was yet another cover up of the JFK assassination. Nelson Rockefeller put his imprimatur on that one.

It may have been touched upon...

wouldn't the SS have to be told some story that would elicit that poor a response?

An exercise that they were told about ahead of time perhaps... as there really is no way to explain the behavior away...

no two ways, Kellerman should have been over JFK after the first SOUND like a shot.

Greer... speeding off.

what could they have been told to make sure they 1) put the limo out front, and 2) didn't react?

had to have been pretty good.

You aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know Glenn...

And you simply do not want to know that your snippet and the JFK shot have nothing whatsoever to do with each other...

But if you want to continue to make your point with non sequitur... and then build your case with your hands over your ears/mouth/eyes

have at it.

I explained the differences... the man in your snippet does not move since the bullet only contacts a very small portion of the man's skull and is thru without an explosion of the skull.

A better question is why are you using an example of a shot that does not blow chunks of skull from the victim?

Newton then is correct since you snippet does not allow for anough mass to push thru the skull to move the man...

Now, if you were to try a hollow-point bullet that mushrooms and/or fragments as it tunnels so that much more surface area is affected...

you get something resembling the JFK shot...

And why do you not acknowledge the real extent of the motion... In your snippet the man falls to the ground... does the bullet do this or is this the result of gravity on a dead person?

JFK's head moves because the bullet hits the top right front... His shoulders barely move at all...

He falls to the left FROM GRAVITY.... just like your snippet

He falls to BACK due to the limo moving and again, GRAVITY and the fact the shot came from the right... not behind... if from behind, in the way he was sitting, he would have fallen to his right..

but again..

If you dont want to open yourself to possibilities to answer your question then it seems you simply have an agewnda that does not include finding or discussing answers

and only includes your POV... which again is fine... but then don't keep asking the same question hoping for a different answer...

DJ

Glenn...

Let's please stay on the same page...k?

I am saying as well as providing the supporting evidence, that JFK's HEAD and arms move AFTER his brains are blown out...In your little snippet... where is the blowing open of the skull? Blood shooting high into the air? A piece the size of HARPER blown off?

None of this explains the difference shown in the two snippets, the Z-film and the VC soldier. Why is there no head move in my snippet?

You are circling the question, but you have not explained it. Physical laws tells us that we should not expect the head to move as the result of a bullet passing through. Which is exactly what we see in the little snippet I provided, right?

Did you SEE what Boswell says the head looked like? From one FMJ bullet??

All you showed us was a small calibre hole at point blank range from a handgun with nowhere NEAR the velocity or the ammo type...

Yes, do you know the muzzle velocity of the S&W 38? It should be roughly half of that from the Mannlicher Carcano. If this is why we should not expect the VC-guy's head to move, you are more than welcome to explain this.

But other than that your snippet is a perfect example of the JFK headshot...

From all I've read, what happens when a bullet strikes is close to impossible to determine other than

Small hole in - LARGE hole out... and that in a vehicle moving forward, and a person going from alive to dead...

the person will fall AWAY from the shot and opposite from the movement of the vehicle based on gravity and the laws of motion.

Back and to the LEFT... the bullet is only one small piece of the equation to determine JFK's movements... look at my graphic again... his right shoulder barely moves..

Tell you what... take your snippet, and at the moment he is shot, have someone push on his chest, just a small push, right after the shot...wanna guess which direction he's gonna fall?

None of this explains anything of what I asked for. You know David, It's fine with me that you regard this stuff as sufficient evidence about this, but please don't expect me to do that.

I'm simply asking a question, to which there are so far no answers. Let's narrow it down, forget about President Kennedy for a moment and explain the sequence displayed in the VC-snippet? Why no head movement?