Joseph Backes

Bernice, FYI, I do have the complete set of ARRB medical exhibits. Joe

Bernice, where did you get that painting from? Joe

Thanks Bernice. So, again, the importance of the clip from the AF1 tape seems to indicate something was going on with "the, ah, body" on AF1. That the body did not arrive in the ceremonial casket but rather arrived in a cheap metal shipping casket at Bethesda is A FACT. Doug Horne on Black Op Radio offered a new explanation, in that they took JFK out of the ceremonial casket on AF1 while still on the ground at Love Field in case Texas authorities showed up and tried to take the body back to Parkland. They would think they have JFK because the casket weighed so much. This was a new one to me. And it doesn't take into account what if they got on board somehow and opened the bronze ceremonial casket? Given the altercation at Parkland which nearly became a fist fight at best, with possible displays of weapons I doubt any Texas official would try and/or succeed in getting anywhere near AF1. For example, there's a report that Bill Moyers was nearly shot at when he was seen running towards AF1. Joe

I interpret that a bit differently. After the Clifton tapes were released in November I noted that when AF1 left Dallas with the coffin it had not been sorted out where the autopsy was going to be conducted. If I remember correctly, somewhere other than Bethesda had been suggested, but Jackie Kennedy, during the flight, made it clear that she wanted this to be done at Bethesda as president Kennedy had been serving in the US Navy during the war. It seems likely to me that this is what they were discussing in your transcript. Glenn, First of all, it's not my transcript. It's Doug's. Second, if you only have a limited knowledge of the medical evidence in this case you will probably think there's nothing amiss here, when actually there is a great deal amiss. The decision for the body/casket and only the body/casket to go (I'm not even getting into different caskets and arrival times at Bethesda yet) ANYWHERE WITHOUT JACKIE was never a decision of Jackie's. Somebody wanted the body/casket to go, ALONE, by helicopter somewhere. That idea and the many different ways it's expressed and by many different people was never Jackie's idea. It is speculated that the conspirators thought they could separate Jackie from JFK at some point in Parkland Hospital. That didn't happen. If you read everything that is available in the public record you'll read where LBJ was kind of pissed off that a Catholic ceremony was performed at Parkland as JFK was given the Last Rites. This delayed things at Parkland. I don't think there was anyone who was Catholic or knew anything about the Roman Catholic faith, its ceremonies or traditions in the group of conspirators who killed JFK. Your opinion that this is just a misunderstanding and that they eventually got it together and went to Bethesda per Jackie's request is an opinion you're being guided into believing. Harold Weisberg goes into this whole "blame the Kennedys," mentality for when and where things seem odd in his book Post-Mortem. Third, the reason I want researchers to focus in on one conversation is because something strange is going on. JFK's body is in a bronze ceremonial casket and is already aboard AF1. When it arrives and is off loaded at Andrews its empty. JFK's body arrives at Bethesda before Jackie and the Navy ambulance get there as Lifton discovered and details in his book. I believe its Dennis David, or maybe Jerrol Custer, who is carrying X-rays and/or other autopsy photos just taken of JFK when he sees Jackie and the rest ARRIVING at Bethesda. This cannot be, if JFK is in the ceremonial casket too and is just arriving. The conclusion is obvious. JFK's body got there another way. Lifton theorizes that they took JFK out of the ceremonial casket at some point while it was on board AF1, probably shortly before LBJ swears himself in as the new POTUS. So, for Roy Kellerman, who is THE central figure in the movement of JFK's body, to say something as odd as he does, that he needs to call Gerry Behn back after SOMETHING happens to "the, ah, body," is damn strange. He doesn't say, "I don't know," or "As far as I know a decision hasn't been made," or anything like that. I would recommend you do some further reading: Post-Mortem by Harold Weisberg Best Evidence by David Lifton In the eye of History by William Matson Law Inside the ARRB by Doug Horne Joe Backes "Blame the Kennedys mentality"? "It is your opinion that.."? "Read these books..."? I simply brought forward my interpretation of this conversation, that's all. Which is a reasonable one, BTW. But let's see if I can return the favor: Basically, you disagree with what I said because you agree with David Lifton's body alteration theory. Correct? I didn't say YOU had a blame the Kennedys mentality. When items in this case, especially in the medical evidence area, many government officials and their apologists direct people to the Kennedys for why things that appear out of the ordinary occurred. And that this is covered in depth in Harold Weisberg's book Post-Mortem. But, I do feel your interpretation would change if you read the books I suggested.

I interpret that a bit differently. After the Clifton tapes were released in November I noted that when AF1 left Dallas with the coffin it had not been sorted out where the autopsy was going to be conducted. If I remember correctly, somewhere other than Bethesda had been suggested, but Jackie Kennedy, during the flight, made it clear that she wanted this to be done at Bethesda as president Kennedy had been serving in the US Navy during the war. It seems likely to me that this is what they were discussing in your transcript. Glenn, First of all, it's not my transcript. It's Doug's. Second, if you only have a limited knowledge of the medical evidence in this case you will probably think there's nothing amiss here, when actually there is a great deal amiss. The decision for the body/casket and only the body/casket to go (I'm not even getting into different caskets and arrival times at Bethesda yet) ANYWHERE WITHOUT JACKIE was never a decision of Jackie's. Somebody wanted the body/casket to go, ALONE, by helicopter somewhere. That idea and the many different ways it's expressed and by many different people was never Jackie's idea. It is speculated that the conspirators thought they could separate Jackie from JFK at some point in Parkland Hospital. That didn't happen. If you read everything that is available in the public record you'll read where LBJ was kind of pissed off that a Catholic ceremony was performed at Parkland as JFK was given the Last Rites. This delayed things at Parkland. I don't think there was anyone who was Catholic or knew anything about the Roman Catholic faith, its ceremonies or traditions in the group of conspirators who killed JFK. Your opinion that this is just a misunderstanding and that they eventually got it together and went to Bethesda per Jackie's request is an opinion you're being guided into believing. Harold Weisberg goes into this whole "blame the Kennedys," mentality for when and where things seem odd in his book Post-Mortem. Third, the reason I want researchers to focus in on one conversation is because something strange is going on. JFK's body is in a bronze ceremonial casket and is already aboard AF1. When it arrives and is off loaded at Andrews its empty. JFK's body arrives at Bethesda before Jackie and the Navy ambulance get there as Lifton discovered and details in his book. I believe its Dennis David, or maybe Jerrol Custer, who is carrying X-rays and/or other autopsy photos just taken of JFK when he sees Jackie and the rest ARRIVING at Bethesda. This cannot be, if JFK is in the ceremonial casket too and is just arriving. The conclusion is obvious. JFK's body got there another way. Lifton theorizes that they took JFK out of the ceremonial casket at some point while it was on board AF1, probably shortly before LBJ swears himself in as the new POTUS. So, for Roy Kellerman, who is THE central figure in the movement of JFK's body, to say something as odd as he does, that he needs to call Gerry Behn back after SOMETHING happens to "the, ah, body," is damn strange. He doesn't say, "I don't know," or "As far as I know a decision hasn't been made," or anything like that. I would recommend you do some further reading: Post-Mortem by Harold Weisberg Best Evidence by David Lifton In the eye of History by William Matson Law Inside the ARRB by Doug Horne Joe Backes

Hello folks, There's a key section in the new Clifton version of the Air Force One tapes I want to draw your attention to. Doug Horne made his own transcript: See - http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=146531 This is from page 4 and 5 of Horne's transcript. Crown - (that's the White House) 26000, ah Duplex is on, go ahead SAM 26000 - [garbled] Stand By Duplex - (Gerry Behn) Hello Digest - (Roy Kellerman) Ok. Jerry? Duplex - Hello Digest - [garbled] in here now, ah, we're at the airport, 26000, everybody aboard. Duplex - Okay go ahead Digest - We're waiting for the swearing in Duplex - That is for Volunteer, is that right Digest - Yes, we are having [garbled] before we take off, Jerry Duplex - That's affirmative. Do you have any idea what, ah, Lace ( Jackie) wants to do and what Volunteer wants to do on their arrival here? Digest - No, I will call you back. Suggest --we have a 2 hour 15 minute flight into Andrews. We have a full plane of at least 40. Duplex - Ok, go ahead Digest - I'll have to call you again after the, ah, body. However, I'm sure the, ah, Volunteer boys will go over his car and so forth. We will need [garbled] and several others. Duplex - All right, let me know what Volunteer wants to do when they, ah, land if they want to come into Crown by, ah, helicopter. Digest - That's a Roger. I'll call you again. Duplex - OK What does Kellerman mean? What is going on with "the, ah, body?" What is this "after" the body? Officially, its already on board and in the ceremonial bronze casket. Why does Kellerman need to call Behn at the White House again about the body? See my blog for more. - http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2012/03/roy-kellerman-and-ah-body.html Joe

I agree with DSL 100% on this count. And since we know White, Manchester and Salinger were given access to a transcript of the unedited tapes and they each quote different portions of it that aren't on the extant tape, then the most important parts that they identified are not on it. And yes, there are most definately copies of the unedited tapes out there, as there is no record of their destruction, their historic value would be recognized by anyone ordered to destroy them, and the fact that anyone with the proper equipment could have heard and recorded the conversations, and private citizens, military personnel and foreign governments (including Cuban Lourdes station, Canada, Israel and Canada) certainly have copies in their archives though the governments would be reluctant to admit they had them. We will eventually locate copies of the unedited tapes. Bet on it. And those interested in discussing Madeline Brown and LBJ please do it on a thread other than this one - which is dedicated to what is on the new Clifton tape. Thanks, BK JFKcountercoup Bill, I want to ask about the sentence of yours that I put in red. I want to make a point here as several questions immediately come to mind, three different authors, in three different books, were given a transcript. This transcript was of Air Force One transmissions on November 22, 1963 after the assassination. I want to clarify some things that I think we're making assumptions about. The biggest assumption is that all communications from Air Force One and to Air Force One were collected into one product, which we're calling The Air Force One Tape. A transcript was made of that. And that one transcript was given to White, Manchester, and Salinger. How do we know that White, Manchester, and Salinger were given access to the exact same transcript? Each author referenced a part of the transcript, not necessarily the same part, given to them that we cannot hear on the extant tape. Correct? So, there could be three or more parts of a transcript we cannot match to the tape. Is it possible that White, Manchester, and Salinger were not given ONE TRANSCRIPT, but rather each got a transcript that was modified, or edited for the specific author? In other words White may have seen a transcript that was different than the one Manchester saw. I think it would be worthwhile to compare and contrast what White, Manchester, and Salinger wrote as well as comparing what we hear with the old LBJ version and this new Clifton version. Think of the two different Oct 10 cables the CIA sent out about Oswald. They are different. Yet, each one is supposed to be about one guy in reference to doing basically one thing, trying to get a visa to Cuba and then "re-deffecting" back to Russia. John Newman did a great job showing that a deception was going on as to why the descriptions of Oswald don't match, that there was something OPERATIONAL going on. BTW, everyone should get all of the videos of every presentation John Newman ever did. You should have that in addition to his two books. Perhaps there was some chicanery going on with what was given to White, Manchester, and Salinger. It's just a possibility. Something else worthy of study is to list who is talking to who, and from where. When a caller is calling to or being called from Air Fore One did they have the capability to record the conversation? Now, it's possible there are copies of Air Force One transmissions yet to be discovered. But, not a certainty. Absence of a record is not proof of a record. Your reference to a record of destruction is misplaced. LBJ could have ordered their destruction back in '63. No one would have them now and knowing they have them destroy them in some kind of routine destruction because of their age.

....WORK of one man, not world of one man.

Another related question is why they flew AF1 from Carswell to Love Field at all, I mean its only a few miles and it would have been easier to drive from Fort Worth to Dallas, except for the fact they wanted to do a motorcade through downtown Dallas and hit Dealey Plaza. And thanks for your analysis, Jim, and others. BK JFKcountercoup This is the stupidest crap I have seen on this forum since Lifton defended the Mary Bledsoe story. Jim, your whole central premise is staggeringly stupid. [snip] You're an idiot! Are you related to Robert Morrow in some way? Kelly, you could learn something from reading Bruno's book too. Joe Backes Backes, You are totally out of line, and also quite misinformed. FYI: I took a look at your "liars" website, titled "StupidShmuck dot com" Do you really think you can just list a bunch of people with whom you disagree, label them liars, call them various names, and have any credibility? Why debate with someone whose response to a contrary position is simply a bunch of name calling? DSL LIFTON, You don't scare me. Apparently, there are no mirrors in your house. You have the gall to criticize others for name calling after your performance on this forum? What they hell do you call what you did to Lee Farley? Out of line and misinformed, yes, that describes YOU on the topic of Mary Bledsoe. I believe in standing up for the truth. I defend solid research. And I criticize the dissemblers of false information. I have no patience for fools. And I don't believe a forum that allows anyone with any theory, or just a "No, it isn't." approach to post helps the cause of EDUCATION. The sheer number of posts doesn't make one a respected researcher in my book. I also believe in guiding people away from making mistakes. Jim Root has not done his homework on this at all. He has the screwiest theory I have ever heard. He has no concept of what he's talking about. In his mind Air Force One's landing makes all the difference as to whether JFK gets killed or not. This is stupid. And as we learned in the Bush years you can't fix stupid. He picks and chooses selected bits here and there from the Warren Commission without doling any additional reading outside of the WC to see why what the WC tells him is not true. He doesn't get the notion that "the victors write the history." He doesn't bother to acquire and read from the sources excluded from the WC's narrative. YOU used to be someone who championed the importance of Jerry Bruno. What happened, are you so eager to have a dig at me you forgot him? George Michael Evica did the definitive work on this topic in a workshop at the 1993 A.S.K. conference. He's no longer with us to defend himself and his work. So, I'll do it. I've added to that work in my presentations on this topic. Unfortunately, only an audio tape exists of Evica's presentation. You have to listen carefully to it. Evica often did not cite where he's getting the information he uses in his presentation ( maybe he did if there was a paper handout, I don't know as I was at another event happening at the same time and listened to this afterwards), but if you're a good researcher you can figure it out and hunt down those books and sources. I will defend this work from all corners and guide people to it. Hopefully, it's still available. Joe Backes

I'll bet they do. Especially given that those "gory" details destroy the official fairytale. Personally I think the best way for us to mark the 50th anniversary is to boycott Gary Mack's Propaganda Palace and stay away from Dealey Plaza altogether. Don't go there and cause a scene, just let 'em know you ain't buying their BS by staying at home. Why go and take part in false debate about whether or not the earth is round? You don't win anything by staying home. I see no reason to shy away from the fight. They want to own the issue of the JFK assassination as well as they own the 6th floor. I see nothing to be embarrassed about in being a JFK assassination researcher. This secretive task force doesn't speak for me. And I don't think they speak for a majority of Americans or the rest of the world. They are a tiny, well financed minority lurking in the shadows. They must be fought. Who are they, anyway? Why are they operating in secret? How many other national historical landmarks get kidnapped like this? We must learn their names. They must be exposed and fought.

Don, How can anyone take this forum seriously if people are allowed to post such a clueless post as Jim Root did? How can anyone take this forum seriously if you're given more and more complementary adjectives about what kind of a poster or researcher you are in this case based solely on how many posts you make on this forum? Can't someone stand up for quality research for once? Stop crying about how I criticize and do a little reading and find out why I'm criticizing. Wouldn't it be nice to have a moderator who actually KNOWS something about the case, or at least the particular aspect of the case under discussion showing up? Wouldn't it be nice if a moderator took Root to task for his ignorance? How about a judgement call from a moderator about who's post had the more factual information in it? And who's showed a total lack of understanding of the most basic facts. "Noting unusual about the planning of the route." Are you kidding me? I have all the HSCA documents about the trip. I researched this at the JFK Library. And I went to TCU and researched this too. I KNOW this topic. I have all the material George Michael Evica used in his presentation on this, of which there is an audiotape. What Root is proposing is total nonsense. Even he can't defend or explain it. Joe Backes

Another related question is why they flew AF1 from Carswell to Love Field at all, I mean its only a few miles and it would have been easier to drive from Fort Worth to Dallas, except for the fact they wanted to do a motorcade through downtown Dallas and hit Dealey Plaza. And thanks for your analysis, Jim, and others. BK JFKcountercoup This is the stupidest crap I have seen on this forum since Lifton defended the Mary Bledsoe story. Jim, your whole central premise is staggeringly stupid. You have not read the basic material on this subject. I'll give you a hint, Jerry Bruno's book, "Advance Man," and Volume 11 of the HSCA report. In volume 11 you'll find a section on the motorcade. I've given presentations on this topic. I know it backwards and forwards. Your whole approach is so flawed it's beyond help. You don't go to Dealey Plaza and work backwards to Love Field. What the hell are you doing that for? Are you trying to find some distance measurement? Why? Your statement that "There seems to be nothing unsusal in the planning of the route," SCREAMS OUT LOUD how totally ignorant you are of the whole Texas trip to begin with, and the Dallas motorcade in particular. When asked to explain your methodology of how in the hell the landing of Air Force One at Love Field has anything to do with the motorcade or the assassination you ignore the question. Instead, you reiterate your unexplained core principal, "But upon close inspection there was one deciding factor which guided the planning and distance the motorcade would travel....THE TIME ALOTTED....which was controlled by when Air Force One landed at Love Field." What the hell are you talking about? What do you mean "time alloted?" There is no "time allotted." Are you seriously suggesting that assassins are on a deadline? What, are the assassins members of an assassin's union? They're only contracted to start shooting at exactly 12:30 local Dallas time? And if JFK's late they say F-it and walk off? But, no, it gets better. You think if Air Fore One was "late," it would shorten the motorcade route? What the hell are you talking about? Air Force One isn't a commercial airliner. It didn't have a scheduled landing time at Love Field. And even if it did and was late do you think people were going to say the hell with it and leave? Not even Germans are that anal about promptness. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. And how would they shorten the motorcade route? How would that work exactly with a route that was publicized and already had people standing along its path? NO! The controlling factor was not the landing of Air Force One. There was no "controlling factor," everything was in place well beforehand. Nothing was left to chance. And I think you're trying to say there was, that there was a tight schedule and any deviation would throw the whole thing off and JFK would be saved. That was never a possibility. JFK and Jackie went to shake hands with people along a fence line at Love Field. That took a few minutes The limo stopped several times so JFK could shake hands. One group had a sign which asked JFK please stop and shake our hands, another time he stopped for a bunch on nuns. That took some time. This paragraph of yours also details your total ignorance of the case - "We also know, factually, that J. P. Hosty had, prior to the design of the motorcade route identified exactly where Oswald was working. Although this note, written by Hosty, seems to have disappeared without a trace and was not given an exhibit number by John J. McCloy while he was questioning Hosty, we must assume, that it, just as Hosty's two other notes about Oswald, made it to the office of Richard Helms!" Oh really? Hosty's WC testimony begins in Volume 4. FBI agent Fain had closed the Lee Harvey Oswald case. Hosty was given Marina Oswald's case. On March 14, Hosty learns that the Oswalds are living at 214 Neely St. Hosty learns that Lee has a contact with the New York Daily Worker from info received from the NYC FBI field Office. Hosty asks for the LHO case to be reopened. Hosty says he waited 45 days as a "cooling off period," because of what he thought were their marital difficulties which led to them being evicted from their previous apartment on Elsbeth street. So, in May he wants to check up on them. By then they were out of the Neely St address and left no forwarding address. Hosty's requests to reopen the LHO case on March 25th was accepted in late March, 1963. On June 17th, Hosty learns that LHO is now in New Orleans. Hosty corresponds with the New Orleans FBI field office during the summer of 1963. Hosty requested New Orleans to verify LHO was there. They do and inform Hosty. In August the New Orleans FBI field office takes control of the Oswald case, since the Oswald's are living in New Orleans they now get control of the Oswald file. New Orleans is now considered the "office of origin," to use FBI parlance since the subjects under investigation now live there. Any other FBI field office assisting in such a case would be called an auxiliary office. So, Hosty does not have jurisdiction, control, or any authority over the Oswald case as we head into the Fall of 1963. Hosty doesn't even learn about Oswald handing out leaflets on the streets of New Orleans until 6 to 7 weeks after the fact. There was no "Fair Play For Cuba Committee" in Dallas so Hosty wasn't concerned about an old event that happened in New Orleans. On October 3rd, New Orleans advises Hosty that the Oswald have left. Dallas now becomes the office of origin and the case is reopened for Hosty. All the New Orleans people know is that Marina left with a woman in a station wagon with Texas license plates, and the female driver could speak Russian. Lee had disappeared. The New Orleans FBI people did not know the name Ruth Paine, nor did Hosty. Hosty checks to see if the Oswalds have returned to the Ft. Worth or Dallas area. On October 25th Hosty learns that Lee had been in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. On October 29th the New Orleans FBI field office tells Hosty that there is a change of address postal card to 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Texas. Also on the 29th, Hosty interviews a neighbor living at 2519 West Fifth Street to find out who's at 2515 West Fifth Street and learns the name Ruth Paine. On Oct 31st Hosty does a credit check on the Paines. And does some further investigation on the Paines. Hosty is led to believe that Lee had abandoned Marina and the kids. On Nov 1st Hosty interviews Ruth Paine who tells him she thinks Lee is living somewhere in the Oak Cliff section, but she doesn't know where. She tells him Lee worked at the Texas School Book Depository at 411 Elm Street. So, it wasn't via some mysterious note. So, there is no missing exhibit number. Hosty wrote FBI reports. He should have, he was an FBI agent. It was part of his job to write reports. You are mistaken in the belief that Hosty discovered where Oswald worked by some "note." You're conflating the note Oswald allegedly left for Hosty, which people did not know about until the 1970's. This note was written by Oswald to Hosty to get Hosty to stop bothering Marina. Hosty is not really questioned by John J. McCloy, but primarily by a Mr. Stern, a counsellor for the Warren Commission. On Monday Nov 4th, Hosty calls the TSBD and verifies LHO works there. Also, on Nov 4th Hosty requests that Dallas now becomes the "office of origin," as he had now proof that the Oswalds were in Dallas. On Nov 5th Hosty tries to learn where Lee is living. He goes to Ruth Paine's house. She doesn't know the exact address. During Hosty's testimony he does refer to the fact that once information is written down into formal FBI reports the notes are routinely destroyed. This seems akin to a newspaperman's notes not being kept after he writes up a story and it is then published in the newspaper. There's nothing sinister there. But, he does say he has notes from Nov. 1963 when questioned by McCloy. Hosty did know Lee Oswald worked at the TSBD but he was not aware of the motorcade route or that the presidential limo would pass by the TSBD. (4H460) Hosty further commented that there was no contact between the FBI and the Secret Service about the motorcade route before the assassination. However, on the 21st Hosty gave them some information about the "Wanted for Treason" poster, some guy in Denton who said something about JFK, and the possibility of some picketing. So, Hosty never did confirm where Lee Oswald was living prior to the assassination. What other notes are you talking about that went to Helms? This is totally ass backwards - "It seems to be a certainty that people in Washington knew where Oswald was working and if they were planning an assassination of the President that would involve Oswald it would have to occur in Dealy Plaza. Controlling the landing time of Air Force One would be an integral part in the accomplishment of their goal." Setting up the patsy was an integral part of the plot. Of course you need to have him near the shooting. The landing of Air Force One has nothing to do with anything other than getting JFK to Dallas and starting a motorcade. Read Jerry Bruno's book. If you had, which you obviously haven't, you'd know that Gov. John Connally promised Bruno that Texas Christian University was going to give JFK an honorary degree only to have Connally yank that idea away at the last moment, which necessitated the need for a Dallas motorcade. Getting bags and people onto Air Force One after the Ft. Worth motorcade and the flight over to Dallas would eat up the hole in the schedule now that JFK was not going to have a luncheon affair at TCU. And again you stick to your ridiculous theory, "After speaking in Fort Worth on the morning of the assassination Kennedy, I believe, returned to his hotel and had a period of down time until the planned departure of AF1. Air Force One had a rather large window of time that could have been used to reach Dallas and Kennedy could have been driven the short distance to Dallas in the time that was available but the reality is Kennedy's assassination could only have occured the way it did based upon the landing time of Air Force One at Love Field." - What total BS. Down time??? There was a motorcade in Ft. Worth! There was no "down time." After the breakfast with the Ft. Worth Chamber of Commerce, hastily arranged by Bruno when the TCU plan fell through, thanks to Connally's mischief, JFK and Co. had a motorcade to Carswell AFB. They took a scenic route to avoid where the TFX fighter plane was being built. JFK also stopped here at various points to shake hands and greet various people, like schoolchildren as he drove by. JFK was in a white convertible. Jackie sat between JFK and Connally. They then flew to Dallas. You're an idiot! Are you related to Robert Morrow in some way? Kelly, you could learn something from reading Bruno's book too. Joe Backes Joe, You are the idiot. I have read Bruno's book. He wasn't in Dallas at the time. And there was a Down Time in Fort Worth, you would know about if you read the Fort Worth Advance man's report in Prologue, which I posted here last week. And Jim Root, don't take Backes' post seriously, as you are on the right track, he's not familiar with your work, and is talking off the top of his head without thinking. BK Bill, You are completely hopeless. Bruno's book details a lot of the Connally shenanigans about the Texas trip. For you to dismiss it claiming he wasn't there in Dallas in November or on the day of the assassination is like dismissing D-Day because Ike didn't hit the beaches. Bruno's account is ESSENTIAL reading. That's why he'd not mentioned in the Warren Commission report's study of the origins of the Texas trip and the Dallas motorcade. Jim Root is not on the right track. He's off the rails completely.

Another related question is why they flew AF1 from Carswell to Love Field at all, I mean its only a few miles and it would have been easier to drive from Fort Worth to Dallas, except for the fact they wanted to do a motorcade through downtown Dallas and hit Dealey Plaza. And thanks for your analysis, Jim, and others. BK JFKcountercoup This is the stupidest crap I have seen on this forum since Lifton defended the Mary Bledsoe story. Jim, your whole central premise is staggeringly stupid. You have not read the basic material on this subject. I'll give you a hint, Jerry Bruno's book, "Advance Man," and Volume 11 of the HSCA report. In volume 11 you'll find a section on the motorcade. I've given presentations on this topic. I know it backwards and forwards. Your whole approach is so flawed it's beyond help. You don't go to Dealey Plaza and work backwards to Love Field. What the hell are you doing that for? Are you trying to find some distance measurement? Why? Your statement that "There seems to be nothing unsusal in the planning of the route," SCREAMS OUT LOUD how totally ignorant you are of the whole Texas trip to begin with, and the Dallas motorcade in particular. When asked to explain your methodology of how in the hell the landing of Air Force One at Love Field has anything to do with the motorcade or the assassination you ignore the question. Instead, you reiterate your unexplained core principal, "But upon close inspection there was one deciding factor which guided the planning and distance the motorcade would travel....THE TIME ALOTTED....which was controlled by when Air Force One landed at Love Field." What the hell are you talking about? What do you mean "time alloted?" There is no "time allotted." Are you seriously suggesting that assassins are on a deadline? What, are the assassins members of an assassin's union? They're only contracted to start shooting at exactly 12:30 local Dallas time? And if JFK's late they say F-it and walk off? But, no, it gets better. You think if Air Fore One was "late," it would shorten the motorcade route? What the hell are you talking about? Air Force One isn't a commercial airliner. It didn't have a scheduled landing time at Love Field. And even if it did and was late do you think people were going to say the hell with it and leave? Not even Germans are that anal about promptness. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. And how would they shorten the motorcade route? How would that work exactly with a route that was publicized and already had people standing along its path? NO! The controlling factor was not the landing of Air Force One. There was no "controlling factor," everything was in place well beforehand. Nothing was left to chance. And I think you're trying to say there was, that there was a tight schedule and any deviation would throw the whole thing off and JFK would be saved. That was never a possibility. JFK and Jackie went to shake hands with people along a fence line at Love Field. That took a few minutes The limo stopped several times so JFK could shake hands. One group had a sign which asked JFK please stop and shake our hands, another time he stopped for a bunch on nuns. That took some time. This paragraph of yours also details your total ignorance of the case - "We also know, factually, that J. P. Hosty had, prior to the design of the motorcade route identified exactly where Oswald was working. Although this note, written by Hosty, seems to have disappeared without a trace and was not given an exhibit number by John J. McCloy while he was questioning Hosty, we must assume, that it, just as Hosty's two other notes about Oswald, made it to the office of Richard Helms!" Oh really? Hosty's WC testimony begins in Volume 4. FBI agent Fain had closed the Lee Harvey Oswald case. Hosty was given Marina Oswald's case. On March 14, Hosty learns that the Oswalds are living at 214 Neely St. Hosty learns that Lee has a contact with the New York Daily Worker from info received from the NYC FBI field Office. Hosty asks for the LHO case to be reopened. Hosty says he waited 45 days as a "cooling off period," because of what he thought were their marital difficulties which led to them being evicted from their previous apartment on Elsbeth street. So, in May he wants to check up on them. By then they were out of the Neely St address and left no forwarding address. Hosty's requests to reopen the LHO case on March 25th was accepted in late March, 1963. On June 17th, Hosty learns that LHO is now in New Orleans. Hosty corresponds with the New Orleans FBI field office during the summer of 1963. Hosty requested New Orleans to verify LHO was there. They do and inform Hosty. In August the New Orleans FBI field office takes control of the Oswald case, since the Oswald's are living in New Orleans they now get control of the Oswald file. New Orleans is now considered the "office of origin," to use FBI parlance since the subjects under investigation now live there. Any other FBI field office assisting in such a case would be called an auxiliary office. So, Hosty does not have jurisdiction, control, or any authority over the Oswald case as we head into the Fall of 1963. Hosty doesn't even learn about Oswald handing out leaflets on the streets of New Orleans until 6 to 7 weeks after the fact. There was no "Fair Play For Cuba Committee" in Dallas so Hosty wasn't concerned about an old event that happened in New Orleans. On October 3rd, New Orleans advises Hosty that the Oswald have left. Dallas now becomes the office of origin and the case is reopened for Hosty. All the New Orleans people know is that Marina left with a woman in a station wagon with Texas license plates, and the female driver could speak Russian. Lee had disappeared. The New Orleans FBI people did not know the name Ruth Paine, nor did Hosty. Hosty checks to see if the Oswalds have returned to the Ft. Worth or Dallas area. On October 25th Hosty learns that Lee had been in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. On October 29th the New Orleans FBI field office tells Hosty that there is a change of address postal card to 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Texas. Also on the 29th, Hosty interviews a neighbor living at 2519 West Fifth Street to find out who's at 2515 West Fifth Street and learns the name Ruth Paine. On Oct 31st Hosty does a credit check on the Paines. And does some further investigation on the Paines. Hosty is led to believe that Lee had abandoned Marina and the kids. On Nov 1st Hosty interviews Ruth Paine who tells him she thinks Lee is living somewhere in the Oak Cliff section, but she doesn't know where. She tells him Lee worked at the Texas School Book Depository at 411 Elm Street. So, it wasn't via some mysterious note. So, there is no missing exhibit number. Hosty wrote FBI reports. He should have, he was an FBI agent. It was part of his job to write reports. You are mistaken in the belief that Hosty discovered where Oswald worked by some "note." You're conflating the note Oswald allegedly left for Hosty, which people did not know about until the 1970's. This note was written by Oswald to Hosty to get Hosty to stop bothering Marina. Hosty is not really questioned by John J. McCloy, but primarily by a Mr. Stern, a counsellor for the Warren Commission. On Monday Nov 4th, Hosty calls the TSBD and verifies LHO works there. Also, on Nov 4th Hosty requests that Dallas now becomes the "office of origin," as he had now proof that the Oswalds were in Dallas. On Nov 5th Hosty tries to learn where Lee is living. He goes to Ruth Paine's house. She doesn't know the exact address. During Hosty's testimony he does refer to the fact that once information is written down into formal FBI reports the notes are routinely destroyed. This seems akin to a newspaperman's notes not being kept after he writes up a story and it is then published in the newspaper. There's nothing sinister there. But, he does say he has notes from Nov. 1963 when questioned by McCloy. Hosty did know Lee Oswald worked at the TSBD but he was not aware of the motorcade route or that the presidential limo would pass by the TSBD. (4H460) Hosty further commented that there was no contact between the FBI and the Secret Service about the motorcade route before the assassination. However, on the 21st Hosty gave them some information about the "Wanted for Treason" poster, some guy in Denton who said something about JFK, and the possibility of some picketing. So, Hosty never did confirm where Lee Oswald was living prior to the assassination. What other notes are you talking about that went to Helms? This is totally ass backwards - "It seems to be a certainty that people in Washington knew where Oswald was working and if they were planning an assassination of the President that would involve Oswald it would have to occur in Dealy Plaza. Controlling the landing time of Air Force One would be an integral part in the accomplishment of their goal." Setting up the patsy was an integral part of the plot. Of course you need to have him near the shooting. The landing of Air Force One has nothing to do with anything other than getting JFK to Dallas and starting a motorcade. Read Jerry Bruno's book. If you had, which you obviously haven't, you'd know that Gov. John Connally promised Bruno that Texas Christian University was going to give JFK an honorary degree only to have Connally yank that idea away at the last moment, which necessitated the need for a Dallas motorcade. Getting bags and people onto Air Force One after the Ft. Worth motorcade and the flight over to Dallas would eat up the hole in the schedule now that JFK was not going to have a luncheon affair at TCU. And again you stick to your ridiculous theory, "After speaking in Fort Worth on the morning of the assassination Kennedy, I believe, returned to his hotel and had a period of down time until the planned departure of AF1. Air Force One had a rather large window of time that could have been used to reach Dallas and Kennedy could have been driven the short distance to Dallas in the time that was available but the reality is Kennedy's assassination could only have occured the way it did based upon the landing time of Air Force One at Love Field." - What total BS. Down time??? There was a motorcade in Ft. Worth! There was no "down time." After the breakfast with the Ft. Worth Chamber of Commerce, hastily arranged by Bruno when the TCU plan fell through, thanks to Connally's mischief, JFK and Co. had a motorcade to Carswell AFB. They took a scenic route to avoid where the TFX fighter plane was being built. JFK also stopped here at various points to shake hands and greet various people, like schoolchildren as he drove by. JFK was in a white convertible. Jackie sat between JFK and Connally. They then flew to Dallas. You're an idiot! Are you related to Robert Morrow in some way? Kelly, you could learn something from reading Bruno's book too. Joe Backes

Thanks Gregg. I tried to keep it short. I could go on and on for days explaining everything, every scrap of info of the Bledsoe story. I could probably do it in 3 or 4 hours to walk people through it. Lifton hasn't bothered to do the work of cross examining everything with the Bledsoe story like he did with the medical evidence vis-a-vie Parkland vs. Bethesda. If he did he'd see its total bunk. But what's really galling is not only did he cheat and take a shortcut that it's insane to believe Bledsoe is lying and that she's a conspirator, which is deliberate, dishonest misdirection, but he bullies people with his total inability to work the evidence in the Bledsoe story. It's totally unacceptable. He's been doing it on this forum for some time and it's got to stop. Joe

[snipped] Joe, Two things: (1) I neglected to give you credit for your original article on the Mary Bledsoe situation, published (as I recall) in the Third Decade. (Email me with the correct info, and I'll modify my post). (2) FWIW: I believe that most of those who wrote about Bledsoe, years ago--e.g., Sylvia Meagher, et al--were unaware that Bledsoe had been interviewed three times by the FBI in the eight days following the assassination. So this hypothesis of Mary Bledsoe supposedly lying to the authorities wasn't a matter of a falsified Dallas Police report. To the contrary: she then would have to lie 3 more times to FBI agents in the eight days following the assassination. These FBI interviews are in CD 5 (toward the back) and I believe the first time that (for example) Sylvia Meagher ever saw them was around 1969, when I provided them as part of my (approximately 2000 page) Available But Not Published (ABNP) collection which both she and Mary Ferrell subscribed around that time. I think that when those three FBI interviews of Bledsoe are factored into the equation, the balance tips in favor of Bledsoe's credibility, regardless of whether she talked haltingly when under oath (because of her stroke) or because some entertain problems with regards to the bus transfer. Personally, I think it highly unlikely--to the point of being absurd--to believe that this elderly lady was involved in a conspiracy that involved multiple lies told to multiple interviewers, including lying 3 times in interviews with FBI agents in the eight days following the Kennedy assassination--all (supposedly) in the service of some hypothetical scheme to place Oswald on a bus in which he was not actually riding. I know that there are those who are wedded to that hypothesis (just as there are those who cannot give up on the idea that Steve Witt and his umbrella are sinister); but I don't think this situation--what I shall call here "the Mary Bledsoe" hypothesis--is particularly credible. Now that's my opinion, and of course I realize there are those who will disagree. DSL 1/2/12; 7 pm PST Los Angeles, California David, Two things, 1.) USE A GOD DAMN SPELL CHECKER! Scroll down and use the "Preview Post" button once in awhile. 2.) I don't know why you give such a huge crap about the Mary Bledsoe story and feel the need to rush to its defense. Nor why you use it to bash anyone in the JFK case that annoys you but this nonsense has to stop. The Mary Bledsoe story is 100% FAKE! I am more confident of that than I am of knowing what my own name is. I will go over every bit of testimony, cross referencing all of it, I will go over every word, every version of every story told by every witness. I'll go over it street by street. I'll take you by the hand and walk the whole damn bus route with you if you want the next time your in Dallas for a JFK conference. You have got to get it into your head its made up xxxx. They boxed themselves into a corner making an amalgamation of two completely different women, neither of whom was Bledsoe, to give credibility to the story of Oswald's escape via public transport, and to give credibility of the story D.A. Henry Wade told Sunday night, after Oswald was dead, that Oswald laughed when he told a woman that the president was shot. When examined carefully the entire story of LHO ever being on McWalters bus falls apart. Everything destroys it. The witnesses destroy each other, simple geography destroys it. Only a total fool would believe it. They needed a woman who normally took that bus, who would know Oswald, and recite back a story told to her. They found Mary Bledsoe. They prep her and put her into a room, with a female lawyer there to help her as she is questioned by the Warren Commission. The WC people questioning her were not the ones who prepped her. There is no evidence that she really was Oswald's landlady. None. No mail for Oswald was redirected there. There's no receipt for the rent. No independent eyewitness ever saw him at Bledsoe's. There's nothing, except Bledsoe let slip the idea that he left some of his luggage behind. And the WC guys zero in on that. And even that goes nowhere. Even she wants to scream stop asking me about his damn luggage. The idea that Mary Bledsoe having had a stroke now makes he story more credible to you is a sick joke. Strokes do not improve memory or brain function. A stroke kills a part of the brain. As a medical expert in this case you should know that. I believe you posted the FBI reports you think rescue her story. I'll look at them again. But, I assure you they do not. It's not a theory David. It's very simple cross examination of the evidence. It's fact. Oswald was not on that bus. Nor was Bledsoe. Instead of examining the evidence in an intelligent, logical fashion you've got it stuck in your craw that Bledsoe is actively lying, that she came forward to lie, that she is part of a conspiracy. No. She is used by idiots to tell a story they want told, period. Bledsoe couldn't tell you what day it was without f-ing it up, even if you told her what day it was and gave her 20 chances to get it right. McWatters couldn't tell you what his name was without saying, "In other words..." These are poor, working class, blue collar, uneducated people. They are being used and they don't know it. Bledsoe isn't some kind of evil genius. She's a moron. But unlike McWatters they don't give up on her. She's the only way out for them for this impossible story. Joe Backes

I'm sorry, but Horne's hypothesis makes even less sense than Lifton's - if that's possible. Why the frack would the autopsy surgeons NEED to conduct an illicit pre-autopsy enlargement of the head wound? They're the ones who are gonna be writing the autopsy report so who the hell are they trying to fool? Themselves? The entire basis for Horne's silliness is Tom Robinson's statement that the autopsy photos showed "what the doctors did", that they "cut this scalp open and reflected it back in order to remove bullet fragments." (ARRB MD 180) Well, of course they did - that's what happens in an autopsy involving gunshots to the head. There is nothing suspicious about this at all. Horne also sees something suspicious in the fact that Robinson and and Ed Reed recalled Humes using a saw even though Humes admitted he did in his Warren Commission testimony: "To better examine the situation with regard to the skull, at this time, Boswell and I extended the lacerations of the scalp which were at the margins of this wound, down in the direction of both of the President's ears. At that point, we had even a better appreciation of the extensive damage which had been done to the skill by this injury. We had to do virtually no work with a saw to remove these Portions of the skull, they came apart in our hands very easily, and we attempted to further examine the brain, and seek specifically this fragment which was the one we felt to be of a size which would permit us to recover it." (2H354) Humes said "virtually no work with a saw" which, of course, does not mean "no work with a saw" it means "very little". So where's the suspicious activity? Oh how depressing. To come on here and attack Lifton for his bullying behavior and have someone make Lifton look good by comparison by not grasping the obvious. Surely, you understand that if you're going to write an autopsy report that says X, Y and Z you have to produce the evidence that proves it. Surely, you understand that you can't write an autopsy report that is in conflict with the photographs and X-rays of the body? Surely, you understand that if you falsify the wounds in the body to tell a false story, an then "document" that with the autopsy report then it looks like you just did your job? Surely, you understand that the tampered with body would support the autopsy report? That that was the plan all along? That they were supposed to be supportive of each other? And surely, you understand that the whole purpose of an autopsy report is to bully any witness who would claim to have seen something the autopsy report doesn't support? If you think there was no post mortem surgery then explain this color autopsy photo and the 90 degree angle of the wound especially when looking at the top left of the head as viewed when looking at this. And if no image appears on here I'm referring to the image I have on my blog with this post: http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2009/12/doug-horne-makes-astounding-claims-on.html You would understand this better if you bothered to understand that we're talking about two events, not one, a pre-autopsy autopsy to alter the nature of the wounds then you have an autopsy with the other people in the room so that now everyone thinks they are at THE autopsy, the one and only one, the first one (when it's really the second) now you have everyone seeing what you want them to see, a falsified body that will align with a lone assassin firing from above and behind. What Tom Robinson described is what he saw at the pre-autopsy autopsy, when Dr. Humes was altering the wounds, (Inside the ARRB Vol II p. 629.) Robinson, it should be pointed out was a member of the Gawler's Funeral team so that may be why he was not ordered out of the room as Ed Reed and Jerrol Custer were. He was not a member of the Navy or of any Bethesda staff. Humes really didn't have any command authority over him. Suspicious activity? How about this line from 2H349 Specter - Tell us who else in a general way was present at the time the autopsy was conducted in addition to you three doctors, please? Humes - This, I must preface by saying it will be somewhat incomplete. My particular interest was on the examination of the President and not of the security measures of the other people who were present. Suspicious activity? How about X-rays having already been performed on JFK when Jackie and Bobby and presumably the hearse with JFK's body in it are only just arriving at the front of Bethesda? Suspicious activity? How about arriving in a body bag? And a multitude of other irregularities documented in Best Evidence? Where's the suspicious activity? Are you kidding me? Suspicious activity? Not allowing Humes to see or use the photographs but having drawings of them made both in 1964 for the WC and in 1978 for the HSCA. Suspicious activity? Humes - The photographs, to go back a moment the photographs and the X-rays were exposed in the morgue, of the Naval Medical Center on this night, and they were not developed, neither the X-rays or the photographs. They were submitted to the, and here, if I make a mistake I am not certain, to either the Federal Bureau of Investigation or to the Secret Service, I am not sure of those. 2H351 Yeah, there was suspicious activity. Quite a lot really. Joe Backes

To err is human, to forgive, divine. But to ass is to be like David Lifton. Spelling and grammatical errors can be such joys, especially when David Lifton feels the need to clear the air, by giving us an attack of his vapors. He is amused that some people don’t like him. Gasp! Can you imagine? What horror! The most recent postings about Lifton are that Hood College the repository of Harold Weisberg’s research is too afraid, apparently, to scan and post online a folder with letters of correspondence between Weisberg and Lifton. Lifton supposedly threatened to sue them if they did. He doesn’t have a legal right to do so, the letters are not his property, they belong to Harold Weisberg, and/or his estate, and the person or people in charge of that estate can do with them as they please whether Lifton likes it or not. But, surprise he doesn’t address that issue. No he wants to attack his attackers. Fair enough, what’s he got? Well, one of his critics points out that Lifton at one time thought there were false trees on the grassy knoll and that Secret Service agents Kellerman and Greer were impostors. Well, Lifton goes awry right away, in an attempt to discredit the totally and thoroughly debunked story that Mary Bledsoe was ever on Cecil McWatters' bus, something that Lifton cannot comprehend or get out of his craw he writes this: "The poster involved is the one who has originated the theory that Oswald’s landlady—Mary Bledsoe—who, according to the Warren Report (and, I might add, according to all credible evidence) was on the bus with Oswald when he boarded McWatters' bus, at around 12:40 PM, going west on Elm Street. Bledsoe filled out an affidavit that Oswald was on the bus she was riding (a bus ride established by the fact that Oswald himself said he took a bus, plus the fact that a bus transfer was found on his person." As written this implies that “the poster,” and I think he’s talking about Lee Farley, created the notion of Mary Bledsoe being on Cecil McWatters bus, when in reality Lee Farley is a critic of such an idea, and though a very good one, not the first. Lifton is so engaged in trying to once again attack Lee that he interrupts his own train of though in mid sentence “The poster involved is the one who has originated the theory that Oswald’s landlady,” and doesn’t return to the idea to finish the thought. No, he goes right into a summation of the Mary Bledsoe story as the Warren Commission would have you believe it. That Lifton, of all people should stridently, almost religiously, believe this Bledsoe story, one of but many, many, stupid, false, ridiculous on its face, farcical stories in the Warren Commission report does not serve him well, rather it invites criticism of the good work he has done. For the record, I do believe that Lifton has made a valuable contribution to the case. I do believe he was right when he found the Sibert and O’Neill report and followed it up. I do believe there was post mortem surgery of the head. But, where Lifton goes awry is when he guesses and theorizes that such surgery occurred prior to JFK’s arrival in the morgue at Bethesda. I think Doug Horne corrects and modifies Lifton’s thesis. The post mortem surgery takes place at Bethesda. All the necessary equipment and people are there. People were ordered to leave rooms and ordered not to talk about anything they heard, saw, or took part in, which is exactly what happened. This order of secrecy had to be lifted by the HSCA. That there was such an order of secrecy is proof enough of a government wide conspiracy to coverup. But, Lifton being correct in some aspects of the medical evidence does not give him absolute credibility or permission to be a bullying pain in the ass to comment and criticize other JFK assassination researchers and aspects of this case he does not comprehend at all as is the case with Mary Bledsoe, for example. Returning to his clearing the air post Lifton writes this: “I have pointed out that Mary Bledsoe was interviewed by about eight FBI agents three different times, in the week to ten days following the assassination, in which she made clear she was on the bus. Furthermore, it there is the sheer implausibility that this lady, who had a stroke, was part of a conspiracy to place Oswald on that bus.” This are more lies, distortions, and misrepresentations in these two sentences than in the two administrations of George W. Bush. Why does Lifton play a numbers game? If an FBI agent interviews you and writes a report it is supposed to be gospel? Well, BS! Anyone worth a damn in this case has read enough FBI reports to know that the vast majority of them are not worth the paper they’re printed on, or the cost to photocopy them. That FBI reports were thought to be absolute truth was used by Hoover to attack people, ruin their lives, cost them their jobs, etc. He used them to blackmail presidents, including JFK. If one FBI report is supposed to be gospel truth are 2 even more so? So, if you got 8, wow, that means what? You can’t get voted off the island? Does Lifton put so much credence in FBI reports because the Sibert and O’Neill report is an FBI report? And if even one FBI report is total BS, like the FBI 5 volume report on the assassination, Warren Commission Document #1, which doesn’t even mention that Gov. Connally was also shot, then that would open up criticism to his Best Evidence thesis and therefore he must defend all FBI reports? Is that what’s going on? Back to Lifton’s posting, and I have to wonder does stupidity have a shelf life? “As I say, these two posters have publicly stated that they are going to start a thread “about Lifton’s theories.” The word they have omitted is “early”—that is, they are going back to between 42 and 45 years ago, and the period 1965- 1969, in the period following the time when I first became involved in the Kennedy case. Remember: as I write this, the year is 2012- - these folks are going back to the year 1967, that’s “44 plus” years ago.” So, if something stupid was said more than 40 years ago, ignore it. MY GOD, LIFTON HAS SOLVED THE JFK ASSASSINATION!!! The Warren Commission report is more than 40 years old. So, just ignore it. Boom! Done! The case is solved! More: “At that time, just past the 3rd anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination, and with the Kennedy case often in the news, and the publication of The Case For Three Assassination (my original piece that was a cover story in the January, 1967 issue of Ramparts Magazine), I was interviewed by Esquire Magazine for an article they were preparing called “25 Assassination theories.” The Case for Three Assassins, not Three Assassination. He goes on and on defending he early beliefs. So, what? Big deal? Without doing a proper investigation, reading everything you could get your hands on, and without going to Dealey Plaza you hypothesized. That’s not what they’re criticizing. But the best misspelling is in this paragraph: “Do I still believed today, in 2012, that what I speculated about in 1967? Not entirely. Nearly a half century later, no, I don’t believe there was a “false knoll,”—in the literal sense of the term—but I certainly have not ruled out the possibility that some very professional camouflage was used, because, although 40 plus years have assed, the same problem exists today, as existed then: the medical evidence indicates shots from the front, but there is hardly any eyewitness testimony of shots from the front, although puffs of smoke were seen coming from certain trees in Dealey Plaza, and one lady exclaimed, at the time, to a police officer, “they are shooting the President from the bushes!” 40 years have assed. Yes, ass is now a verb. And who demonstrates that better than David Lifton?

Thanks for the heads up John. This is poorly laid out and will take forever to download one doc at a time. Box 5a has not been scanned yet. Nor has box 9. Joe

Folks, Go find Real Time with Bill Maher, June 17, 2011. Ross Douthat was on the panel representing the Right, along with Gretchen Hamel. Hamel in trying to defend and support Mitt Romney's idea to privatize FEMA she thought she could get away with saying that FEMA didn't work too well with hurricane Katrina. This is a classic Right-wing tactic, the lie by omission. How she could smile and omit Bush's total incompetence, all that "New Orleans Dodged a Bullet," newspaper headline many Bushies claimed to have read that did not exist, and "Heck of a job," Brownie. Bill jumped right on it saying that's because Republicans were running it! She actually scoffed at Bill's criticism!! Douthat came to her defense trying to say that when FEMA worked well under Democratic presidents the credit should really go to the Republican governors. Maher was having none of it. Competence beats cronyism every time. Also on the panel was Chris Matthews who made mincemeat of both Hamel and Douthat. Then again, Matthews thinks Bachmann will win. And insists on telling every one the "correct," way to pronounce Cheney. In a segment on Rep. Anthony Weiner's resignation and wondering why he had another press conference Douthat commented that Democrats didn't really want to rally around Weiner because he was always on TV and not involved in the actual business of legislation. "He [Weiner] was on the last time I was. So, I'm not really in a position to- And the brilliant Kevin Nealon quiped "That's where I know you from. Okay. It was killing me. I kept thinking, who is this guy?" You can hear this as a podcast here - http://castroller.com/Podcasts/RealTimeWith/2384589. HBO is a little protective of the video. You may be able to find the video somewhere.

Robin, I think you're being a little misleading with this. The record Dulles is referring to, as the one he wants destroyed, is the transcript of this Executive Session of the Warren Commission, and not records pertaining to Oswald being an FBI agent. This issue is not new. Harold Weisberg wrote about it, a whole book, based solely on this topic, Whitewash IV in 1974. He reprinting the whole transcript 37 years ago. So, I don't understand the point of this posting. Joe Backes

delete.

Thanks Duncan. Boy, oh boy, they are doing exactly what I said they would, pointing to a blow up from the Charles Bronson film and saying "You can see Oswald getting into position." What crap! This is intellectual property theft, again! Taking his cue from what Posner did in stealing the computer graphics from Failure Analysis Associates and getting away with it Holland now steals Groden's work on the Bronson film, which shows something moving in the 6th floor windows and using the power of suggestion, saying, "You can see Oswald getting into position." If there's anything moving it has to be Oswald. You can't see who or what is causing movement, but that doesn't matter to them. What liars. Joe Backes

Max Holland goes looking for what he calls the lost bullet. He's sticking to the Warren Commission version of the assassination, of course, and thinks high definition scans of assassination films will reveal where the bullet that not only missed everyone in the presidential limousine, but the presidential limousine itself went. He also thinks he's found photographic evidence of Lee Harvey Oswald in the 6th floor of the TSBD. Now what I think he's going to do is show a blow-up of, I think it's the Bronson film, which according to Robert Groden shows some movement in and near the alleged sniper's nest. Or he's going to show the blow-up from the Dillard photo that shows someone on the 6th floor at the opposite corner window of the TSBD and claim there, see, that's Oswald. See - http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/ Joe Backes

Robin, Fascinating photos. I've never seen the SS re-enactment in color before. Thanks for posting them. Joe