Ashton Gray

Just can't get enough Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Anybody ever stop to notice where Arlen Specter hails from?

Why, he's Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

And where did Richard A. Sprague, that White Knight of Conspiracy Theorists, HSCA's Chief Counsel hail from—who oh-so-valiantly tilted at windmills for millions of tax dollars, mounted a big "fight" with CIA that accomplished a net of nothing, then went home?

Yes, he was from the City of Brotherly Love, the Birthplace of Our Nation: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

And it just tears at my heart strings to hear what the poor man said after the fact: If he had to do it all over again he would probe "Oswald's ties to the Central Intelligence Agency." Well, of course he would, bless his heart.

Of course he was then replaced by someone who told us all the Mafia did it. Well, of course they did.

Where else would CIA even think of establishing their headquarters for the murder of a president and an American coup but right where it all started? In fact, I would be very surprised if crucial exchanges weren't conducted right in public view on the grounds of Independence Hall.

I'd love to hear from Bill Kelly on this subject. Meanwhile, more keeps pouring out in a flood.

Ashton

Ashton:

First of all Sprague was horribly attacked in a media smear campaign. Because he wanted to go after the CIA. You can refer to this all you want as a fake " fight"; I beg to differ.

And he did not just " go home". He was fired by Henry Gonzales. (Was that fake too?).

You're playing a bit fast and loose with the facts here.

So what if both he and darlin' arlin are from Pennsylvania? That's REALLY reaching!

I know you call 'em as you see 'em. As do I.

Dawn

As you should. I enthusiastically welcome just such reasoned debate.

What I am saying categorically and unequivocally is that far too many absolutely critical vectors form a nexus at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, while all the "investigative committees" <SPIT!> pointed everybody's nose all over the globe to everywhere but Philadelphia. And in both seminal "investigative committees" <SPIT!> sending researchers running everywhere but Philadelphia, the point man with senior investigative powers was from Pennsylvania.

And what I'll say again categorically and unequivocally is that CIA always plays both sides of the game. I don't care how many times I have to repeat it.

And playing both sides of the game effectively always includes installing double-agent "allies" in martyrish garb who always are "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Dontcha' know.

Saint Daniel Ellsberg comes to mind. (And, boy, are we ever going to be hearing more about him.)

In fact, after his "firing," Sprague was reinstated, then Gonzalez resigned in protest, then Sprague was "persuaded" to resign. Poof! They're both off the stage. You're asking me if the Gonzalez/Sprague war a Punch'n'Judy show? You know it's a rhetorical question that can't be answered by me for you. You'll have to answer that one for yourself. The only way I ever approach such questions for myself only is to look at the outcome. YMMV.

Ashton

Off-the-cuff comments:

1. I can mostly follow your thinking on this, but the montage is still somewhat opaque to me.

2. I realize you're being somewhat cryptic about your own approach or any conclusions you might already have reached (which may be none at all) in hopes that someone else will pick up the ball as an independent peer check on your methods and math.

3. Speaking just for myself, I ain't a likely candidate.

4. What I can and happily will contribute is a 3D representation of as many (within reason) possible locations for the fragments as anyone who wants to play comes up with—including you.

5. To move things along, it might be worth just taking the wraps off of your own deductions and let me start constructing possible models in 3D that others can then look at (with actual numbers being in the formulas). Others then might be more inclined to lend their logic and thoughts to that effort, resulting in refined 3D models, etc. It might help get more participation that could lead to a consensus.

This is your ball game and I'm not trying to influence it; just trying to help find ways to move it along get more people involved.

The one thing I will say is that I certainly see many valuable ramifications to getting the sync project completed that don't necessarily have anything to do with the fragment trajectories. And while I definitely am interested in this fragment trajectory problem, I don't yet clearly see how it necessarily will lead to establishing a bullet trajectory for the head shot. I'd like to understand more about that aspect, but feel I will as it all progresses. Right now I'm still a bit stumped.

Ashton

Just can't get enough Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Anybody ever stop to notice where Arlen Specter hails from?

Why, he's Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

And where did Richard A. Sprague, that White Knight of Conspiracy Theorists, HSCA's Chief Counsel hail from—who oh-so-valiantly tilted at windmills for millions of tax dollars, mounted a big "fight" with CIA that accomplished a net of nothing, then went home?

Yes, he was from the City of Brotherly Love, the Birthplace of Our Nation: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

And it just tears at my heart strings to hear what the poor man said after the fact: If he had to do it all over again he would probe "Oswald's ties to the Central Intelligence Agency." Well, of course he would, bless his heart.

Of course he was then replaced by someone who told us all the Mafia did it. Well, of course they did.

Where else would CIA even think of establishing their headquarters for the murder of a president and an American coup but right where it all started? In fact, I would be very surprised if crucial exchanges weren't conducted right in public view on the grounds of Independence Hall.

I'd love to hear from Bill Kelly on this subject. Meanwhile, more keeps pouring out in a flood.

Ashton

Snipe hunts are for kids. Here's an adult game: collar slits hunt!

Okay, there you go. Find as many bullet-caused slits on the top of the collar as you can find in one minute. Use a Boggle timer, and don't cheat.

Finding one slit won't do! The testimony submitted is "slits." That's plural. Don't ask me why there would be more than one slit from one bullet, or how many slits you're supposed to find. There just has to be more than one, and they have to be ragged, with threads pointing out. No "innies." Only "outties." Those are the rules.

Winner gets dinner with Harvey, the invisible rabbit. No, really...

Ashton

HINT: The slits you find have to be on the right side.

Hi there Antti.

I really, really appreciate your posting testimonial "evidence" from the official doctor of Rockefeller's little group. Boy: do I feel better already!

Let's see now what this authority you're calling on has to say. Today you wrote:

"Report of Richard Lindenberg, MD to the Rockefeller Commission,

signed May 9, 1975, p. 3. Retrieved from the Gerald R. Ford Library."

Wait, wait! I have to catch my breath. Rockefeller and Ford endorsements. Okay. Okay. Go ahead...

In his report, Dr. Lindenberg wrote that, "In the front of [JFK's]

shirt the bullet produced 1.2cm vertical slits in the overlapping

parts of the collar just below the collar button. The stumps of torn

fibers of the material point to the outside."30 In 1964, J. Edgar

Hoover had advised the Warren Commission that the FBI lab had found

the same thing: "The hole in the front of the shirt was a ragged,

slit-like hole and the ends of the torn threads around the hole were

bent outward. These characteristics are typical of an exit hole for a

projectile."31

(emphasis mine)

Uh-huh. Well, you won't mind if I repeat a section and add some emphasis of my own, will you?

Here's the good Rockefeller-approved doctor in a reprise:

Now, stroking me grey beard, I'm trying to recall what you said just a page earlier in this thread. Hmmm. Yes, it's coming to me now...

Not much to debate in my opinion. Kennedy had a wound in his neck, below the adam's apple, upon arrival at Parkland. This fact is based on the early descriptions of this wound by Parkland staff, it was most likely a bullet wound (entry wound).

Well, darn, Antti, if you're going to argue against yourself, there's not much for me to do but just watch and clap along.

Of course, I could post the conflicting data that says that the "slits" ("nicks," whatever) were not consistent with any bullet damage, but since you're arguing against yourself, maybe you'd like to go ahead and do that, too?

I'll wait and see, and if not I'll help you out. (Of course, I'm not sure that my "authority" will carry as much weight as someone blessed by Rockefeller. But I'll try!)

Ashton

Any objections to a continuation of the research into how Specter & Company, with the assistance of cronie JEH, managed to obscure and confuse the facts related to the examination of the clothing of JFK?

Not at all. It only proves the obvious: the only possible reason there is paragraph after paragraph, page after page of rhetorical sword dancing around this issue by all concerned is for the very simple reason that no bullet had passed through either shirt or tie.

If one had, the literature would say: "There's the bullet hole."

Since there isn't a bullet hole where there absolutely has to be a bullet hole, then of course there has to be endless shuck and jive explaining why everybody responsible managed somehow to miss out on finding a bullet hole or any evidence that any bullet had been anywhere in the vicinity.

By all means, post all the shuck and jive you can find till you get just worn out and have to lie down.

There still won't be a bullet hole.

Can you guess why?

Ashton

I've recently had the most astonishing exchange with a researcher involved in timelining the JFK assassination and related data.

I said in my first message in this thread (and I quote myself here, if I may be allowed the indulgence):

• ASHTON GRAY: Consider some information about this other Gladys Palmer:
  Not a lot is known, except that she was very highly placed personnel within the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Now, immediately, this seems to make no sense even to mention.
  

Have I ever been disabused of that naive notion in a hurry.

I can't relate at the moment everything that was told to me in rather a rush, but I've invested some time now looking into some of it on my own, and am writing this while still trying to recover from the series of electrifying arcs of connection that went off like high-tension transformers in an earthquake.

In the briefest possible memo to get some of these notes recorded for, I hope, further discussion and expansion:

• • Ruth Hyde Paine had taught at the Germantown Friends' School outside of Philadelphia—just a few miles from the Wharton School, where both Gladys Palmer and Allen Dulles's sister Ellen Lansing Dulles worked.
  • While at that school, Ruth Hyde Paine had met and married Michael Paine. They moved from there to Dallas.
  • On 14 March 1963, CIA's James McCord is based in New York City, but his wife is flying from Frankfurt, Germany—purportedly on a "family emergency"—to...Philadelphia? Yes, Philadelphia. There she is met, for reasons not explained, by CIA's Special Agent In Charge of the Manhattan Field Office. And from Philadelphia, she is taking a flight on 15 March 1963 to...Dallas, Texas? Yes, Dallas, Texas, where she then takes yet another flight to Lubbock, Texas on this "family emergency" of unspecified nature.
  • On 1 April 1963, the wife of CIA's James McCord arrives on American Airlines flight #20 in...Philadelphia? Yes: Philadelphia. There she again is met by CIA's Special Agent In Charge of the Manhattan Field Office and is set up in accomodations at the McGuire Hotel near or at McGuire AFB in New Jersey, 45 minutes from Philadelphia, 90 minutes from New York...and there the trail ends. Supposedly she was on "space available" status for a MATS flight to destination unknown, but there was no "space available," so— Well, the CIA document says that the CIA's Special Agent In Charge of the Manhattan Field Office was "advised that Headquarters could offer no further assistance" to James McCord's wife other than "accommodations permitted under her present orders." Whatever those were. (She may have sat there outside Philadelphia until she received the electronic equipment from Alfred Baldwin for all we know.)
  • On 19 April 1963, George De Mohrenschildt left Dallas on an unexplained trip first to New York, then to...Philadelphia? Yes, Philadelphia. And although some researchers have claimed that he came back to Dallas and left from there for Haiti on 1 May 1963, the record says that he arrived in Haiti on 2 June 1963, and didn't arrive in Dallas (from his New York/Philadelphia trip) until "two days" prior to leaving for Haiti. That wouldn't have been until around 30 May 1963. So at the moment it seems that De Mohrenschildt was gone for something like six weeks, at least some of which time he spent in New York (where James McCord was), and the rest in Philadelphia (where we last heard from James McCord's wife).
  • In September of 1963, Ruth Hyde Paine was in Philadelphia for some so-far undetermined amount of time with her in-laws Ruth Forbes Paine and Arthur Young. She left Philadelphia and drove straight to New Orleans, arriving 22 September 1963 and leaving the next day for Dallas with Marina, freeing Lee Harvey Oswald to go to Mexico.
  • In Mexico is where Lee Harvey Oswald is reported to have been in the company of a Quaker from Philadelphia named Steven Kennan.
  

Please forgive this sketchy outline and unorganized nature of this data, but there is much more surrounding all the above, and so much is unraveling so fast that I wanted to get these notes set forth here as quickly as possible.

Any contributions that might expand on the above will be greatly appreciated, particularly with dates.

If a certain Gladys Palmer of Philadelphia's Wharton School, an associate of Eleanor Lansing Dulles, had found out a little too much for her own good and had been spirited off to the loving care of CIA psychiatrists on the payroll at the Jackson, Louisiana State Hospital, and there had expressed just how much too much for her own good she had found out, it certainly would explain much about the "twosies" at issue: the Terrible Twins of Prescience. Much and much more.

Ashton Gray

1.78 feet in 1/40 th of a second.

38.22 feet in one second.

26.05 mph

This once again brings up an unresolved problem that I contionually came across when working out how to derive object speed from blur differences last year. The worked out speed is twice what it should be.

Because it is so regularly double, this could be a very useful techynique if only the doubling is resolved.

Exactly how long is the shutter open on the various cameras?

I don't know what formula you're using for your computation but I read the following in a photo forum: Most 35mm and 16mm motion picture cameras use a 180 degree shutter and at 24 frames per second this becomes a 1/48th sec exposure for each frame.

Would that account at all for the factor of 2 (or .5)?

Found these forumulas at this web site if they will be of any help:

((frames per second) * (shutter speed as measured in a fraction of a second))*360 = Shutter size in degrees

or

1/((Shutter size, in decimals)/fps) = whole number shutter speed, expressed as a fraction of a second.

EXAMPLES:

The manual says a new, "low light" camera has a 220 degree shutter and offers 9, 18, and 24 fps. What are the shutter speeds?

1/((220/360)/(9))=15(th of a second)~1/15th

1/((220/360)/(18))=29.5(th of a second)~1/30th

1/((220/360)/(24))=39.3(th of a second)~1/40th

A camera claims to have a 180 degree shutter and frame rates of 18, 24, and 54. What are the shutter speeds?

1/((180/360)/18)=~1/36th of a second (use either 1/30th or 1/40th)

1/((180/360)/24)=~1/48th of a second (use 1/50th)

1/((180/360)/54)=~1/108th of a second (use 1/100th)

Ashton

Pertinent to Mssrs. Devine and Bush: a brief timeline of lowlights of 1953, in which specific dates for divers events have not yet been determined with any great certainty, but which, even in this raw state, nonetheless offers interesting glimpses into malign forces that shaped and stained all of our lives:

• circa January 1953
  John J. McCloy becomes Chairman of the Board, Chase National Bank. Around this same time (sometime during 1953), McCloy becomes Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. [NOTE: McCloy will remain Chairman of the CFR for 18 years, until sometime in 1971. See 1 c. July c. 1971.]
  Thursday, 26 February 1953
  Allen W. Dulles becomes Director of Central Intelligence.
  Saturday, 4 April 1953
  CIA Director Allen Dulles approves $1 million for CIA's Directorate of Plans to overthrow the Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh (who has nationalized Iran's oil industry) in a CIA program called Operation AJAX. Head of the Directorate of Plans is Frank Wisner, his deputy Richard Helms.
  Monday, 13 April 1953
  CIA Director Allen Dulles authorizes Operation MK-ULTRA, the CIA’s major drug and mind-control program. It is the brainchild of Richard Helms.
  Thursday, 16 April 1953
  A boy named Lee Harvey Oswald is admitted on this date to "Youth House" in New York City as a truant. He is placed under the jurisdiction of psychiatrist Renatus Hartogs, where he will remain for about two weeks.
  Thursday, 23 April 1953
  Charles P. Cabell, still an active Air Force officer, is appointed Deputy Director of CIA under Allen Dulles.
  circa July 1953 [No specific dates in 1953 yet confirmed]
  • J. Edgar Hoover, describing activities of CIA's Frank Wisner in the CIA front Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) as "Wisner's gang of weirdos," supplies information on some of the members to Senator Joe McCarthy, who begins to investigate their backgrounds.
  • CIA's Thomas James Devine "resigns" from CIA "to go into private business."
  • George H.W. Bush is bankrolled by Herbert Walker's G.H. Walker & Co. et al. and forms Zapata Petroleum, which is a culmination of "joint activities" of George Bush and Thomas James Devine. [George Bush's father Prescott Bush has left Dresser's board of directors and is in the U.S. Senate.]
  Sunday, 26 July 1953
  Fidel Castro leads 119 rebels in a failed attack on the stategically important army barracks in Santiago de Cuba. Most of the rebels are caught, 55 being tortured and executed. Castro and a few others escape into the nearby mountains. [Castro later is caught and put on trial. A lawyer by profession, he defends himself, earning a 15 year jail term on Isla de Pinos (Isla de la Juventud).]
  Wednesday, 19 August 1953
  The CIA instigated coup in Iran succeeds, ousting and arresting Mossedegh.
  circa late August 1953
  CIA's PBSUCCESS is initiated, resurrected from the earlier PBFORTUNE, to overthrow democratically elected President of Guatamala Arbenz Guzmán, whose policies greatly have antagonized United Fruit Company. CIA officers involved include Tracy Barnes (CIA officer in charge), David Atlee Phillips, Jacob 'Jack' Esterline, E. Howard Hunt, and David Sanchez Morales.
  Thursday, 19 November 1952
  On a 3-day working holiday for CIA officials at Deer Creek Lodge in the mountains of Maryland, Sidney Gottlieb—head of CIA's MKULTRA—slips LSD into the Cointreau they all have for an after-dinner drink (violating CIA policy of not receiving prior approval). An Army scientist and germ warfare specialist named Frank Olson, who is working on an MKULTRA project, experiences a "bad trip," becoming very disoriented. [Within 10 days, after failed attempts by CIA to "handle" Olson, he throws himself through a 10th floor window of a hotel in New York. Police report that Olson has killed himself after a Lover's quarrel with CIA's Richard Lashbrook, who had taken Olson to New York to try to get him treatment. The CIA report says Olson has died of "a classified illness."]
  

Ashton

Ashton

I never thought that I would say this, but you offer an extraordinary amount of "very sound thinking", on those occasions when you descend from that area of the stratosphere where I often find you. I also look forward to your "Timeline".

Charlie Black

Thank you, Charles. That was very gentlemanly of you to acknowledge points of alignment despite areas of considerable disagreement. And while I'm glad we have this point of agreement, Ms. Pease deserves all the acknowledgment, just to keep things in order.

Ashton

According to a CIA internal memo dated November 29, 1975, Bush's original oil company, Zapata Petroleum, began in 1953 through joint efforts with Thomas J. Devine, a CIA staffer who had resigned his agency position that same year to go into private business.

Exact, precise M.O. as Hunt and McCord prior to the "Pentagon Papers" CIA op and subsequent CIA Watergate hoax. How many bloody handprints are needed to rig up the machinery of justice?

I think Poppy had more reasons to cry than Murdoch's FOX happy-talkers got around to considering.

Ashton

Myra, I thought you might be interested in the following excerpts from a 1977 article by Lisa Pease in PROBE:

• Walt Rostow was one of Kennedy's "counterinsurgency" experts. "He made counterinsurgency seem profound, reasonable, and eminently just," said author Gerald Colby in his book Thy Will Be Done. Walt Rostow—like Dean Rusk, Roswell Gilpatrick, Edward Lansdale, Paul Nitze, Harland Cleveland, Roger Hilsman, Lincoln Gordon, Adolf Berle, McGeorge Bundy and Henry Kissinger—came to work in the Kennedy administration directly from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund's Special Studies Project. This group had been hand-chosen by Nelson Rockefeller to assist him when he himself was seeking the Presidency. Author Colby called this "Nelson's Secret Victory", pointing out that while Kennedy knew many powerful people, they were mostly politicians, not men with experience in foreign affairs. The Rockefeller family network, and Nelson's group in particular, provided a large assortment of bright, qualified men. However, with such a homogenous group surrounding him, Colby noted, "there was no one to advise the young president on the wisdom and efficacy of such covert operations as the Bay of Pigs invasion, the CIA's secret war in Indochina, Project Eagle, or Lumumba's murder."
  [Otto] Otepka's biographer doesn't seem to understand the distinction between Kennedy and this group. He insinuates that Bobby was behind Walt Rostow's rise and Otepka's fall. Bobby was originally the true believer in counterinsurgency as a means for conducting limited warfare and thus saving a greater number of lives than in outright war, which at that point in time seemed to mean nuclear war. But Bobby became disenchanted himself with both Rusk and Rostow and their type of counterinsurgency. Colby includes the text of one of Bobby's speeches as released to the press, in which was written, "Victory in a revolutionary war is not won by escalation, but by de-escalation." Kennedy did not actually speak these words when the speech was delivered, but the words were widely quoted by the press.
  

Omitted from that list of Rockefeller alumni is Douglas Caddy.

The artilce opens with the statement: "Otto Otepka once told journalist Sarah McClendon that he knew who had killed JFK, but would say no more on the subject."

I suspect that may be one of the few valid claims in that regard.

Ashton

I thought that at some point someone in this discussion of an alleged motive for the murder of John F. Kennedy being to provide an uninspected, unquestioned knee-jerk excuse for an all-out flags-and-flourishes spit-and-polish over-the-ramparts Congress-be-hanged military invasion of Cuba, someone might mention, as a reality check, the fact that Lisa Howard's interview with Castro—in which Castro had said he was amenable to rapproachment "if the United States government wishes it"—had aired on ABC months earlier, on 10 May 1963.

Since no one else has mentioned it, and I believe it warrants mentioning, I have.

Ashton

Mr. McLean, this is extraordinary research work, and is invaluable. Simply wonderful information. Thank you.

This may seem an odd request, and I admit at the outset that it is extremely tangential to what you have posted, but I have to ask if you happen to know of any connections whatsoever that might have existed circa 1963 between some of the oil and international interests you have posted about here, and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).

I can't express how serendipitous the timing of your post is to a certain spur line of investigation that is being carried out by several associates. I think they will find anything you have on this matter to be utterly riveting.

In any case, thank you for this thoughtful work.

Ashton Gray

Ashton, I can't summon up any reason you should have an interest in it, but the combination of CSIRO and 1963 in relation to anything possibly of a conspiratorial nature involving US seems to point in only one direction: the Bogle-Chandler deaths. Is that in fact, what you circling here?

Damn. Can't put anything past you guys, huh?

In a word: yes.

In two words: yes—partially.

I certainly don't want this thread shooting off in that direction, though, which is why I'm specifically interested in any connections surrounding CSIRO related to David McLean's very interesting post, particularly in the 1962-1963 time period.

Ashton

Such a mind-bending collection of similar but irreconcilable data has accumulated in one small but writhing corner of the timeline being put together that I am appealing to the collective reasoning capabilities of the research community to help in any way they can to isolate and tame this hideously shape-changing beast. Or first to pull apart and then isolate and tame these shape-changing beasts, as the case may be.

First, there is the case of Rose Cheramie (or Cherami):

Encapsulated from John Simkin's page on her: She was found unconsciousness by the side of the road at Eunice, Louisiana, on 20 November 1963 and taken by Lieutenant Francis Frugé of the Louisiana State Police to the state hospital (which is in Jackson, Louisiana—stay tuned). Cheramie told him and told the doctors and nurses at the Jackson mental facility that she had been thrown out of a car by two gangsters who worked for Jack Ruby. She claimed that the men were involved in a plot to kill John F. Kennedy.

Now compare the story of one Gladys Palmer:

According to Garrison office informant Tom Williams, Palmer was a resident of Jackson, Louisiana who supposedly had been employed by Jack Ruby in Dallas. On or about 8 November 1963 ("two weeks before the assassination), Palmer reportedly drove herself in a black Lincoln Continental to the state hospital in Jackson, purportedly for "treatment of alcoholism." Then two hours prior to the assassination, on 22 November 1963, Gladys Palmer reportedly said, "This is the day of the President's assassination."

The Palmer story is complicated enough by her having been the ex-wife of Henry Earl Palmer, who is one of the witnesses placing Oswald and others in and around Clinton and Jackson Louisiana (and who, uniquely, puts the date at around 1 August 1963, while other such witnesses put it at around 1 September 1963, a month later—all of which is an entirely separate issue that I don't want to get off into, but had to mention here).

And that isn't the end of this, either, because there is yet another Gladys Palmer whose name has crept into the mix, and this is where things get really strange. (I know, I know...)

Consider some information about this other Gladys Palmer:

Not a lot is known, except that she was very highly placed personnel within the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Now, immediately, this seems to make no sense even to mention. But please take just a moment to review, even briefly, The Alumni Network of the Wharton School.

After you do, let me tell you that one of the contemporaries working at and with the Wharton School with this Gladys Palmer was Eleanor Lansing Dulles—sister of Allen Dulles.

And then there is this arresting and vague statement concerning what became of this Gladys Palmer: "There was no successor for Palmer, who was incapacitated by illnesses prior to her retirement in 1965." It doesn't say anything about how long before her retirement this "incapacitation by illness" (a favorite euphemism) took Ms. Palmer out of the picture.

Maybe there is no connection at all between the two Gladys Palmers. Indeed, there seems to be a difference in middle names, one being "Fletcher," the other identified as having an "L." middle initial.

Then again, there is something compellingly odd indeed about this strange confluence of one set of nearly duplicate names, overlapping two apparently different, yet almost identical stories of prescience about the murder of John F. Kennedy.

Any illumination that can be brought to bear on this conundrum will be greatly appreciated.

Ashton Gray

The Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assissination both did everything that a small collection of men could do, by any means possible, to bewilder, baffle, and befog every man or woman incautious enough or bold enough to attempt to understand the origins and evolution of John F. Kennedy's trip to Dallas, the selection of the Trade Mart as a luncheon site, and the subsequent (or simultaneous) determination of the Route of Death that led to the blatant murder of John F. Kennedy.

These tax-funded committees have succeeded beyond all reasonable expectation at what they set out to do, which was to confuse the issue. Their work was masterful. Even a brief address to the available literature and discussions on the question will confirm it.

A recent effort by a group of researchers devoted at least 90 man hours to untangling the stupefying amount of confusion that has been intentionally generated (the words "intentionally" and "generated" are used advisedly) on this one central and crucial question alone.

Of course 90 hours isn't a drop in the ocean compared to the probably hundreds of thousands (or greater) number of man hours that have been spent by researchers wandering lost in the jungle of manufactured confusion that surrounds this question. But these were very focused hours invested in the unprecedented effort to put the information of record carefully into a timeline, to harness the random, scattered data for the first time into an accurate sequence of events.

GROSS AND GLARING OMISSIONS

The first thing that emerged from the effort was the startling amount of information that is missing. The most fundamental and pivotal facts either have been omitted altogether, or have been befogged with "either/or" possibilities never confirmed in any direction. These omissions cannot be accounted for or explained away by mere oversight. These are questions that men responsibly and honestly employed on such commissions would have had as a top priority to answer clearly, decisively, and emphatically.

Their product uniformly is the exact opposite on these seniormost questions: confusion, uncertainty, obfuscation, and a perfect vacuum where a named source should be on utterly supreme questions of decision.

The only rational conclusion from such malign product of "investigation" is that just such confusion, uncertainty, obfuscation, and cover-up was their purpose at all relevant times, while pretending that their purpose was probity and justice.

Despite such willful and dishonest manipulation and sabotage of facts, part of the power of a well-designed timeline is its capability for bulldozing a clear path through the densest jungle of tangled lies and omissions in ways that no other approach to the data possibly can accomplish.

Before presenting the timeline excerpts that are deemed relevant to this question, I want mention two things that leapt to the attention of researchers engaged in this little project. Each of these points has earned a nickname within the group involved: "Hobson's Choice" and "One-Stop Car Shop."

HOBSON'S CHOICE

The term "Hobson's choice" in its original purity means an apparent choice that actually is no choice at all. This has a very practical use in the arcane art of magic, especially card magic, where the mark is given "choices" among cards placed before him, and no matter which "choice" he makes, the card the practitioner wants chosen is the card the mark ends up with.

And so it is with the purported "choice" between the Dallas Trade Mart and the Women's Building at the Fair Grounds. The Women's Building at the Fair Grounds was never an option for the luncheon. The representation that it was an option is a complete manipulative lie. The reason it never was an option was carefully kept out of all discussion and exchange on this "choice," and out of all the entirely manufactured and phony "fight" over this "choice" until the strange date of Wednesday, 13 November 1963. Yes, once again 13, CIA's favorite number, rears its befanged head in the murder of John F. Kennedy.

The one thing that Dallas Secret Service Special Agent In Charge Forrest Sorrels consistently withheld from White House personnel right up until 13 November 1963—through all the alleged "dispute" over which "choice" for the Dallas luncheon—is that the Women's Building had no kitchen.

Every other trumped up, phony "pro and con" was beat to death: catwalks, relative security capabilities, interior decorations, everything but the color of the janitors' uniforms. But the one and only relevant fact—just another tangled vine which has been tripped over by who knows how many researchers how many thousands of times—was kept out of all discussion right up until nine days before the murder, after which all "argument" ceased.

But why? Why this utterly specious "choice" kept in foment and played out melodramitcally in the notes of advance man Jerry Bruno and other players on the planning stage? Why the absolute lie that the "final choice" of the Trade Mart wasn't made until two days later, on 15 November 1963, when in fact it had been made considerably earlier (as will be seen in the timeline)?

That exact question brings me to the second item:

ONE-STOP CAR SHOP

Sitting almost dead-center in the timespan of the fraudulent "controversy" over Hobson's Choice (above), as though it were the very axle around which the phony decision-making argument over the luncheon site pinwheels, is one of the stranger oddities in the sideshow of deformities surrounding the murder of John F. Kennedy: the "one-stop car shop" of Saturday, 9 November 1963.

On this date—just four days before the first official recorded "revelation" of the kitchenlessness of the Women's Building—Lee Harvey Oswald (or someone impersonating Lee Harvey Oswald) walked into an automobile dealership within sight of Dealey Plaza, Downtown Lincoln-Mercury, and went for a test drive in an automobile.

But Lee Harvey Oswald purportedly didn't drive. And Lee Harvey Oswald purportedly had no money to buy any such car (although the One-Stop Car Shopper said he expected to be coming into some money soon). And at the very same time that the One-Stop Car Shopper is reported to have been at Downtown Lincoln-Mercury, adjacent to Dealey Plaza, Ruth Hyde Paine claims that she had Lee Harvey Oswald with her, having driven him, she says, to—of all places—the Driver Examination Station to get a driver's license. On a Saturday. Dontcha' know. And lo and behold, it was closed. Wonder of wonders!

And so—says the always reliable Ruth Hyde Paine—she had taken Lee and Marina and the children to while away the remaining hours of alibi time at "a local five and dime store." None of which, of course, can be corroborated in any way. But the always reliable Ruth Hyde Paine says it's so.

Why would Lee Harvey Oswald (or someone pretending to be him) want to test drive a car right there near Dealey Plaza that day? And why would a completely phony "controversy" over "location of the luncheon" (which of course determined the Route of Death) swirl so tornadically around this extremely curious center?

I believe that when the timeline is laid out in full, the answers will become obvious to most—if they aren't already from just this introduction.

But I will tell you unequivocally that the Trade Mart had been selected by the time of the One-Stop Car Shop on Saturday, 9 November 1963—despite the phony Punch'n'Judy Show "arguments" over Hobson's Choice. And I will tell you unequivocally that the route down Elm had been selected by the time of the One-Stop Car Shop on Saturday, 9 November 1963—despite the phony Punch'n'Judy Show "arguments" over Hobson's Choice.

And I will post the relevant excerpts from the timeline, whose researchers regretably will remain unsung, soon.

Ashton Gray

Frank, thank you again for the truly exceptional and unprecedented work.

Ashton

Mr. McLean, this is extraordinary research work, and is invaluable. Simply wonderful information. Thank you.

This may seem an odd request, and I admit at the outset that it is extremely tangential to what you have posted, but I have to ask if you happen to know of any connections whatsoever that might have existed circa 1963 between some of the oil and international interests you have posted about here, and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).

I can't express how serendipitous the timing of your post is to a certain spur line of investigation that is being carried out by several associates. I think they will find anything you have on this matter to be utterly riveting.

In any case, thank you for this thoughtful work.

Ashton Gray

CD933a dated May 1, 1964...at the end of CD 933; there we read, "LACY stated he has been informed that DAN RATHER, newspaper correspondent, Washington, D.C. had made a statement that CARROLL is known to have made investigation about 11 months ago in El Paso, Texas and Mexico regarding a proposed assassination plot and was possibly being paid $ 10,000 by the Rockefeller Foundation for his work."

Robert, all your work here is of enduring value. It is being timelined, and I wanted to mention to you this little matter I was just noticed about that dropped out of that effort: when the reference to this El Paso incident was inserted into the timeline "about eleven months" prior to 1 May 1964, it dropped in at 1 c. June 1963, juxtaposed curiously close to this entry:

• Wednesday, 5 June 1963
  The first important meeting between the President and the Governor took place in El Paso, Tex., in June. 1963. Kennedy suggested August 27 as a possible date for the visit because that was the Vice President's birthday. The Governor objected since inclement Texas weather at that time of year resulted in the absence of many Texans from the State for vacations. Apart from the President's suggestion that four or five fundraising dinners be held in the major Texas cities, no final decision was reached regarding the date for the trip or the itinerary. Nevertheless, the decision to make the trip was considered final as of this time. [staff Report of HSCA on "Politics and Presidential Protection: The Motorcade." Other sources place John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, John Connally, Cliff Carter, and Fred Korth at this meeting at the Cortez Hotel in El Paso.]
  

I thought you might find this of some interest.

Ashton

there was NO large, gaping hole, as witnessed by the Parkland emergency room personnel. And, this is because some of those Parkland E.R. personnel present at the time Kennedy was brought in, either answered an ad in a newspaper, or medical journal in Great Britain, advertising for an Emergency Room position in Dallas

I found the fact that Bowron inarguably lied, as is documented in this thread, to be far more compelling than the fact of her purportedly having answered an ad—if she did. Whether she did or not, she lied. It's documented in this thread.

That's right: someone in the medical profession lied. As utterly impossible as that might seem. To some.

Ashton

As shepherds seek to herd this topic off into a discussion of Jacqueline Kennedy's coif, boisterous unproven claims of Zapruder film fakery, and nebulous speculative sermons about proper body etiquette at moments of unprecedented horror, I would like to recap some actual evidence of record:

Here are eight frames from the Zapruder film showing the back of JFK's head:

And here again is Secret Service agent Fox's photo of the back of JFK's head:

Let's go through the simplicity of it one more time.

Either:

• 1. All of the images posted above have been retouched to remove all traces of a massive, gaping hole that was in the back of John F. Kennedy's head, or,
  2. All of the testimony claiming there was a massive, gaping hole in the back of John F. Kennedy's head is false.
  

It's just that simple. When "facts" contradict each other, at least one of them is false (sometimes both are false, and the truth is still being hidden).

In the instant issue, we have sets of facts contradicting each other. The same principle applies.

Earlier there was an assertion of "mass hallucination" by all the Parkland Hospital personnel concerning a large hole having been in the back of John F. Kennedy's head. I have documented in this thread that there was no such "mass hallucination."

In fact, the number of remaining proximate eye witnesses who have continued to assert the existence of a "large hole" in the back of John F. Kennedy's head, as compared to the right side of his head, are few.

One of them is nurse Diana Bowron. Ms. Bowron had arrived in Dallas, Texas all the way from England in early August 1963, less than four months before the assassination, to spend one year only working in the Parkland Hospital emergency room. It is Ms. Bowron's testimony that she got the temporary job at Parkland Hospital by "answering an ad" in the newspaper. Apparently, Parkland Hospital was investing advertising dollars in newspapers in England for temporary employees in their emergency room, or so we are to believe. Why would be anybody's guess. (Except mine.)

Ms. Bowron also has the dubious distinction of having lied about when and where, or even if, she saw an alleged "bullet" wound in the throat of John F. Kennedy. That is being more fully explored in the thread called Throat Wound. That she lied is inarguable. Why she lied is anybody's guess. (Except mine.)

Another of the medical personnel persistently insisting on a considerable hole the back of John F. Kennedy's head is Dr. Malcolm Perry. Malcolm Perry is the doctor who performed the artful tracheotomy that destroyed forever all evidence of any alleged throat "bullet wound" (the same purported wound that Ms. Bowron lied about).

In September 1962 Malcolm Perry had left for a year away from Parkland Hospital on a course of study in San Francisco. He returned to Parkland in September 1963—not long after Ms. Bowron had arrived from England.

There are several others who have insisted that a hole was in the back of John F. Kennedy's head, one of them being veteran FBI agent Sibert, who was present at the autopsy. He drew a picture of where this alleged hole was, and drew it squarely centered in the back of the head, saying it had been the size of an orange. An FBI agent who stood right next to Sibert in the autopsy also drew a picture of a hole in the "back" of the head—but drew it all the way over on the right side of the "back" of the head so it visually was a thin oval on the drawing.

They stood side-by-side in the same autopsy, then contradicted each other on the location of the head wound. Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.

Then, in contrast to the few verbal claims by proximate eyewitnesses, there is the visual evidence I've placed at the top of this message.

There have been a number of strident claims that carefully picked single frames of the Zapruder film show some sort of deformity to the back of John F. Kennedy's head that just has to be a big hole in the back of his head. I have demonstrated in this thread that the alleged deformity in one instance was nothing whatsoever but optical trickery, the "deformity" being caused by the placement of Jacqueline Kennedy's white glove in relation to the back of John F. Kennedy's head. I have demonstrated elsewhere that a very similar alleged "deformity" is seen at Z:312—which happens to be prior to the head shot—and is consistent with a reasonable configuration of Kennedy's hair at any given moment, particularly on a windy day.

In short, there is not a single image anywhere in the Zapruder film that shows conclusively anything even vaguely resembling a "large hole in the back" of John F. Kennedy's head as it has been described by a few proximate witnesses. Not one frame shows the slighest indication of the kind of darkening in the area that would have to be present if any such hole had existed. Not one frame shows anything at all that isn't consistent with hair and scalp covering the back of John F. Kennedy's head at all relevant times.

This is why I have shown a series of frames—not tried to select out one tricked frame—to demonstrate the visual consistency where the back of the head is visible in the film.

To "see" a "large hole" or "avulsion" in the back of John F. Kennedy's head in the Zapruder film requires a prior faith that such a hole is there, period. No prior faith can be attained at all without prior acceptance of testimony from certain individuals that such a hole existed.

And so the simplicity, again, is that testimony and "drawings" of a large hole or avulsion in the back of John F. Kennedy's head contradict the visual evidence of record.

Both cannot be true. One or the other is false. Either the die-hard claimants of a large hole in the back of John F. Kennedy's head have lied about it, or the available visual evidence all has been faked.

It's that simple.

Ashton Gray

[indicating attached images, that I can't reproduce in replying, of a window in the connecting structure between County Records and County Courts buildings]:

Ashton, would this spot work or is it too far recessed.

John Dolva suggest that location and I did a set-up from there for the head shot back with the old funky limo that's at the bottom of forum page 5 in the "Where were the shooters" thread. (I tried posting the link to the exact message, but that never works for me no matter what I do—always goes to some other post in the thread.) Maybe I ought to revisit it at some point to take a look at possibilities for the Connally shot. I'll try at some point once I catch up on some other backlogs.

Ashton

I just noticed that the enhanced Quicktime movie snippet I uploaded jumps from Z:207 to Z:212, then checked the folder of stills I'd been sent that the Quicktime movie was made from, and discovered that they don't have the intervening frames. <Sigh>

Just didn't want y'all cooking up yet another conspiracy where none is warranted. We got a bushel basket full already.

Sorry. I'm going to get it cut down so it starts at Z:212 and replace it soon.

Ashton

Here you go, starting mid paragraph on page 377.

[Etc.]

This is the relevant text and I hope you and other members found this helpful.

Well, Nick...

I...

Well, I really, genuinely, and deeply appreciate all that typing—by both you and Weisberg.

It's one of the great tragedies of literature that after all the time invested in interviewing, Malcolm Perry wasn't allowed to wedge a single word of his own into all that Weisbergian paraphrasing other than "as they always are."

But at least that was quoted twice. That's very nice, and was a generosity on the part of Mr. Weisberg.

Ashton

Chris, unless I'm not getting something about this, it seems that the relative position of the feet of Hill and Hill have to be taken into account along with the relative position of the tops of their heads.

Ashton