Ashton Gray
-
Posts
1,199 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Ashton Gray
-
-
QUOTE:
Former FBI Agent Sibert shows how large the rear head wound was.
Ohhhhhh. <HEAD SMACK> And all along I had thought he was showing the size of the holes in his story.
Ashton
-
On forum page 15 in another thread, Where were the shooters, I set up an experiment in a 3D model of Dealey Plaza to consider a possible trajectory for the head shot based on what appears to be a mass of ejecta from the head wound in Zapruder frame 314.
Without repeating the methods of that experiment, tracing the trajectory back led to this window in the County Records building.
Later in that same thread, I briefly considered the possibilities of that location also having been the source for the shot to JFK's back, which, for reasons I stated there, I set up with the limo in this location, with the Stemmons freeway sign between JFK and Zapruder:
I've since found a bit of time to explore this back shot possibility in greater detail.
To do that, I created a trajectory from that top right window in the County Records building to the approximate location of the wound in JFK's back that has been described as follows:
- During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.
This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.
James W. Sibert and Francis X. O'Neill, FD 302 report (22nd November, 1963)
Although there has been not inconsiderable dispute about the actual location of the back shot, some have put it not just below the shoulders, but around the level of the shoulder blades. I opted for that location.
Creating a trajectory from the County Records rendered this, as seen from behind and somewhat to the left:
Looking from that location on the back up towards the County Records building top window rendered this:
Just as in the case of the head shot, I found nothing to argue against a back shot from that location. The firing lane is clear and unobstructed.
Next, I wanted to address the angle of entry. In the FBI 302 report excerpted above, it says it was determined that the bullet had entered at "a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees."
Assuming that this meant from the vertical, I set up a view behind the JFK figure in the model with perspective turned off and measured the angle of the trajectory. Here is what I got:
Ashton Gray
- During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.
-
For Bill Miller and David Healey to usurp this thread for juvenile bickering is about as revolting as it gets.
Ashton Gray
-
Ashton:
That nasty version of Z:321 that you posted appears to show a cavity in the area described by Dallas doctors.
Okay. I understand that you see something you can interpret that way in one frame. That's why I posted eight frames together. I consider that the changing light on his hair in the eight frames, and the various positions of Jacquie's white-gloved hand on the back of his head not only argue strongly for there being no such massive hole in the back right of his head, but absolutely preclude the possibility—entirely consistent with the autopsy photos of the back of the head.
But that's just what I see.
Whatever anyone sees or does not see in the visual evidence, it doesn't alter the fundamental principle at work: either the visual evidence is fraudulent, or the testimony about the large hole in the back of the head is fraudulent.
Both can't be true.
I haven't argued against it. You won't find me arguing for it, either. In fact, this "theory" condenses the entire disinformation psy-op surrounding this issue completely into one tight little snarled ball of confusion and opposition (literally and figuratively). If that seems at all sphinxlike, I'll discuss it further in a little while, after both sides of the manufactured dichotomy are done using me for rhetorical target practice here in this thread (as I expected when I started it—and there's a major clue).Also, a shot from the front doesn't preclude a shot striking the rear of the head almost simultaneously, which some have theorized.Geez... ugly language in your retort to my post... you not sleeping nights?
I went back to see what you could be talking about. If you meant my "I hate jerks who answer real questions with questions," I was only poking myself in the eye in set-up for the string of questions I was about to "answer" you with. If you thought for a moment I was poking you in the eye, I'm really sorry for having written it so sloppily. I guess it was a Kerry joke moment. Absolutely not directed at you at all.
Ashton
-
Okay...
We have 2.3 x 1023 threads where you guys can call each other names and argue about alteration, one's lineage, etc.
Trains don't stop when chihuahuas start barking at the wheels.
Drive on.
Ashton
-
Here are eight frames from the Zapruder film showing the back of JFK's head:
[but look with your eyes. It's simple. Either what is in the photographic record has been carefully and meticulously faked, or false oral testimony—without, by the way, any tiniest shred of physical evidence anywhere in existence that supports it—has been put into the record.
It's one or the other. And that's how simple it is.
Ashton
Ashton:
In addition to your two alternatives there are two others:
1. Surgery to the president's head (after his death)- postulated by David Lifton in Best Evidence and/or
2. Humpty Dumpty put back together again by a coroner. (Leggit) For this illuminating information see The Smoking Guns ( 1 hour)
on the Men Who Killed Kennedy. I have bumped the thread for your convenience.
Either way the autopsy photos are fakes and do not represent the president's post- mortem condition.
(In your alternative one above I am assuming by "faked" you mean the photos themselves, although you could also refer to the additional alternatives I have added. Just was not clear from your post. )
Dawn
Hi Dawn.
I've made no distinction as to how any of the visual evidence might or might not have been "faked." Whether it might have been by altering (or substituting) the body, or by altering images of the body, faked is faked. My usage of "faked" is inclusive, not exclusive, of any and all possible ways of faking the visual evidence. If you, for your conclusion, wish to postulate major cosmetic alteration to, or even substitution of, the body itself for the purpose of taking photos at the autopsy, I wouldn't assay to deny you your right to rely on such a belief.
Either way the autopsy photos are fakes and do not represent the president's post- mortem condition.Okay. That's a conclusion I don't reach to. I take it you then include the film images I've posted, as well, being faked to eliminate any visual indication of a large hole the way testimony describes it as being in the back right of Kennedy's head.
Ashton
-
Sounds as if Ashton needs to get a copy of In the Eye of History. He should read Jim Sibert say how he was a foot away from JFK's head at the autopsy, and described the large gaping hole in the back of the head.
So, Smitty, let me make sure I understand you completely: if, arguendo, there was a government conspiracy, veteran FBI agent Jim Sibert —who was sent by the federal government to be in attendance on the body when it arrived in D.C.—is above suspicion for complicity. Is that your position? That seems to be your position.
And what "Ashton needs to" do is understand this thoroughly. Is that right?
Sibert, he was standing right there, and said of the wound "it was this big":Indeed.
Ashton Gray
-
And is it your position that faking all the medical visual evidence and all of the films would be easier than the CIA buying or coercing false closed testimony given to a federal commission with John J. McCloy and Allen Dulles on it?
Let's see, what would be easier?
Fake two (2) back of the head photos..
Point to the place where the scalp is entirely gone and bones are sticking out of a massive hole in the back right of the skull in all eight of these images:
Ashton Gray
-
I think the photos are legit. I mean, why fake photos indicating a conspiracy if your goal is to convince people there was no conspiracy?
IMO the one obvious fake is the back of the head photo, the purpose of the fakery being to show no conspiracy (i.e. no exit wound in the back of the head...
How does "no exit wound in the back of the head" equate to "no conspiracy"? (WARNING: This is not a light, mild, innocent question. It is the question. It is where this thread inevitably had to go.)
...despite statement after statement after statement by credible witnesses).How are such statements, themselves, exempted from any conspiracy?
And a corollary: if there were a conspiracy, and such statements were to be part of it, would you expect the conspirators to submit statements by non-credible witnesses?
Ashton
-
How many of you have already just been waiting to hear the doublespeak that while blown-out bones in evidence on the front of the head had to have come from a frontal shot (why, naturally), any avulsed bones on the back of the head could only mean...well, a frontal shot. How many saw this gibbering dribble-babble whack-warbling coming before it hit you on both sides of the head?
Show of hands?
Is there any mystery any more to the work of the con artists?
Ashton
-
Paul, in addition to the information that Plumlee reportedly flew Lisa Howard on her interview mission to Cuba in late April 1963, I thought it would be worth including this, although there is no way, so far, to date the described events accurately. I'll just quote these relevant passages from the Orange County Weekly's story of 14 September 2006, "Cocaine Airways—A Former CIA Pilot Says Secret Flights To El Toro Could Explain A Marine Officer's `Suicide'," by Nick Schou:
- William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee was a CIA contract pilot. He worked where the agency sent him. That meant that he ran guns to Fidel Castro in the 1950s, and then, when Castro overthrew Fulgencio Batista, Plumlee ran guns to Castro's opponents.
...[Plumlee]: "I started flying for a series of companies—Southwest Aero Charter, Intermountain Aviation, Riddle Aviation in Miami, and a few others."
Plumlee would only later discover his employers were funded, if not completely run, by the CIA. His first major assignment: running guns from the Florida Keys to Fidel Castro and a group of students at the University of Havana known as the Movement of the 26th of July, or M26-7. The group was supported by the CIA in its effort to overthrow Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista. "I was making hit-and-run raids in Cuba," Plumlee says. "The CIA was funding it and sending guns and hardware to them, and I was flying those guns in and out of Cuba."
On one such raid, in the mountains of northern Cuba near Santa Clara, Plumlee's DC-3 airplane lost an engine. "We couldn't get out of there," he says. "We made a weapons drop there at a site that had been secured and we landed and couldn't get enough power to get out. We abandoned the aircraft and they took us to Raul Castro's compound. Raul Castro got me off the island. I had coffee with Fidel Castro in the mountains. Fidel Castro gave me a fatigue hat. I thought he was democratic and patriotic and still to this day believe we drove him into this communist deal. All he wanted was tractors."
One of Plumlee's partners in running guns to Castro and his cohorts was a man we'll call "Carlos," an M26-7 member whose sister, along with several others, had been gunned down by Batista's agents in a raid on a Havana safe house. Convinced a Batista agent masquerading as a revolutionary had aided the attack, Carlos spent two years establishing the mole's identity and then lured him onto a gunrunning flight from Florida's Marathon Key to Cuba. Plumlee copiloted the plane.
"Somewhere between Cat Cay, southeast of the Keys, and the Cuban coast, the door light went red in the cockpit, meaning the cargo door had been unlatched," Plumlee says. He went back to the cargo area to investigate. The suspected Batista agent had disappeared, and Carlos was re-latching the cargo door. "My copilot told me to get back in my seat," he says. "He told me it was a Cuban affair."
In 1961, two years after Castro took over Cuba, Plumlee went to work running guns to Castro's right-wing opponents. He says he was attached to the CIA's Miami station in a project known as JMWAVE, the agency's codename for anti-Castro operations.
"JMWAVE was the first time I knew I was CIA," Plumlee says. He got to be friends with various members of Alpha 66, a group of anti-Castro extremists recruited by the CIA to carry out terrorist attacks inside Cuba. One of those operatives was Frank Sturgis, who later turned up as a Watergate burglar. "Sturgis and I made flights to Cuba together," Plumlee says. "He was a good friend of mine in the Cuba days. We dropped some leaflets over Cuba together and made an air raid over Santa Clara. ..."
The Santa Clara reference might help narrow down that event. Guevara entered Santa Clara on 28 December 1958.
Ashton
- William Robert "Tosh" Plumlee was a CIA contract pilot. He worked where the agency sent him. That meant that he ran guns to Fidel Castro in the 1950s, and then, when Castro overthrew Fulgencio Batista, Plumlee ran guns to Castro's opponents.
-
How easy would it be to insert these BS photos into evidence if you are the Warren Commission?
Damn good question—without stipulating to them being "BS photos." How easy would it have been? And they had them.
So the better question is: why didn't they insert the photos into evidence?
Why did they—instead—trot out a lot of testimony exactly contrary to the photos they had?
How hard would it be to convince the Parkland doctors that they all saw a massive rear head wound, and have them stick with that viewpoint despite the mounting wave of LHO framidence? (I've coined a new phrase...)Despite? I don't know if you've noticed, but the "testimony" of a gaping hole in the back right of the head was on a line pointing back up to the sixth floor of the TSBD.
And "how hard would it be"? I hate jerks who answer real questions with questions, but I don't mind answering rhetorical questions with questions: So how much duress can be brought on the grounds of "national security"? How much fear is in the record from people connected in even minor ways peripheral to the assassination? How many people died mysteriously after the assassination? Why did the Chief Justice of the United States cry?
And is it your position that faking all the medical visual evidence and all of the films would be easier than the CIA buying or coercing false closed testimony given to a federal commission with John J. McCloy and Allen Dulles on it?
And finally, while we're batting around rhetorical questions: if you were going to seed an "investigative" <SPIT!> committee with a lot of false testimony, who would you want to make sure, at all costs, was at the head of the committee to lend apparent 100% validation and credence to such false testimony just by his presence?
(I like "framidence." I'll use it. Probably without credit.)
Ashton
-
Where are the purported photos taken of the big hole in the back of the head?
Oh, darn. They aren't in evidence. They are no-see-ums.
But, hey: not to worry—there's "testimony" about them. Oh, yeah: we got that by the bucket. (Please take note of who told you all about these alleged photos—but, you know, just didn't produce them.)
So just believe in them. That's all. It's a faith thang. Doncha' know.
Ashton Gray
-
Paul, I think this is a very interesting topic and I'm looking forward to your additions.
In the interim, I'd like to mention a few things here that I hope will augment or correlate with your work. I'm going to do this in the form of a timeline regarding several incidents of interest packed into the very busy months of April and early May 1963. This necessarily is long; I've included the full texts of several documents. It would have been much longer if I hadn't made some hard decisions about what to include from the timeline for this period and what to leave out, but I think these entries have some relevance to the Cuba topic in relation to the assassination and its motives:
-
Thursday, 4 April 1963
Carlos Bringuier is named in a New Orleans Times-Picayue story as a spokesman and "New Orleans delegate" for the Cuban Student Directorate of Miami. In the artilcle, Bringuier claims that the Cuban Student Directorare will continue efforts to liberate Cuba "despite action by the United States to stop raids originating from U.S. soil." Bringuier further claims that Cubans have "never received any efficient support from the United States in their struggle against Communist oppression," and charged that "imprisonment of Cuban leaders by the U. S. and the British-U.S. blockade to curtail attacks of the freedom fighters ... are direct results of negotiations effected last October between the USA and Russia." [NOTE: The timing of this issuance by Bringuier is very odd in context, and evidence mounts in the timeline that Bringuier was connected to CIA's operations in Miami, including E. Howard Hunt, William "Tosh" Plumlee, and Frank Sturgis, among others. This statement also is in precise alignment with later statements made by E. Howard Hunt.]
Friday, 5 April 1963
A photo of Lee Harvey Oswald standing in a yard holding a rifle in one hand and a newspaper in the other is inscribed on the back: "To my friend George from Lee Oswald" with a date of 5/IV/63. The handwriting is attributed later to Lee Harvey Oswald. Additional unattributed writing says: "Copyright Geo do [sic] M" and the words, in Russian: "Hunter of fascists, ha-ha-ha!" [NOTE: The photo doesn't surface until April 1 (April Fool's Day) 1977, when it is delivered to the House Select Committee on Assassinations by Jeanne de Mohrenshildt, widow of George de Mohrenschildt.]
Monday, 8 April 1963
There is a flight plan of this date for a flight from New Orleans, piloted by David Ferrie. Passengers listed are Hidell (an alias for Lee Harvey Oswald), Lambert (an alias for Clay Shaw) and Diaz. The destination is Garland, Texas.
Thursday, 11 April 1963
DOCUMENT [NOTE: Gordon Chase, author of this document, is assistant to National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy. It is very difficult to take this document at face value in the context of other incidents in the timeline. Chase is the primary contact for ABC newswoman Lisa Howard, and within 10 days of this memo to Bundy, Lisa Howard will be in Cuba interviewing Castro and other members of the Castro government, having been flown there by CIA's Tosh Plumlee. Analyzed against other incidents, the document should be regarded with the possibility that there was something else at work in its creation--which also may not have been when it is dated.]:
April 11, 1963MEMORANDUM FOR: Mr. BundySUBJECT: Cuba -- Policy1. We are all concerned about solving our Cuba problem, but so far, we have been looking seriously at only one side of the coin -- ways to hurt Castro by varying degrees of overt and covert nastiness. We have not yet looked seriously at the other side of the coin -- quietly enticing Castro over to us.2. If the sweet approach turned out to be feasible and, in turn, successful, the benefits would be substantial. In the short run, we would probably be able to neutralize at least 2 of our main worries about Castro -- the reintroduction of offensive missiles and Cuban subversion. In the long run, we would be able to work on eliminating Castro at our leisure and from a good vantage point.3. While the practical obstacles to this sort of approach may be immense, they may not be insuperable. Two such obstacles are the domestic political situation and Castro's reluctance to be enticed. ( a ) Domestic Problem -- If the American people can be shown that the offensive missile threat and the subversive threat are under control, that the Russian presence in Cuba is reduced and that Castro is much more a nationalist than a Communist, the selling job necessary for a careful, quiet policy turn-around may not be impossible. ( b ) Castro's Reluctance to be Enticed -- This may be an easier nut to crack now than it once would have been. Castro may have received, from our point of view, some very valuable education over the past couple years. Hopefully, he has learned that the Russians are not as tough and reliable as he thought they were and that we are a lot tougher and nastier than he thought we were; also hopefully, he is scared.Our present nasty policy is probably a necessary prelude to a sweet approach. The more we can (1) scare Castro and (2) demonstrate to him that the Bloc is either unwilling or unable to fill his security and economic requirements, the more amenable Castro probably will be to a new approach. In this regard, perhaps the worst thing we can do is to let our nasty policy ease off without a particular objective in sight.4. I understand that in the near future, the President will be looking at some more violent solutions to the Cuban problem. It might be interesting if, at roughly the same time, he could have a look at a feasibility study on a policy turn-a-round. Do you think this timing for such a study is right? Or do you think it is still premature?Gordon Chase
Monday, 15 c. April 1963
Approximate time Silvia Odio begins seeing psychiatrist Dr. Burton C. Einspruch in Dallas, Texas.
Wednesday, 17 April 1963
Carlos Bringuier sends a telegram to President Kennedy: "Your promise is now two years old. If the Monroe Doctrine is dead, allow us to fight for our Fatherland. Remember Bay of Pigs." That night, a mass "in memory of the dead of the Bay of Pigs invasion" is held, all of it covered the next day by the New Orleans Times-Picayue.
Friday, 19 April 1963
On April 19, George and Jeanne De Mohrenschildt leave Dallas, puportedly for New York City.
Saturday, 20 April 1963
Ruth Hyde Paine meets with the Oswalds, ostensibly for a "picnic" at a park near the Oswald's Neely Street apartment.
Monday, 22 April 1963
Lisa Howard, ABC newswoman, is in Cuba interviewing Fidel Castro. On this day her session with him lasts from 12:45 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. She will total about 10 hours of interview with Fidel Castro, and also will interview Raul Castro, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Vilma Espin de Castro, Raul Roa, and Rene Vallejo. Quoted from second source: "[Tosh Plumlee] flew ABC reporter Lisa Howard into Cuba, where she created a back channel between Robert F. Kennedy and Castro after the Cuban missile crisis. 'There was an arm [of the CIA] out there trying to talk peace with Castro during the assassination attempts,' he [Plumlee] says."
Tuesday, 23 April 1963
Lyndon Johnson is in Dallas for the Second Annual NASA Manned Space Flight Conference. He makes an announcement about a plan for John F. Kennedy to visit Dallas. [NOTE: Some sources have opined that this will be to attend a dinner to be given in honor of Congressman Albert Thomas, but there is no known record of anything about a Thomas dinner in the Johnson announcement.]
Wednesday, 24 April 1963
The Dallas Times Herald is headlined: "LBJ sees Kennedy Dallas Visit--One Day Texas Tour Eyed." Ruth Hyde Paine arrives at the Neely Street apartment of Lee and Marina Oswald at around 10:00 a.m. and "discovers" that Lee is packed to go to New Orleans. Supposedly, it is "a distinct surprise" to Ruth Paine. Lee is fully packed and asks Ruth to drive Lee's "bags and duffel bags, suitcases, to the bus station for him where he would buy a ticket to go to New Orleans." [NOTE: Lee Harvey Oswald does not drive. Ruth Hyde Paine just "happens by" when he is packed and needs to be driven to the bus station on the day of the announcement of plans for Kennedy to come to Dallas.]
Friday, 26 April 1963
Guaranteed Warranty #64413 is issued in Austin, Texas, by C.B. Smith Motors to George Gordon Wing, of 717 Landon Lane, for a 1959 Rambler station wagon, with an identifying number of D-713121.
Monday, 29 April 1963
The CIA Office of Security finds "that it had no objection to De Mohrenschildt's acceptance of a contract with the Duvalier regime of Haiti in the field of natural resource development." [NOTE: This is related to oil. CIA reaches this conclusion, somehow, while de Mohrenshildt supposedly is in New York City. The following day, 30 April 1963 (see), the "Standing Group" of the National Security Council will meet and determine that CIA is to research and submit a "report on the oil problem in relation to Cuba" (see McGeorge Bundy memo of 2 May 1963). It should not be overlooked that the westernmost point of Haiti is about 40 miles from the easternmost point of Cuba.]
Tuesday, 30 April 1963
Lisa Howard, ABC newswoman, returns to Miami from Cuba, where she has interviewed a number of high-ranking Cuban officials, including Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Vilma Espin de Castro, Raul Roa, and Rene Vallejo. She has been accompanied on the trip by CIA's Tosh Plumlee. On the same day, there is a meeting of the "Standing Group" of the National Security Council in which certain decisions are made about Cuba and Castro (seen 2 May 1963 memo from McGeorge Bundy), including orders for CIA to submit a "report on the oil problem in relation to Cuba."
Wednesday, 31 May 1963
Kerry Thornley ends his membership in the Hotel, Motel, and Restaurant Employees Union [known today as the Hotel and Restaurant Employees and Bartenders' Union (International)] in New Orleans. Its office is in the Newman Building at 544 Camp Street [which also has an address of 531 Lafayette Street]. Thornley purportedly leaves New Orleans "to travel to California and Mexico."
Wednesday, 1 May 1963
DOCUMENT [NOTE: Deputy Director (Plans) CIA Richard Helms submits the following memorandum to the Director of Central Intelligence, John McCone, regarding ABC newswoman Lisa Howard's trip to Cuba and interview with Fidel Castro.]:S-E-C-R-E-TNO FORIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM/NO DISSEM ABROAD/BACKGROUND USE ONLYCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WASHINGTON 25, D. C.1 May 1963MEMORANDUM FOR: The Director of Central IntelligenceSUBJECT: Interview of U.S. Newswoman with Fidel Castro Indicating Possible Interest in Rapprochement with the United.States1. On 30 April 1963 Liza Howard [sic—elsewhere Lisa Howard], U.S. newswoman associated with the American Broadcasting. Company, returned to Miami from Cuba where she had interviewed a number of high-ranking Cuban officials, including Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Vilma Espin de Castro, Raul Roa, and Rene Vallejo.Her conversations with Fidel Castro totaled about ten hours and included one session on 22 April which lasted from 12:45 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. Following is an account of those onversations and Liza Howard's observations concerning the present Cuban situation.2. It appears that Fidel Castro is looking for a way to reach a rapprochement with the United States Government, probably because he is aware that Cuba is in a state of economic chaos. The October blockade hurt the Cuban economy. Liza Howard believes that Castro talked about this matter with her because she is known as a progressive and she talked with him in frank, blunt, honest terms; Castro has little opportunity to hear this type of conversation.Castro indicated that if a rapprochement was wanted President John F. Kennedy would have to make the first move. In response to the statement that Castro would probably have to make the first move, Castro asked what the U.S. wanted from him. When a return to the original aims of the revolution was suggested, Fidel said that perhaps he, President Kennedy, and Premier Nikita Khrushchev should discuss this.Liza[sic—throughout]Howard said that she thought it was a more likely topic for Castro to discuss with President Kennedy. Castro said that he doubted that President Kennedy would talk with him without Khrushchev being present. When Howard pressed Castro for further information on how a rapprochement could be achieved he said that steps were already being taken. Pressed further, he said he considered the U.S. limitation on exile raids to be a proper step toward accommodation.It is Liza Howard's opinion that Castro wants to pursue the discussion of rapprochement with proper progressive spokesmen. Based on her discussions with the following persons Liza Howard feels that Guevara, Raul Castro, and Vilma Espin oppose any idea of rapprochement; Roa and Vallejo favor these discussions.3. Castro asked Howard, who had previously interviewed Khrushchev, for an appraisal of him. When Howard said that Khrushchev was a shrewd politician who would break and dispose of Castro when the Soviets no longer needed him, Castro made no comment but only nodded his head as if in skeptical agreement. Liza Howard had no insight or advance notice on Castro's travel to Moscow.4. Castro appears healthy, has no visible nervous twitches or tics, and was calm, rational, humorous, and non-argumentative during all discussions. Vallejo, Castro's personal physician, also acts as secretary, interpreter, and confidant.5. Castro is in complete control in Cuba. No major decision is made without him. Neither Guevara nor Raul Castro would be able to rule Cuba if Fidel were assassinated.6. In discussions with Castro about terror and secret police methods Liza Howard received the impression that he was not completely aware of the extent to which terror has gripped Cuba.7. Castro refers to Soviet troops in Cuba as "technicals" and indicated that they have a training mission in Cuba. He made the point, however, that if an internal revolt takes place in Cuba Soviet "technicals" would fight with Castro to put down a counterrevolution.8. Liza Howard said that Emil Stadelhofer, Swiss Ambassador to Cuba, is an overworked, timid man who does not have Castro's ear. She believes that the Swiss need a larger staff in Habana [sic--Havana] and that Stadelhofer needs recognition for a job well done. Howard also said that in her opinion the Western diplomatic community in Habana [sic] has no influence on Castro or his government.9. While discussing a possible rapprochement Castro asked for full assessments of President and Mrs. Kennedy, and Robert Kennedy, and wanted to know if Adlai Stevenson had power in the U.S. and if his voice was heard in President Kennedy's councils. Castro commented that James Donovan was a good man; it was Liza Howard's impression that Donovan had not talked politics with Castro but that Donovan had a platform from which he could launch political discussions on the philosophy of revolution.10. Liza Howard said that she was willing to undertake further discussions with Castro concerning a possible rapprochement. Other possible candidates whom she suggested were Edwin M. Martin, Adlai Stevenson, and Luis Munoz Marin. She also mentioned Donovan but was not quite certain that he was progressive enough. Liza Howard is willing to arrange a meeting for any U.S. Government spokesman with Castro through Vallejo, who will be the point of contact.ll. Liza Howard definitely wants to impress the U.S. Government with two facts: Castro is ready to discuss rapprochement and she herself is ready to discuss it with him if asked to do so by the U.S. Government.[signature of "W. Lloyd George"]Richard Helms Deputy Director (Plans) CSDB-3/654,439Orig: The Director of Central Intelligencecc: Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs [McGeorge Bundy]The Director of Intelligence and Research Department of State The Director, Defense Intelligence AgencyThe Attorney GeneralThe Department of JusticeThe Deputy Director of Central IntelligenceDeputy Director for IntelligenceAssistant Director for National EstimatesAssistant Director for Current Intelligence
Wednesday, 1 May 1963
George de Mohrenschildt departs for Haiti on May 1, 1963. On or around the same date, Edward Lansdale receives an honorary graduation certificate from a sniping school that the U.S. has in Panama.
Thursday, 2 May 1963
DOCUMENT [NOTE: it cannot be overstressed that this letter below does not come to McGeorge Bundy from Director of Central Intelligence, John McCone. It comes to Bundy from the Acting Director of CIA at the time, Marshall S. Carter--even though Richard Helms's memo of the day before (see 1 May 1963) had been addressed to DCI McCone. Carter cites a purported "cable" from McCone, but there is no such cable in evidence. Many sources claim that this letter came from McCone, and such claims are false.]:Letter From Acting Director of Central Intelligence Carter to the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy) WashingtonMay 2, 1963Dear Mr. Bundy:With respect to the Lisa Howard report, Mr. McCone cabled me this morning stating that he cannot overemphasize the importance of secrecy in this matter and requested that I take all appropriate steps along this line to reflect his personal views on its sensitivity. Mr. McCone feels that gossip and inevitable leaks with consequent publicity would be most damaging.He suggests that no active steps be taken on the rapprochement matter at this time and urges most limited Washington discussions, and that in these circumstances emphasis should be placed in any discussions on the fact that the rapprochement track is being explored as a remote possibility and one of several alternatives involving various levels of dynamic and positive action.Lisa Howard of the American Broadcasting Company had a 10-hour interview with Fidel Castro on April 22. During that interview Castro made a number of points, the most important of which was that Cuba was looking for ways to establish a rapprochement with the United States. Cottrell summarized the main points of the interview in a May 2 memorandum to Martin, and Richard Helms prepared a more detailed account in a memorandum to McCone, May 1. The President read Helms' summary.In view of the foregoing, it is requested that the Lisa Howard report be handled in the most limited and sensitive manner.Faithfully yours,Marshall S. CarterLieutenant General, USA(Printed from a copy that indicates Carter signed the original.)
On the same day:
Thursday, 2 May 1963
DOCUMENTMemorandum From the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy) to the Members of the Standing Group of the National Security Council Washington, May 2, 1963.Top Secret; Sensitive; Eyes Only.The following assignments have been made as a result of the discussion in the Standing Group on Tuesday, April 30th:1. There will be an examination of the possible developments in Cuba if Castro were to disappear from the scene. This analysis will be developed by Mr. Sherman Kent and will be available for discussion at the meeting of the Standing Group on May 14th.2. There will be an analysis of the possible use of contingencies for the achievement of wider political objectives. This analysis will be conducted under the direction of Mr. Alexis Johnson and Mr. Paul Nitze, and its first results will be available for discussion at the meeting of the Standing Group on May 14th. This first analysis will provide:a. A detailed examination of possible action in the event of interference with surveillance; andb. a more general assessment of possible use of other contingencies in Cuba or in the waters around Cuba.3. The Central Intelligence Agency will prepare a general paper on the possible forms of effective interference with the economic life of Cuba by sabotage or other means. In particular, CIA will report on the oil problem in relation to Cuba. It is hoped that a first report on this study may be available next week for distribution.4. The Department of State will examine the possible use of the sugar market as a means of complicating the life of the Castro regime. It is hoped that this study will be available next week.5. The principal topic of discussion for the meeting of the Standing Group on May 7th will be the development of a U.S. program and policy toward post-Castro Cuba, and the initial lead in the discussion will be taken by Mr. Wilson for USIA. Appropriate papers will be circulated before noon on Monday, May 6th.McGeorge Bundy
Friday, 10 May 1963
Lisa Howard's April interview with Fidel Castro airs.Ashton
-
Thursday, 4 April 1963
-
Ashton i am using Windows movie maker in Windows XP
It's prefference save function seems to be WMV, which plays with Windows media player.
I will try and download some conversion software and see what i can do.
Prefferably i would like to save it as (AVI) then you can slit the frames using Irfanview.
WHAT IS YOUR PREFFERED FORMAT:
AVI would be great (and probably most universal?), but Chris Davidson has been nice enough to convert it to Quicktime, and that works fine here.
I have the Windows Media Slayer, but on the Mac the .wmv plays at the wrong rate, and it can't be saved or exported as anything else, and you can't even grab stills from it (except by doing screen grabs).
Anyway, thanks very much for providing it, period.
(And thanks very much to Chris Davidson for the QT version. Can't post another reply yet.)
Ashton
-
Muchmore film made from the frames grabs on the history channel DVD.
Robin, is there any chance of your making it available in any format other than .wmv?
Ashton
-
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.
Now, as entirely expected, there are three disinformation magpies who were drawn out and immediately jumped on it to make it complex and attempt to keep it all in foment and to create the greatest possible confusion around it.
But look with your eyes. It's simple. Either what is in the photographic record has been carefully and meticulously faked, or false oral testimony—without, by the way, any tiniest shred of physical evidence anywhere in existence that supports it—has been put into the record.
It's one or the other. And that's how simple it is.
Ashton
-
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,
-
I thought we had already gotten past your flawed 3D graphics and mass hallucination theory.
3D? you know 3D? Can you put Dealey Plaza in a 3D world? If you can't, how do you know something related to perspective, size, position <x,y,z> and/or area activity is flawed? If you can, please provide 3D topo graphics files of DP...
David, the man is a fraud and a humbug, as has been proven conclusively twice earlier in this very thread. It's in the record. It's inarguable. He knowingly and willfully set out to deceive, and he's been caught red-handed and exposed by me, and all he's done ever since is shriek inane and vapid insults about the person who exposed him for the charlatan he is.
What else can he do? You noticed he hasn't even apologized for having made a "mistake" for either of his frauds I exposed. You know why? Because it wasn't a mistake either time. It was knowing, willful, and intentional.
As I established long ago, the 3D model was created using the standard Dealey Plaza plats for placement of every building, road, and major landmark.
As I've also acknowledged repeatedly, the elevations of the Plaza infield and roads heading down into the underpass are a concern to me and are not guaranteed, but they are as close as I have been able reasonably to determine so far, and work continues on it.
Meanwhile, I'd be happy to spot the braying jackass +-3 feet of elevation (when the model elevations are nowhere near that far off) for any of his lamebrained Miller's Magic Bullet scenarios, and he'd still be off by such a ridiculous factor that he may as well be in Yankee Stadium.
Let him screech and bang his head against the crib.
Ashton
-
Some more quotes of note from the good Nurse Bowron, first from her Warren Commission deposition of 24 March 1964:
-
SPECTER: And what, in a general way, did you observe with respect to President Kennedy's condition?
BOWRON: He was very pale, he was lying across Mrs. Kennedy's knee and there seemed to be blood everywhere. When I went around to the other side of the car I saw the condition of his head.
SPECTER: You saw the condition of his what?
BOWRON: The back of his head.
SPECTER: And what was that condition?
BOWRON: Well, it was very bad---you know.
SPECTER: How many holes did you see?
BOWRON: I just saw one large hole.
SPECTER: ...Did you notice any other wound on the President's body?
BOWRON: No, sir.
SPECTER: ...Did you ever see his [John F. Kennedy's] neck prior to the time you removed the trach tube?
BOWRON: No, sir.
And now from a 1993 letter:
- "I saw that there was a massive amount of blood on the back seat and in order to find the cause I lifted his head and my fingers went into a large wound in the back of his head; I turned his head and seeing the size of the wound realized that I could not stop the bleeding. I turned his head back and saw an entry wound in the front of the throat... ."
Diana Hamilton Bowron lied in her letter, or lied under oath, or—most likely—both. Diana Hamilton Bowron is impeached. She is a xxxx.
The timeline suggests extremely curious circumstances and timing surrounding her arrival from England at Parkland Hospital Emergency room in Dallas, Texas.
Ashton Gray
-
SPECTER: And what, in a general way, did you observe with respect to President Kennedy's condition?
-
An extremely brief timeline excerpt, surely of no real consequence:
-
Thursday, 1 August 1963
FBI conducts raids at Farm Bouchet Munitions Dump, Slidell, and Covington, Louisiana of purported training sites for anti-Castro Cubans. There are only confiscations of firearms and munitions—no arrests. [NOTE: The raids take place over the next few days, through 3 August 1963.]
Sunday, 4 August 1963
Diana Hamilton Bowron arrives in Dallas, Texas from England. For no known reason, this British transplant has been put on a one-year contract to work in the emergency room at Parkland hospital. [NOTE: Bowron will just happen to be the emergency room nurse who will attend John F. Kennedy's arrival at Parkland Hospital less than four months later, on 22 November 1963.]
Monday, 5 August 1963
Lee Harvey Oswald purportedly comes into the store of Carlos Bringuier and expresses an interest in "joining the struggle against Castro." [NOTE: There is evidence in the timeline to suggest that this event never took place, but was an alibi provided for Oswald by Bringuier.]
Now a few words from Nurse Diane Hamilton Bowron:
-
BOWRON: There was a gaping wound in the back of his head.
QUESTION: So, in this massive hole, was there a flap of scalp there, or was scalp actually gone?
BOWRON: It was gone. Gone. There was nothing there. Just a big gaping hole.
QUESTION: We're talking about scalp first, and then bone, right?
BOWRON: Yeah. There might have been little clumps of scalp, but most of the bone over the hole, there was no bone there.
Ashton Gray
-
Thursday, 1 August 1963
-
Five ringy-dingies...
Well, Mr. Plumlee, the questions list just keeps growing, so when you do get around to picking up, here's the latest:
Who among the CIA-briefed team you flew into Dallas on 22 November 1963, on the basis that there could be an attempted assassination of the President, was assigned to "alert and prepare" (we'll just put it that way for now) the area hospital for possible traffic involving national security matters?
Pursuant to that question, did your CIA briefing include reference to National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy in relation to the purported threat of attempted assassination, and if so, what exactly was the nature of the reference?
Ashton Gray
-
- "...[T]here were far more doctors there than they should have been... . You must remember that I had only been there a short time and I did not know all the doctors, some I never saw again... ."
—Nurse Diana Bowron
Ashton Gray
- "...[T]here were far more doctors there than they should have been... . You must remember that I had only been there a short time and I did not know all the doctors, some I never saw again... ."
-
Hopelessly contradictory "facts," glaring omissions, gratuitous irrelevant details, falsehoods, and altered sequences are illogics that form the iridescent trail of madmen.
It is a fool's game to attempt to find reason, rationality, or logic in such mad illogics. They are traps laid by madmen specifically to snare reason and rationality and hold it fast in the hopes of covering their tracks. But the illogics are their tracks. They are effective as traps only when the rational attempt to find logic where there only is illogic. Then they are hopelessly inescapable traps.
The only rational advance comes in recognizing an illogic for just what it is, not falling into it, and following the trail of illogics to the source. And that is the source of the madness.
The "medical evidence" is a mine field of illogics that leads directly back to the Warren Commission, but doesn't stop at the Warren Commission.
Ashton Gray
-
Today's Educational Forum Fairy Tale:
Sycophantic CIA golum, gofer, boy toy, and hand-puppet Darlin' Arlen Specter got to see the SS medical photos—but John J. McCloy and Allen Dulles didn't. How do we know? Well—Darliin' Arlen sez so, chillun. That's why Brother Speer passed it along to you as the word of God.
And it isn't to be questioned or doubted. Got it?
Ashton Gray
Where is the massive back head wound?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Ashton Gray
The purported large hole in the back of Kennedy's head is and at all relevant times was the official government line; it was the primary constant in the testimony collected by Specter for the Warren Commission. This is one element of this discussion that anybody will have to concede is amusing: the idea that this "giant hole in the back of the head" story originated somewhere else. No: it was little Darlin' Arlen trotting around (alone) collecting it up. (I guess the rest of the commission investigating the assassination of the President of the United States just couldn't be bothered to be present at the time.)
And guess who, of the Warren Commission, is on record as having viewed the autopsy photos.
At the top of your message I was replying to was in all caps "QUOTE." Were you quoting yourself? If not, where do you think the sarcasm was directed?Believe me, I'm going to. And I don't just believe it: I know it.
Ashton