Bernice Moore

Paul ....all FWTAW....... B.....

These repeated insinuations and accusations against Mr. Palamara are false and defamatory, and are calculated to bring this forum into disrepute. If you have any evidence beyond the imaginings of your own mind, then produce it, otherwise please cease and desist from impugning Mr. Palamara's character. Vince has produced, after many years of diligent research, the first detailed study of how the Secret Service of the United States failed in its basic mission, that of protecting the President. In his study, Vince quite rightly gives the SSA the benefit of doubt when trying to determine whether certain acts or omissions were deliberate. In logic, that is known as the PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY. In Law it is known as the presumption of innocence. It is one of the fundamental principles of civilization. THe question that Vince set out to examine had nothing to do with the identity of the assassin(s), and Vince's views on that subject are really irrelevant. and now he's made his exit from the stage, you say. IN YOUR DREAMS, I say. ROCK ON, VINCE. ********* Agreed this is all supposition, and if any enlightenment is to come about, then eventually we shall see...from Vince through his actions, as well as his associations... ......Till then it is somewhat a waste of resources to continue to guess at what Vince may or may not be thinking...doing, was, is, or may be.... His work on the SS still stands, and he has been nothing but kind and generous, with the sharing of his research......But I suppose some will think that is how he suckered us in.....wouldn't be surprised.... That worm turns so quickly...doesn't it..Give it a rest...... B...

Hi Miles : That photo is a William Allen, not a Jim Murray, though they were together at the same time, within the same area, and that is the why we have the continuous spread of photos showing that particular activity.....and they do get confused.... Here is Robin's full copy...... B..

Speculation says this man - who allegedly screamed something in Spanish during the motorcade, but was released. Not sure if this is the same photo that was shown to Craig - not sure if Craig had the right guy either. - lee Hi : Lee: The photo is from the Marsh collection, who got it from Jim Garrison, there was nothing related that the man screamed anything during the motorcade.. is that new....information...from him ...? Just that he was arrested after the assn, as well as others......and released by the PDP..because he spoke no English...When Garrison showed it to Craig he thought it was the man driving the station wagon....?? ....... FWIW.... B.......

Bill: re..... (Mac Kilduff's announcement of JFK's death was the first). Gary Mack... So does this mean that Mac Kilduff, spoke only the once, in announcing the President's death....?? That afternoon. And there were no audio, microphone recordings of what he stated....as there were no recording devices set up as yet...?? Thanks B.....

Hey Pat: Da Bug gets around, whatever he has a mind to...whatever and whenever.....just like the W/C...they just skip on by it......imo.. I will have a look at the Ye Old Switcherro, great title...got a link ?? I have gone into my folders and found a bit more info, gathered along the way...The photos of Montgomery do not comply with what later is written within the w/c.. as to size..If I recall correctly..but then what does...In the Det Montgomery photos, that particular bag is wider.. The Dallas photo with the paper ?? I had another look, but do not see which you mean... Unless the photo showing the rifle on the table......that is from the DPD files... The bag by the gun I have no idea....here is the email address for contact..... jfkresearch@mail.com ....re Jerry McLeer's article.. re The Paper Sack, I am sure they will supply that info.. FWTAW......some you may have.......B...... STUDEBAKER, ROBERT LEE Sources: CE 3131; CE 3145; CD 897, pp. 158, 167-168; CD 1497; HSCA Vol 6, p. 153; Whitewash I, Weisberg, pp. 73, 79-83, 190 Mary's Comments: Detective, Crime Scene Search Section, Identification Bureau, Dallas Police Department. Described place where paper bag was found as "in southeast corner [of TSBD 6th floor] lying in 16" space between cardboard box and south wall." See Studebaker Photograph No. 26. Died April 7, 1994. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=9211 DRAIN, VINCENT E. CE 3131; CD 5, p. 129; CD 205, p. 120; Whitewash I, Weisberg, 73, 148 Special Agent FBI. Hand-carried rifle to Washington night of 11/22/63. Drain signed FBI report that paper bag found on 6th floor of TSBD WAS identical to Kraft paper used by shipping department of TSBD. Vincent's brother, Lee Drain, was Secretary-Treasurer of Republic National Bank, Dallas. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=3438 Wesley Liebeler staff attorney W/C memos -----The Long and Bulky Package----- 1. The last sentence states: "Frazier could easily have been mistaken when he stated that Oswald held the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand, or when he said that the upper end was tucked under the armpit." On the very next page of the galleys, in the discussion of the prints that appeared on the paper bag, it is stated that the palmprint was "found on the closed end of the bag. It was from Oswald's right hand in which he carried the long package as he walked from Frazier's car to the building." I am advised that the palmprint is right on the end of the bag, just where it would be if Oswald had carried it cupped in his hand. If we say in the discussion of prints that that print was put on the bag when he carried it to the TSBD [the Book Depository Building] (which we don't quite do) and if the print is where it would be if he carried it cupped in his hand, then we must face up on the preceding page and admit that Frazier was right when he said that that is the way Oswald carried it. If the print story is right and the implication left there as to when the print was put on the bag is valid, Frazier could not have been mistaken when he said Oswald carried the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand. (11 HSCA 225; 9/6/64 memo) 2. The last paragraph of this section is misleading when it attempts to show the falsity of the curtain rod story by stating that Oswald's room at 1026 North Beckley had curtains, and does not take account of the fact that Frazier specifically testified that Oswald said he wanted the curtain rods to put in an apartment. This takes on added significance when we remember that Oswald was talking about renting an apartment so that his family could live in Dallas with him. That aspect of the problem should be specifically treated if we are going to mention the fact that his roominghouse had curtains. (11 HSCA 225; 9/6/64 memo) PAPER BAG, Q-10 -----Gary Shaw CE 2723; CD 5, p. 129 3/19/64 attempt by J. Edgar Hoover to explain two conflicting reports on samples of paper from TSBD compared to "gun" bag. On 11/30/63, Lt. Day wrote: "....This paper was examined by the FBI Laboratory and found to have the same observable characteristics as the brown paper bag shaped like a gun case which was found near the scene of the shooting on the sixth floor..." This page was paginated on the typewriter. Years later, Gary Shaw received another p. 129 among documents completely unrelated. This page was paginated by hand (as were the other approximately 500 pages of CD 5) and Lt. Day had written: "....This paper was examined by the FBI laboratory and found not to be identical with the paper gun case found at the scene of the shooting. The Dallas police have not exhibited this to anyone else..." http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=7301 Below is from a Mike Griffith article, I do have his permission to post his info, as long as nothing is changed within, and he is given the credit due. Sylvia Meagher discusses some of the problems with these items: The Commission . . . offered no firm physical evidence of a link between the paper bag and the rifle. The [Warren] Report does not mention the negative examination made by FBI expert James Cadigan. Cadigan said explicitly that he had been unable to find any marks, scratches, abrasions, or other indications that would tie the bag to the rifle. Those negative findings assume greater significance in the light of an FBI report (CE 2974) which states that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was in a well-oiled condition. It is difficult to understand why a well-oiled rifle carried in separate parts [as the WC claimed] would not have left distinct traces of oil on the paper bag, easily detected in laboratory tests if not with the naked eye. The expert testimony includes no mention of oil traces, a fact which in itself is cogent evidence against the Commission's conclusions. Equally significant, there were no oil stains or traces on the blanket in which a well-oiled rifle ostensibly had been stored--not for hours but for months. This serves further to weaken, if not destroy, the Commission's arbitrary finding that the Carcano rifle had been wrapped in that blanket until the night before the assassination. (Meagher 62) In fact, although the paper bag was allegedly found in the sniper's nest, incredibly, the Dallas police "failed" to take a crime-scene photograph of the bag lying in the nest! The bag does not appear in any of the pictures that were taken of the sniper's nest that afternoon. Some WC apologists have suggested that Lt. Day and Detective Studebaker, the two policemen who took snapshots of the nest, didn't photograph the bag because they didn't notice it. This is surely a farfetched explanation. The bag, which the Commission said measured 38" x 8" and was allegedly shaped "like a gun case," would have been in plain view and could not possibly have been "missed" or "overlooked." Since Day and Studebaker "noticed" the three spent shells lying on the floor, it strains the imagination to think they would not have noticed the 38" x 8" bag lying in the same small area. (Rusty Livingston, a former Dallas Police Crime Lab detective, says the bag was about 42 inches long. In a photo of the bag, which was taken long after it was "discovered," the bag is seen to measure 38 inches in length, although there appears to be a four-inch flap folded over on the left edge of the bag.) The bag, say some WC supporters, was folded and thus was not easy to spot. But three of the policemen who saw a bag in the nest gave no indication that it was folded; they said it was a small bag and that a partially eaten chicken leg was lying beside it. One police officer specifically described the bag he saw as a small manufactured bag, such as the kind found in a grocery store's produce department. Another policeman described it as an ordinary lunch bag. The other explanation offered by WC apologists to explain the "failure" to photograph the bag is that the bag was "accidentally" removed from the nest before it could be photographed. However, the police officer who supposedly removed the bag prematurely indicated that no evidence was removed until AFTER Day and Studebaker "took pictures and everything" (7 H 97). As one studies the WC testimony about the bag, one is struck by the utter confusion and contradiction in the accounts. The accounts differ markedly about where the bag was located, who found it, what it looked like, whether or not it was folded, whether or not it was even a "bag" at all, when it was removed from the sniper's nest, and who handled it. It should be mentioned that for some reason the bag did not leave the TSBD until three hours after it was supposedly discovered. The small paper bag seen in the sniper's nest probably had nothing to do with the long bag that was later presented as evidence by the Dallas police. Many researchers believe that the police and/or federal agents made the long bag partly with paper that Oswald had previously handled in an effort to strengthen the case against him. This would explain why only two of Oswald's prints were found on the bag (more should have been found), why the bag was devoid of gun oil even though the Carcano was well oiled when discovered, and why the bag did not leave the Depository for three hours. Faulty Evidence : Mike Griffith http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id184.htm Frazier Bag,,,,, http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...absPageId=73558 Bag replica http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=160 Here are the Montgomery photos, in case.....the first comparing LHO to the rfile was done by John Dolva... and Short bag, lightened ..... B.....

Hi Pat: A quick reply... There are two reports......I guess technically three..... ""In 1980, researcher Gary Shaw discovered what appeared to be another copy of the FBI report while examining documents in the National Archives. However, the newly discovered version stated that the paper sack did NOT have the same observable characteristics as the test sample:"" Below the reports and Don Roberdeau's info..... See...... The Paper Sack http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/papersac.htm Did you ever come across that Golz article.......?? Pat :""I'm sorry that I started this thread with a faulty comparison, but it is proving most interesting. Gary Mack sent me an e-mail saying that Vincent Drain was contacted by Earl Golz when Gary Shaw first found the second document. He says that Drain ADMITTED writing the document, but claimed he'd written two different documents while waiting for the test results, one claiming the bag matched and one claiming it didn't. He told Golz that he thought he destroyed the one found in the Archives, after the results came in. I think there's a problem with this excuse. Cadigan tested the bag on the 23rd. The results were furnished on the 23rd. Drain's report on the evidence was prepared on the 26th. Bernice, or Jack, what is the date on the bottom of this report? At the top it says 11-30 but that could be the date it was typed up. What is the date at the bottom? If it was written up after the 23rd it proves Drain to be inaccurate in his recollection to Golz, and possibly a xxxx. Does anyone have the Golz article? Drain's exact words could be helpful."" http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...t=0#entry113961 B......

Wait a minute, David ... did you not read the 'Hoax' book after it had come out and before you posted that you have seen 'NO PROOF OF ALTERATION - SOMETHING YOU HAVE SAID FOR YEARS'????? How many times have I seen you repeat this same thing now? Fifty? You always did have trouble understanding what "proof" & "evidence" meant didn't you? Is there any proof that(the plaza's very own Bigfoot) Gordon Arnold was standing in the plaza filming "the parade" as he called it? NO. There is no proof of that whatsoever but, do you still try & convince people that he was there by using the same tired circumstantial "coincidences"(that's being generous calling them that) over & over again & even go so far as twisting the truth to make it lean towards him being there? YES. So then, just because there is no proof of something does not stop an intelligent man believing in that possibility & neither does it stop him wanting to discuss it in a civil environment without fear of being trolled by some repetitive say-nothing garbage. Any Arnold fanatic with a conscience would realise this, oh wait a minute, hmm... that's another one you have trouble with, damn. ********* Alan Agreed: Except with your first comment....."How many times have I seen you repeat this same thing now? Fifty?" I think it is more like 100 or so..at least.... B.....

Peter: The Psychiatrist's name has never been forthcoming as far as I have heard, though someone must know...? ..Just that he was paid a million dollars..for his silence ......and the records, have not been revealed..See the 6 min mark.... TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.3 The Guity Men, seg.5 http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=7mzZGK9tNyM&...feature=related B.......

The De Gaulle connection is interesting, as the attempt on his life came from an element in French Intelligence allied with that part of American Intel that pulled-off the Dallas [and other] hits. De Gaulle and the more progressive parts of French Intel got revenge with this book. Many think one of the shooters was a Frenchman operated by US Intel through Harvey. I'd even go so far as to say that the most recent French-U.S. tiff [over Iraq War] was connected to all this down deep. Most people have NO idea what really goes on - only what they read in the synthetic news media - which is, at best, propaganda - at its worst, circus - often both. ************ Peter: Here is the thread that Randy began on the same subject some time ago......May 2006..... with a few more interesting replies......... Farewell America...now it's permissable.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6940 B.....

Here is a photo from the re-enactment.....showing a clipboard.. View from the rear, uniform and clipboard..... B...

During the past many years, Vince has referred too many times to a conspiracy,....... to believe otherwards now....imo..... It takes only one Lone Nutter, and or Government lacky .....to gather and bring the conspiracists together,......and remind them of their common cause...... They may and do continually rattle at each other, at times, ......over their differences of opinion, which must be expected, as it does continually occur.. But when such as this, is announced......which could be considered a boot in the keester...... for all involved.......... They rally, unite and speak out, and it is always a pleasure to see....Because upon that bottom line, ...they are together in their common goal..... I will continue to admire greatly his invaluable work on the complicity of the SS......and have spent some years now within those studies...and in email contact he has always been helpful .......and courteous.......which has been greatly appreciated. I respect his right to his own opinion, and whatever the reason for his decision will become clear, eventually... ....So....I do want to thank him for this rally.......and reminding the all, who believe in the conspiracy of their goal......and that imo is good... Thanks Vince.... Best B

*************** Hi Don: Hope all is well....... A few comments......and a crop enlarged..... His wife describes the man as being middle aged...and it has been posted on his site as of May 2008..... ..The young man in the Bond photo, appears to be at least thirteen perhaps to fifteen, or ?? by his height.....that would make him approximately anywhere from 58 to 60 years old...or.......and therefore not middle aged....I do realise today that the saying is "don't trust anyone over 90"....especially by those who have turned 50... but 60 or so, is not middle aged.....well imo...Perhaps one could just say older and quite a bit past their prime..... for safetys sake...... Also in enlarging the Bond 5 and cropping, the youngman, does give the appearance of being white...imo......I am doubting that is him seen within the Bond, though his information may be sound, as to what he did see....... I have also searched the Bonds, and even though the sunlight was very bright the skin tones of the African-Americans and Cubans see within those and other photos that day, are very apparent.... I think his identifying of self, in this photo... is doubtful........... For now, thanks for the information.... B....

James Yes it is them. One of Hemmings last post on the Forum stated that these same supplies ended in Castro's hands. Do you know the tragic {to me} details of Hemming's report? Thanks James. Harry ************ Hey Harry: Here is Gerry's post.....from Oct.2005 Best B..... Juan ARQUIAGA was NEVER Fidel's "top-ordnance man". He was later forced to go to Peru in failed attempts to manufacture his worthless sub-machine gun design. He couldn't go to Havana because during 1958 he was the one who wasted "M-26-Julio" money on Mannlicher-Carcano carbines; which were later flown into Manzanillo, Oriente on the C-46 piloted by Guillermo Verdaguer. Later, some of these M/Carcanos were the bait to be used by Sturgis/Fiorini, Crozier & Wiecha [CIA Santiago Base] in a "stalking-horse" scheme to assassinate Fidel in Minas del Frio, Sierra Maestra. Dumb-ass Sturgis [and the CIA officers] were later pissed off when they discovered that the "hit" was to be carried out by B-26 Bombers & F-47D "Thunderbolt" Fighter aircraft; and would have killed all of them along with Fidel & company !! The "medical supplies" were from John Bircher doctors and dentists, and were "samples" commonly fronted to physicians to garner future purchases or R/Xs of those brand named products. "Guy" Gabaldon was Larry Howard's buddy, gained fame from a movie about his WWII Japanese linguistic capabilities [raised by Isei, Nisei folks in East Los Angeles]; and blew off Hall at their singular meeting due to Hall's foul mouth -- even fouler than mine !! ALL of the medical "samples" were later shipped to Cuba, for the families then desperately in need of same. Of course the Fidel folks purloined their percentage for later "sale' to the misbegotten. While Hall had only shaken Logue's hand during 30 seconds of presence [January 1963], he was never knowledgeable of Dr. Robert Morris; that is until his FBI handlers gave him a script and sent him out to all of my contacts [better, who they then thought were my VIP contacts !!] The Dallas FBI/CIA wanted Hall to continue on safely to Miami in order to set up the Masferrer types for later arrest. Gerry ___________________________ http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry42524

FYI: Quote Duke : ""Don't you think that it's suspicious that the head of the Dallas Diocese has always been a Catholic? Even today that's true! "" The Catholic Church in Dallas, is not the only......There are also other Diocese within Dallas ....Some other religions use that term also... See.. The Anglican Diocese of St. Mathews Church; Dallas Texes http://www.stmatthias-dallas.org/ Evangical Diocese of Dallas, Texas http://www.episcopal-dallas.org/ Quote Duke: ""And let us not forget that there is not just one Cistercian monk - St Bernard's order, he who was a great supporter of the Knights Templar ... and we all know what became of them! - but a whole monastery of them just a few miles from downtown Dallas!"" There are also Anglican Benedictines, Franciscans, Cistercians, and in the Episcopal Church in the USA, Dominicans), as well as other monastic orders.. Not only Catholic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monk Quote Duke: ""The evidence is clear and overwhelming, and shows how secure they are in the knowledge of never having to admit their hand in the playing out of the Dealey Plaza tragedy by the simple fact that they've remained exactly as before, and if anything have gained an even higher profile! Further proof - a la Hoover's refusal to allow DPD to attend the FBI Academy in what remained of his lifetime - is that Dallas is still but a diocese - not an archdiocese despite the millions of Catholics there. If little tiny Connecticut can have three archdiocese, why else would huge Texas be limited to just Houston? Hmmm? The pope knows. It's in the same room deep beneath St Peter's where the Fatima predictions are hidden. Wim may know someone who's seen it ... "" A Diocese is administered by a Bishop, if there is one in residence within that area... An Archdiocese is administered by an ArchBishop, as there is no Bishop, residing within the city.. A Diocese is higher is status, that is what Dallas is.......See Different classes of dioceses There are several kinds of dioceses. There are dioceses properly so called and archdioceses. The diocese is the territorial circumscription administered by a bishop; the archdiocese is placed under the jurisdiction of an archbishop. Considered as a territorial circumscription, no difference exists between them; the power of their pastors alone is different. Generally, several dioceses are grouped in an ecclesiastical province and are subject to the authority of the metropolitan archbishop. Some, however, are said to be exempt, i.e. from any archiepiscopal jurisdiction, and are placed directly under the authority of the Holy See. Such are the dioceses of the ecclesiastical province of Rome, and several other dioceses or archdioceses, especially in Italy, also in other countries. The exempt archbishops are called titular archbishops, i.e. they possess only the title of archbishop, have no suffragan bishops, and administer a diocese. The term "titular archbishop", it is to be noted, is also applied to bishops who do not administer a diocese, but who have received with the episcopal consecration a titular archbishopric. For the better understanding of this it must be remembered that archdioceses and dioceses are divided into titular and residential. The bishop of a residential see administers his diocese personally and is bound to reside in it, whereas the titular bishops have only an episcopal title; they are not bound by any obligations to the faithful of the dioceses whose titles they bear. These were formerly called bishops or archbishops in partibus infidelium, i.e. of a diocese or archdiocese fallen into the power of infidels; but since 1882 they are called titular bishops or archbishops. Such are the vicars Apostolic, auxiliary bishops, administrators Apostolic, nuncios, Apostolic delegates, etc. (see TITULAR BISHOP). Mention must also be made of the suburbicarian dioceses (diœceses suburbicariœ), i.e. the six dioceses situated in the immediate neighbourhood of Rome and each of which is administered by one of the six cardinal-bishops. These form a special class of dioceses, the titulars or occupants of which possess certain special rights and obligations (see SUBURBICARIAN DIOCESES). http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05001a.htm B.......

Hi Robert : The Jesuits....????? The Church of Scientology ....Whatever happened to.....The Right Wing ? The John Birch Society ?? Castro......??? The Russians.???? The Driver SS Greer ????? Oops and I almost forgot, Jackie herself...??????.....as well as the many others, that right now ,do not come to mind........What have I been missing........Apparently nothing...... Just carry on, carrying on.....as they say.........and let none stand in your way..... From one of the several Billion to another.......

I personally cannot see anyone trying to alter the Zapruder film before frames were going into print. The film was shot with Kodachrome II film that according to CTs Robert Groden ... its properties could not have allowed someone to merely make prints and put them back into the film without color shifts and sharpness irregularities being present. Another problem for an alteration would be to risk one of the actual witnesses spotting the change as being something that did not match what they witnessed at the time of the assassination. There also would have been the problem that the Feds did not know who all was filming at the time of the shooting and to keep an alteration hidden ... it would had to have been done to each and every assassination film that was running at the time of the shooting. As far as frames being reversed ... that didn't occur to the actual film, but rather to the prints placed into the 26 volumes of the WCR. Bill Another problem for an alteration would be to risk one of the actual witnesses spotting the change as being something that did not match what they witnessed at the time of the assassination Didn't Jean Hill say she wasn't stood where the film shows her to be standing? But that problem is chicken feed. A good old fashioned car crash or suicide normally sorts that kind of trifling problem. A much worse scenario surely would be definitive PROOF of a conspiracy catured on film! If you were a conspirator which would you risk? A problem witness or 200 or definitive proof of your culpability? But in fairness Bill you still haven't addressed my question. I asked would they do it if they could? Not DID they. ************* Bernie : You may be referring to this information by Mary re where she and Jean were.......from an previous post.. Jean Hill also stated in a interview, that she did not see the Zapruder film till 15 years later.. FYI..... B... Title: David Lifton strikes paydirt Post by: jack white on February 16, 2007, 12:22 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yesterday while reviewing some transcribed old notes taken many years ago at the National Archives, David Lifton came across a long forgotten information of the mother lode variety. He was transcribing by hand, listening with earphones to audio tapes made on the afternoon of 11-22-63, from KRLD Radio tape reels. The reel was an interview by Jay Hogan of Mary Moorman and Jean Hill at 3:30 pm...on KRLD RADIO excerpts, Tape 5B and 6A at NARA. I am excerpting from the lengthy transcript several relevant parts of the interviews. Decide for yourself the importance of this first day evidence: HOGAN: Q: Hello, Mrs. Moorman? A: Yes. Q You took the picture just after the shooting, or just before? A: Evidently, just immediately, as the. . . Cause he was, he was looking, you know, whenever I got the camera focused and then I snapped it in my picture, he slumped over. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: About how close were you? (DELETED FOR BREVITY) A: 10 or fifteen foot, I, no more . . . Because I fall behind my camera. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: Were you up on that grassy bank there? A: We stepped out in the street. We were right at the car (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: How many shots did you hear? You say "shots rang out". A: Oh, oh, I don't know. I think three or four is what I, I uh, that I heard. Q: Uh huh.A: (continuing) that I'm sure of. Now, I don't know, there might have been more. It just took seconds for me to realize what was happening. Q: Yeah, uh, what as your first thought? A: That those ARE shots. I mean, he had been HIT. And that they're liable to hit me, cause I'm right at the car, so I decided the place for me is to get on the ground (laughs) Q: So huh, how did the president respond to this shot. I mean, did he just slump suddenly? A: He grabbed his chest, and of course, Mrs. Kennedy jumped up immediately, and fell over him; and she said: "My God, he's been shot." Q: Did you notice any other reactions... (DELETED FOR BREVITY) A: Uh, they hesitated just for a moment [referring, I believe, to the car itself, rather than to the behavior of any particular individual--dsl] cause I think they were like I was, you know--'Was that a shot," or was itj ust a backfire, or just what? And then, course, he clutched himself and they immediately sped up, real fast, you know, like--to get OUT of there. And, uh, the police, there were several motorcycles around him; and, uh, they stopped, and uh--one or two must of went with him, And one ran up the hill, and a friend that was with me ran up the hill across the street from where the shots came from. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: It (shots) seemed fairly close by? A: Yes, uh huh. Q And form what direction did they seem to be? A: Oh, Lord? North. Just back there (at--laughs) Q: Just just right at you? A: Yes, sir. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) A: The sound popped, well it just sounded like, well, you know, there might have been a firecracker right there in that car. Q: And in your picture, uh, you uh took this picture just BEFORE the shot? (DELETED FOR BREVITY) A: Evidently, at the minute (means "instant") that he, that it hit him because, uh, we was we was looking, at me, or I mean, he was looking, you know, at the people when my picture came out. They just slumped over, so I must have got it. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) A: Yes, uh huh. You could see he's clutched, he's bent over, and she's... and she hadn't even gotten up in my picture, and she DID get up, STOOD UP, in the car. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: Uh huh. And you and your friend Miss Hill, uh, were together there at the scene. Was anybody else with you? A No, uh uh. Q: OK, well we sure thank you. FROM HERE ON OUT, the interview continues with Jean Hill Q: (continuing) And also, here, we do have Miss Hill. Miss Hill, you were an eyewitness, also? A: Yes, I was . I suppose we were the people closest to the President's car at the time. Q: Uh, that as about 10 or fifteen feet, you'd say? A: Not anymore than that at all. Q: Uh huh. You were both looking right at the presidential car, then? A: Yes, we were looking right at the President. We were looking at his face. As Mary took the picture, I was looking at him. And he grabbed his hands across his ch-when two shots rang out. He grabbed his hands across his chest. I have never seen anyone killed, or in pain before like that but there was this odd look came across his face, and he pitched forward onto Jackie's lap. DSL NOTE: I believe this must mean: "to the side onto Jackie's lap" --because Jackie was to the left of JFK, not in front of JFK. In my interview of the Newman's, circa 1971, in person, and on tape, they talk of JFK falling to the side, or being thrust towards Jackie. A: And uh, she immediately, we were close enough to even hear her, and everything, and she fell across him and says "My God, he's been shot." Q: ..... Did you notice particularly any of the other people around? At the time (she cuts in) A: There was NO one around us on our side of the street. We had planned it that way; we wanted to be down there by ourselves; that’s the reason we had gotten almost to the underpass, so we’d be completely in the clear. Q: Any other reactions form the other people in the motorcae, that you recall? A: The motorcade was stunned after the first two shots, and it came to a momentary halt, and about that time 4 more uh, 3 to 4 more shots again rang out, and I guess it just didn't register with me. Mary was uh had gotten down on the ground and was pulling at my leg, saying "Get , get down, they're shooting, get down, they're shooting; and I didn't even realize it. And I just kept sitting there looking. And uh uh just about that time, well, of course, some of the motorcycles pulled away. And some of them pulled over to the side and started running up the bank; there's a hill on the other side (she is interrupted) Q: Yes, Maam. A: And the shots came from there. After they were momentarily stopped--after the first two shots--THEN they sped away REAL quickly. (DELETED FOR BREVITY) Q: Well, thank you Miss Hill, and also Miss Moorman, for speaking with us about this. A. Thankyou. ANNOUNCER: That's two eyewitnesses to the murdered president, who saw on his face the anguish of his very last hour alive. Before we go back to CBS, here again are some announcements of special local importance. TO SUMMARIZE: MOORMAN 1. HOW CLOSE TO CAR: 10 or fifteen foot, I, no more 2. WHERE WERE YOU: We stepped out in the street 3. HOW MANY SHOTS: three or four ... there might have been more. 4. WHAT DID MRS. KENNEDY DO: Mrs. Kennedy jumped up immediately, and fell over him; and she said: "My God, he's been shot." 5. WHAT DID THE LIMO DO: they hesitated just for a moment...and they immediately sped up 6. WHAT DID THE MOTORCYCLES DO: they stopped 7. WHERE DID THE SHOTS COME FROM: Oh, Lord? North. 8. WHAT DID YOUR PHOTO SHOW MRS. K DOING: he's bent over, and she's... and she hadn't even gotten up in my picture, and she DID get up, STOOD UP, in the car. HILL: 1. HOW CLOSE TO CAR: about 10 or fifteen feet...not anymore than that at all. 2. WHAT DID THE PRESIDENT DO: he pitched forward onto Jackie's lap. 3. WHAT DID MRS. K DO: she fell across him and says "My God, he's been shot." 4. WERE THERE OTHER PEOPLE AROUND YOU: There was NO one around us on our side of the street 5. WHAT DID THE LIMO DO:The motorcade was stunned after the first two shots, and it came to a momentary halt. After they were momentarily stopped--after the first two shots--THEN they sped away REAL quickly. 6. WHERE DID THE SHOTS COME FROM: there's a hill on the other side...and the shots came from there. THIS IS FIRST DAY TESTIMONY FROM THE TWO CLOSEST WITNESSES. Jack B......

Mike:: Here is some information on The Orville Nix Film: A Snip here......a snip there.....and then a disappearance...... FYI........ B...... A Video titled "Rush To Judgment.".Begins with the date.. Feb. 1964) a 1966 film documentary about the John F Kennedy Assassination that was directed by Emile de Antonio and hosted by Mark Lane. It is a black and white film, 122 minutes long. It has also been shown on BBC TV since 1967 as part of the much longer (300 minutes) film entitled "The Death of Kennedy". ************************* Orville Nix Verbatim from the Video.... Mark Lane: "Mr.Nix .Where were you on November 22nd ?.." Orville Nix: "I was standing on the corner of Main and Houston "..(Sts). Mark Lane: "And did you take any pictures of the Presidental Limousine as it went through Dealey Plaza ?.." Orville Nix: "Yes, I had taken pictures before and after --before and during the assassination ".. Mark Lane: "And you know of course that your pictures were used by the Government to determine where the limousine was when some of the shots were fired ?".. Orville Nix: "Yes ".. Mark Lane:"And did you deliver a copy of your film to the Federal Government ?".. Orville Nix:"Yes, I delivered a copy of my film to the Federal Government about December 1st ".. Mark Lane:"About a little over a week after the assassination ?".. Orville Nix:"Yes, my film got lost in the processing plant !".. Mark Lane: "Where is the original film ?".. Orville Nix: "The original film --uh--belonged to United Press International .The Government has a duplicate copy ".. Mark Lane: " Where is that copy ?".. Orville Nix: " In the Archives".. Mark Lane:"And is that the duplicate copy which was used by the Warren Commission determining along with other films, the Muchmore film and the Zapruder film where the Presidential limousine was when some of the shots were fired ?".. Orville Nix: "I would say so".. Mark Lane: "Well you now have a copy, of your film which you were kind enough to show to us this afternoon .Is that copy the same as the original that you gave to the FBI on December 1st ?".. Orville Nix: " I would say, No--- there is some films maybe missing---some --uh--frames--uh--some of the frames were ruined ".. Mark Lane :"Does the film which you have at the present time ,have the same number of frames as the film that you delivered to the FBI on December 1st ?".. Orville Nix: "--uh--I would say No--but its' cause of loosing maybe a --uh--frame --uh--here and there ".. Mark Lane :" At the time of the shots were fired ,did you look at the Book Depository building ?".. Orville Nix :" No".. Mark Lane : " Did you think ,at that time ,that the shots came from the Book Depository ?".. Orville Nix : "No, I thought it came from a fence --uh--between the Book Depository and the Railroad Track".. Mark Lane:"--uh--Did anyone else ,who you know, that you've spoken with ,also believe that the shots came from there ".. Orville Nix: " Most everyone thought it came from the fence behind the Book Depository ".. Mark Lane :"Did you have the occasion to speak with Forrest Sorrels ---who is of course a friend of yours ,and is the Secret Service agent in charge of Dallas that day ?".. Orville Nix:" Yes, I did ".. Mark Lane : "Did he tell you where the thought the shots came from ?".. Orville Nix : " He thought they came from the same place".. Mark Lane : " Which is ?".. Orville Nix: "Behind the fence".. Mark Lane : " At the present time where do you believe the shots came from ?".. Orville Nix : " Well they came from the Book Depository because there's proof it did come from there ".. Mark Lane :" I see---and this you've read in Newspapers and you've read the Report ?".. Orville Nix :" Yes,--er-- I believe the Warren Report".. *****************************************end of his interview on tape**** Orville Nix: JFK: How the Media Assassinated the Real Story... From Real History Archives ""But perhaps nothing revealed CBS's prejudice in the series more tellingly than the network's treatment of Orville Nix, a man who was wielding a movie camera across from the grassy knoll on that fateful day. Nix, who had worked for the General Service Administration as an air conditioning repairman in the Dallas Secret Service building, sold his footage to UPI for $5000 in 1963. But, according to his granddaughter Gayle Nix Jackson, the film only brought him heartache. "The FBI had issued a dictum to all of Dallas's film labs that any assassination photos had to be turned over to the FBI immediately," recalls Gayle Jackson. "The lab called my granddad first and, like the good American he was, he rushed it to the FBI." Nix had to turn his camera over to the FBI as well. "They took the camera for five months. They said they needed to analyze it. They returned it in pieces," recalls Jackson. In 1967 Nix dutifully turned out for the CBS re-creation. Recalls his granddaughter: "His turn came to reenact what he saw. They said, 'Mr.Nix. where did the shots come from?' He said, `From over there on that grassy knoll behind the picket fence.' Then it would be, `Cut!' We went through this six or seven times and each time it was, `Cut!' And then a producer stepped forward and said, `Orville where did the Warren Commission say the shots came from?' My granddad said, `Well, the Texas Book Depository.' The producer said, `That's what you need to say.'" CBS producer Bernard Birnbaum, who worked on the documentary, denies the exchange. "We never tried to put any words in anybody's mouth, absolutely not," he told the "Voice." Birnbaum says CBS did give Warren Commission critics air time and cites a segment of the documentary where another eyewitness contends shots came from the grassy knoll. "We were looking to disprove everything," he insists. According to Jackson, her grandfather also told CBS that there were four shots fired during the assassination, an observation subsequently endorsed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1975, based on controversial acoustical evidence. But what did the CBS viewing audience hear from Nix? "Bang, bang, bang," as if to suggest that Nix also subscribed to the three-bang theory. After being browbeaten by CBS, Orville Nix, a normally mild-mannered man, became furious. "He was hitting the steering wheel on the ride back home saying, `Why are they trying to make me feel like I am insane?'" Jackson recalls. She remembers that a year or so later, when District Attorney Jim Garrison called for Nix to testify, her grandfather wouldn't talk. He was afraid for his life. How many other witnesses experienced the Orville you-never-heard/saw-that phenomenon we will never know. But one other was Kenny O'Donnell, a confidant and adviser to JFK who was in the motorcade. In Tip O'Neill's book Man of The House, O'Neill describes a conversation with O'Donnell, who told him he was sure that two shots had come from the fence behind the grassy knoll. O'Neill said to O'Donnell, "That's not what you told the Warren Commission." O'Donnell responded, "You're right, I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family." Since Orville Nix's death in 1988, his granddaughter, a former loss-prevention executive, has been waging a one-woman war to get the original film back from UPI. She wants it analyzed to reveal the details that a copy does not provide. "You know my granddad believed in the Texas handshake, and that is how he made his deal with UPI." According to Jackson, the rights to the film were to revert to Nix's estate in 1988. After initially getting a green light from UPI for the return of the film, the then-media giant informed her that the attorney that granted her request was "no longer with the company." She was told to wait until 1991. Then on June 4, 1991, came a note from UPI's general counsel, Frank Kane. "UPI agrees that, in accordance with the oral agreement . . . UPI hereby releases all rights over the Nix Film to Mr. Nix's heirs and assigns." There was only one problem. UPI no longer had the film. Jackson received a letter saying the film had gone to the Warren Commission and was supposedly housed in the National Archives. With the Warren Commission out of business, she contacted the National Archives only to learn that the original was not there either. The last official place the film was said to have been was in the House Select Committee on Assassinations files. That Committee was convened in 1975 to investigate the assassinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King. The chief counsel for the HSCA, G. Robert Blakey, who has a penchant for gagging his staff via mandatory secrecy oaths, came clean with Nix's granddaughter about the fate of the family heirloom, says Jackson. "Blakey's the only one who takes full responsibility for the loss of the film because it was his committee that was supposed to assure that all evidence was returned to the rightful owner," Jackson says. So much for posterity's view of the grassy knoll on November 22, 1963. A former HSCA staff member, Gaeton Fonzi, recalls that back at the time of the hearings the staff "heard rumors that Blakey planned to classify all of the committee files, but we didn't believe them because that would be too reminiscent of what the Warren Commission had done." In fact many of the files were classified and this same man, Blakey, is the one who has been recently assigned to help draft legislation about what will be released from the original Kennedy assassination files. "" http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/...assination.html *************************************** B......

Steve: For your interest....... Quote:""David is saying NO PHOTOGRAPHS ARE KNOWN WHICH PROVIDE POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION OF ANY PEOPLE ON THE PEDESTAL. Identifications are all based on assumptions of the verity of the official story. Right, David?"" Jack ****************** This below is Jack White's "The Zapruder Waltz".... As we see in Bronson, which shows Marilyn Sitzman to be wearing a dark dress, she was in reality wearing a light beige coloured one....also seen in many other photos from that day........ ........It is impossible to see within any of these frames who exactly is on the pedestal....there is no clarity..........and yet, in a re-enactment Robert Groden is ,with much more......as well as other such photos that are available.......from studies taken later.... I have over time read the explanations, many times, of the photographers having the wrong settings, the wrong type of film, the excitement of the moments , the rush etc etc......and so on and so forth, which seem in the end to me, to be just more coincidences, when are there simply too many....within all of the assassination scenario... When studied, the heights of the two people, as seen on the pedestal, also seem to vary....at times by what appears to be several inches, but also I have read the, he must have crouched down, bent etc etc...... whatever.... ......Marilyn was a tall girl, Zapruder his son has stated I believe, was 5' 10"...Marilyn was approximately the same....and or somewhat taller if as some say, she had on high heels.....that day.....which would have added another 2 inches or so.... Also if one notes, in Bronson, Marilyn's, apparently it is called her right leg and foot, ? but when studied her right leg and foot appear to be, what?? no foot, with a fat widening leg ?? There were reports from a couple of witnesses that come to mind, off hand........of people seen in this area and with cameras.....two that come to mind are the Associated Press Photographer, James Altgens seen on the south side of Elm, from where he took his photographs, opposite the pedestal and also Emmett Hudson....the Dealey Plaza, groundskeeper....who was standing on the steps, to the left ......of the pedestal... Is it possible that Marilyn Sitzman had a camera ?, well that is just as possible as Gordon Arnold having one........ imo.......as seen within the studies, what could be Arnold, a soldier holding a camera to his eye, filming from the top of the steps, in front of the fence........ ........but then again he cannot bee seen clearly either nor identified.....with any real clarity.....soooooooooo... B........

Bill: May I ask...Do you believe in any alterations.. Thanks.... B.....

Mike: Quote : ""The very first episode of that CBS report aired the day I was born."".......well you Spring chicken , you..... Whatever else Rowland had to say, was clipped by CBS.....and they went on to Carolyn Walther ( never called by the W/C...... who mentioned two men seen in the TSBD....she thought a window about even with the top of the tree... fourth or fifth...... She recalled what to her appeared to be a shorter than a rifle weapon.....They then clip.....to Amos Euins, and his recall of seeing what he had thought a pipe....sticking out about a foot, .....about on the sixth floor.... Then of course they went to Howard Brennan....who had become an embarassement to the W/C ...at first being hailed as their best eye witness....yada.....and then proven to be fos......... Why CBS used him, I have no idea, but then again, they used anyone and everything they could for that series to prove the W/C correct....note how they cut, the witnesses they did speak to......... Shame on Croncite......for putting his stamp of approval on all.....He was more intelligent than what he appeared to make himself out to be in that particular series.....imo...... Hey Peter: There were many open windows as seen in Moorman 3.....I believe it is......as well you are aware...but for posterities sake, let's have another gander, shall we..... As seen normal photo as well as inverted , as sometimes whatever shows up clearer...... Best fellas, your welcome..... B......

Including a page of a letter sent to Janet Reno, from former Senator Richard Schweiker......on what he thought of the W/C.... It would be assumed that you are aware that the "page of a letter" is in fact a page of a letter sent by myself, in which I quoted Senator Schweiker's comments regarding the WC. P.S. It is also a "roadmap" to understanding the manipulations of Specter & Company. Well, Tom you can assume all you care to, ........No I did not know it was"" in fact a page of a letter sent by ( you ) myself, in which I quoted Senator Schweiker's comments regarding the WC."" ....... But they are Senator Schweiker's comments....Many are greatly aware of the dishonest Specter's manipulations..... So a cheers for you, for sending such letter.......I hope you feel better now that is all straightened out..... Ta......B..... No I did not know it was"" in fact a page of a letter sent by ( you ) Well, hopefully, now you are aware of it. What you provided represents page#3 of one of the multitudes of correspondences to the attention of the Attorney General, Janet Reno, and was in response to a letter which I received from the Violent Crimes Section of the FBI who had been provided with various aspects of the information. Attached is Page#1 of this letter, and I will follow up with the other pages as well. As well as answer Ron's questions. Tom P.S. Having lived in St. Anne, Manitoba; Geraldton, Ontario, as well as Regina, Saskatchewan; to include two winters on the North Slope of Alaska, I alway take into consideration the "numbing" effect of the cold on one's thought process prior to passing judgement on simple human error. And, just as us "Southern Boys" are somewhat and sometimes afflicted with the "Dumb A**", caused by the heat and humidity, the "frozen brain" syndrone demonstrates little difference in affliction of the thought process. **************************************************************** Hey, Purv and Bean! Nice to see you discussing some documents, here. "P.S. Having lived in St. Anne, Manitoba; Geraldton, Ontario, as well as Regina, Saskatchewan; to include two winters on the North Slope of Alaska, I alway take into consideration the "numbing" effect of the cold on one's thought process prior to passing judgement on simple human error. And, just as us "Southern Boys" are somewhat and sometimes afflicted with the "Dumb A**", caused by the heat and humidity, the "frozen brain" syndrone demonstrates little difference in affliction of the thought process." And, speaking of climactic changes inherent to certain parallels located in the northern hemisphere, as well as, its effects on the body's central nervous system. I've come to know the frozen aspect, common to the northernmost territories as "numbing of the skull syndrome," [Man! That used to leave me with such a pain right between my eyes walking against the wind towards the Hudson River, in the dead of winter, when I lived back in NY]. Then, there's the condition afflicting the southernmost territories commonly referred to as "refried brains syndrome." [Which sometimes leaves me in a "Watt's Riots" mode when the heat gets too intense.] FWIW Love ya, Ter Well. Hi Ter: It could be someone does not know their Geography nor climates, as well as one thinks....and how anyone thinks the numbing effect may effect one when they cannot adventure out in the bitter ,well, some talk about nothings they know nothing about...... same old, but they must get that last word in... It has been Spring for some time, aw but that must be that "refried brains syndrome."you mention and that is a good one......isn't that the one that lingers...endlessly .? I thought this thread had taken a turn for the better and was referring to the W/C, and just might carry on with further info.....as it was Senator Schweiker's comments that were important........ ..but I guess not....some must toot...there is that darn AAM syndrome again.......it seems ....trying to endlessly end up on top.....shame that....and it will continue.....I have no doubt...... Good to see you posting... B....

Marilyn Sitzman in her own words..... On "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" series......re the Zapruder film .......Marilyn Sitzman states... Quote " He started filming about .....oh....just before they came around the corner......and then we heard what to me sounded like two firecrackers...it was starting to get a little confusing because you could see things happening in the car..." and on.....So she does in her own Quotable words, state that he did start to film the motorcade as they just started to turn the corner.... On the video "Image of an Assassination: Another Look at the Zapruder Film " Marilyn says. Quote... "when they started making their first turn, turning into the street, he said, o.k. here we go, or something to that effect ". ...so where is the rest of the film...?? B....

Including a page of a letter sent to Janet Reno, from former Senator Richard Schweiker......on what he thought of the W/C.... It would be assumed that you are aware that the "page of a letter" is in fact a page of a letter sent by myself, in which I quoted Senator Schweiker's comments regarding the WC. P.S. It is also a "roadmap" to understanding the manipulations of Specter & Company. Well, Tom you can assume all you care to, ........No I did not know it was"" in fact a page of a letter sent by ( you ) myself, in which I quoted Senator Schweiker's comments regarding the WC."" ....... But they are Senator Schweiker's comments....Many are greatly aware of the dishonest Specter's manipulations..... So a cheers for you, for sending such letter.......I hope you feel better now that is all straightened out..... Ta......B.....