Joseph Backes

We're going to get a lot of this with the new book "Listening In."

Chris, They are not so much "censored," as redacted. What you're describing, and I've run into it myself, is how they redact audio tape. The original tape, either a dictabelt or reel to reel is played and a copy is made, almost always a 90 minute audio cassette. That tape is made publicly available to preserve the original. If there is a discussion that somebody somewhere thinks will affect national security then it's redacted. So, you will hear a tone instead of the conversation(s). Many, if not most of the material secretly recorded by JFK and LBJ are not transcribed. A lot of it is being transcribed now after they've been declassified. But, there are many instances where mistakes have been made, wrong words transcribed which change the whole conversation, even the wrong person identified as speaking, especially with the JFK tapes being transcribed by the Miller Center. This critique was brought up by Sheldon Stern, at the JFK Library during a conference on presidential taping systems. Stern worked at the JFK library as an historian for 23 years. He wrote an article criticizing the entire approach and methodology taken by Ernest May and Phillip Zelikow for The Atlantic Magazine. What JFK Really Said. I consider this article to be essential reading, and a warning to those who would use the JFK tapes and transcripts from the Miller Center. The LBJ library declassified the tapes prior to the JFK Act going into full effect. They were afraid they would lose ownership and control of the tapes if they were still classified when the JFK Act began. There was language in the Act that would have resulted in them effectively being taken and put into the JFK records collection at Archives II. It is very difficult to stay on top of what has been redacted in audio recordings. You need the tape with the redacted tones inserted, and documentation as to when that redaction was done, and you have to follow up and see if they say it will be released later on if they actually did so. In my experience NARA isn't that interested in staying on top of it at all. It's too much manpower for them to be so, and I think they are just going to let stuff go in 2017. However, I expect the CIA and other agencies will try to keep things secret beyond 2017. Joe

Sorry folks, it's not in Newsweek. I went to the New York State Library today and went through Newsweek for 1991 and 1992. So, it may be in TIME, or more likely in a newspaper, perhaps The Washington Post. Again, the caption said, "Gun it, Stone's trying to open the trunk." The image is of Clint Hill trying to reach the limo, as seen in the Zapruder film, after JFK has been hit in the head. The caption is said by Kellerman to Greer in this cartoon. The trunk of the presidential limo I think had a caption like that's where all the JFK files were. I think on the back of their suit jackets Greer and Kellerman had FBI and CIA. I don't recall which had which. This appeared prior to June 26 of 1992. So, somewhere between Jan of 1991 and June 26, 1992. Joe

Michael Unfortunately, no. I have this issue and checked it last night. BTW, my Mom's Mom was a Hogan. Joe Joe, there's a slim possibly I may have that issue. If you get stuck, let me know. It would be somewhat time consuming to try and locate Nick Nick, I'd appreciate it if you could find the issue with this political cartoon. Joe

I'm going to look at some stuff of mine this weekend. I could be wrong, and I was not referring to the Murchison party thing. But, I swear I heard or saw something about J. Edgar Hoover either giving or receiving an award from or to something like the Boy Scouts, or Boys Club, or that scam charity Boys Inc. At first, I thought this was in a Penn Jones "Forgive My Grief," volume. But, I also think there was a newspaper article about this. BTW, Boys Inc. was the parent company of the Del Mar Surf Club racetrack and the Hotel del Charro (sp?) The director of Boys Inc, who ran it for Sid Richardson and Clint Murchinson was none other than John Connally. J. Edgar Hoover was heavily involved in Boys Inc. If I find anything I'll let folks know.

Someone has sent me a scan of p. 85 from Forgive My Grief III p. 85. So, I agree Lee that page alone is not sufficient to support the idea that Hoover was in Ft. Worth. But, for some reason I swear I saw something about Hoover getting an award or giving one to the Boy Scouts of America in Ft. Worth in November 1963. And It was in a newspaper article. Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me. Joe

Hello, I need some help. In Forgive My Grief Vol. 3 p. 85 Penn Jones has some information that J. Edgar Hoover was in Ft. Worth around the time of the assassination, the day before, I believe. I think Jones had a small article from a local paper. Hoover either was receiving or giving an award to the Boy Scouts of America. If you have this book handy could you check this? Maybe post a scan? If Jones cites a newspaper, could someone give me the name and date for it? Thank you. Joe Backes

David, Well, 1967 is irrelevant. Either Hill or Moorman commented on getting yellow paint on their shoes. I think others commented on it too. It was fresh paint, it had rained that night and earlier that day. In order for it to be fresh someone put it there that day. I do believe there were there to help the shooters. I only meant about Lamson that angle of reflection does indeed equal angle of incidence. Joe

Michael, Unfortunately, no. I have this issue and checked it last night. BTW, my Mom's Mom was a Hogan. Joe

To David Josephs, David, Foster should not be seen. Take the semi flat area of the trunk and expand that out as a horizontal plane. In order for a reflection to occur on that something has to be above it and the sun has to be in the right spot. Foster has already ducked and is about to hit the dirt. He's too low for a reflection. Altgens, and Hill and Moorman are standing up and from the waist up are more or less sufficiently above the horizontal plane of the trunk for a partial reflection of them to appear on the trunk. As your still asking your initial question you're not understanding the math, the angles, where the sun is, where Zapruder is, that the limousine is moving, that Zapruder turns, the topography of Dealey Plaza, that Elm Street has a slight curve in it and ranges downward about 3 to 4 degrees. What Lamson said is true. The limo is not moving on a flat even surface and Zapruder is not filming alongside on a flat parallel surface. As for the yellow marks, Gary "Not My Real Name" Mack, is full of it. There is nothing routine about this. Those yellow stripes were not put there by the City. People have checked. There is no city work order for them, no paperwork for any public employee to paint yellow stripes on Elm St. in Dealey Plaza that day. They are only there on the one side. Joe

David, It's before June 26 of 1992. Joe

Well, I think you do see Algten's reflection on the trunk. It's clearer to me in the attached thumbnail of Z348. I wish I had better software and the skills to put a circle around what I'm talking about. In almost a straight line down from Jackie's right elbow is a circular reflection, which could be Altgen's head, and just before that, back to the right, closer to Jackie's right elbow, there's a reflection of something shiny which to me lines up with Altgen's camera which is reflecting some sunlight off of it. Now the reflection on the trunk is at an angle, like 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock because the limo has moved down the street and Zapruder has turned that way as he filmed. We don't get a clearer reflection because Zapruder was almost perpendicular to the limo at or near the time of the fatal head shot as were Hill and Moorman on the other side of Elm Street. Also, the elevation of Zapruder's camera, looking down, and into the car, plays a part in this. He's filming the limo better and has it more within the film frame after the shooting. Just one man's opinion. What's really striking to me in the frames you've posted is the freshly painted yellow stripe on the curb of Elm St. on the side where Hill and Moorman were. That was definitely done that morning after it stopped raining. It's amazing no one photographed or filmed, or ever mentioned seeing anyone doing that. Joe

Hello, I don't know the date of this issue. The caption said, "Gun it, Stone's trying to open the trunk." The image is of Clint Hill trying to reach the limo after JFK has been hit in the head. The caption is said by Kellerman to Greer in this cartoon. The trunk of the presidential limo I think had a caption like that's where all the JFK files were. If anyone has a scan of that I'd appreciate it. Thanks. Joe

Also, I'm looking for a copy of this: Francelle Pruitt has written an article detailing the role of Congressman Albert Thomas in bringing the Manned Spacecraft Center to Houston, as well as highlighting some of his connections to Rice and Vice President Lyndon Johnson that aided Thomas in seeing his plan through to completion. See Francelle Pruitt, “Congressman Albert Thomas and NASA’s Coming to Houston: A Study in Legislative Effectiveness, 1936–1966,” in Southwestern Historical Quarterly 55 (April 2002), 583–614. Thanks. Joe

Hello, I found something looking through the LBJ daily diary. On June 26, 1963 LBJ calls George Brown in Houston about the Albert Thomas announcement. And LBJ is calling at 8:15 a.m. So, what did Thomas announce? Can someone with access to a microfilm roll of a Houston newspaper, or maybe Nexis-Lexis goes back that far, look this up please? Thank you. I would post a scan of this page but file attachments can't be bigger than a Hydrogen molecule these days. Joe

If you go to the JFK Library and under Exhibits there is a submenu. There you'll find Interactive Exhibits Scroll down a bit and you'll see White House Diary. Click on that and a new small window opens up. It looks like a three ring binder that's open. On the left side there's a small monthly calendar. And you can click through 1961 - 1963. There's often a film or some audio playing on this side. On the right side there may be a quote and a note for what was scheduled that day. On the bottom there's a very small icon "view appointments," which will show you a scan from the President's appointment book. You have to scroll up and down as the scan is embedded into the small viewing space of this diary thing. It won't let you see the whole 8 and 1/2 by 11 inch paper. So, if you go to page three, for June 5th, 1963 you will see that after JFK went to the White Sands missile range he went to El Paso, Texas. And it says the president was greeted by: 1.) Hon. Lyndon Johnson 2.) Hon. John B. Connally, Governor of Texas 3.) Mayor Judson B. Williams, El Paso, Texas 4.) General Thomas V. Staten 5.) Colonel Netcher. I want to know who General Staten was. As this General met, and that's the key verb, "met" he was there to greet JFK. He was not traveling with JFK. So, I think he's a local official from El Paso. Maybe that's an incorrect assumption. I've contacted the El Paso Times, and a nice woman, Trish Long, in their archive has never heard of him. She checked the city directories but found no information. Well, he might be living on a military base and, hence, he wouldn't show up in a City Directory. The El Paso Times has a section where they're selling photos from that day. President John F. Kennedy visits El Paso. I think my mysterious General Staten has to be in one of these photographs. There are 21 photos to go through. I thought my General might be in #8. It's just JFK and some military person. But it looks to me like his name begins with a T, so probably not. Maybe he's in #10. Though not listed as greeting the President, Senator Ralph Yarborough was at this event. Now we know this because it states at "6:30 p.m. The President, Governor John B. Connally, and Senator Ralph Yarborough departed the airport and motored to the Cortez Hotel, El Paso, Texas." Apparently, LBJ made his own arrangements to get to the Cortez Hotel. It was at the Cortez Hotel that JFK, LBJ, and Connally allegedly discussed the 1963 Nov Texas trip. So, I want to learn all I can about this day, what JFK was doing, where he went, and who met him, everything about what he did this day. I would love to hear from people who were there that day and may have taken photos. Would love to talk to people, get their memories written down. See their photos and films, get them preserved. Joe

Chris, Thank you very much. Joe

Hello, When JFK went to El Paso on June 5th, 1963 he was met by LBJ, Gov. Connally, the Mayor of El Paso, Judson B. Williams, a General Thomas V. Staten, and a Col. Netcher. Netcher was the commander of the 95th Bomb Wing at Bliss airfield which is in or on Ft. Biggs. I think Staten came from Ft. Biggs too, but I can't find anything about him online. Thanks Joe

We should use the ISOO, the PIDB and ISCAP too. And we should not give up on the NDC. I hope to see many JFK researchers at the next open forum of the NDC Wednesday, Aug 29th. See my blog for more information on it. Read their report. Joe

Hello, Does anyone have a photo of Jack Halfen? He was a gangster in Texas with reported ties to Carlos Marcello. He reportedly paid off government officials including LBJ. He's mentioned in in a few books. But, I've never seen a photo of him. Anyone got one? Thanks

have more than one conference. I’ve been thinking of how to counter the fact that the 6th floor thinks it has now bought and now owns Dealey Plaza, for a whole week, in an attempt to own the 50th anniversary. I think we can and should build a movement, and we can start outside the influence of the 6th floor, by having conferences, even small ones, invite college kids in, in cities that have a connection with the case. We should have a conf in New Orleans in April 2013. We should have one in Chicago, and if at all feasible walk along where the Chicago motorcade would have been, at least have a mini-motorade of our own. We should have one in Tampa and Miami. And we should have conferences outside the U.S. We should have a conf in Mexico City in or near where LHO allegedly stayed, and/or near where the Soviet and Cuban consulates were in Mexico City. We should do this around Thursday, Sept 26 – to Thursday, Oct 3, 2013. We should have one in Russia. Yes, I'm serious. We should highlight that we really don't know where Oswald was or what he was doing for a long time while he lived in Russia which people would probably be quite surprised at. Joe

I’m sick of these charlatans coming forward who no one has ever seen or heard of before claiming they see whatever in this photo or film and presenting their imagination as not only research but actual proof that what they say they see is real. They are con-men. They exist solely to discredit the entire JFK research community. They are allowed to pollute the research community by fools who think one forum posting is just as good as another, or from some false notions of free speech and democracy. This is how you do research: First of all properly identify the photograph and its history, give the reader everything, the name of the photographer, the make and model of the camera, and type of film. Where was the film developed? Explain if the Dallas Police Dept or any other local law enforcement agency ever had possession of the photograph. Was the film ever used in any federal investigation? Did a corporation buy the original photo or film? Was the photograph published in any book? Has the film or photograph been moved from its original medium to another, i.e, from 8mm to 16mm, to 35mm, to videotape, to DVD, etc. Was the photo or film enhanced in any way? Explain what type of scanner and software you’re using if you using any to capture a copy of the photo from a book. Explain what type of software you’re using to copy an image from a CD, or DVD, or video source or from something already online, like from Youtube.com. Explain where you got the version your using. In other words give us the meta-data. It is not acceptable to say this is the Altgens photo when you’re using a copy, and God only knows how many generations removed from the original source. The Altgens photo that you got from a book, DVD, TV documentary, off the internet somewhere, etc. is a copy, and probably a very bad one. It is not right to just call it the Altgens photo. If it’s a distant copy, and it almost invariably is, then say so. A postcard of the Mona Lisa is not the Mona Lisa. In this digital age, with photographic altering software such as Photoshop widely available the integrity of the JFK photographic record is something that needs protection. And I know some people question the integrity of the photographic record because they think a photo or film was faked, that's not my point, but I'll get to that one in a moment. The study of the photographic record in the assassination of President Kennedy deserves the very best standards. If one uses the tools of today's technologies for discoveries in the photographic record, for example to prove a photo or film was faked, or altered, then one should guard against be accused of using the same tools to submit or promote a falsehood. If the technologies of today allow for better methods of studying the photographic record, and perhaps as a way to prove forgery in a photo or film then you must support and abide by a very high standard of research lest you be accused of some chicanery in how you arrived at your conclusion(s). This should be implicitly obvious to all. Unfortunately, it's not. It's imperative to list and explain the tools you used, you need to take notes of the steps you took that led you to your conclusion(s) so that others can duplicate the process and thus confirm or refute your conclusion(s.) That’s the scientific method. The scientific method is not, exclaiming, I see X, and then say I see X over and over and over, never listening to anyone, never admitting they have made any mistake, never admitting there is any flaw in their methodology. The scientific method is not just saying “I see X.” I am sick of this amateur crap. We've had two goofballs behaving like this, one was Cinque, and now we have Mike Rago. These people and more importantly their methodology must be banned. Joe Backes

What a BS artist you are. I'm not promoting a theory. I'm destroying yours. Black dog Image Man is not a Woman and a Baby. I'll repeat that tell hell freezes over. Your methodology is exactly like Cinque. You, and you alone, see something, and you stop, as if your imagination is proof. Nobody can tell you you're wrong. You just repeat your false conclusion. You have nothing to prove your conclusions. Nothing. Sitzman saw a young Black couple. She never said anything about a Black couple and a baby. They were there eating their lunch. There is photographic proof of the food they left behind. If they hit the ground how could they possibly appear in any photograph? The retaining wall and the fence would block them from the view of any camera. Schmuck. When you start calling people names ( which you do alot) you don't have much of a case. In your very first post you made a point of pointing out that it was not me and me alone who believes that is a woman with a baby. So which is it? Get your story straight. I am going to keep asking you this question until you answer it.... This does not sound right to me. Who did he ask? I call 'em like I see 'em. I will stand up for honest JFK research. I will defend good, honest research and will always denounce charlatans like you. Hey moderators, we need to set some standards for JFK research and forum posting. This guy Mike Rago is just another Cinque. And we're going to get more and more screwballs like this as we get closer to the 50th anniversary. People like this, and clueless methodology like this need to be weeded out, the sooner the better. Joe Backes

This does not sound right to me. Who did he ask? What's so hard to understand about that? How dumb are you? She feared for her life. Does that actually need to be spelled out and diagramed for you? Go ask Acquilla Clemons how safe it was to comment on what she saw on November 22, 1963, oh, that's right you can't because she disappeared. Casey asked people that he was getting information from about Evelyn King, and why she didn't come forward sooner, and why she does not want to be photographed, especially on the Knoll. She was afraid back then, and probably still is to some extent. That's not difficult to understand. Why don't you step away from the computer and go read some books on this case. Joe Backes

What a BS artist you are. I'm not promoting a theory. I'm destroying yours. Black dog Image Man is not a Woman and a Baby. I'll repeat that tell hell freezes over. Your methodology is exactly like Cinque. You, and you alone, see something, and you stop, as if your imagination is proof. Nobody can tell you you're wrong. You just repeat your false conclusion. You have nothing to prove your conclusions. Nothing. Sitzman saw a young Black couple. She never said anything about a Black couple and a baby. They were there eating their lunch. There is photographic proof of the food they left behind. If they hit the ground how could they possibly appear in any photograph? The retaining wall and the fence would block them from the view of any camera. Schmuck.