Bernice Moore

For now just two more.. B...

Hi John: By all means, perhaps James will.......Too bad you are still having problems posting photos....? I am continually running out of upload space, but try to work around.. Below is Bob Jackson's, Prize winning photo..and a few others leading up to such though I know not who took them, perhaps you do..?? Thanks. B.....

Jack Beers photograph......B.....

They were Jack Beers, who worked for the Dallas Morning News who took 33 photos around and inside the TSBD ...including shots of the tramps.. William Allen the Dallas Times Herald took 73 snap shots of Dealey and of the inside of the TSBD, and three photos of the tramps.... & George Smith .Forth Worth Star Telegram... Below is another man that was arrested, or escorted for questioning, so far a "no namer" That is Asst D.A....William Alexander getting into a patrol car....also taken by Jack Beers.. which is attached.... Some may be interested in the artice below...... ""NUMBERs 32-35.* Policeman with "tramps." None of these pictures were seen by the Warren Commission. In the case of the "tramps," those three men who were rounded up on orders of Police Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer (the man in charge of security activity at Dealey Plaza), we find a sequence of astounding actions. A Sergeant D.V. Harkness was ordered to stop a freight train and remove the men. Harkness arrested the three men and turned them over to policemen Marvin Wise and Billy Bass, who marched them all the way from the west side of the Book building, around the north side of the Plaza, and into the vehicle entrance of the Sheriff's office. Few people realize this entire procedure took place almost on the steps of the Sheriff's office. While Wise and Bass were marching these men to the Sheriff's office, William Allen, George Smith, and Jack Beers of the Dallas Times Herald, the Fort Worth Star Telegram, and the Dallas Morning News, took several pictures of them. Their remarkable pictures show clearly that Wise and Bass took them to the Sheriff's office. Yet Harkness and Sheriff Harold Elkins couldn't remember that there were any other policemen with Harkness. This is utterly ridiculous in the face of so many clear pictures. Why was this done? And why weren't these amazing pictures shown to the Commission so that it could order the men before them. And worse still, there is absolutely no record anywhere that these men were booked that day. There are no "blotter" records at all. The men have simply vanished. I have been given a list of the names of these men. Also, the pictures show three policemen. Did the Sheriff, or someone in that office, spirit them away? And why did the Sheriff, who had all of these men in his custody, permit them to get away within minutes of the time that the President of the United States had been shot and killed on his doorstep? These are tough questions, but let's go a bit further. Why didn't the all-powerful Warren Commission -- which included the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the former Director of Central Intelligence, the man who is now our President, etc. -- why didn't they have an opportunity to see these pictures? The photos would have led them to ask these questions and then to demand answers. "" http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thegunsofdallas.htm B..

Hello Bernice, I personally have never been in any way a fan of Jim DeEugenio's journalism. I feel in no way A Kennedy Basher, but neither am I any more proud of some of his actions than am I of some of the actions of my own children. In order to respect or love a person, I don't feel that you need approve of, or think that every action that this person makes is wise. Truth is not slander. Observing and mentioning weaknesses and imperfections in any human being is something to which all human beings are subjected. Researching the horror of the Kennedy murders does not enlist one in the Kennedy FAMILY Fan Club. There are aspects of both this family and each of our own, that are not worthy of praise. Charlie Black ************* Hi Charlie: Whether or not you are a fan of Jim's work, is irrelevant I believe, it is the overall, and at times down through the years regular "Killing Kennedys" as they call it......some at seemingly every opportunity and being government connected, I shall say...writers. etc....have and do take the opportunity....I believe is what he is trying to point out, there are others who also have written such articles....It seems to come around and go around, at times, the trash articles and books, as I call them are prevailant, at others, they seem to receed for a time.. We, I think are all aware of all the flaws of JFK, and the Kennedys, why theirs ?? we have read them, and had them pushed in our faces for years...even if we were not interested....in many Enquirer trash type magazines, staring you in the face in the check out line, at the grocery stores...... All men are human therefore they all have their flaws......not all the sons of some who take all to whatever extremes turn out to be of the same character........each is after al an individual.. I have often thought that for instance, if JFK bedded as many women as some seem to imply, and so and so said, he never would have had the time to possibley have completed anything..... but he did.... The Presidency is a very expensive run, and if you do not have if, you do not run, no matter wherever the money comes from it has to be and is there.....Roosevelt, Rosevelt, had it, Nixon got it, LBJ had it and twisted arms for more..even Carter with the monetary support he had to have in order to obtain such, most if not all, Presidents in the past 100 years or so, came from well to do families, theirs perhaps have as many secrets and dirty linen as the Kennedys, but because he was whom he was..and his Presidency is held in such esteem by many when compared......his is prevailant....and he makes the others that have followed him, since appear to be what they have been, inept, in many ways....every President it is said has to have his war....JFK was different he tried to stop them. ..But Kennedy ..and his famiily, are a fair target and continually.....so whenever some see this type of thread going they also step up to the plate and give the other side of the coin..., that is what debate is all about....I do not know anyone who loves the Kennedys though I am sure there are some adoring fans....I am not. I have a great respect for what the man tried to do, and did accomplish, and a great interest in what was taken away, and the overthrow of the government the day they slaughtered him in Dealey, and the take over that has proceeded since... I am very aware of his said faults.... So in order to make him appear to not be the President he was, they have chosen the only roads they could, disinfo, misinfo, gossip,and trash...whatever it takes...to down him..they connect him to his fathers sins, and business practices and beliefs.. yet there were many differences between him and old Joe....did he set some good examples certainly not....did he set other more appropriate ones, yes..imo.. ...When I do read such remarks in books or articles, I have noticed as a rule there is no documentation, it is usually a she says he said..type of info, or an insider made the statement, heck we all can do that......that proves nothing.. .....so whether one chooses to believe or not, is entirely up to the individual... Whatever his sins and the sins of his family were, they were not and did not relate, imo to how he ran the Presidency, and the good he did accomplish, and also what he was not allowed to complete... No he was no saint, far from it, he could dally with the best of them, it seems there is some proof to that accusation..but many could and did, in the WH..and according to what I have read so far, in this past history of the Presidency there were only two who did not and they were Harry Truman and Jimmy Carter... I have no objections to whatever is discussed, makes for a good thread, but others also have the right to come forward with their opinions..apparently many look to his Presidency and what they lost, and do not dwell on his private life...which I agree may relate in some ways but definite proof is needed, for all that has been thrown about, before that can be looked at as reflecting on his Presidency in any way......there again imo. Thanks Charlie.....you got a feisty one going..... B

Here are a couple from Ft.Worth, in the one there is a little boy, appearing similar to Bill on the right, but....?? In the other just have a look at the two girls left and right, staring at their hands, and the looks on their faces...he must have shaken them in more ways than one..........That JFK charisma..... Wonder how long it was before they washed them...?... B..

Thank you Trygve for the links.... The article on Dave Powers, just about says it all, from what I have read...I have never seen him in a video, about the assassination, that he does become quite emotional...even after many years had passed... They were great friends..... Below, for you are two photos..One is the Altgens, which has been labeled, by Robin or R.J.S, not positive now..by someone......anyway, insert Bennett and you have them all named.. The other was taken on the Presidents last Birthday, May 29th 1963....at the WH...on the right you can see Dave Powers grinning...He was never far away.... B..

Here, here.....Don....... Thanks.... The links... The Posthumous Assassination of JFK Judith Exner, Mary Meyer, and Other Daggers By James DiEugenio # 1 http://www.ctka.net/pr997-jfk.html # 2 http://www.ctka.net/pr1197-jfk.html B......

It is Powers........if you also look at the top of his head, above the mirror, it appears to be bald.. From Powers' affidavit May 1964: "I was assigned to ride in the Secret Service automobile which proceeded immediately behind the President's car in the motorcade. That Secret Service follow-up automobile was an open car with two Special Agents in the front seat, two Special Agents in the rear seat and two Special agents on each of the two running boards. I sat in the jump seat on the right side of the car and Kenneth O'Donnell sat in the jump seat on the left side of the car." I believe somewhere I have his recall that he thought the first sound was a firecracker as many others did.....and also how well everything appeared to be going, in the motorcade, the welcoming crowds and all..all waving and friendly. Vincent Palamara " "Powers is the older, bald guy with glasses in the middle of Altgens' photo.".. SA Bennett is in the right back seat.... It is difficult at times not to mix them up...we all do I am sure... B.....

***************************** There was a study done on this subject in the past, and Dave Powers could not be found filming after Main St... in any film or photos..........I believe he said he ran out of film part way down Main...would have to check.. But please do your own study.. Below is the schematic of the Queen Mary, and the Motorcylists..with names shown of the passengers in the Willis photo....... Powers film......it does stop on Main St....... http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/powers.html B....

After all last evening, difiiculty in posting...I have found the link to the "ratmandu"......the ratman's..site..... Where he has Colonel Prouty's statement and the copy of Richard Sprague's article, with some photos, and frames of the Zapruder film....a study.....and in a much more concise form for all.......If interested.... http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.html What I posted was from my files, this is a much better rendition... The rest of the info, photo & sites etc..were on file..and added to the information... If interested grab the facts from the weapons list, as this type of information seems to be disappearing from the web, the site is no longer active...?? Well from what I see.. Thanks B....

Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty: ""It was in my own office, in a part of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, in the Pentagon in 1960 that I first saw an early version of the weapon fired. On July 29, 1960 I flew to Fort Detrick, Maryland by helicopter from the Pentagon to see developments of this and other new weapons at that top secret installation. I am able *from personal and official experience* to support the Sprague- Cutler thesis that an umbrella weapon was used as part of the JFK murder plot. The inventor of the flechette rocket was shown into my office by a fellow staff member, and I was told that he had something he wanted to demonstrate to the military to see if it could be developed into some useful tactical weapon system. In his hand he held several small plastic tubes which looked to me like soda straws, about "thick malt shake" size. Then he showed me a small plastic, nylon perhaps, rocket. It was a perfectly shaped, miniature rocket, complete with tail fins. Inside was a tiny charge of propellant. Then, without further introduction, the inventor touched a button, and two tiny flechettes zipped out of the "straws" and slammed into the thick soundproofing of the wall across the office. Only their tail fins stuck out from the wall, and the inventor said that it was a good thing he had only a partial charge in them, because they could easily have gone right through a normal wall panel and acoustic board. This early, unengineered weapon was shaped something like a pistol with a flashlight-size chamber above the grip. The inventor contemplated using about twenty-five or thirty "straws" mounted together and fired all at once or in clusters. This would give a buckshot impact and more effective target coverage. I was impressed. I called my boss' office and introduced the inventor. Again we went through the demonstration. It was not long before the weapon system was under top secret control and was being worked on by some of the military specialists at Fort Detrick. I heard about the development of the weapon many times later, but I did not see it again until it was exhibited at the Church Committee hearings. Shortly after that, when I saw Cutler's first "Umbrella Man" book (The Umbrella Man: Evidence of Conspiracy), published in October 1975 and describing an "air-rifle" type umbrella weapon, I wrote to him to explain that I thought it much more likely that The Umbrella Man had used the rocket flechette I had seen demonstrated. It remained for Senseney's Church Committee testimony to close the circle when he stated that he had developed just such an umbrella weapon at the same place I had gone with the earlier weapon---Fort Detrick. The rest of this remarkable story is developed by Sprague and Cutler. As you read this article, consider this: It is against Secret Service directives for anyone to be permitted along the route of the President carrying something as conspicuous a weapon concealer as an umbrella. Furthermore, it is abnormal for anyone standing close to the President to open an umbrella in sunlight, raise it, lower it, and maneuver it as this man did. Why was this permitted by the Secret Service? Who had the power to arrange that TUM not be apprehended with the umbrella weapon that day? Consider also that until the day of the JFK assassination in 1963, there was no place that anybody outside of the very small CIA and Special Forces group (perhaps as many as twenty people) could get access to that flechette-launching weapon system or anything like it. Someone had the power to ensure TUM's nonapprehension and access to the weapon. That person was the murderer. "" *************************** June 1978 : Gallery Magazine November 22, 1963, the day President Kennedy was slain, was bright and sunny in Dallas. Why, then, was there a young man with an open umbrella on Elm Street, less than 30 feet from the President's car as it slowly passed by? Presented below is an answer to this puzzle by a former consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. THE UMBRELLA SYSTEM: PRELUDE TO AN ASSASSINATION by Richard E. Sprague and Robert Cutler INTRODUCTION: To the skeptic who refuses to accept the idea that the Central Intelligence Agency was involved in the assassination of John Kennedy, nothing could be more convincing than to demonstrate how one of the CIA's secret poison and weapon systems was used in the assassination. Such a claim would have been scoffed at by everyone, but the weapons system itself was made public by Mr. William Colby, CIA director; Mr. Richard Helms, former CIA director; and Mr. Charles Senseney, a contract weapons designer for the CIA in testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee) in September 1975. The system is based on launching devices of various types, used to launch a self-propelled, rocket-like dart, or flechette. The flechette can carry either a paralyzing or fatal poison. The flechette itself is very simple. It is about the same size and looks like the tip of a large chicken feather. It is plastic and has tiny tail fins. Many varieties were developed for different uses. The great advantage of this weapon is that it is recoilless, almost silent, and the flechette travels at a high velocity which increases after launch. The flechettes can be fired singly or in high-impact clusters. It is propelled to its target by a solid-state fuel, ignited electronically at the launcher. It strikes its target, animal or human, dissolves completely in the body leaving no observable trace, and totally paralyzes its victim within two seconds. The launching devices developed by Mr. Charles Senseney at Fort Detrick, Maryland for the CIA included a cane, a fountain pen, soda straws, and an umbrella. The umbrella was used to shoot President Kennedy. The flechette struck JFK in the throat, causing a small entrance wound, but leaving no other trace. The missile was about 5 millimeters in diameter, and the wound was 4 millimeters. The size of the wound as compared to the size of the flechette is consistent with other findings of this nature. This particular wound, officially called an exit wound by the Warren Commission, puzzled medical examiners and critics of the Warren Commission alike. The critics charged that had the throat wound been an exit wound, it could not have been so small. JFK was paralyzed by poison contained in the flechette in less than two seconds--so paralyzed that the first rifle bullet that hit him did not knock him down, but left him in a nearly upright position. A second volley of shots fired at JFK a few seconds later struck a stationary, visible target. The paralyzing flechette shot was fired by a man holding the umbrella launcher. He was in close proximity to an accomplice. Using a radio transmitter, the accomplice signaled the riflemen through each of their respective radiomen in the Dal Tex building, the western end of the Texas School Book Depository building, and on the grassy knoll. An exquisitely timed intelligence murder was performed. The paralytic poison allowed two volleys of rifle shots to be fired into JFK. He had become a sitting duck. In what follows, the basic evidence for this sophisticated murder technique and weapon system will be presented. Much of the evidence, in the form of photographs, has been under the noses of assassination researchers for many years. The testimony given by Colby, Helms, and Senseney opened the minds of a small group of researchers, who looked at the photographic, medical, and ballistics evidence in a new way. The coauthors of this article and researcher Christopher Sharrett have now been able to clearly show that JFK's assassination had to have been a carefully planned, well-executed intelligence operation, using CIA weapons and techniques. ___________________________________________________________________ | | | Analysis of JFK's Motions and the Shots: | | | | Numbers beginning with "Z" are frames of the Zapruder film. | | | | | | Crucial to an understanding of the shots and JFK's | | reactions to them is an understanding of President | | Kennedy's hand, head, and upper torso movements at the | | time he was hit by shots, and the motions of Governor | | Connally. Contrary to what most media organizations and | | some researchers state, JFK's hands did not raise to grasp | | at his throat. The Zapruder film shows quite clearly that | | just the opposite occurred. Photos #1 through 6, are | | frames 189, 190, 204, 224, 225, and 227 from the Zapruder | | film. The President's right hand can be seen making what | | appears at first to be a slight forward jerk between | | frames 189 and 190 (1/18 second) and then snapping | | downward from his forehead to a position well below his | | throat by frames Z224 and Z225. It also clenches into a | | fist. His head, during this two-second timespan, snaps | | into a nearly straight-ahead position, and his left hand | | raises and clenches into a fist somewhat below his right | | hand level. His right fist can be seen to be still moving | | downward between frames Z224 and Z225. | | The discontinuity between Z189 and Z190 added to the | | continuous downward, fist-clenching motion of his right | | hand from Z190 to Z225 has been taken by many researchers | | as evidence of a shot striking JFK at frame Z189. The | | theory of discontinuous motion caused by a transfer of | | momentum from an externally applied force is evident here. | | Any discontinuity in JFK's motions occurring in the 1/18 | | second between frames can be taken as evidence of momentum | | transfer from a projectile, rather than being caused by | | any internal neurological phenomenon, voluntary or | | involuntary. What actually occurs between Z189 and Z190 | | is a backward and upward motion of JFK's head. His right | | hand remains in a fixed position with respect to the side | | of the limousine. This indicates a shot from the front. | | A second such discontinuity occurs between frames Z225 | | and Z227 (2/18 second), during which time JFK's head and | | upper torso are driven forward and down into his clenched | | fists. The fists remain in a fixed position with respect | | to the side of the limousine. JFK's elbows are flung | | upward and outward by the force of a rifle bullet striking | | him in the back. This is the shot that caused the back | | wound 5 3/4 inches down from the top of his shirt and | | created holes in his jacket, his shirt, and his back. It | | did not exit at his throat. | | A similar analysis of momentum transfer from the rear | | causing a discontinuity in motion can be made for Governor | | Connally between frames Z237 and Z238 (photos #7 and 8). | | Finally, JFK's head motions between frames Z312, Z313, | | Z314, and Z321 (shown in photos 9 through 12) demonstrate | | two transfers of momentum--one from the rear, between Z312 | | and Z313, and another from the right front, between Z313 | | and Z314 and up to Z321. The latter bullet drove JFK's | | head and upper torso back and to his left, where he | | bounced off the rear seat into his wife's arms. | |_________________________________________________________________| BASIC QUESTIONS: Throughout the last fourteen years, a number of questions arising from the evidence obtained at Dealey Plaza have puzzled serious researchers. While these questions seem to be unrelated, all of them are answered in a very logical way by this new interpretation of the evidence. The questions concern President Kennedy's throat wound, the motions of his hands and head before the fatal shot struck, the timing of the shots, the absence of bullets, the presence of a man carrying an open umbrella, and the trajectory of an early shot from in front of JFK. Here are the questions: The Throat Wound and Trajectory of the Throat Shot: Assuming the throat wound in JFK to be an entry wound, why was it so small (4mm)? How could a rifle bullet leave such a small wound (about the size of a soda straw)? If a bullet did enter JFK's throat, where did it go? Why was no trace of a bullet found? The entry wound apparently was not at a downward angle. If a bullet *was* fired from the grassy knoll, hitting JFK in the throat at Z189 (frame 189 of the film shot by Abraham Zapruder), where could it have come from to enter at a *nearly horizontal* trajectory, while missing everything in its path, including the Stemmons Freeway sign, Abraham Zapruder, a small tree, the side of the limousine, Secret Service agent Kellerman, Governor Connally, and the limousine windshield? Where did the throat shot come from (see photo #13 [CAPTION READS: "TUM at lower left of Stemmons sign, The Accomplice farther left. (For actual photograph, see Warren Commission Hearing and Exhibits, Vol. XXI, P. 770.]) Why is there a *forward* motion of JFK's right hand between Z189 and Z190, if a shot hit him from the front at that time? Why didn't that bullet drive JFK violently backward (see photos #l and 2)? The Motions of JFK's Hands: Why did the President's hands clench into fists and drop below his throat as the result of a bullet striking him in the throat? Why did his head snap around to the front? These motions, which can be observed in photos #1 to 6, Zapruder frames 189, 190, 204, 224, 225, and 227, appear to be more like a stiffening action, taking a little less than two seconds, rather than the grasping at his throat described by many casual observers. JFK did not grasp at his throat at all. Why didn't the bullet fired at frame Z225, striking JFK in the back, knock him down on the seat? Why are JFK's fists still in the same position after the bullet hits, Z225 to Z227 (see photo #6, 2/18 second after photo #5)? The motions make it appear that JFK's head, torso, and fists were frozen in position at Z225. The bullet forced his head and upper torso down and forward into his fists. It flung his elbows outward as though they were pivoting around his fists and shoulders. Why? Why didn't JFK duck or turn or shout after he was hit at Z189? His mouth opened, but there is obviously no lip or mouth motion between Z224 and the time of the fatal shots. When Governor John Connally was hit, he screamed "like a stuck pig," said Jackie Kennedy, and rolled to the floor of the car. One bullet went completely through Connally, and he is alive today. If JFK had been able to fall to the floor after the first, nonlethal bullet hit him in the back, he might have lived, too. But he could not, because the flechette's poison had paralyzed him. The people who thought they heard JFK scream were imagining it. The Timing of the Shots: Some witnesses said they heard two volleys of shots separated by a few seconds. The photographic evidence coupled with other evidence shows there actually *were* two volleys of shots: The first volley was timed between Z189, when the throat shot hit, and Z237, when a shot hit Connally.[1] The back shot hit JFK at Z225. The shots in this volley occurred over forty-eight frames, or about two and a half seconds. If the Z189 shot is taken out, the other two shots were separated by only twelve frames, or about a half- second. The earliest overseas press reports, such as NZPA-AAP (New Zealand Press Association) datelined Dallas, said, "Three bursts of gunfire, apparently from automatic weapons, were heard." These earliest reports had not been tampered with. The second volley occurred at frames Z312 and Z313, nearly simultaneously. The shot that missed could have also been fired at about this same time (see photos #9 and 10). The questions are: Were there two volleys of shots, and if so, why? How could shots fired from three or four widely separated positions be timed so accurately? Keep in mind that the earliest reports said "automatic weapons." On-the-spot witnesses heard shots so closely timed that they reported them to be from automatic weapons. This takes precision firing under control. [1] The authors disagree on the timing of the Connally shot. Cutler believes it was fired at Z223, Sprague at Z237, a difference of less than a second. In either case, it was part of the first volley and was a separate shot from the JFK back shot at Z225. The Umbrella and The Umbrella Man (TUM): Questions have always been raised about TUM (The Umbrella Man) ever since Josiah Thompson and Richard Sprague discovered the open umbrella in a series of photographs. Photo #13, a picture taken by Phil Willis at Zapruder frame 202, shows TUM with open umbrella. Photos #4, 5, and 6 (frames 224, 225, and 227 of Zapruder's film) show the umbrella protruding from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign. Photo #14 (by Richard Bothun) [CAPTION READS: TA and TUM seconds after shooting] shows TUM less than a minute after the shots, sitting on the edge of the grass near his original position, with another man seated next to him. The umbrella is lying on the sidewalk. Photos #15 and 16 (by Wilma Bond) [CAPTIONS READ: TA at left, casually walking down Elm Street. AND, TUM, folded umbrella in hand, to right of sign.] show TUM a minute later, standing near t he highway sign holding the umbrella. The temperature was a cool and breezy 68 degrees F. The sky was clear blue. No rain had fallen since early that morning. No natural reason seemed to exist for a fairly young man to be holding an open umbrella over his head while the President of the United States was passing by, ten to fifteen feet away (see diagram of relative positions of TUM and JFK). An examination of the thousands of photographs taken during the Presidential procession and in and around Dealey Plaza that day revealed not a single other open umbrella. Thompson and Sprague's speculations were that TUM was giving visual signals--first to go ahead (opening umbrella), then to fire a second round (raising umbrella). Afterward, the speculation went, he stayed around to see whether anyone had noticed anything about the actual shooters. A closer analysis of the Zapruder film shows that TUM actually raised and lowered the umbrella very rapidly--too rapidly to have been a good signal for riflemen as far away as the Dal Tex building and the grassy knoll (see photos #3, 4, 5, 6, 17 [CAPTION READS: TA's arm raised at right front of limousene (Z228)]). Why did he do this? Analysis also shows that TUM actually rotated the umbrella. This rotation appears in the original Zapruder film, including frames up to Z236 that show the umbrella in the space between the sprocket holes. Measurements of this rotation show that it tracks JFK's position during his travel down Elm Street at this time period. Why did TUM rotate the umbrella? If he were an observer, he would turn his head, not the umbrella. After the shooting, why did TUM sit down and then stand up, within a few feet of his position in front of the Stemmons Freeway sign, when everyone else in that vicinity ran or jumped away in the direction of the grassy knoll? Everyone, that is, except one man who sat down next to TUM. Who was he, and where was he when the shots were fired, and what was he doing with TUM? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | No natural reason seemed to exist for a fairly young | | man to be holding an open umbrella over his head | | while the President was passing by ten or fifteen | | feet away. | | | | Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty of the Defense Department | | witnessed a demonstration of the flechette-launching | | weapon system in his office in Washington, D.C. in 1960. | | Here is his description. | | | | | | It was in my own office, in a part of the Office of the | | Secretary of Defense, in the Pentagon in 1960 that I first | | saw an early version of the weapon fired. On July 29, | | 1960 I flew to Fort Detrick, Maryland by helicopter from | | the Pentagon to see developments of this and other new | | weapons at that top secret installation. I am able *from | | personal and official experience* to support the Sprague- | | Cutler thesis that an umbrella weapon was used as part of | | the JFK murder plot. | | The inventor of the flechette rocket was shown into my | | office by a fellow staff member, and I was told that he | | had something he wanted to demonstrate to the military to | | see if it could be developed into some useful tactical | | weapon system. In his hand he held several small plastic | | tubes which looked to me like soda straws, about "thick | | malt shake" size. Then he showed me a small plastic, | | nylon perhaps, rocket. It was a perfectly shaped, | | miniature rocket, complete with tail fins. Inside was a | | tiny charge of propellant. | | Then, without further introduction, the inventor | | touched a button, and two tiny flechettes zipped out of | | the "straws" and slammed into the thick soundproofing of | | the wall across the office. Only their tail fins stuck | | out from the wall, and the inventor said that it was a | | good thing he had only a partial charge in them, because | | they could easily have gone right through a normal wall | | panel and acoustic board. | | This early, unengineered weapon was shaped something | | like a pistol with a flashlight-size chamber above the | | grip. The inventor contemplated using about twenty-five | | or thirty "straws" mounted together and fired all at once | | or in clusters. This would give a buckshot impact and | | more effective target coverage. I was impressed. | | I called my boss' office and introduced the inventor. | | Again we went through the demonstration. It was not long | | before the weapon system was under top secret control and | | was being worked on by some of the military specialists at | | Fort Detrick. I heard about the development of the weapon | | many times later, but I did not see it again until it was | | exhibited at the Church Committee hearings. Shortly after | | that, when I saw Cutler's first "Umbrella Man" book ("The | | Umbrella Man: Evidence of Conspiracy"), published in | | October 1975 and describing an "air-rifle" type umbrella | | weapon, I wrote to him to explain that I thought it much | | more likely that The Umbrella Man had used the rocket | | flechette I had seen demonstrated. | | It remained for Senseney's Church Committee testimony | | to close the circle when he stated that he had developed | | just such an umbrella weapon at the same place I had gone | | with the earlier weapon---Fort Detrick. The rest of this | | remarkable story is developed by Sprague and Cutler. | | As you read this article, consider this: It is against | | Secret Service directives for anyone to be permitted along | | the route of the President carrying something as | | conspicuous a weapon concealer as an umbrella. | | Furthermore, it is abnormal for anyone standing close to | | the President to open an umbrella in sunlight, raise it, | | lower it, and maneuver it as this man did. Why was this | | permitted by the Secret Service? Who had the power to | | arrange that TUM not be apprehended with the umbrella | | weapon that day? | | Consider also that until the day of the JFK | | assassination in 1963, there was *no place* that *anybody* | | outside of the very small CIA and Special Forces group | | (perhaps as many as twenty people) could get access to | | that flechette-launching weapon system or anything like | | it. | | Someone had the power to ensure TUM's nonapprehension | | and access to the weapon. That Person was the murderer. | |__________________________________________________________________| THE WEAPON SYSTEM: The answers to all of these questions and the analysis of the evidence must begin historically with the development of the weapon system itself. There is no better way to describe it than to hear about it from ex-CIA directors William Colby and Richard Helms and weapon developer Charles Senseney. Here is their testimony before the Church Committee on September 16 to 18, 1975, as published in Volume One (1976) of that Committee's final report, under the title, "Unauthorized Storage of Toxic Agents." TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1975. Testimony of William E. Colby, director of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Committee met at 10 A.M. in the Russell Building. Present: Senators Church, Tower, Mondale, Huddleston, Morgan, Hart of Colorado Baker, Goldwater, Mathias, and Schweiker. Also present: William G. Miller, staff director, Frederick A. 0. Schwarz, chief counsel, Curtis Smothers and Paul Michel, Committee staff members. Chairman Church: The particular case under examination today involves the illegal possession of deadly biological poisons which were retained within the CIA for five years after their destruction was ordered by the President. . . . The main questions before the Committee are why the poisons were developed in such quantities in the first place: why the Presidential order was disobeyed; and why such a serious act of insubordination could remain undetected for so many years. William Colby: The specific subject today concerns the CIA's involvement in the development of bacteriological warfare materials with the Army's Biological Laboratory at Fort Detrick, CIA's retention of an amount of shellfish toxin, and CIA's use and investigation of various chemicals and drugs. . . . Information provided by him [a CIA officer not directly associated with the project] and by two other officers aware of the project indicated that the project at Fort Detrick involved the development of bacteriological warfare agents--some lethal--and *associated delivery systems suitable for clandestine use* [emphasis added]. The CIA relationship with the Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick was formally established in May 1952. The need for such capabilities was tied to earlier Office of Strategic Services World War II experience, which included the development of two different types of agent suicide pills to be used in the event of capture and a successful operation using biological warfare materials to incapacitate a Nazi leader temporarily. The primary Agency interest was in the development of dissemination devices to be used with standard chemicals off the shelf. Various dissemination devices such as a fountain pen dart launcher appeared to be peculiarly suited for clandestine use. . . . A large amount of Agency attention was given to the problem of incapacitating guard dogs. Though most of the dart launchers were developed for the Army, the Agency did request the development of a small, hand-held dart launcher for its peculiar needs for this purpose. Work was also done on temporary human incapacitation techniques. These related to a desire to incapacitate captives before they could render themselves incapable of talking, or terrorists before they could take retaliatory action. [Or to prevent guard dogs from barking.] One such operation involved the penetration of a facility abroad for intelligence collection. The compound was guarded by watchdogs which made entry difficult even when it was empty. Darts were delivered for the operation, but were not used. Church: Have you brought with you some of those devices which would have enabled the CIA to use this poison for killing people? Colby: We have indeed. Church: Does this pistol fire the dart? Colby: Yes it does, Mr. Chairman. The round thing at the top is obviously the sight; the rest of it is what is practically a normal .45, although it is a special. However, it works by electricity. There is a battery in the handle, and it fires a small dart. [self-propelled, like a rocket.] Church: So that when it fires, it fires silently? Colby: Almost silently; yes. Church: What range does it have? Colby: One hundred meters, I believe; about 100 yards, 100 meters. Church: About 100 meters range? Colby: Yes. Church: And the dart itself, when it strikes the target, does the target know that he has been hit and [is] about to die? Colby: That depends, Mr. Chairman, on the particular dart used. There are different kinds of these flechettes that were used in various weapons systems, and a special one was developed which potentially would be able to enter the target without perception. Church: Is it not true, too, that the effort not only involved designing a gun that could strike at a human target without knowledge of the person who had been struck, but also the toxin itself would not appear in the autopsy? Colby: Well there was an attempt-- Church: Or the dart? Colby: Yes; so there was no way of perceiving that the target was hit. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1975. Richard Helms' testimony: Huddleston: Mr. Helms, you said you were surprised, or that you had never seen the dart gun that was displayed here yesterday. Would you be surprised or shocked to learn that that gun, or one like it, had been used by agents against either watchdogs or human beings? Helms: I would be surprised if it had been used against human beings, but I'm not surprised it would have been used against watchdogs. I believe there were various experiments conducted in an effort to find out how one could either tranquilize or kill guard dogs in foreign countries. That does not surprise me at all. Huddleston: Do you know whether or not it was used, in fact, against watchdogs? Helms: I believe there were experiments conducted against dogs. Whether it was ever used in a live operational situation against dogs, I do not recall. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1975. Testimony of Charles A. Senseney: Senseney: I worked in the Biological Warfare Section of Fort Detrick from 1953. . . . I was the project engineer of the M-1 dart launcher and following on microorganism projectiles and so forth. Smothers: Is this a device that looks roughly like a .45 caliber pistol with a sight mount at the top? Senseney: This was a follow-on. It was to replace the M-1 projectile to go into the Army stockpile. It did look like a .45. Smothers: Did the CIA have, Mr. Senseney, the wherewithal to utilize this dart launcher against humans? Senseney: No, they asked for a modification to use against a dog. Now, these were actually given to them, and they were actually expended, because we got all of the hardware back. For a dog, the projectile had to be made many times bigger. It was almost the size of a .22 cartridge, but it carried a chemical compound known as 46-40. Smothers: And their interest was in dog incapacitation? Senseney: Right Baker: Your principle job with the DOD, I take it, was to develop new or exotic devices and weapons: is that correct? Senseney: I was a project engineer for the E-1, which was type classified and became the M-1. They were done for the Army. Baker: Did you have any other customers? Senseney: To my knowledge, our only customer was Special Forces and the CIA, I guess. Baker: Special Forces meaning Special Forces of the Army? Senseney: That is correct. Baker: And the FBI? Senseney: The FBI never used anything. Baker: Looking at your previous executive session testimony, apparently you developed for them a fountain pen. What did the fountain pen do? Senseney: The fountain pen was a variation of an M-1. An M-1 in itself was a system, and it could be fired *from anything* [emphasis added]. It could be put into-- Baker: Could it fire a dart or an aerosol or what? Senseney: It was a dart. Baker: It fired a dart . . . a starter, were you talking about a fluorescent light starter? Senseney: That is correct. Baker: What did it do? Senseney: It put out an aerosol in the room when you put the switch on. Baker: What about a cane, a walking cane? Senseney: Yes, an M-1 projectile could be fired from a cane; also an umbrella. Baker: Also an umbrella. What about a straight pin? Senseney: Straight pin? Baker: Yes, sir. Senseney: We made a straight pin, out at the Branch. I did not make it, but I know it was made, and it was used by one Mr. Powers on his U-2 mission. Huddleston: Were there frequent transfers of material between Dr. Gordon's [a researcher at Fort Detrick] office and your office, either the hardware or the toxin? Senseney: The only frequent thing that changed hands was the dog projectile and its loaders 46-40. This was done maybe five or six in one quantity. And maybe six weeks to six months later, they would bring those back and ask for five or six more. They would bring them back expended, that is, they bring all of the hardware except the projectile, okay? Huddleston: Indicating that they have been used? Senseney: Correct. Huddleston: But it could have been used on a human being? Senseney: There is no reason why it could not, I guess. Schweiker: Mr. Senseney, I would like to read into the record [from a CIA document] at this point a quote from paragraph nine [exhibit 6, document 67]: "When funds permit, adaptation and testing will be conducted of a new, highly effective disseminating system which has been demonstrated to be capable of introducing materials through light clothing, subcutaneously, intramuscularly, and silently, without pain." Now, I just have a little trouble, Mr. Senseney, reconciling your answers in conjunction with this project, when the CIA document makes clear that one of the very specific purposes of the funding and the operation was to find a weapon that could penetrate light clothing subcutaneously, which obviously means through the skin, and intramuscularly, which obviously means through the muscles of a person. And are you saying that you have absolutely no recollection at all that tests or programs were designed to use any of these devices to permeate clothing on people and not dogs? Senseney: We put them on mannequins. Schweiker: What's that? Senseney: We put clothing on mannequins to see whether we could penetrate it. These were the requirements. You almost read the exact requirements that the SDR quoted from the Special Forces there. Schweiker: I would not expect you to test them on live human beings. I would hope that you did use mannequins, Mr. Senseney. Wouldn't that be directed toward people-usage, though? That is the point we're trying to establish. Senseney: That is what the Special Forces direction was. You have to look at it this way. The Army program wanted this device. That is the only thing that was delivered to them. It was a spin-off, of course, from the M-1. The M- 1 was a lethal weapon, meant to kill a person, for the Army. It was to be used in Vietnam. It never got there, because we were not fast enough getting it into the logistics system. Schweiker: What was the most-utilized device of the ones with which you worked and supervised? Senseney: The only thing I know that was really used was the dog projectile. The other things were in the stockpiles. I don't think anyone ever requested them. Schweiker: How do you know for certain it was for dogs? Senseney: Well that is what they asked us to test them against. They wanted to see whether they could put a dog to sleep, and whether sometime later the dog would come back and be on its own and look normal. Schweiker: Of the devices that came through you, which of these were utilized in any capacity other than for testing? Senseney: That was the only one that I know of--the dog projectile. I call it a dog projectile. We were developing it because the scenario read that they wanted to be able to make entrance into an area which was patrolled by dogs, leave, the dog come back, and then no one would ever know they were in the area. So that was the reason for the dog projectile. Church: Thank you Senator Schweiker. I think it is clear that the CIA was interested in the development of a delivery system that could reach human beings, since not many dogs wear clothing. And you would agree with that, wouldn't you? Senseney: Yes. Church: Okay. Schwarz: Along the same line, I assume you must agree that spending money in order to make darts of such a character that they cannot be detected in an autopsy does not have much to do with dogs? Senseney: No, that would not have anything to do with dogs. SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY: In 1960, the CIA purchased from the Army at Fort Detrick, Maryland a poison-dart weapon system, consisting of small flechette-type projectiles, self-propelled by solid-state rocket fuel, and launched by a series of devices, including umbrellas. The flechettes were about 5mm in diameter and about an inch long. The poisons carried were of two types. One was a lethal poison, apparently used against enemies in Vietnam. The other was a quick-acting, paralyzing poison that took effect in less than two seconds and lasted for several hours. This was intended for use against dogs guarding a secured enemy area. It had to cause paralysis fast enough to prevent the dog from barking. The flechette completely dissolved in the body, leaving no trace, so that enemy agents would not be suspicious. The dogs recovered after several hours and behaved as though nothing had happened. The launching devices did not have to be very accurately aimed and fired, because the weapon was designed for close range. The flechette could hit any part of the body of a dog or human and still cause complete paralysis. The solid-state fuel was ignited by completing an electrical circuit. The umbrella used a battery-powered circuit. The battery and trigger button were located in the handle of the umbrella. Wires running up the shaft connected the button and battery to the igniter, which was mounted on the shaft. The trigger button activated the igniter, firing the solid propellant, which sent the flechette through the rocket launcher--a straw-sized metal tube--to its target. WHAT HAPPENED IN DEALEY PLAZA? Here is the way the assassination team used the weapon system to kill JFK. The Umbrella: TUM took aim by sighting along the launcher and tracking JFK as he moved down Elm Street. He continued to track JFK after firing the flechette at Z189. He quickly raised and lowered the umbrella after firing. This motion may have been caused by operating a reloading mechanism in the umbrella to put a second flechette into the firing position. It could also have been a signal to a radioman accomplice to transmit a beep, calling for a second volley of shots (see next section). The flechette struck JFK in the throat at Z189, entering above his collar, creating a 4mm entry wound and causing immediate paralysis. The trajectory can be seen from photo #13 to have cleared the edge of the limousine. The flechette was traveling at an angle from the right front of the limousine, and it missed the other occupants of the car. The paralysis took place in about one and a half seconds, from Z189 to Z216. By Z224 (see photo #4), JFK's arms, fists, head, and shoulders had been in a paralyzed state for a half-second. The flechette made no noise when launched, so that no one heard a shot at the time of Z189. The flechette's momentum was small because it was extremely lightweight. As a result, only a small transfer of momentum occurred, driving JFK's head only slightly upward and backward. This can be detected by a careful comparison of photos #1 and 2, Z189 and Z190. JFK's right hand can be seen to remain in a fixed position between these two frames (1/18 second) with respect to the side of the car. His head moves up and back in comparison to his hand or the car. The Rifle Shots: The first rifle shot was fired from the second floor of the Dal Tex building. It struck JFK in the back, five and three-quarters inches below his shirt-collar line, at frame Z225. Since JFK's muscles were paralyzed, he was like a rigid, sitting duck target. His head and upper torso were driven down and forward, and his elbows were flung upward and outward, because no muscles would stop a rotating elbow and arm motion pivoting around two frozen points- -his fists and his shoulders. (Observe all of these points between photos #5 and 6, Z225 and Z227--2/18 seconds apart.) If JFK had been in a nonparalyzed state, the back shot would have knocked him much farther forward and down. The flechette dissolved in JFK's body, leaving no trace, except for the small entrance wound in his neck. The poison would not have shown up in the autopsy, even if tests for it had been made. However, because there was no apparent reason to suspect poison, no tests for it were made. The Timing of the Shots and The Accomplice: After Jim Hicks made his statement to Jim Garrison's investigators in 1968 about being a radio coordinator for the firing team, researchers were convinced that radio communications were used between radiomen located near each of the riflemen and some central coordinating transmitter. Hicks appears at the center of the plaza on the south side of Elm Street, near Houston Street. In the Zapruder film, he is seen during the shooting with both hands showing, no radio transmitter visible, and no other indication that he is doing anything but observing at the time of the shots (photos #1, 2, and 3). Hicks' real role was as the radio system supplier and tester. Later Hicks shows up with the radio in his back pocket, walking down Elm Street (see photo #18, taken by Willis [CAPTION READS: Hicks in light jacket with radio in back pocket (Same as #13 above)]). In 1977, Cutler, Sprague, and Sharrett discovered the real radio coordinator in a series of photos. In photo #13 he appears with raised hand, standing to the left of the Stemmons Freeway sign, on the north curb of Elm Street. He is about twenty feet away from TUM. Because his identity is unknown, he will be called TA (The Accomplice) in this article. His raised hand appears in photos #4, 5, and 6. Early observations of his hand concluded he was waving at the President. Closer analysis shows he was not waving. His hand remains raised and motionless, except for a slight clenching. TA can be seen sitting next to TUM in photo #14 and walking away down Elm Street in photos #15 and 16. The radio can be seen in photo #19, taken by Jim Towner [CAPTION READS: TA, radio in back pocket, heading down Elm Street.], in TA's belt at the back, and also in photos #14 and 15. TA undoubtedly was using a button-type beeper transmission technique for signaling all radiomen to have the riflemen shoot in volleys. The button was in his raised hand. A wire connection to the battery-powered transmitter was mounted on his belt at the back. The first beep was transmitted as soon as TUM launched the flechette. The second beep was transmitted a second or two ahead of Z312. The first signal triggered rifle shots from the shooter in the Dal Tex building and the shooter on the west end of the sixth floor of the TSBD (Texas School Book Depository). The man on the knoll did not have a clear shot at that time and did not fire. The Dal Tex shot hit JFK in the back at Z225, and the TSBD shot hit Connally at Z237. Three shots were fired in the second volley--by the Dal Tex rifleman, whose bullet narrowly missed JFK and hit the south curb of Main Street; by the TSBD rifleman, whose shot struck JFK in the head at Z312; and the man behind the fence on the grassy knoll, who now had a clear path and fired the fatal shot. His bullet struck JFK in the right temple and exploded at Z313. The fourth rifleman was positioned right by the octagonal structure at the west end of the semi-circular wall on the grassy knoll north. He did not shoot, because the Stemmons Freeway sign and a tree were in his way. He had a clear shot after the limousine had passed the sign, but by then JFK was dead. He would have fired had the others missed their target. TA and TUM got together, for about two minutes, immediately after the shots, probably to discuss the results and to observe any police or Secret Service activity in the area (see photo #14). Then they went in separate directions, up and down Elm Street (see photos #15 and 16). ___________________________________________________________________ | | | ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS: | | The questions plaguing researchers can now be answered. | | | | | | * The President's small throat wound was caused by a | | small flechette. | | | | * The flechette dissolved, leaving no trace, | | explaining why no bullet was found. | | | | * No bullet was fired from the grassy knoll at the | | time of the first hit. TUM had a clear shot at Z189. | | | | * TUM's flechette was actually moving in a slightly | | upward trajectory, explaining the backward and upward | | motion of JFK's head between Z189 and Z190. | | | | * The flechette's small momentum explains why there | | was no violent backward motion. | | | | * JFK's fists clenched and his head snapped to face | | forward while his right hand snapped downward because | | his muscles were paralyzed quickly by the poison. | | | | * The bullet at Z225 didn't knock JFK down, because | | he was paralyzed. | | | | * The paralysis affected the muscles, fixing them in | | position and preventing those portions of JFK's upper | | body from moving when he was hit in the back. His | | elbows were not fixed and were flung outward. | | | | * JFK did not make a sound, because his vocal cords | | were paralyzed (see testimony). | | | | * There were definitely two separate volleys of | | shots. Each of the four gunmen were prepared to | | shoot twice upon radio coordinating commands. One | | knoll gunman could not fire the first volley, because | | of obstructions. The other did not fire at all. | | | | * All the questions about TUM and the umbrella are | | answered by knowing he was using an intelligence | | weapon system with umbrella launcher and flechette | | dart. | | | | * Raising and lowering the umbrella was a signal to | | TA for a radio beep to order a second volley. | | | | * The umbrella rotated because TUM was tracking JFK. | | | | * TUM and TA sat down together to assess what | | happened. | | | | * TA was the radio coordinator and was standing | | behind TUM, where he could see TUM's signal and | | transmit a beep to the radiomen, ordering the first | | volley. | |_________________________________________________________________| CONCLUSIONS: What conclusions can be drawn from this analysis? FIRST: Some higher-level individuals within the CIA furnished one of their secret weapons systems to be used in the assassination. It is doubtful that more than a very few umbrella launchers were made for the CIA at Fort Detrick. This may have been the principal reason for the CIA cover-up that began on November 22, 1963. SECOND: The degree of sophistication in such a complex intelligence murder--including the planning for the paralysis, the radio coordination, the firing positions creating a cross fire in two volleys, gaining access to the buildings, setting up a patsy (Oswald), and all of the other techniques used-- indicate that lower-level anti-Castro Cubans, or even Mafia members, could not have pulled it off without CIA guidance and supervision. Skill and intelligence training, plus detailed management, were required from the only organization capable of running such an operation. THIRD: The Select Committee on Assassinations and the Senate Intelligence Committee have a lot more interrogating to do. They must question the people who designed the weapon system and those who made it available to the assassination team. Richard E. Sprague is currently a consultant to the Battelle Institute, a think tank in Columbus, Ohio, and was formerly a consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He has written numerous books and articles, including the self-published "The Taking of America 1-2-3." Robert Cutler is an architect and a assassination researcher. He has self-published five books on the Kennedy assassination, the latest of which is "Seventy-six Seconds in Dealey Plaza." **************************** Below Senator Church and Senator Towner..... with a flechette firing weapon.. The Church Committee ""referrs to the United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, a U.S. Senate committee chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-ID) in 1975."" Bill Number: SB 578 http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/...9_enrolled.html CABO Weapons List http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:zZ00Gw...ct=clnk&cd= B...

Just a thought....Jim.... Jim Garrison's Playboy Interview 1967... ""PLAYBOY: You've claimed that many of the people involved in the conspiracy were "neo-Nazi" in their political orientation. What would motivate Ruby, a Jew, to work with such people? GARRISON: Money. As far as my office has been able to determine, Jack Ruby had no strong political views of his own. Historically, of course, there have been a number of self-hating Jews who abetted their own tormentors: Adolf Hitler's mentor in Vienna, Karl Lueger, was born a Jew, and I understand that one of the leading pro-Nazis in New York City, a retired millionaire who finances anti-Jewish activity across the country, is the son of a rabbi. But I don't believe Jack Ruby falls into this category; he was just a hoodlum out for a buck. I will say --- with the understanding that it's pure speculation --- it's not impossible that Jack Ruby developed certain guilt feelings in prison over his role in the plot. Remember his repeated lament, "Now there will be pogroms. They will kill all the Jews."? Most people assumed this was just the fantasy of a crumbling mind. But maybe Jack Ruby knew better than the rest of us what the master-racist authors of the assassination had in mind for the country."" http://www.jfklancer.com/Garrison4.html B......

TIMED SIGHTINGS OF JACK RUBY BASED ON TESTIMONY by M.A Moyer & Betty Windsor (If a time was not given—it is not listed here. ALL sightings are presented on attached annotated Timeline) See link...... As this will not print out as shown on site..... http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/issues_and_ev...ne_of_Ruby.html B..........

Here is the print out . As you can see there is a signifigant drop.....upon mention of the name Rutledge ...as you state... ""One of the first prosecution witnesses, Police Reporter John Rutledge of the Dallas Morning News, testified that Ruby was "a loudmouthed extravert" who loved to strut wherever there was big action. Rutledge said that he saw Ruby at police headquarters at least three times on the night of Nov. 22, after Oswald had been arrested. Ruby was familiar with the place; he always liked to hang around with cops. Wielding pad and pencil, he had slipped past a police guard among surging newsmen. "He was explaining to members of the press from out of state who everybody was," said Rutledge. "Somebody would come out and say something to the press and a newsman would say, 'Who's that? Sheriff Decker?' and Ruby would say, 'No, that's Captain Will Fritz.' He'd spell out the names. He was making all the identifications, shouting them out." Once, testified Rutledge, an officer spotted Ruby in the crowd at headquarters and said, "Hey, Jack, what are you doing here?" Ruby had replied: "I'm helping out these reporters here."" http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...,828230,00.html B......

******************** Now there's a name, "Cam Koo" I still miss him...... B......

Jim: Here are a couple of photos of Ruby in the hall at the PDP, on the friday..with reporters, or so I have been led to believe.. .......as well as at the press conference. For interest.... B....

Quote : "" This incident is prime evidence that Oswald was known to Walker and his buddies before 12/3 when Marina decided to come clean to her interogators."" And to J.Edgar Hoover... Ruth Paine provided two books to the Irving Police to pass them onto the Secret Service to give to Marina, on or possibly before Dec. 3/63.....The note found inside was translated by one SA Gopadze. On Dec.3rd/63 Inspector Thomas Kelley then called Gordon Shanklin about the note, who then sent a memo to J.Edgar Hoover. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=21 January 17/64 : Hoover then wrote a letter to Lee Rankin, stating that prior to Marina's interview on December 3/64, where she had related said information that LHO had shot Wallker............. He mentions that previously ......"the possibility that Oswald may have fired at Walker was considered." http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=3 B

Not to get involved in this ongoing adventure.... But I do have a few mentions re the subject of the shooting at General Walker and LHO being involved... As the only implications to him being there came from Marina.. But it seems re the information that this perhaps all began a few days before the actual event....That the bullet found ,was attributed at the time to a 30.06 rifle.. and that it was only after the assassination of JFK that LHO was mentioned as being guilty, and that Marina related her story.. while in custody.. I have no idea now where I collected this from now, it was buried in an old folder....but relates to the Walker incident.. ""On the night of April 8, Walker's aide Robert Surrey observed two men suspiciously lurking about the house of General Walker, "peeking in windows," and when called out by a neighbor, the men jumped into a car with no license plate and fled. This was reported to the police almost immediately. Walker had just returned from his coast-to-coast speaking engagement .... WC 5 H 448. On Tuesday, April 9, Walker aide Max Claunch observed a suspicious-looking "Cuban or dark-complected man in a 1957 Chevy" drive slowly around Walker's house several times. Anthony Summers, "Conspiracy" page 214. On the night of Wednesday, April 10, 15-year-old Scott Hansen was attending a Scout meeting at a church near the Walker house. He observed a 1958 black-over-white Chevrolet parked along the fence next to Walker's property. He had seen this car parked in the same place on a previous Wednesday, and never saw it after April 10th.... FBI Report of June 4, 1964, FBI #100-10461. At about 9 pm on April 10th, General Edwin A. Walker was sitting in his study when someone fired a bullet through his window. The bullet glanced off the wooden window frame and embedded itself in the wall above General Walker's head. A 14-year-old neighbor, Kirk Coleman, saw two men flee in separate cars from a church parking lot adjacent to Walker's house; one man -- of medium build with long black hair -- he got a quick look at, while the other was hidden from his view by a fence... DPD Supplementary Offense Report, April 11, 1963, OfficerW. E. Chambers. "The Dallas *Morning News* of April 11, 1963, carried a page-one story by Eddie Hughes stating that the bullet that crashed through the rear window and into the wall of the Walker house was 'identified as a 30.06,' and citing other police findings on the authority of Detective Ira Van Cleave" .... Sylvia Meagher, "Accessories after the Fact " page 288. An Associated Press story on the shooting was reported in the *New York Times* of April 12, 1963, page 12; the police had no suspects in custody; the bullet was identified as a steel jacketed 30.06.. The following day, "Toby," a dog belonging to a neighbor of Walker's, Mrs. Ross Bouve, became terribly sick. Mrs. Bouve told the FBI later that "she was of the opinion someone had given him something to quiet him or drug him or poison him, because he did become sick and vomited extensively on April 11 and 12, 1963. . . . She based her belief that the dog had been given something because of the shooting incident and the dog's habit of barking at anyone or anything in the alley area behind Walker's house" .... CE 1953.22--- also Sylvia Meagher page 290. In a scintillating bit of discourse, Gen. Walker's aide Robert Surrey was questioned about "Toby" by the Warren Commission. Mr. JENNER. Does she have a dog that is sometimes obstreperous, does a lot of barking? Mr. SURREY. Yes; she does. . . . Anyone approaching the house, generally her house or General Walker's house, would be barked at . . . in the middle of the night . . . Mr. JENNER. And you have approached General Walker's house, I assume, at night, have you? Mr. SURREY. Yes. Mr. JENNER. If the dog is out . . . the dog is alerted and barks? Mr. SURREY. Not so much anymore. Evidently he knows who I am now. Mr. JENNER. I see. But before the dog became familiar with you, he did bark? Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. . . . WC5 H 433--also Sylvia Meagher page 290. Walker hired a private investigator to look into the assassination attempt when he grew frustrated with the efforts of the Dallas Police force; he also had a suspicion that a former employee might have been involved. The crime was still listed as unsolved on November 22, 1963. It has also been attributed to General Walker that he did not believe that LHO was involved in the shooting..in a video.......right now I have no idea which..though.. B

Hi Bill: My,My how the story has already grown..... NOTE: ""The report, titled simply Robert F Kennedy, is not sourced or authenticated but it was circulated to the FBI's five most senior officers, Mora said."" That means it could be another phony.....they have arisen in the past.... Killing Kennedys Again Time.?? Repeatedly moreso it seems in the past few years. This was the earlier report, how some seem to have jumped on the bandwagon...as always. And as usual break their necks to report such without checking and or having any verification...aw well, the way it has gone on for years... Kennedy link to Monroe death March 17, 2007 12:00 Article from: AAP Font size: + - Send this article: Print Email AN Australian director has uncovered a document that suggests Robert Kennedy was aware of a plot to "induce" the suicide of Marilyn Monroe. Bobby Kennedy was the brother of murdered US president John F Kennedy and served as US Attorney-General from 1961 to 1964 before he was assassinated in 1968. Philippe Mora, writing for Fairfax newspapers, said Monroe was well known for staging suicide attempts as a form of attention seeking. But he said he has uncovered a three-page document that revealed on August 4, 1962, she was left to die while attempting another attention seeking moment. The report, handed to the FBI on October 19, 1964, implicated the actor Peter Lawford, Monroe's psychiatrist, her housekeeper and personal secretary in the 36-year-old actresses death. It stated Lawford made “special arrangements” with the psychiatrist that saw Monroe given a high quantity of her prescription medication. “Marilyn expected to have her stomach pumped out and get sympathy for her suicide attempt,” the report said. It said on the same day, Kennedy made a phone call from St Charles Hotel, San Francisco to Lawford “to find out if Marilyn was dead yet”. Mora, who is based in Los Angeles, has found the document, compiled by an unnamed former special agent, among thousands of pages released under Freedom of Information laws in October. The report, titled simply Robert F Kennedy, is not sourced or authenticated but it was circulated to the FBI's five most senior officers, Mora said. http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...from=public_rss

This is all I have Chris, re the timing......of the David Wiegman film.... the wee bit on the Sprague-Mack study, included, was found on the web....and the article is not available. Though if anyone does have this copy of "Coverups" 9/82.. the information would be appreciated, when I contacted Gary a few years ago he had them packed away and they were not accessible. David Wiegman: "We were in that straight-a-way heading down to what I now know as the Book Depository, and I heard the first report and I thought like every body that it was a good size firecracker---a cherry bomb .Then when I heard the second one, the adrenaline really started pumping because there was a reaction in the motorcade, I was sitting on the edge of the (car door) frame,which I sometimes did. I keenly remember right after the incident that my feet were on the ground during one of the reports. I don't think I was fast enough to react to the second, but I think on the third one I was running. The car had slowed down enough for me to jump out. I swung my leg over and jumped while the car was still moving, but it was very slow. I jumped and I remember running and I remember the third shot. When I got out I knew I better get around the corner. The car was stopping. I'd better run around there and see what was happening. I knew the reaction was to run forward. I'd done this before in other motorcades because a lot of times the President will stop and do something. He might just shake a hand. He might look at a sign. So your doing no good sitting in your car, and you can always retrieve your car as it goes by....It was a technique I've used and I've gotten some good pictures that way. That may have been built in to get out and run and get up there and see what the heck's happening . The motorcade has stopped, plus you heard a report I don't think I thought on the first or second ( shot ), but when the third one went off, I really thought I felt the compression on my face. ----I really thought I felt it. The I thought "Somebody is shooting". The idea of turning on the camera, I don't know where that came from. I’ve turned in some real sloppy work over the years that went into editing because I believed that sometimes your not photographing what's happening as much as the moment. It's a slice of time. And something told me, "hey look, what have I got to lose. I've got a full spring and just turn it on." I can't stop and plant my feet, so I put it against my chest because you can't run with a Filmo up to your eyes. So I just slid it down under my chin and looked forward and ran as fast as I could and took in everything I could." Telephone interview Wiegman, 3/11/89..P.O.T.P...Trask.. pages 371-372. .......................... He was in the Press car 1."the reel car" the first with photographers aboard..A yellow 1964 Chev.Impala convertible. The President's Lincoln..The Queen Mary.SS...L.B.Js ... SS..The Bell Telephone press pool car ..then the Press #1 Car.. (Wiegman's). Along with Atkins,Craven,John Hoefen,( Wiegman's sound man..Front seat driving a Texas Ranger..then Cleve Ryan then Wiegman on the passenger seat in the sixth car behind the President.. He was carrying a Filmo movie camera,used no handle, shot with left eye finders on left side of camera.Wide angle lens, He thought he used a 10mm.that day.. Worked for NBC..TV cameraman..White House attachment every day for 8 years..37 years old.. ......................... "It would appear through careful analysis of this film, and aided in research done by Richard Sprague and Gary Mack ,on the timing of the sequence, that Wiegman began filming A LITTLE OVER THREE SECONDS:.... prior to the President BEING HIT IN THE HEAD". Gary Mack 's,"Coverups!"..9/1982..p.2-5...9/1985, p.1-2.. Letter Richard Sprague to Robert Cuttler, 10/31/1982. .......................... "Wiegman probably first pressed his camera trigger just after the second shot."..clip.."begins as Wiegman's car is approaching the TSDB, while the telephone car infront begins making the left hand turn.".." shows various spectators on the steps of the Book Depository as well as others on the sidewalk..Many are looking forwards towards the presidential vehicle while some are gazing back at the vehincles coming in their direction." .Trask..p373 ....... In the film we see, the film begins with a panning of the front entrance of the TSBD,swings to the left, then back to the right, he then was on his way to the knoll,and behind the fence...see. the film at below...click, Wiegman, then when page loads, click top right hand corner button....ta da.. http://www.jfk-online.com/films.html ................................. We have Wiegman capturing the TSBD entrance approximately "A little over three seconds" prior to the President being hit in head."..see above..Sprague..Mack.. ...................... He continued filming as he ran his film shakes and jumps as he spans the grassy knoll area, the Limo travelling to the underpass, and what appears to be smoke coming from under the trees in the area of the fence ,then the pergola area again, and some of the witnesses laying on the ground,finally he proceeded to the parking lot behind the fence area.. Wiegman ********************************* Altgens From what I have been able to find out, the Altgens 1st..then..approximately in the area of 30 to 45 seconds later the Wiegman was taken.. The Altgens as the first shot rang out, the Wiegman as he heard the final two shots as he was jumping from the press car running and filming . B......

Rick Needham's Nix Gif.....working, I do hope.Hope this helps. http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s143/Be...moore_nix_r.gif The follow two research photos are also I believe Rick Needhams......is not please let me know.. BTW: Charlie, for what it's worth..I very, very rarely consult the Zapruder film. B...

************** Yes: And so much more...documents, statements within the WC, and on...... Results, being to keep the researchers from their further and perhaps new investigative studies.. B

Hi Duncan: A few thoughts, nothing in stone, as usual. You mention that Don stated this shooter was close to the Files spot..words to that effect... Files states that he was only 8 to 10 feet from the corner of the fence, seen closest to the steps.. Sam Holland in the Mark Lane clip.....and some of the men with him on the overpass mention the area was 20 to 30 feet towards them on the overpass. Not towards the corner and steps closer to the Zapruder pedestal... The many footprints found in the mud, behind the fence and the mud seen scraped off the bumpers of the cars. As seen below, were a distance up towards the overpass ,from the closest corner to Zapruder.. Each car is approximately 5 feet wide, each car parked, has a two feet approx distance on each side, to enable the driver and passenger to get out of said car..... As is seen on Sam Hollands map......approximately a 2 feet distance between the corner fence and the first car, then the 2 feet opening on the far side to be able for the passenger to get out....etc. Now the map shows 4 cars......The muddy footprints, he has drawn between the 2nd and 3rd car....or someone has...therefore the mathematics would be........ 2 feet from fence....5 foot wide car...2 feet on the other side also... Times 3 equals approximately 16 feet........Now Sam does say in his film with Mark Lane the footprints were in front of the 3rd car but on the map they are seen drawn mainy in front of the 2nd and 3nd car......who knows where he stood after walking back and forth so many times, to finally take a shot, it's hard to decide with a positive....given several feet between each way.. The Nix below which is a more direct view shows the tree and the hatman....is this the same man that you are viewing, or is this a different shooter, spotter whatever..... Another from Skaggs show a more front view, seen after..... Now note, the sign and the light pole.......As seen in the Lane video, when they walk around the fence to the spot.... Where they saw the smoke drift out from under the trees, the sign is closer on their right, and he states JFK was hit just as the limo got to this side, the left of the lamp post.......see photo also..... You have the ability to catch a frame from films, as you have so kindly done in the past..... When you find the time, or anyone who is able to...perhaps if you catch the frame from where Sam and Mark Lane are standing behind the fence, you will be able to catch the spot in front of the sign, and the lamp post as shown.. I am thinking the distance where the shot took place from, was much closer to the overpass as the R.R men stated.. The Allen photo taken after,shows more of a perspective re the distance from the step fence corner, to the lamp post,and appears more than 8 to 10 feet...imo.. As I said just some thoughts... Confusion reigns... B..

Hi Bernice Thanks for that link. It had been a while since I last saw it. I've always been interested in Wilson's work. What is curious about the video is the wound shown in Moorman does not appear similar to what is allegedly obscured in the autopsy photo. Any thoughts on that? Anyone else also notice that? Nick *************** Hi Nick: There are many threads on the forum, discussing the differences in what is seen between the film and photos compared to the medical studies and autopsy photos. In the Moorman we are also looking at JFK from the south side of Elm, the Zapruder from the North .....and neither agree with the autopsy photos..imo.. Within Dr.David Mantik's and Dr.Cyril Wecht's studies....Dr.Mantik has had access to the autopys photos 9 times at the archives. BTW. They are the most foremost medical minds....in our corner, and discuss at great length those differences and their findings... Found in Dr.Wecht's latest book,and Dr.Manitik's studies which are in Dr.Fetzer's series of books. Tom Wilson was a V.P of the company and an Engineer, he developed a computer program that peered within steel for flaws, which over the years, must have saved the steel companies zillions? Not to mention the safety features of such a discovery..... He spent ten years at least, I believe on his assassination studies. Men of such stature, do not invent findings...His work and studies if obtainable would put to rest many other claims made by others. Therefore his work would be extremely damaging. Nothing seems to comply, they did a mighty fine job..and as we see the daily continual attempts at confusion still proceed.. Thanks...take care.. B.