Michael Crane

23 hours ago, Christian Toussay said:

 

Ok, the link prblm is apparently solved.

I will update all preceding threads with those new links.

 

OK, so we've seen that, just as the Ruler's Puzzle in the back-of-the-head autopsy picture, the Powell / Dillard box discrepancy is explained by forgery of the record: in the first case, it was about suppressing the occipital exit wound; in the second case, it was about suppressing the presence of a man in DPD uniform in the Sniper's Nest, about 30 seconds after the last shot.

In both case, Special FX, i.e. the inclusion in the data set of deceptive information was used: fake wet hair to hide the occipital wound, and a stack of box to hide the DPD officer.

That's one method, that we will find again in the Zapruder and Nix films.

But let us see different technique of the forgers. I am reposting below (not sure it is still accessible here) the Dillard picture:

 

 

As captioned, this is an FBI document, so the black arrow pointing at nothing intrigued me. So I decided to also processed, just in case, the Dillard picture.

 

I post below a result from that processing:

 

 

And here are two different iterations from the data bank:

 

 

 

 

So this is the fourth picture, so far, being presented here of a man wearing a DPD uniform present in the Sniper's Nest from 10 minutes before (Bronson film) to 30 seconds after (Dillard / Powell) the shooting, all this data coming from different material, different point of view and different time sequences.

That's quite a lot of corroborative data.

But the discovery of this man does not actually resolve the mystery of the FBI Arrow.

As I am about to post, I realize I can't locate the files I wanted to present about the solution to this Arrow problem....

So this is what I'll do; I will use the processed result posted here, and simply apply three settings:

- first I will light up the image as much as possible:

 

 

We can now see what appears to be coherent data where there was previously nothing.

 

- then I will apply an Auto Enhance command (basically a set of options with various combinations of light/contrast/sharpness/colour balance, whatever: I chose one) and then Scratch Removal, which is essentially a coordinated blurring tool, on the segment of the open window:

 

 

 

And here, I have added a few indications to facilitate the analysis:

 

 

 

So here, with the Dillard Picture, we find a second type of forgery: the total blacking out of unwanted data. We have already seen this in the "Assassins' Team Behind the Fence", with the complete darkness over the retaining wall and fence, and we will another striking example in Moorman.

Here again, we have indisputable evidence of Federal treachery and felony.

The results presented just above, anyhow, confirms how efficient and easy the process is: the results are simply three-steps-removed from the processed result used as a source...

I will continue with this in a day or two..

Hey,

I went to High School with that guy.

Yeah,go ahead and shut it down.

No offense meant.

I have only been able to view 1 picture on this thread,and I still need a decoder.

On 4/24/2024 at 8:32 AM, Pat Speer said:

Heck, he claims Tom Robinson, his star witness, was involved in the clandestine delivery of JFK's body at Parkland an hour and a half before its official arrival. 

 

That might not be so far fetched.Somewhere,somehow...the Secret Service found a funeral home nearby that owned a black hearse.Wasn't the driver and the passenger wearing a white smock? I'm not saying that I believe it,but I'm not disregarding it either.I can see a hurried mortician still wearing his smock.

Damn,this case is a 1500 piece puzzle.

13 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 it was Joe O'Donnell. 13 years ago or so, I was reading the New York Times and came across an article about a former U.S. Information Agency photographer who had recently passed,  whose passing had ignited a scandal. 

Because his obituary had listed a number of famous photos he'd taken, when he had in fact not taken these photos. It turned out that, although he had taken some famous photos in the aftermath of the A bomb in Japan, he had been signing and selling photographic prints for decades of photos that he had not taken==all of which were Kennedy-related. An investigation followed and led to his family admitting he'd been suffering from dementia and had developed an unhealthy obsession with the Kennedys. This was, of course Joe O'Donnell, one of the few people in history whose obituary led to a retraction. 

In any event, I read a number of articles on this situation, and saw that Cecil Stoughton, the White House photographer who'd accompanied Kennedy to Dallas, and had taken the Johnson swearing-in photos, had said he'd never heard of O'Donnell, and that, if I recall, U.S. Information Agency photographers did not interact much with White House photographers or the first family. 

Well, hell, I thought, and went back and read the notes of the interviews of the Knudsen family, and found they said they'd never heard of O'Donnell. And then re-read the notes on Horne's interview with O'Donnell, in which he reported that O'Donnell had claimed he'd performed a private showing of the Zapruder film for Jacqueline Kennedy, and that the two of them had edited the film together. 

Well, that was it, I thought, the man was obviously suffering from dementia when he claimed Knudsen had shown him some photos. But, wait, how would he have known Knudsen had claimed he'd taken some photos? I then remembered that Knudsen had written an article in which he claimed he'd taken photos...and that the HSCA had then called him in to testify and that he'd told them he'd developed photos taken by others.

In any event, I shared this info with the research community in the hopes people would stop citing O'Donnell as an important witness. And have instead witnessed men like Mantik and Horne continue to cite O'Donnell as credible, when they know full well he is not. 

Now, recently, after re-reading all of this stuff, I feel a little more charitable towards O'Donnell. We Know Knudsen developed photos. So the possibility exists Knudsen DID show O'Donnell some photos, and that O'Donnell had simply mis-remembered the nature of these photos

Possible smear campaign or good old Government character assassination?

13 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Hilarious. Horne's history is one of taking inconsistencies in the record and spinning them into the wildest tale possible. 

I urge you to do the research.

What did Tom Robinson tell the HSCA? That he recalled a small wound on Kennedy's temple.

What did Tom Robinson tell the ARRB? That there were two or three tiny wounds on Kennedy's cheek. 

What did Doug Horne take from his statements? That there was a bullet hole high on the forehead above the right eye. 

 

What did James Jenkins say? That he recalled seeing a gray smear on the skull above the right ear.

What did he come to claim later? That he saw a bullet hole above the right ear.

What did Horne claim in JFK: What the Doctors saw Jenkins REALLY saw? A bullet hole high on the forehead above the right eye.

 

What did Ed Reed say? He and Custer took the x-rays, developed them, brought them back to the morgue, sat down for twenty minutes, saw Humes start cutting on Kennedy to remove the brain, was asked to leave as his services were no longer required, and never returned to the autopsy. 

What did Horne take from his statements? That he came in to take the x-rays and sat down, saw Humes cutting on Kennedy to remove bones from the top of the head to phony up the x-rays, was asked to leave, and was asked to return after 20 minutes to take the phony x-rays.

 

The statements of Robinson and Reed are the pillars of Horne's theory. And yet he grossly misrepresents their statements to conjure up this theory. 

 

Now, as you know, he has few if any supporters among the upper echelon of researchers within the "community." That doesn't mean he 's wrong. But it's saying something that he has spent dozens if not hundreds of hours with Mantik in which he undoubtedly pushed. a theory holding that the largest recovered bone fragment was removed by Humes at Bethesda, and that Mantik would never embrace this, telling you, a few years back that the fragment was missing at Parkland but the hole was covered by scalp, and telling his audience in 2021, that this is pretty much what Humes saw when he first saw Kennedy's head. 

 

Now, as a refresher, here is what Horne claims Humes saw, prior to his alteration of the body...

Now I'm guessing you're siding with Horne. 

But Horne, in case you haven't noticed, is by far the most slanderous researcher of all. Virtually everyone interviewed by the ARRB, in Horne's eyes, was a coward or a liar.

Heck, he claims Tom Robinson, his star witness, was involved in the clandestine delivery of JFK's body at Parkland an hour and a half before its official arrival. 

 

 

I know that you seen the series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" now who was that guy that seen the bullet hole in the temple? Was it O'Donnell or someone that knew a name close to O'Donnell?He was an older gentleman.

One picture it was there & one picture it wasn't there.

You have to know who I'm taking about?

Was it a Joe?

Pictures came from a Knudsen set?

18 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I know that's what Horne wants us to believe...but how do you remove a hole by cutting into it? As detailed in Jim D's last book Stone asked Horne this very question, and was given some rigamarole. The bone Horne claims was cut off the head contained no bullet hole, and was inches away from were they claim the bullet entered. So why was no hole in this location observed by those viewing the body at Parkland? Or Bethesda? Or shown on the photos? Or on the A-P x-ray? 

There was no bullet hole there. This whole hole thing got drummed up when Mantik took Robinson's recollection of a small wound by the temple and started claiming he saw a bullet hole on the forehead. Robinson was asked about this by the ARRB and said it was two or three small wounds on the cheek.And yet here we are 25 years later with Mantik and Horne still claiming Robinson said he saw a hole on the forehead. 

The medical evidence is overwhelming.They probably starting cutting & searching there for a bullet.

Incision was made to remove the entrance.

I'm debating on hiring a ghost writer for a book idea I have called "Turn In Your Man Card" so,I'm just shopping around.

6 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Now, there's a lot of blithering on my part and a lot of repetition and almost certainly some mis-statements

Any particular reason for this?

3 hours ago, Robert Montenegro said:

Yeah, but then there's that whole cauliflower ear thing

Those are known as a badge of honor.

Mr.Larsen could have saved some money.

I could be way off base here & I probably am,but don't they have cameras that magicians use to use in slow motion of them catching a bullet in there mouth.

Isn't there a camera out there that could show the bullets hitting JFK in super slow mo?

9 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said:

If there had been a real investigation by the DOJ everyone on this forum would know about it.

Laughable!

Every bit of law enforcement,agencies or departments were LBJ's whipping boys.

6 hours ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

 

And, after being No1 re Einsteinian krapp, i got bored & came to the jfk forums, where i am now No1 re jfk krapp.

It took me 2 years to solve the dark age of jfk. Solving the dark age of Einsteinian krapp took me 8 years.

Excellent research indeed.

Have you ever considered the Bermuda Triangle phenomenon?

Well,I have been away from the forum and did not know that.

Thanks for reposting Vince.I find this a big deal.

Video has been removed.

Not good.

On 4/2/2024 at 5:54 PM, Ron Bulman said:

Threatening another forum member, including Moderators/Administrators, will result in vacation time for the member doing so at any time, every time.

If a person was to choose to begin training in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu,he would have to pay $199.00 per month.

If a person was to choose to begin training in Muay Thai,he would have to pay $169.00 a month.

That is not even including the $75.00 enrollment fee.

Solid offer IMO.

4 hours ago, Christian Toussay said:

 

I am now posting Iteration n°208 of Nix Frame 27. The original frame has been processed and now reveals the following information:

 

- the bluish hue that covers the already suspicious darkened area on the knoll is evidence that this area has been altered. That is the only part of the image where this happens. The whole picture being processed, there is no reason why this specific area should react in such a unique way. Note how the bluish hue appears artificial as compared to the rest of the image

 

- just above the "sunlight spot" on the fence, there now appears to be a pattern of  some sort, roughly triangular or pyramidal

 

 

I think I see Gordon Arnold & the Secret Service imposter also.

Witnesses & evidence is non-existent.

Time to move on IMO.

2 hours ago, Nick Bartetzko said:

Wow….amazing…. I’m just stunned in your ability to dismiss or ignore the incredible amount of materials that have been accumulated that contradict your lone nut position. 

I'm under the assumption that Dave is now just here to keep a pulse on the CT's and drive traffic to his website.

54 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

I found the interview to be an interesting look at Pat's research approach, and his thinking on several subjects.  I think it was more of an interview than a discussion by two people who disagreed.  Carlier spent most of the time nodding in apparent agreement and at the end praised Pat's answers, while saying he had learned a lot. That he says he had started as a disciple of David Lifton, but was now a LNer indicates a certain openminded on his part, if nothing else.

 

I want to focus on what you said about LBJ, Pat. You made an important point right off the bat. The others who wanted Kennedy whacked needed assurances from Johnson, before they could go ahead with the plan, that he wouldn't come after them afterwards. He would have authority over the coverup that protected them.

 

But logic tells me Johnson's involvement with the murder plan went beyond that one nod of the head.

 

The murder was not the work of a committee.  There had to have been a small set of people with decisionmaking authority.  It's likely Johnson was one of them, as I have said before.

 

There was a well known disagreement among the full group of Kennedy haters about how to use the Oswald story they had agreed upon.  After the murder Johnson quickly squelched the idea that Oswald did it for the commies.  He had lusted after the presidency too long to see it destroyed by a catastrophic war.

 

But there is no way the decisionmakers would have left that question to be decided on the fly after the murder, among the chaos that ensued. It seems clear that version was taken off the table before the murder was given the go ahead.  It is also clear that Johnson, who was to be the guy with authority over the investigation once Oswald was killed, would have been the guy who insisted on that. Johnson killed the other investigation starting up to centralize everything in the Warren Commission he created to make sure there was no real inquiry.

 

Which is not to say that those who wanted to go after Cuba and the SU all accepted no for an answer.  There were still attempts after the murder to bring in Cuba and the SU as the villains, that Johnson had to squelch.

 

There was a third element of Johnson's involvement.  He had to assure the others he would not stand in the way of their foreign policy plans, as Kennedy had done. Pax Americana would be implemented.  While stopping a war with the SU, and perhaps in return for it, he agreed to the Vietnam escalation.

 

Johnson's agreement to remove the foreign policy impediments Kennedy had constructed was absolutely necessary before the plan could go forward. Otherwise the murder would have lost its main purpose. It's not clear how explicit Johnson's agreement had to be in that regard, since the others knew Johnson pretty well. But it had to be understood by the others.

My $.02 cents

Unless Madeline Brown was a scorn lover,the meeting at Clint Murchinson's went over all of the details the night before the parade.

For the record Pat,

I feel the same way about David Lifton....disappointed.

There is barely any legitimate evidence in this case.

I believe that at least some were not taken in the Bethesda morgue,but on the Bethesda compound.Something like a veterinary morgue.

Good thread.