Bernice Moore

I appreciate, anyone's efforts, that do operate a forum, it is time consuming and at times very frustrating ..it takes a great effort....and at most times taken for granted.....and it is a job.....but ... Are these all User Errors..?...and I am getting the impression that it seems to be appearing to be minimized...as such..? Then the next question is, who, and why ?? I would think.. Maybe some did perhaps have a glitch in posting...it happens, you wait a few minutes and try again......as a rule, it clears up.......and the next time you try....it works well.... But it seems to appear the list of names is growing, and by experienced posters, not newbies....and it appears at times for hours on end,....?? As well that does not explain, posts nor threads disappearing ? Is someone playing games ?, has the F been infested ?... I do not know who or why, but it appears that perhaps someone could be......imo.. B

Ruby's clothes......B

John: Here is the Dallas Morning News photo that was taken and printed in their Newspaper..I believe..lightened, for you.. I do not see the marks or scratches on the curb.....were these scratches seen, made when the cutting out was done.I am thinking.....????? B..

1. The first shot to the head of JFK was at Z313. (Second shot fired) Stationing 4+65. 2. The second shot to the head of JFK was some 30+feet farther down Elm St. in front of Mr. Altgens. (Last/third shot fired) Stationing 4+96. 3. The Z313 shot is the one that fragmented the bullet. Bernice, thank you for your comments. What I'm trying to do is to show what would happen to a fragment assuming it's from z313 wihout favouring the outcome. I think it shows that a fragment from z313 is unlikely if not impossible to strike the curb and if it did, is unlikely to cause the surface of the curb to break and send fragments to Tagues cheek. I don't agree with Toms conclusions about the last shot, AND I don't disagree with them either, I'm following his explanations to the best of my ability. Whatever, the method is really the important thing, and can be applied to any situation. Also I haven't had (I hope someone will) any confirmation (or denial) of the methodology. I already found one mistake (however that mistake when corrected made the curb strike even more unlikely). I have very little doubt that the mark on the curb is a curtate cycloid* wheel weight balance strike and it looks like the "blond Agent'# palmed a wheel weight and not a bullet. I know that wasn't in the same place, but the likelyhood, given the trochoids* on the small section of curb cut out and Tom's accounts from his youth et.c. makes no lead pieces collected and identified as wheel weights unlikely ie. >>>they were found, and for some reason not logged as what they were. I theorise that this is to confuse things and make the Tague strike credible because if it didn't strike the curb bur rather took the more credible downward trajectory to him, the fragment would have gone skipping across any number of vehicles behind him and there is no report of anything like that. IOW they needed it to rise up as a ricochet and the curb damage fitted the bill. Now subtract the Tague strike and the field is ripped wide open. No more 'but what about Tague?'. So it's important to get this right. * http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=78733 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=78802 # (image) ******************** Thanks John: I am also trying to follow both yours and his to the best of my ability, and when it comes to the trajectories and such it does become a handful at times.. I realise that both you, I believe, now correct me if in error, and Tom believe perhaps only three shots from the TSBD doing all the damage as reported to all involved..plus limo and such..and three shots only.... I try to keep an open mind in that area as I have never come to a final conclusion as to how many....there actually may have been. Especially when I take into consideration the witnesses information and first day statements, and first early reports, well there is great doubt....and as I put it they were present, and I was not. Also, and cannot find it at the present time, when they cut and took the piece of cement curb finally, the nick, hole whatever had been filled, touched off with a topping of cement, it had been filled...and when Weisberg requested to see such, it had been destroyed, in that huge bulding there was not room enough to keep a piece of cement and a possible shot strike to the curb..... The following may be of interest to you.... This is from "White Wash" The report on the Warren Report....Harold Weisberg 1965...page 158-159.. About the curb hit...FYI, Minutes after the assassination. Patrolman L.L.Hill radioed.. "I have one guy that was possibly hit by a ricochet from the bullet off the concrete." H 116. James T Tague, had left his car at the end of Dealey Plaza opposite the Depository. He was slightly injured on the cheek and immediately reported this to Deputy Sheriff Eddy R. Walthers, 7H547,553., who was already examining the area to see if any bullets had hit the turf. Patrolman J.W.Foster ,on the Triple Underpass ,had seen a bullet hit the turf near near a manhole cover. Other witnesses in the same location had and reported similar observations, Walthers found a place on the curb where Tague had stood where it appeared a bullet had hit the cement ", In the words of the Report .According to Tague ,"There was a mark quite obviously, it was a bullet ,and it was very fresh. "R 166. Photographs of this spot were taken by two professional photographers who were subsequently witnesses in another connection. Tom Dillard had photographed the South face of the Book Depository Building. James R. Underwood, a television news director, had made motion pictures of the same area and had been in the motorcade. From it's own records, the Commission did not look into this until July 7, 1964...when it asked the FBI to make an investigation which produced nothing. I discovered this entirely by accident, for there was no logical means by which to learn of it. What follows is a credit to neither the FBI nor the Commission: Not until September 1st ,1964 with it's work almost done ,did the Commission call back Lyndal Shaneyfelt the FBI photographer, not a ballistics expert. Assistant Council Norman Redlich took a deposition from him beginning at 10.45 a.m. at the Commission's office. 15H 686-702 The previous investigation was reported in an unsigned memorandum of July 17, 1964, from the Dallas field office 21H 472 ff. In it, the author politely called to the Commission’s attention that the photographs in question "had been forwarded to the President's Commission by Martha Joe Stroud, Assistant U.S Attorney, Dallas, Texas.". In other words, if the FBI was going to be the subject to criticism for not finding what the Commission wanted, the FBI was going to have it on record that there was no need for the Commission to have delayed seeking further information. This FBI report quoted Dillard as locating the point at which he took the pictures. It was, he said,” on the South side of Main Street about twenty feet east of the Triple Underpass." The FBI Dallas office said, “The area of the curb from this point for a distance of ten feet-in either direction was carefully checked and it was ascertained that there was no nick in the curb in the checked area, nor was any mark observed." In the concluding paragraph, repeating the above information almost word for word, the Dallas Field Office concluded," It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 23, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away such a mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week,which would also wash away any such mark." Bear this in mind in considering what Shaneyfelt reported. Under the date of August 12, 1964.by courier service, J .E. Hoover presented the fruit of Shaneyfelt's investigation to Com. Counsel Rankin 21H 475-7. Shaneyfelt had no trouble locating the spot. He used exactly the same raw materials the Dallas Field Office had used the two paragraphs. What followed was all conjecture, and the most basic conjecture, supported by no evidence, was that all the shots came from the sixth-floor window. Thus, the FBI concluded that the shot would "correspond to frame 410 in the Zapruder film. " ...."and that it " went directly over the President's head."15H 699. This was long after the President received the fatal wound that was the last shot according to the most credible witnesses. Before supervising the removal of the curb and it's trasnportation to FBI in Washington on Aug 5,1964..Shaneyfelt took a number of photographs ,none of them with the possibility in mind that the shot could have emanated from any other source. Perhaps the rains were light during those ten months or the street-cleaning machines inefficient, for there remained traces of the bullet. Spectrographic examination showed the metal smears on the curb were "essentially lead with a trace of antimony." This could have come from a mutilated bullet of the type presumed to have been used in the rifle. It could have come from a bullet of another type. Or it could have come from other sources .By "mutilated bullet" is meant one that deformed after first hitting another object. In his letter, Hoover precluded a bullet such as "from Governor Connally's stretcher " (he could not bring himself to say it was found there) or the "bullet or bullets" represented by the jacket fragments ...found in the Presidential limousine "He said" It was also determined from a microscopic study that the lead object that struck the curbing and causing the mark was moving in a general direction away" from the Texas School Depository Building". Hoover did not so state, but the bullet was also "moving in general direction away "from several other buildings, places and areas, such as the area where the puff of smoke was seen, or the building next to the Depository. If it were a fragment, he said, they did not know enough to determine "whether it was caused by a fragment of a bullet striking the occupants of the Presidential limousine, such as the bullet that struck the President's head. or whether it is a fragment of a shot that may have missed the Presidential limousine." Politely Hoover was saying that there could not have been a fragment from any other bullet that hit an occupant of the Presidential car."21H 75-7 Even to ascertain that the thought that a fragment of the bullet that struck the President in the head could have gone this distance in this direction and left any kind of mark on the curb is to do violence to Euclid, whom the Commission has already left unchaste.......snip. The point of impact of this "missed" bullet was well to the left and in front of the President .The President was also not turned in such a fashion as to make this possible, and the experts said that the only known fragmented bullet found, had it caused the President's head injury, dissipated it's energy in the explosion. The fragments did not have enough energy left even to carry them out of the car. *************************************** Below is a copy from the DMN of the same photo you posted, but I believe may be a clearer copy, a close up of the hit,and a photo of possible other hits that day....may be helpful in your studies... Thanks B.....

1. The first shot to the head of JFK was at Z313. (Second shot fired) Stationing 4+65. 2. The second shot to the head of JFK was some 30+feet farther down Elm St. in front of Mr. Altgens. (Last/third shot fired) Stationing 4+96. 3. The Z313 shot is the one that fragmented the bullet. Tom: From what I have studied the head shot in front of Mr Altgens is the one that fragmented and blew outward..Z 313.. The second entered ( third shot ) within a fraction of a second, of the first..( second head shot),almost simultaniously.....I believe according to Dr.Mantik's and other's studies. Harold Weisberg, put the first shot further up Elm towards the TSBD..and the last shot down further past the steps, as not seen in the Zapruder film. Re Hoover, according to his report the trajectory was not to the TSBD......the Tague curb hit was to Hoover an annoyance he really could not be bothered with such.....at least he acknowledged a curb hit.. And Tague, being present that day, stated in his information the shot that he received the small frament hit to his right cheek from, was from a different location and further up towards the corner of the fence and the overpass... Thanks B..

John & Tom : A Question please... I have been following this thread, and it appears to me that you are basing the Tague curb shot, trajectories with the Z 313 head shot, re the Zapruder film....from the TSBD.. But at the same time, Tom has posted previous information that the head shot occurred 30 feet further down Elm Street, than what we see within that film....and John you agreed with his information, I believe. If so. this study would therefore not be of any use, as the findings based on Z 313 would all be in error. E.J.Hoover's report, was that this shot had not come from the TSBD, but from the Dal Tex or another building.... Thanks B..

Hi Steve: I think these are the newspaper articles, I split and lightened them but, not clear copies, It may not help... I cannot make out the paper either, but if perhaps the writers name then perhaps that could be checked into..with the Dallas newspaper archives..? Perhaps if posted on here they may be clearer..... ? Second time, a bit larger ?? They do not appear any clearer. sorry.... B..

**************** Hi Steve: I have no clippings, but this information on the US Day Rally may be of some interest to you... It is from some work I did looking into this area at one time....it is rewritten from a book. "Dallas Public & Private" by Warren Leslie, 1964..though you may have it...if so old news... B.. Before the Assassination: The jostling of Senator Lyndon B. Johnson and Lady Bird had raised some eyebrows in 1960, when the right-wing had accosted them. The Ambassador Adlai Stevenson incident brought Dallas national and international attention in terms of its far right movement, he arrived on Oct.24th 1963, to address a U.N Day meeting in Dallas, Stevenson had been twice a candidate for his countries Presidency. Just before the United Nations Day, and extremist right-wing organization called the National Indignation Committee, headed by Frank McGeehee, set aside a day and called it United States Day. A United States ceremony was scheduled in the Dallas Memorial Auditorium Theater, which seated about 2,000, and set exactly for 24 hours before the United Nations Day, approximately 1,200 people attended. About 2,400 people attended the U.N. Day. Before it was over, the Ambassador had been spat upon and struck over the head with a placard, and Dallas was front page news throughout the world. “We booked Memorial Theater for the Stevenson meeting” Jack Goren, chairman of the U.N. Day committee, said, “because we were hopeful that one of the Dallas TV stations would televise the occasion. KRLD-TV (CBS) responded and agreed to televise the program”. “We had a press conference some two and a half to three weeks before U.N Day. We announced in the newspaper what we were proposing to do. From my conversations with the people at Memorial Theater, General Edwin Walker, upon hearing of our meeting (about one week prior to this) booked the same auditorium ,for the evening before the U.N Day. About a week prior to the U.N Day celebration we became concerned that there might be picketing at Memorial Theater." This concern was brought about by the fact that some young students who were out at the state fair were entertained at the home of a local person and one or two of them had reported to their parents that they observed some pickets derogatory to the United Nations at the home of General Walker. Whether this was actually true or not we were never sure, and we have no proof of it. However, we did observe that there were cars with signs on the Dallas streets reading, U.S Day Or United Nations Day---There Must Be A Choice; You Cannot Ride Both Horses, or words to that effect. This was the propaganda circulating on the Dallas streets, apparently put out by General Walker’s supporters. General Walker was billed as the feature speaker for U.S.Day the night before the U.N Day. "All you, probably know, U.S Day was designated two or three years ago by the ultra-right wing groups in the United States but primarily in a few selected areas such as Arizona, Texas and California. Out of 365 days of the year, they picked the day before the U.N Day celebration, which had been in effect since 1948. The reason for the selection of that date was obvious, but so far as we were able to determine, U.S Day had not gotten off the ground anywhere but the three areas that I mentioned and mostly in a few parts in Texas and Arizona.” At this point, the supporters of the U.N Day suffered a real shock when Governor John Connally of Texas issued an official proclamation of United States Day in Texas. (U.N had been proclaimed long before in 1948).This provoked some immediate correspondence between Jack Goren and Governor Connally’s office. Goren expressed his dismay that the governor had apparently given respectability to an occasion drummed up (by the ultra-right wing), for the purpose of discrediting U.N.Day and the United Nations itself. He questioned whether the governor had known before issuing the proclamation that Major General Edwin Walker, a clear-cut representative of the far right wing, was to be the principal speaker. The governor replied that he had not, as Goren suspected, but that he had been encouraged by some, a number of people to issue a proclamation for the occasion, that in fact some kind of observance had been in effect before his time. He gave Goren the definite impression that he was not in any way trying to encourage General Walker and his supporters. “It was a nice letter from the governor,” Goren said, “and it made me feel a good deal better. The major thing worrying me was not that something called United States Day should be proclaimed, as an official observation. The curse of this town has been that these things get into the hand s of the extremists. Then, one way or another, through the newspapers, public statements or whatever, the actions of the extremists get to seem all right, defensible, respectable. Nobody blasts them and tells them that their actions are impossible in civilized communities. I think that’s the basic difference between Dallas and other places. Anyway, I venture that there will be no further proclamations of U.S.Day so long as it is in control of the extremists elements which run it now.” During this time before the Ambassador’s visit, the premonition of some kind of trouble began to build. This was partly built on what kind of man Stevenson was, and the feelings he inspired. This man intellectual, internationalist, brilliant speaker --- seemed capable of arousing an emotion in Americans that is almost unique. His supporters some of whom were militant, as evidenced at the Democratic National Convention of 1960. His detractors were no less so. He was not a man who provoked a mild reaction. Goren’s task was to do everything he could to prevent the premonition of trouble from turning into reality. “I asked a security representative, Mr. William de Gan (a former agent for the FBI, now employed in Dallas), who knows Police Chief Jesse Curry, to go down to the police department and to tell them of our concern about picketing. I was anxious to make sure that we would have adequate police protection at the theater because of what we had already learned. Also, we were sure General Walker would stir up his meeting in opposition to United Nations Day and to Mr. Stevenson.” “Mr. de Gan went there personally and spoke to Jesse Curry and was assured that there would be adequate police protection. A few days later reports began to come back to us that picketing might be extreme and de Gan again went down to the police station and made arrangements for more extensive protection. The extra police were supposed to arrive at approximately 7.30pm.” “U.S Day drew nearly 1,200 people. We monitored the meeting. This made us extremely aware that there would be a large scale attempts to picket and possibly do other things at our meeting the next night. We realized this from the tone of General Walker’s speech, which aroused his audience to a high pitch about United Nations Day, that it was a part of the world-wide communist movement, the usual stuff with which you are familiar”. “We were, of course, concerned, but we had confidence that the police protection would be adequate. When I arrived at about 7.30pm, I found that the theater had already been infiltrated with numerous supporters of U.S Day. ---complete with flags, complete with their signs, complete with their noise makers, which we were of course, not aware that they would even attempt to use. The pickets did not show up in force until approximately 7:45. The police protection at the early stages was inadequate and in my judgment was never adequate or timely. If I had to say what the really terrible thing was I would say that as bad as the picketing was, as bad as the mob action that took place as a part of the picketing was, and as bad as the spitting and hitting incident was----even worse was the hooting, the yelling, the noise makers, the waving of the flags, the waving of the signs, the attempt to break up the meeting itself by followers of General Walker, the John Birch groups, and the supporters of Mr. Frank McGeehee of the National Indignation Committee. This was totally undemocratic and un-American. The attempt to deny the American Ambassador to the United Nations the opportunity to express his ideas and the ideas of the United States government on world peace---this to me was the terrible sad thing.” Fortunately, it was all photographed. It was all heard by several hundred thousand people on live television. Coupled with the terrible incident that took place afterward, the Dallas community was faced with the fact that the extreme right wing had gone too far. After the meeting, we had a reception in the Memorial Theater on stage for the UN people. There was no attempt made to infiltrate that, but the pickets remained outside in numbers of seventy-five to 150 and they were an organized group. About forty-five minutes after the meeting, roughly 9:45, we left with police escort to try to go to the cars. Apparently there was a woman screaming at Mr. Stevenson. He walked into the crowd, leaving the line of the police escort, merely to ask her what she was screaming at him about and to try to quiet her down. The result was the hitting incident by the woman and the spitting incident by the young student. When Mr. Stevenson was rescued by the police, he was brought back to the limousine. He was in a state of shock, so to speak. He just could not understand that in America this sort of thing would happen, certainly not to him or to anyone. He had been used to picketing, but never to violence of this kind against representatives of the American government by Americans. He could not understand this. While he was wiping off the saliva with his handkerchief, his only comment was, “Are these human beings or are these animals?” The woman who struck Adlai, was the wife of an insurance man who was quite prominent, he was not present at the meeting. When it was all over he told a friend, he could not make an outgoing call on his phone for two or three days after the incident as the line was constantly jammed with calls coming in, protesting his wife’s actions. She claimed someone pushed her, but the television tape indicated no such thing. The man who spat on him was a college student, Robert Hatfield of Irving; Stevenson did not prefer charges against either person. But Hatfield also made the mistake of spitting on one of Dallas’ finest, Patrolman L.R.Larsen and according to the asst D.A that was a much more serious offence. During the meeting Mr. Stevenson kept control, though stunned at the reactions and actions by those within the assembly.( Some who went as far as to march up and down the aisles carrying their American flags upside down, some carrying signs, jeering and heckling (with noise makers sounding.) When the police finally did escort Frank McGeehee to a side door, Mr.Stevenson said “For my part, I believe in the forgiveness of sin and the redemption of ignorance”. (The actions by these people were not the actions of the majority of citizens, many were stunned, but the mood of the stage had been allowed to be set, for the Presidential visit that was to occur within a month.) On Oct. 28th the Dallas City Council shocked and embarrassed by what had happened, unanimously adopted an anti-harassment ordinance to protect visiting speakers. It prohibited any person or group from “interfering with a public or private assembly by the use of insulting, threatening or obscene language or intimidation.” The City Council and Mayor Cabell apologized to Stevenson on behalf of their city. But Texas right-wing Congressman Bruce Alger stated the city had no reason to feel disgraced. Young Hatfield he said “ lost his head because of his resentment against the UN that threatens his freedom and his country’s freedom.” Alger did not state that he approved of hitting people nor spitting on them, but he did feel that people of Dallas should not be “throttled” in expressing their dislike of the UN. Ironically at this time Dallas was engaged in the middle of a promotion program to invite the world to visit it. Brochures printed in German, French, English and Spanish had been distributed to fifty-one major cities throughout Air France’s Offices. They told of Dallas, a jet-age city with old fashioned southwestern hospitality. At the same time, the fervor of the far right reached an extraordinary Pitch, A handbill was distributed around town, it was dropped into cars, and scattered over parking lots. It cast President Kennedy in the role of a wanted criminal and profiled J.F.K. classic full faced, and profile shot of a fugitive poster, and titled “Wanted For Treason”. "Dallas Public and Private" Warren Leslie ..1964- P: 188 to 198.

Thanks Bernice. The first time the south knoll came up as far as I know was in April of 1964 at Buna Vista Colorado in an interview with the Denver FBI. (declassified and documented FOIA release 1981) It was discussed again with Congressman Tom Downing in 1974 and again with Senator Swicker in 1976 (Ricky Feeney and Daneul Shore before the HSCA was formed) If anyone really looked into the best places to make a hit they would have looked at this south knoll position. I believe Doug Weldon perhaps took a good hard look and came to those conclutions as would anybody if they really studied it. Also the south shooter was talked about in 1973 public but was discounted, with the aid of the FBI, for whatever reasons. ********** Your welcome, William. His main studies are the Limousine, and that of course led him to the trajectories of the damage that it obtained and a part of his findings were the shot from the South knoll. Thank you for the information that you have mentioned.. I have also found these Cancellare photos, in my an old files. They may be of help to you, they were photos that you marked your whereabouts on, some years ago now....on some forum, but which I have no idea of now whose....If of any use to you.... Bernice...

William "Note: Each time this south knoll information comes up; the thread is turned back to the "Badgeman" and other north side of Plaza matters and those theories and doctored photos. Why is it so important not to really look into that area of the south side? Each time that area is brought up it is past by or diverted into something else not related. It was the same in 1964, and again in 1974, and again in 1978, 81, 91, and now 2006. It was the same with the FBI, Secret Service, Congressional and Senate investigators of many years ago. It seems to be very important to focus on the North side and by pass the South. Why? Is it perhaps that is the area that best confirms the fake story played by the government of where the shooters or assassins really were?" What you say above is not quite true...Doug Weldon, who has been investigating the assassination of the President, since 78..extensively, the Limousine and the trajectories of the hits...presented his research in "Murder In Dealey Plaza" 2000 one of the many contributors in one of Dr.J.Fetzer's books, as well as at some conventions and in documentary's..etc.. He came to this same conclusion years ago..that there was a shot and a hit from the south knoll... But IMO you are also correct in your thoughts, that when the subject arises, it does not proceed, I have tried this in the past, perhaps not here,I cannot recall now, but it never seems to go very far..I think perhaps the main problem could be many have never bothered to study that area as a possibilty, or dismiss it rather quickly.... Though I am sure there are others out there that I do not know of...that have.. Just FYI.. Bernice

B., In your travels through this evidence morass, have you run across a date [month,day,year] when the NPIC first evaluated the Zapruder Film? Thanks -- DHealy Hi David: What a morass... Yes, it states, " Late Sunday, November 24th, the Secret Service turned over to the CIA a copy of the Zapruder film. The CIA had a keen interest in the film because the the White House had authorized the agency to conduct it's own in-house investigation. McCone requested that the agency's National Photographic Intelligence Center (NPIC) in Washington D.C. undertake a special rush job on the film. ...page 151...Note # 63.. Note # 63..page 406: G.McNight.." My telephone interview, May 2, 2003, with Dino. A Brugioni, the centre's chief analyst who was in charge of NPIC's interpretation of the Zapruder film . The conclusions that follow are my own and should not be attributed to Mr. Brugioni. When Brugioni turned over to McCone of Helms the four photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations including the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the official truth of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the week-end. See also Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up and Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film." The Third Decade 1 No.1( November 1984) :9... Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case that the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder film the day after the assassination." ****************************** Quote:Pat: I have Breach of Trust. What I was getting at is that there is nothing in the CIA files that says "we conclude there was more than one shooter," there is only McKnight's interpretation from the numbers on the NPIC sheets that there was more than one shooter. As the FBI were the ones to test the Carcano, and determine that it needed a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots, and the SS and/or CIA were the ones to perform the NPIC analysis, there is no reason to assume the NPIC people knew about the 2.3 seconds, and no reason to assume the FBI knew about the NPIC analysis. If the Kennedy assassination shows us anything it's that the compartments of the government do not share information and do not cooperate with each. There is not one evil government; there is a multitude of incompetent and self-serving bureaucracies. The FBI didn't even look at the autopsy report for over a month after the assassination. Reply: Bernice: ( Mr,.McKnight does not say this is his interpretation, he says " the NPIC's analysis showed".. I will look up this document in Mr.Weisberg's book, to see what it says exactly.) see below... But it does say, " the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined"..see below ( which he says the NPIC's analysis showed, so it reads that all three , the NPIC, FBI & CIA came up with the first shot coming before Z # 210 ).. The FBI received a copy of the JFK autopsy report on Dec.23rd some 18 days after it turned it's report CD 1,over to the WC ..see Rosen to DeLoach,11/15.1966, FBI JFK Assassination File, 62-109060-NR..) No they did not work together, jealousy, and with the WC, that is obvious....many of their requests, were ignored, and not completed..or so we are led to believe...but with all the leakage of reports, that did seemingly go on, I do have to wonder just how much those at the top did not know?? Perhaps they did not want to work together in this situation, as they did not want the truth released, this way it was all the more confusing, ? imo..B.. *************** "The report on the center's analysis of those terrible six seconds in Dallas was returned to McCone or Richard Helms, the CIA's deputy director of plans, sometime early Monday morning ..The results were presented in tabular frame-interpretation of the Zapruder film, the same historic six feet of film upon which the Commission would rely heavily for it's own version of the Kennedy assassination. NPIC's analysis indicated that the first shot came before Zapruder frame # 210 . In addition, the center's analysis showed that there was a second shot at Z # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot . All of the Commission's firearms experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled rifleman would require at least 2.4 seconds ( and this was an optimistic estimate) to cycle Oswald's alleged murder weapon. The 1.6 second interlude between the first and second shots could only mean that there had to be more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza." page 151..Note # 64. Note # 64:Pages 406 -407: See CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film of JFK's assassination. These results were pried loose from the CIA by a Freedom of Information Act request in 1982 by the assassination researcher Harold Weisberg. Or see Harold Weisberg, "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures ( Frederick, Md :Harold Weisberg Publisher, 1967) pges 302-303. "The Warren report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z # 210. The Commission's reasoning was clear enough. If Oswald had secreted himself on the sixth floor at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository to prepare for his rendezvous with history, he could not have had a clear shot at Kennedy until at least Z # 210. Between frames 166 and 209 , the aforementioned live Oak in full foliage on November 22 would have blocked a view of the presidential limousine from the so called sniper's nest. If the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined ,then,according to the Commission's own, construction, Oswald could not have fired it. However, a sniper hidden in one of the buildings on Houston Street, the Dal-Tex Building, for example, would had had a clear shot at kennedy's back anytime between Z # 170 and Z # 210 . Since what should have been unthinkable in the investigation into the murder of President Kennedy became commonplace, it is not surprising that the results of the FBI and the CIA analysis of the Zapruder film were ignored. The FBI Rankin and his staff suppressed the results if the bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's historic film, and it is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record revealed was that the FBI and CIA coluded in fabricating a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film until December 1964, after the Commission disbanded .Hoover told Rankinthat in December 1964 the CIA resquested a copy of the film for " training purposes".."..... Pages 151-152 Note # 65. Note # 65 page 407. Hoover to Rankin, December 4, 1964. A copy of this letter appears in Weisberg ,"Photographic Whitewash" p.143 ..In my conversation with Brugioni , he was absolutely clear that it was over the weekend following the assassination that McCone requested that NPIC submit the Zapruder film to analysis. Brugioni still recalls his shock when he witnessed the fatal shot that took off the right side of JFK's head. The former chief analyst for the center relayed the same account to the assassination researcher and author Gus Russo. See Gus Russo " Live by the Sword" The Secret War against Castro and the Death of JFK", ( Baltimore: Bancroft Press, 1998) pages 339 - 340. From Gerald McKnight's "Breach of Trust"..... B..

************************************* Pat: Bernice, as far as the NPIC, am I correct in understanding that the there is no record indicating that the NPIC or CIA concluded there were two shooters, but that this is McKnight's understanding of the 4 boards found in the archives? (It had been my understanding that these were not discovered till the 80s and yet there they are in the Rockefeller Commission files from 75.) Bernice: Yes there is a record, NPIC's photo analysis of the Zapruder film, see E.H.Knoche, assistant councel to the CIA Director, to Robert Olsen 5/14/75....CIA document No.1641-450, released May 18/1982...Copy can be found in the Harold Weisberg Archive, Hood College, Maryland. p.374.. ********************* Pat: Anyhow, if you look at the calculations on the sheets, they calulate 32 when they assume the Zapruder film was running at 16 fps, and 36, when they assume the Zapruder film was running at 18 fps. In other words, they assume a 2 sec differential no matter what. I'd bet the farm this was because they believed that was the amount of time between shots from the M/C. They were wrong. In their primary scenario they placed the shots at 210 and 242. Later, when the WC men argued over the Z film there was ONE guy who held out that Connally was first hit at 242 (which, presumably, would make the three shots three hits scenario viable). That guy was Arlen Specter. After the May 24 re-enactment, however, they realized that Connally was out of position after Z-230. This necessitated the single-bullet theory. Anyhow, due to his initial unwillingness to budge from 242 as the moment of impact on Connally, I suspect Specter was shown the NPIC analysis, probably by SS Inspector Thomas Kelley, the same guy who showed him the autopsy photo. Bernice: They supressed the results of the analysis of the NPIC of the Zapruder film.The FBI and CIA engaged in a conspiracy of silence, they had already decided that LHO was the lone gunman that week-end.p.6 The FBI rushed it's report through CD 1, laid out that Kennedy was hit by the first and third shots, Connally, by the second, a separate bullet. This CD 1 spends less than 60 words on the shooting. But it was rushed into print without consulting the official autopsy report...oops..all shots from behind, and it also failed to mention any of their wounds, failed to give the cause of the President's death.and surpressed any mention of the curbstone shot...or " missed bullet." It was "Hoover's hasty, shake-and-bake solution to the Kennedy murder".......though they realised it was inconsistant with the physical evidence. "To impose the FBI's investigative "triumph" on the nation and the bludgeon the Commission into acquiescence. Hoover had CD 1s conclusions leaked to the press before President Johnson's blue ribbon commission had even settled into it's quarters at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Building"........ The FBI then built their scale model of Dealey Plaza and had it ready for inspection..by the end of January...."it was a constant reminder along with it's accompanying visuals such as a panoramic aerial view of the entire assassination area and a brochure... .... describing the exhibit's technical details...and was a constant reminder to the commissioners and legal staff of the "true facts". " "The impressive 480 square foot-mock-up was designed as an architectonic testimonial to the Hoover version of the assassination".. From Feb till June Commission staff lawyers worked with the layout in the assembly room to construct the sequence that killed JFK and wounded Connally...In order to pinpoint the timing intervals between " the assassin's " three shots, lawyer Eisenberg made use fo some of the assassination films, Zapruder, Nix, Muchmore, plus slides of Zapruder's film, he enlisted the assistance of FBI and SS agents, medical Doctors, army ballistics experts and one veterinarian...( W.D Griffith to Conrad 1/28.64, FBIHQJFK assn file 62-109060-2367, Rosen to Belmont 4/15/64, FBIHQJFK assn file 62-109060-2933, Griffith to Conrad 4/22/64, FBIHQ JFK assn file 62-109060-2985. Trouble was during these long five months that the Com groped toward's trying to validate it's preconceived conclussions of the one lone gunman, despite facts and a preponderance of evidence that pointed in another direction, it was bogus....Because they had chosen to ignore the bullet that had hit the curbstone....the Tague shot, or the missed shot.....it could not account for the FBI's model of three shots three hits..the fourth shot meant two assassins. The lapsed time they worked with was 2.3 seconds by the best of professional experts to cycle the alleged murder weapon.....so instead of being the lapsed time of 4.8 to 5.6 seconds between the second and third shot...that had to be stretched.....to 7.1 to 7.9 secs...However they were not interested about a shooting span of over 7 seconds.....so..Eisenberg and his staff pondered. With a June 1st deadline in front of them and approaching fast....this mortifying fact plagued them...the single bullet construction was being discredited even as the Comm. members were dreaming it up..and prey may we ask what had happened to the bullet that they said had exited Kennedy's throat at the front???? The premise was that the shot had only hit soft tissue in the President's neck... it should have ripped into the car after exiting his body, but it had not ??......in an aside to Inspector Thomas Kelley , the Secret Service's liason with the Commission, one of the staff lawyers offered as " an outside possibility, that the first shot might had gone through JFK with sufficient velocity "" to penetrate Connally's body, wrist and leg""....Kelley later confided to the FBI's L.T. Gauthier that the idea was "rediculous " and that a shot under those circumstances would have gone completely wild."" In April Eisenberg arranged for two sessions, with the three pathologists who had performed the autopsy......Humes, Boswell and Fink.....they viewed the Zapruder film for the first time..Humes took the lead seeing that he had written the autopsy in this session..After viewing the film and the Zapruder slides, he hypothesized that Connally was hit by the first two shots..He thought that the first shot had exited Kennedy's throat and then passed through Connallys chest loosing it's velocity, it then lodged into the governor's clothing and later appeared on his stretcher....the second shot hit Connally's wrist with such velocity it shattered into fragments one causing the wound to his thigh.....Just as they had testified to the WC a month earlier Humes and the other two prosecters had not changed their opinions about Connally's wrist wound...All three were convinced that the near pristine CE 399 was not mutilated enough to have shattered the governors wrist bone. Humes, Boswell, and Finck refused to attribute any magic to the "magic bullet"....Neither did Mr.& Mrs Connelly at the second conference a week later...even after viewing the Zapruder film.Their own two ballistics experts, Dr.Joseph R.Dolce and Dr.Frederick W.Light jr...Whose expertise was also ignored......and did not carry the day....Dolce's echoing Humes, and Light agreeing, CE 399 could not shatter the Governor's wrist and remain as pristine as it was.....all Dolce's 33 years as a surgeon and in wound ballistics were dismissed..After the conference Dolce mentioned the " legal" talent in attendance.. The one who battled the hardest for CE 399, Dolce recalled was ..you got it.....Arlen Specter . Only Dr.Oliver ( a veterinarian chief of the division, Wound Ballistic Brandh at Edgewood ) of the same institution as Dolce, Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland..witheld an opinion, until he could make some tests on animal tissue and bone with the rifle. After the tests by all the Edgewood experts, in 1986 Dolce was inteviewed by Chip Selby in every instance he stated the bullet " was markedly deformed".. from pages 183, to 187. The FBI labratory had established the Zapruder Bell & Howell zoom-lens 8 mm camera, took on average 18.3 frames per second.. as seen above they disregarded the NPIC report.....the lapsed time between the first shot that struck JFK Z (210) and the last frame in which Connally could have been hit Z (236) was less than two seconds.....these parameters were not calculated to inspire relief or celebrations.......as the firearms experts had found the rifle required a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots. They had made for themselves a Hobson's choice....an anathema politically, that Connaly had been hit by a separate shot by a second gunman.....or the nonfatal bullet that sruck Kennedy from the rear exited his body and continued downward hitting Connally and causing all his wounds.... In order to excise this demon of conspiracy, Rankin and his staff lawyers paid a heavy price.......in the coin of credibility, ignoring all their own hand picked experts...there was staff pressure on Rankin to enlist the FBI's help in a reenactment of the assn at the scene of the crime... Hoover whose grip on the assn facts was tenuous at best, felt the April conference was "poppy-cock". Alex Rosen and Alan Belmont his senior asst directors, were even more opposed to any re-enactment. They knew the made up story was impossible and wanted no part of any inquiry that could prove their so-called investigation was no better than fiction. Hoover was satisfied with the sprawling model of Dallas. When Rankin sent out feelers, to the FBI about their personnel help in collecting on the site data to resolve some " technical problems" the FBI said it would "prefer not to be involved in any such plan"... What Rankin characterized as technical problems centred on whether JFK and Connally were aligned at or near Zapruder fr. # 236, so that a shot from the southwest corner of the sixth floor of the TSBD, the alleged " sniper's nest" could have penetrated both their bodies. "Tentatively, the groundwork for the counterfeit history of CE 399 that the Commission advanced as an indispensable part of it's "factual story" of the Kennedy assassination was being laid.." However, it was Norman Redlich, Rankin's "top gun"amongst the assistant counsels, who pointed out in the strongest terms that the FBI model of the shooting was a rock tied around the Commission's neck. Redlich's memo to the general counsel urging him to abandon the FBI and Secret Service's assertions that Connally had been struck by a separate bullet was written a week after the April 21st conference..He told Rankin the FBI and the SS "were totally incorrect, and if left uncorrected, will present a completely misleading picture"..Redlich did not pull his punches: If the Commission adopted the FBI model, it was his opinion that this "would place the report in jeopardy since it is a certainty that others will examine the Zapruder film and raise the same questions which have been raised by our examination of the film ". Redlich urged the Comm. to go to Dallas and collect it's own on the site data to establish that it would have been "physically possible" for Oswald to have accomplished what the Commission intended all along to attribute to him..... " Our intention, he briefed Rankin was "not to establish the point" at which JFK and Connally had been hit with the first shot " with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusion that Oswald was the sole assassin." since the FBI model of the shooting could not be jiggered to accomodate a single-bullet hypothesis, it had to be jettisoned. A contingent of the Comm. members made a visit May 7-9th /64 to the scene of the crime. Cooper, McCloy, Dulles, escorted by junior counsel David W.Belin..For two days Belin acted as a guide during a walkabout familiarizing themselves with the layout, they made themselves available for interviews and even Belin's report on the trip did not try to diguise the fact the biggest pay-off was the public relation advantage. Belin however did let it slip, when the commissioners took up the same advantage point that Howard Brennan, their highly touted witness, had occupied while a SS agent had assumed Oswald's alleged position at the window, "where the shots were fired, we could see the problem involved in identification" . It is safe to assume that Belin was referring to the fact that Brennan could not have determined the assassin's height, weight and clothes he was wearing from the waist down unless the SS substitute was standing and pretending to shoot through a windowpane. Rankin did get the FBI to co-operate in the reenactment at the scene of the crime.. The chief counsel promised to supervise the work and bring along certain staff members to help with on the spot examination and evaluation. Rankin selected Arlen Specter and Redlich, Specter's superviser. They expected to arrive May 23rd, and have the reenactment on the 24th.. Two days before Rankin called a meeting that lasted three hours. Asst Director Rosen learned from James R. Malley, the FBI's liaison with the Comm. and one of the bureaus representatives at this lengthy conference, that there were still " a few gaps that remain".. What Malley choose to brush aside as a piddling matter, and Rosen chose to downplay to avoid angering Hoover, was the fact that the Comm. lawyers were now seriously entertaining the possibility that one of the three shots may have missed the presidential limo entirely. In fact, this new development was the focus of the three hours session. At 6 am (cst) on May 24th/64 the Dallas police cordoned off Elm St. and for the next 7 hours the Comm. staff worked with the FBI and the SS teams as they went through their paces in reenacting the government version of the assassination. The Zapruder film was used extensively in the restaging. The Zapruder frames were checked against known reference points in an effort to aline the limo at it's position and the relative positions of Kennedy and Connally...especially from frames #207 through #313..the frame that depicts the fatal head shot... At the end of the day, Rankin, Redlich and Specter were satisfied that they had descovered their " silver bullet" ....At or near Zapruder frame # 222 JFK and Connally were aligned so that a shot from the "sniper's nest" striking the President could have exited his throat and gone into Connally's chest. It had previously been determined that the angle of the bullet traveling through the body of both victims was 17 degrees .At Zapruder # 222 the angle from the " sniper's nest" to JFK's rear wound was also 17degrees .In demonstrating a perfect JFK-Connally alignment at Zapruder # 222, basic trigonometry, it could be said, helped play mid-wife to the "single-bullet theory".. A little more than a week before Rankin, Redlich and Specter left for Dallas, Specter sent a memo to Rankin in which he laid out in detail what should be looked at when the autopsy photos and X-rays were examined. In his second point of this five point memo Specter urged that the autopsy pictures and X-rays were essential "to confirm the precise location" of Kennedy's "upper back" wound as depicted in Commission Exhibits 385 and 386. These were schematic drawings of President Kennedy's non fatal wounds. It is not certain exactly what Specter saw of the autopsy photos and X-rays when he was in Dallas, during the May 24th reenactment, but apparently shortly after the April 30th session the Comm. came to some sort of a understanding that satisfied Warren but permitted some limited ( read "unofficial") access to some sort of the autopsy material, for key staff members only .........during the reenactment at the scene of the crime. This approach meant that the Comm. itself could maintain it's public party line that it never saw nor used the autopsy photographs or X-rays.However, several years after the Comm. had concluded it's business. Specter acknowledged, in rather curious lawyer like language, that he had seen "one picture of the back of the body which was represented to be the back of the President, although it was not technically authenticated".It allowed him to later, when he appeared before the HSCA to deny that they had ever been made available to him, by shaving the truth. There is one "hugger mugger" pungent irony to all this by the WC. using the autopsy picture, Specter was able to pinpoint the precise location of the wound in JFK's back.That this photo was used in the May 24th reenactment is dramatically attested to by photograph number 12 found in Chapter 8 of the WR. In the photograph two FBI standins for the President and Governor have chalk marks patches on their coats representing where the first shot hit JFK and allegedly continued through his body to enter under the Governor's right armpit. The purpose of this was to substantiate the proposition that the two men were in perfect allignment, making it possible for a single bullet to inflict all of the non fatal wounds..SS Inspector Thomas J. Kelley, who assisted in the May 24 th reenactment recalled that the chalk mark on JFK's stand-in " represented the point of the shot which wounded the President". The chalk mark, Kelley told the Comm. was based on the "medical drawings by physicians and people at Parkland " and an examination of the coat JFK was wearing at the time of the assn. In this reenactment the coat on "President Kennedy is not riding up his back".The chalk patch on President Kennedy is clearly located on his back at the level of the third thoracic vertebra, consistant with Dr.G.G.Burkley's description of this wound in the President's death certificate, the same two page, report document that the WC inexplicably failed to include in it's report or in the 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits. There is no mistaking this wound for a neck or lower neck wound . The endgame to use the autopsy picture of JFK's back wound was the unintended subversion of the Warren report's single bullet hypothesis. A bullet entering Kennedy's back at the level of the third thoracic vertebra at a downard angle, could not possibly have exited at his throat.....The Commission's own reenactment black and white nunber 12 photograph unmistakably underscored this abberation in it's group-grope for a single bullet no-conspiracy solution. The reenactment picture allowed for no believable explanation of President Kennedy's throat wound. Furthermore, it had to be perfectly evident to Specter that the autopsy picture of Kennedy's back wound used in the reenactment was anatomically incompatible with CE 385 and CE 386. At this point the only explanation for Specter's insistance on the single bullet invention was political need rather than fact. Frompages 189-193. Info from Breach of Trust ..by Gerald McKnight. All documentation for the above information are in the notes section in the back of the book.... Below ( above now) you will also see........ The autopsy report, the verified one from Dr.G.G. Burkley with his notation and signature on the left , you will also notein the one from the WC, below, this notation and his signature has been erased...and is so poor it is unreadable, or I know, just a poor copy...... .I do not know how, but the Dr.Burkley autopsy report ended up on top of the post instead of the bottom, and I have had so much trouble in posting , I am going to leave a sleeping dog alone..... Forget it that did not work either, ok maybe number 5 is lucky.......?? B.....

Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report Many respected senior members of the U.S. military, intelligence services, and government have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. Some even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. Below are the highly revealing statements on this vital topic of over 50 prominent public servants with links for verification and further investigation. The collective voices of these respected senior officials give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These dedicated individuals from both political parties cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report is not only reasonable and responsible, it is in fact a patriotic duty http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquesti...ommissionreport

O’Reilly Sicks FBI on Fetzer, Barrett Friday October 13th 2006, 7:33 pm Bill O’Reilly, the scurrilous “phone sex” deviant and prime time bully, wants nine eleven researchers and investigators arrested—or, more accurately under the so-called detainee bill, disappeared into Gestapo torture dungeons—and presumably brought up on treason charges, marched before a secret military tribunal, and sent to the gallows. O’Reilly did not say as much when he abused and talked over Jim Fetzer last night, characterizing him as a “disgrace” to the country for not buying lock, stock, and barrel the official Grimm Brothers fairy tale version of events of what did and did not happen on September 11, 2001. Not only did the reprehensible O’Reilly, who had the academic Dr. Sami al-Arian arrested and charged as a terrorist, slander Fetzer and by extension anybody else who questions the government, he also demanded Fetzer be tailed by the FBI. “I’d put the FBI on you and that nutty [professor Kevin] Barrett and find out what the hell you guys are up to,” threatened O’Reilly, basically insinuating that scholarly research is a crime, as of course “everything changed” after nine eleven, including the right to exercise the First Amendment. But then, as we know, or some of us know, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are now effectively dead and, increasingly, it is a crime to question the government, especially in an academic setting, same as it was after the Nazis took over in Germany. would appear O’Reilly’s latest temper tantrum is part of a concerted effort to demonize those who “hate their country” (i.e., have the gall to ask questions) because they are unable to accept the officially sanctioned fairy tale stipulating without evidence that a few Muslim cave dwellers—one with a documented past linked to the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI and others trained on U.S. military bases—made NORAD stand down with boxcutters. Last month, the unitary decider, in a speech at the Capital Hilton Hotel, cited a White House strategy paper that insists “[t]errorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories.” Is it possible Fetzer may soon be considered a terrorist recruiter for dispensing “falsehoods … corrupted by conspiracy theories,” that is to say information at variance with the official fairy tale? It will be if Bill O’Reilly has his way. “In late September 2001, al-Arian was invited to be a guest on The O’Reilly Factor,” explains Democracy Now. “Al-Arian thought he was going to be discussing Arab-American reactions to the attacks. Instead, host Bill O’Reilly went on a tirade against him, basically accusing al-Arian of supporting terrorism and terrorist groups. O’Reilly dug up comments al-Arian had made 15 years earlier and suggested that he should be followed everywhere he went [by the CIA]. All of this on live international television and just weeks after the 9-eleven attacks.” The FBI and Joint Terrorism task Force raided the home of Sami al-Arian early on the morning of February 20, 2003, slapped him in handcuffs as his family looked on in horror, and dragged him off to a federal dungeon. Of course, as al-Arian is not a terrorist, the government is unable to make charges stick against him, although, as is usually the case in such highly touted “terrorism” cases, al-Arian was forced to plea to a lesser charge and will be deported “to another country,” no doubt one where he will be regarded with suspicion. In short, the Justice Department and Bill O’Reilly ruined Sami al-Arian’s life—but then fascists are experts at such destructive behavior. As the government has a keen interest in shutting down the nine eleven truth movement, especially now as it continues to gain visibility, there is a distinct possibility Jim Fetzer and other prominent researchers and academics will be arrested in the wee hours of the night. Bill O’Reilly has once again sounded the clarion call, demanding the feds take out Fetzer, Kevin Barrett, and anybody else who stands in the way of the neocon master plan to turn America into the equivalent of Germany under Hitler or Russia under Stalin. In a way, however, Sami al-Arian was lucky, as habeas corpus still existed when he had his day in court. If the government determines nine eleven researchers and other “conspiracy theorists” are terrorist recruiters, we can expect select personalities from the nine eleven truth movement—as fractured and factionalized as it is (and riddled with COINTELPRO agents) and thus ineffectual to a large degree—to disappear into the night, hustled off by the American version of the Geheime Staatspolizei, our very own state secret police. http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=604 O'Reilly needs to get back on his meds....before he completely dissolves one night on his program, with all his favorite viewers watching, and what would they do, why they would applaud..That's what they are waiting for......after all that is the mentality of his audience...imo..... ******************************************** The Majority is no longer buying........... Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research Americans Question Bush on 9/11 Intelligence October 14, 2006 Many adults in the United States believe the current federal government has not been completely forthcoming on the issue of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to a poll by the New York Times and CBS News. 53 per cent of respondents think the Bush administration is hiding something, and 28 per cent believe it is lying. Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks, down five points since May 2002. Al-Qaeda operatives hijacked and crashed four airplanes in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people. In October, after Afghanistan’s Taliban regime refused to hand over al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the U.S. launched the war on terrorism. On Aug. 6, 2001, a Presidential Daily Briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." mentioned "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." On May 17, 2002, Bush discussed the situation, saying, "The American people know this about me, and my national security team, and my administration: Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people." On Sept. 11, Bush referred to the attacks, saying, "Five years after 9/11, our enemies have not succeeded in launching another attack on our soil, but they’ve not been idle. Al-Qaeda and those inspired by its hateful ideology have carried out terrorist attacks in more than two dozen nations. And just last month, they were foiled in a plot to blow up passenger planes headed for the United States. They remain determined to attack America and kill our citizens—and we are determined to stop them." Polling Data When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying? ............................................... Oct. 2006...................May 2002 .................Telling the truth.............16%......................21% .................Hiding something...........53%.......................65% ..................Mostly lying..................28%.......................8% ..................Not sure.........................3%.......................6% Source: The New York Times / CBS News Methodology: Telephone interviews with 983 American adults, conducted from Oct. 5 to Oct. 8, 2006. Margin of error is 4 per cent http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/13469 B..

Pat Speer' wrote: A couple of corrections to Bernice's list... Ford was a congressman in 1963. He never was a Senator. B: Correction, Pat, he was a Congressman... ************************** Pat: He changed the back wound from "back" to "back of the neck" and the report ended up saying "base of the back of the neck." This was probably an innocent mistake in that Ford was not the sharpest tack in the box and was almost undoubtedly basing his impression of the wound on the Rydberg drawings, which depicted the wound at the base of the neck. Bernice : Not innocent IMO....."In editing the initial draft of the Warren Report , Ford moved the the wound In Kennedy's back from a "point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine " to " the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine" . Ford's revision brought the posterior wound in line wiht the Commission's no-conspiracy conclusion, repositioning it to make it consistant with what came to be called " the single bullet theory"..Ford's editing of the Warren Com Report draft dated 6/26/64 ,can be found in the Rankin Papers ,box 26, folder 385 ,NARA. Pat: The real question is why Arlen Specter, who'd seen the back wound on an autopsy photo and knew the Rydberg drawings were incorrect, never tried to have the drawings corrected and said nothing to the commission. And I have an answer to that question: he was an ambitious spineless coward. The head wound wasn't moved till 1968. Bernice : "During Specter's and the commission's "March 16th questioning , Humes repeatedly referred to these drawings ( Ryberg's because they were denied access to the autopsy pictures and X-rays .According to Hume's testimony , the drawings depicted the trajectory of the nonfatal bullet ( CE 399) entering Kennedy's lower neck at a downward angle and exiting his throat in the region of the Adam's Apple.) when describing JFK's neck wounds . When McCloy asked the navy Doctor if the bullet trajectory took " roughly the line which is shown on your Exhibit 385", Hume's succinct response was "Yes, Sir". Even to the medically or forensically untrained eye it is patently obvious that the depciations of JFK's nonfatal wounds presumably produced by bullet CE 399 in photograph Number 12 and CE 385 and CE 386 are hopelessly irreconcilable .There is no way that these separate representations can coexist in the Commission's own permanent record without inviting skepticism of the deepest die. Commissioner Gerald Ford spotted this "eccentricity" in the report's third draft where it asserted , "A bullet entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine."..Ford edited the sentence to read, " A bullet entered the back of his neck slightly to the right pf the spine." With just a few facile changes, Ford and the Reediting Committee were satisfied that photograph Number 12, based on Specter's prized autopsy picture ,and Hume's much-exploited drawing's ...stand ins for the best evidence ....were now compatible ans would travel well together. Ford's editing of the Warren Com Report draft dated 6/26/64 ,can be found in the Rankin Papers ,box 26, folder 385 ,NARA ************************************ Pat:The NPIC study was done for the Secret Service. dgh: Pat, do you have a cite re: the NPIC study was done for the Secret Service, [specifically? Or, are you assuming that conclusion from Doug Hornes interview with NPIC employees[/b]. Thanks -- David Healy .. Bernice : "Zapruder Film re NPIC ...also the following from "Breach of Trust.".for information.. "Several days after the assassination the CIA received, from the Secret Service a copy of the Zapruder film. In return for a copy of the film the SS received an analysis of the film from the agency's National Photographic Intelligence Center (NPIC) in Washington. It had the reputation as being the finest photo-interpretation center in the world. The center's interpretation had come to the conclusions, that (1) the first shot had not come from the TSBD.."Sniper’s nest "..And (2) that there had been at LEAST two gunmen in Dealey Plaza shooting at the limo...But the results were supressed..page 6.. The three cartridges found in the TSBD on the 6th floor, corresponded with the time frame dictated within the Zapruder Film...which allows for only three shots from the MC rifle..It took at best a little more than two seconds just to cycle the rifle ,with no leeway factored in for the shooter to keep the scope fixed on the moving target. The manual that accompanied the model determined that all the shooting had occurred within a span of 6.4 to 8.0 seconds. But seeing and having to acknowledge the shot that had hit the curb on the South side of Main St. and wounding, on the cheek, bystander JamesT.Tague..a fourth shot could only be explained by a second gunman, but this was politically unacceptable... ( FBI Manual, Rankin Papers, " Investigation and Evidence"..RG 12, box 8, folder 7.Nara, 14-15.) The FBI chose to ignore the Tague shot, and the wound in the front of JFK's throat...page 99-100 The CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the government's official version was agreed upon..and before President Johnson appointed the WC..after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis ,it had been discovered that the first shot, according to the film, had come Before Zapruder frame 210.....and a second shot at frame # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot. All the WC experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled gunman would require at least 2.4 seconds..the 1.6 second shot interlude meant there had to be more than one shooter.. Page: 151. (.McKnight’s telephone interview , May 2,2003...with Dino A.Brugioni, the center’s chief analysis who was in charged of the NPICs interpretation of the Zapruder film..( Conclusion that follows are McKnights..not attributed to Brugioni, "When Brugioni turned over to McCone, or Helms the four-photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations interpreting the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the "Official Truth"..of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the weekend..( notes page 406) See also..Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up & Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film"..The The Third Decade no.1 ( November 84).9. Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder Film the day after the assassination"... Also see CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film..of JFK's assassination These results were pried loose from the CIA by a FOIA request in 82 by Harold Weisberg ..or see Wiesberg's "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures"..1967..available at Hood College..pages: 302-303.) The Warren Report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z..210..Therefore the analysis and results of the FBI and CIA, of the Zapruder film were ignored.... The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..after the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes"..pages 151-152.. ( Hoover to Rankin Dec4/64..Copy of letter appears in Wiesberg's , "Photographic Whitewash." page 143..) The three cartridges found in the TSBD on the 6th floor, corresponded with the time frame dictated within the Zapruder Film...which allows for only three shots from the MC rifle..It took at best a little more than two seconds just to cycle the rifle ,with no leeway factored in for the shooter to keep the scope fixed on the moving target. The manual that accompanied the model determined that all the shooting had occurred within a span of 6.4 to 8.0 seconds. But seeing and having to acknowledge the shot that had hit the curb on the South side of Main St. and wounding, on the cheek, bystander JamesT.Tague..a fourth shot could only be explained by a second gunman, but this was politically unacceptable... ( FBI Manual, Rankin Papers, " Investigation and Evidence"..RG 12, box 8, folder 7.Nara, 14-15.) The FBI chose to ignore the Tague shot, and the wound in the front of JFK's throat...page 99-100 The CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the government's official version was agreed upon..and before President Johnson appointed the WC..after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis ,it had been discovered that the first shot, according to the film, had come Before Zapruder frame 210.....and a second shot at frame # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot. All the WC experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled gunman would require at least 2.4 seconds..the 1.6 second shot interlude meant there had to be more than one shooter.. Page: 151. (.McKnight’s telephone interview , May 2,2003...with Dino A.Brugioni, the center’s chief analysis who was in charged of the NPICs interpretation of the Zapruder film..( Conclusion that follows are McKnights..not attributed to Brugioni, "When Brugioni turned over to McCone, or Helms the four-photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations interpreting the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the "Official Truth"..of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the weekend..( notes page 406) See also..Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up & Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film"..The The Third Decade no.1 ( November 84).9. Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder Film the day after the assassination"... Also see CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film..of JFK's assassination These results were pried loose from the CIA by a FOIA request in 82 by Harold Weisberg ..or see Wiesberg's "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures"..1967..available at Hood College..pages: 302-303.) The Warren Report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z..210..Therefore the analysis and results of the FBI and CIA, of the Zapruder film were ignored.... The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..after the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes..pages 151-152.. ( Hoover to Rankin Dec4/64..Copy of letter appears in Wiesberg's , "Photographic Whitewash." page 143..) *****"" In my ( McKnight’s) conversation with Brugioni , he was absolutely clear that it was over the week-end following the assassination that McCone requested that NPIC submit the Zapruder film to analysis. Brugioni still recalls his shock when he witnessed the Fatal Shot That took off the right side of the President’s Head”. (Notes: page 407) The work of compiling the medical evidence record of the President's autopsy did not require neither the co-operation of the FBI nor the CIA....so in this area of the investigation the Commissions efforts were not impeded nor distorted..by any investigative dishonesties and or cover-ups perpetrated upon such by the agencies..The WC condoned the sanctioned perjury ,connived, at the destruction of the best evidence ,boycotted key witnesses ,and deliberately and knowingly suppressed materials, medical records and legal documents. The massive corruption of the autopsy records was undertaken with one purpose : To ensure that the Medical evidence in the President's assassination was consistent with the Official Government's version of a Lone Assassin.. "The Overwhelming weight of the evidence supports the view that President Kennedy's official autopsy report was Deliberately Falsified to suppress the fact that he was a victim of a conspiracy." "It is a joyless irony that the autopsy of Kennedy's alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald ,performed by the Dallas County medical examiner ,Dr..Rose ,was worthy of a President. By comparison. President Kennedy received an autopsy unworthy of even the most unfortunate and unlamented derelict.." page: 153...(For critics and information of the President's autopsy see..... Henry Hurt aptly described JFK's autopsy as "the autopsy of the century" .See Hurt " Reasonable Doubt "..Sylvia Meagher ,"Accessories After The Fact." ..reprint 1992.. David Lifton " Best Evidence" 1981..Harold Weisberg " Post Mortum"..1975..Weisberg's powerful work still remains the most forcefully argued critique of the official autopsy..The official defenders of the President's autopsy whom usually argue that whereas the autopsy had starling deficiencies, it still arrived at the correct and valid conclusions ..such as Gerald Posner.."Case Closed"..1993..David Wobbling "November 22,1963:You are the Jury." 1973..David Belin’s, Wobbling "Final Disclosure"..1988..Denis L.Breo."JFK's Death"..parts 1-3..Journal of the American Medical Association 267 ,no.20 & 268.no.13...and John K. Latimer "Kennedy and Lincoln..Medical and Ballistics Comparisons of Their Assassinations..1980..notes p:407.. "Anticipating the FBI ,the CIA's NPIC ran it's own analysis of the Zaprduer film over the week-end following the assassinations. Like their FBI counterparts , the NPIC interpreteurs established that the first shot came before Oswald could have a clear view of the presidential limo and that there were at least two shooters". p.355 and chapter 6.. "Breach of Trust" ************************ Pat: Burkley's placement of the back wound at the third thoracic level was not confirmed by the Parkland witnesses, as none of the Parkland witnesses, save a nurse many years later, made any statements indicating they even knew of this wound's existence. While Burkley may have simply said third thoracic based upon his own observation, the possibility he saw the face sheet at the autopsy, which places the wound in that area, seems m ore likely. As Burkley spent most of his time with the family, it seems likely he only took a passing glance at Kennedy, and deferred to the face sheet. There is certainly no report of Burkley making a close inspection of the body. When you look at the face sheet it is clear the drawing is inaccurate in the shoulder area. A mark in line with the shoulder is way too far from the head, and a mark the correct distance from the head is way too far above the shoulder. On the night of the autopsy I believe Boswell placed the wound--which was around T-1 T-2, in line with the shoulder. Later, when it became a huge issue, he placed the wound in relation to the head, effecvtively moving the wound onto the neck. A wound at T-1, as acknowledged by the HSCA, is still too low to be in line with a trajectory from the sniper's nest to the throat. As a result I feel the T-3 T-1 dispute is a non-issue. What remains an issue is whether the doctors deliberately lied to Rydberg when he created his drawings depicting the back wound 2 inches higher than T-1. Bernice :Correction....*****It should read Rear Head Wound"****** will correct and add in Head".... B: "Why------was John F .Kennedy’s death certificate---signed by Dr. G. Burkley treated as such... The death certificate sheet headed by the words “summary of the facts related to death “-----Places the President Kennedy’s non-fatal back wound “ in the posterior back at about the level of the Third thoracic vertebrae …Recall that Dr.Burkley wrote the death certificate a day before he had received the Bethesda autopsy report..along with the six copies, before the assassination accounting was manipulated and settled upon….Burkley’s positioning of the Rear Head Wound in the Death Certificate was and is consistent with the Parkland Doctors and Nurses reports of said wounds, along with the Dallas Inquest Report signed on Nov.22/63…the press meeting announcement at Parkland as well as the 15 Doctors,3 Surgery Traumatic Nurses ,Television, radio newspaper reports, eye witnesses ,SS agents, FBI observers and Jacqueline Kennedy". ..The document that was treated like the “plague” to the Commission’s already predetermined conclusions…”one it treated like a poisonous snake”.. ------was John F .Kennedy’s death certificate---signed by Dr. G. Burkley The death certificate sheet headed by the words “summary of the facts related to death “-----Places the President Kennedy’s non-fatal back wound “ in the posterior back at about the level of the Third thoracic vertebrae …Recall that Dr.Burkley wrote the death certificate a day before he had received the Bethesda autopsy report..along with the six copies , before the assassination accounting was manipulated and settled upon….(notes..page 415..For Burkley’s Nov.24/63 ,receipt of the official autopsy report ,see ARRB Master Set of Medical Records.). Burkley’s positioning of the Rear Wound in the Death Certificate was and is consistent with the Parkland Doctors and Nurses reports of said wounds, along with the Dallas Inquest Report signed on Nov.22/63…the press meeting announcement at Parkland as well as the 15 Doctors,3 Surgery Traumatic Nurses ,Television, radio newspaper reports, eye witnesses ,SS agents, FBI observers and Jacqueline Kennedy,, It is not however CONSISTENT with, nor seen in the ZAPRUDER FILM….film, nor the individual frames from such…. The Dallas Inquest Report…and Burkley’s positioning of the rear head wound that was “signed on Nov. 22/63..at 1pm..states, by Theran Ward justice of the peace ,Precinct Nov.2, Dallas County… Under the heading “Findings of the Justice” ,it reports the cause of death as “ two gunshot wounds..” one of which was “near the center of the body and just above the right shoulder .”” Ward’s information comes from Dr .Malcolm Perry, This document also destroys the information that the body was not turned over and was therefore they were unaware of JFK’s back wound.. and that the Parkland emergency team never checked such.. Harold Wiesberg also in a interview with” Dr. Charles Carrico of Parkland ,who reported that he ran his hands down the sides of Kennedy’s body to determine whether there was a large wound in the back . Carrico noted that this was standard operational procedure in all gunshot cases..” (Notes :page 415.”.It should be noted that there are Two Dallas JFK death certificates . The one signed by Theran Ward on November 22/63, it placed the non fatal rear wound “just above the right shoulder “ as sited in the text..A second death certificate signed by Ward on December 6/63..reported that the immediate cause of death was “ multiple gun shots wounds to the head and the neck”….Since the later was issued after the official autopsy report was released the author Gerald McKnight regards this repositioning of the none fatal posterior wound with great suspicion .For copies of these Dallas County death certificates ,see ARRB ,Master Set of Medical Exhibits ,MD 42 and MD 43 ..The HSCA forensic panel chose to site the second Dec.6/63 version od the death certificate in its critique of the official autopsy report because that version was compatible with it’s findings that the report , while sullied by gross errors and deficiencies,had arrived at “correct and valid conclusions”. See HSCA .Mar.79 vol.7,189..see Weisberg interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, Dec. 1/77,Southwestern Medical School ,Univ. Texas ,Harold Weisberg’s autopsy file ,Weisberg archive..”.. John F. Kennedy’s death certificate affected greatly, the Warren Commission’s Weekend conclusions that a lone assassin had shot and killed the President, from the TSBD…so they therefore ignored and suppressed the report on his wounds.The Death Certificate does not appear in the Report, now the 26 Volumes of Hearings and Exhibits….Ignoring it appears that is was his Assassination after all that generated the 914 page investigative report displayed with almost seven thousand footnotes and a “bodyguard” of 26 stout volumes of more than 10 Million Words… A two page death certificate threatened to bring down this astounding, regarded as a respectful officially “sanctioned truths and conclusions is a scenario worthy of George Orwell”.. Pages…6-7-167-8-177-8-9- BOT..McKnight.. ********************************************** B...

(33) Why did the SS destroy all the motorcade records?. (34) Why did the CIA retain no less than 16 file drawers of Kennedy assassination ducuments not viewed by anyone outside the agency.. including the WC and HSCA. (35) Why did the CIA not only have a program of the harassment of CT authors, but also classify Top Secret, their efforts, to also use the CIA assets within the newsmedia... against Jim Garrison in 1968, and Oliver Stone in 1991.. (36) Why did then Congressman Gerald Ford, move the head wound incorrectly, 4 inches lower than the point of entry.. (37) Why is there a document stating that the body was removed from a metal shipping casket at Bethesda.. (38) Why was Dr. G. G. Burkley not called by the ARRB when offering his testimony, and that he had information to give them.. (39) Why did the WC classify transcripts, when it had no such authority of the proceedings, "Secret" except when it classified them "Top Secret". (40) When proceedings were leaked why was it almost always done in the form of "authorized leaks" of information planted in the media by either the Commission or the FBI, to prepare the public for the eventual release of the official explanation "One, Lee Harvey Oswald" , lone assassin. (41) Why did only 11% of the 912 page report the alleged facts of the assassination. (42) Why did President L.B Johnson, approve that the FBI make a report showing the evidence conclusively tie Oswald as the assailant of President Kennedy..The President and Hoover agreeing, that be the official solution of the crime before any evidence was tested, any witness questioned, or JFK buried. (43) Why on Sunday the 24th did LBJ tell Hoover he wanted a report on his desk by Tues, Nov, 26th, Hoover agreeing to the timetable and ordering the bureau's General Invetsigative Division to wrap up the investigation. (44) Why did several days after the assn the CIA receive from the SS a copy of the Zapruder film... for which they received an analysis of the film from the agency's Nat. Photographic Intel Center (NPIC) Washington.. The center's interpretation coming to the conclusion, that 1. the first shot had not come from the TSB Snipers nest..and 2..there had been at Least two gunmen in Dealey Plaza..But the results being suppressed.. (45) Why when the CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the Governments official version was agreed upon....and before President Johnson appointed the WC..and after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis, that it had discovered that the first shot, accoridng to the film, had come before Zapruder frame #210....and a second shot at frame # 242..just 1.6 seconds after the first shot.The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..after the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes. (46) Why fifteen years after the autopsy of President Kennedy did a government report reveal that the autopsy had been incompetently conducted, full of gross errors and failures to carry out standard forensic procedures in the investigation of an "unatural" violent death.. (47) Why were the Doctors at Bethesda prevented from examining JFK's clothing by a superior officer.. (48) Why was the autopsy performed at Bethesda which was not fully equipped to do a flawless autopsy upon the Presdident, it being mainly a training school for technologists.. (49) Why was it allowed that at least 24 onlookers almost all ranking military, as well as overcrowding, and continual background noise, interfere with the pathologists work allowed... why was not one of 5 outstanding qualified and experienced forensic experts within one hours flying time of Bethesday, not called in. (50) Why was the autopsy first draft and autopsy notes destroyed by Dr.Humes... and why is the chain of those autopsy notes a mystery. (51) Why did the WC suppress , deliberately JFK's death certificate from it's published records because it was destructive of the official explanation of the crime... (52) Why were there 7 changes of fact about the head wound. (53) Why did the ARRB hide the fact that more than 70% pf the facts and statements in the final autopsy draft do not appear in any published government records. (54) Why is the story that Robert Kennedy had denied the WC the autopsy and X-ray photos a lie. These lies, misinformation and blaming the victim’s family, was so unpalatable to even J.Edgar Hoover… that he noted on an FBI memo.. ”The confusion…would never have occurred if we had obtained the autopsy report originally. The Kennedys never asked us to withhold it and if they had we should have disgarded it.” (55) Why------was John F .Kennedy’s death certificate---signed by Dr. G. Burkley treated as such... The death certificate sheet headed by the words “summary of the facts related to death “-----Places the President Kennedy’s non-fatal back wound “ in the posterior back at about the level of the Third thoracic vertebrae …Recall that Dr.Burkley wrote the death certificate a day before he had received the Bethesda autopsy report..along with the six copies, before the assassination accounting was manipulated and settled upon….Burkley’s positioning of the Rear Head Wound in the Death Certificate was and is consistent with the Parkland Doctors and Nurses reports of said wounds, along with the Dallas Inquest Report signed on Nov.22/63…the press meeting announcement at Parkland as well as the 15 Doctors,3 Surgery Traumatic Nurses ,Television, radio newspaper reports, eye witnesses ,SS agents, FBI observers and Jacqueline Kennedy.. (56) Why of the 12 people who stood on the North side of Elm St. closest to Kennedy during the shooting, who stated that shots were fired from directly behind them and of whom only 2 were called .... one stating that shots came from both the TSBD and the Knoll area....the other 10 not being called...by the WC..one not even being interviewed...that being Marilyn Sitzman. (57) Why were millions of copies of the WC Report printed and distributed while only 8,000 sets of the 26 volumes printed. Enuf..for now.. B..

""While Moorman and Holland described more than one shot after the head shot, neither of them mentioned a significant pause after two quick shots before other shots resumed. Hill always made a point of saying there were two shots, a pause, and then the rest. Moorman thought there were two, three or four shots all together around the time of the head shot. In her early statements, perhaps under Hill's influence, she said three or four. She eventually settled on three."" Pat: Jean Hill never uses the words a Significant Pause.....she uses such words as... "interval,........... instant pause between the first two shots , ..............three shots, one right after the other, and a distinct pause, or just a moment’s pause then I heard more." And where in heavens name does," perhaps under Hill's influence "come into the documentation...where is the information pertaining to such, in that regard??. That is supposition, on your part .....and we cannot put words into the witnesses mouths, no matter what we would like them to say...mean or not state.. it doesn't work that way...imo. And yes Mary did settle on three after some time and she had been talked to...Jean never did, she said she heard more than three shots and stuck to her guns, as others did, also.. Jack: mentioned:" 4. She said she crossed the street "chasing a gunman" on the knoll immediately, but films show it was a couple of minutes. To her, it was immediately. And she thought the man she saw was suspicious, but she was only speculating about him being a gunman, since she did not see him shoot." Jean said: She observed: "......... a man up there running, .....or getting away ....at the top of the slope." She described the man as of " average height and of a heavy build "...and " wearing a brown raincoat and a hat". She said the man ran " in the direction of the railroad tracks ." An abandoned overcoat was found later that afternoon under an overpass a short distance west of Dealey Plaza..? Jean declined to give a filmed interview to Mark Lane, though she did tell him, he said, that "......the FBI was here for days .They practically lived here. They just didn't like what I told them I saw and heard when the President was assassinated"......No filmed interview because " For two years I have told the truth, but I have two children to support and I am a public school teacher. My principal said it would be best not to talk about the assassination, and I just can't go through it all again. I can't believe the Warren Reprt. I know it's all a lie, because I was there when it happened, but I can't talk about it anymore because I don't want the FBI here constantly and I want to contunue to teach, here. I hope you don't think I'm a coward, but I cannot talk about the case anymore." and she did remain quiet for a number of years..until her children were grown. They tried to intimidate her as they did Marina, which was corroborated by Robert Oswald, and others such as Richard Randolph Carr when he was told, rather than asked what he had witnessed during the assassination. Agents told him he had better keep his mouth shut. There were others also..and some did ..change their information when compared to first day, and some never did, like Orville Nix, Sam Holland, and others......but for now. Thanks.. B..

Mark to Len....... ""An expert on a wide range of subjects and a 'newbie' on this. Give me a break. I'm beginning to regard your presence here with a degree of suspicion"".. ..Cheers.... ************************ Pat: You say......""As virtually no one else describes hearing shots after a pause after the head shot, it seems possible Miss Hill was hearing the echoes of the two loud shots she and so many others had just heard.. "" First day evidence.. WBAP TV.. Nov 22/63, live interview...Mary virtually states the same, information of hearing shots after, the head shot..and being in the line of fire....... Mary Moorman: Quote.. ""There were oh three or four real close together, and it was, uh, and it must have been the first one that, that uh shot him, cause thats when I, thats the time when I took the picture..and during that time, after I took the picture, and the shots were still being fired and I decided I'd better get on the ground, I was oh ..no more that fifteen feet from the car, and in the line of fire, evidently"". Mary did not attend the WC but her statement was taken, this information is not within, I do not believe. B..

""And that “those who were close by were asked the wrong questions…and if any of them actually provided information that was accurate and important on relevant topics they had their testimony changed” Fetzer made these claims in a presentation about 9/11 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=86...etzer&hl=en starting at 38:45 [/size] Most of his claims about 9/11 were false so why should his claims about the assassination be any different? Len ************************* Len: In reply to your question.. Simply because What Dr. Fetzer stated is true, and sadly, it is also but one dishonest Tip of the iceberg... but there were others as well... Posted Sep.2/04.... "Many Depository employees went outside to view the motorcade. Most of them signed reports to the FBI during March 1964..Oddly, the reports all begin to sound alike in that the agents apparently never asked critical questions such as "Where did the shots come from?"..."How many shots?"...or "Did you see the effect of any shot?'... As the evidence quickly piled up against Oswald and the Depository became the center of the investigation, the authorities, news media, and public soon forgot the initial focus of attention in Dealey Plaza---the Triple Underpass..(area)..."Crossfire" Jim Marrs.. "None of the TSBD employees who thought the shots came from elsewhere other than their building were called as a Warren Commission Witness"... "Crossfire".....Jim Marrs... ******************************** THE TEXAS SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY......Nov. 22.1963 Witnesses In or Immediately Outside the Depository.... 1: Shelley:William (Steps):.. Manager of the Depository, (Oswald's immediate supervisor)and (part of the floor laying crew that day ) testified that he was on the top landing of the entrance watching the motorcade when he heard the shots: Ball: " What seemed to be the direction or source of the sound.?" Shelley:" Sounded like it came from the West."...VOL.V1, 328-9. "also: WC:.. "something sounded like it was a firecracker and a slight pause and then two more a little bit closer together." He then ran with Lovelady across a small street in front of the Depository to the North curb of Elm, then down towards the railroad yards where people were converging..."Crossfire"..Marrs..p.46 The Oswald "nest" was directly over Shelley's head.To the West of his position is the Grassy Knoll area. ( Shelley told the FBI that TSBD employee and Oswald look-a-like Billy Lovelady was seated on the steps in front of him at the time of the shooting . Oswald upon being questioned by the DPD after his arrest, reportedly said he encountered Shelley just outside the Depository after the shooting. According to the official version of Oswald's statements, Oswald said he then went home because Shelley told him there would be no more work that day.Shelley denied this,but admitted to being in the right place for this to have occurred.).."The JFK Assassination." Benson..p.236. 2: Truly: Roy Sansom... Superintendant of the Depository, was standing in front of the building , a little West..at the time of the shots... He joined a policeman, Marrion Baker, and showed him the way to the top of the Depository. Com.Council David Belin: "Where did you think the shots came from?" Truly:" I thought the shots came from the vicinity (of) the railroad or the WPA project.(pergola or pavillion on the Knoll) , behind the WPA project West of the building ." Belin:" Did you have any conversation with the officer (Baker: Marrion L.)...about where you thought the shots came from?" Truly: I said " ... I think we are wasting our time up here," or words to that effect, "I don't believe these shots came from the building ."... Vol.111, 227. "Truly said after the initial explosion,( he thought it was a firecracker or toy cannon) everything seemed frozen...Then there were two more explosions, and he realized that shots were being fired....He saw the President's car come to a complete stop"...."Crossfire". Marrs...p.27. "Truly saw Oswald about 90 seconds after the shooting on the Depository's second floor calmly drinking a coke....Truly says it was he who first noticed that Oswald was absent and drew that to the attention of the police."The JFK Assassination.".Benson...p.268 3: Campbell: Ochus Virgil: ...Vice President of the Depository, was standing next to Truly in front of the building. He gave an affidavit to the FBI. "...I heard shots being fired from a point which I thought was near the railroad tracks located over the viaduct on Elm Street"..VOL. XX11, 638. 4: Wilson; Steven F. ...Vice President of a textbook publishing company, watched from his corner office on the third floor of the Depository ---three floors directly beneath the Oswald ":nest". Wilson said in an FBI affidavit: "At that time it seemed the shots came from the West end of the building or from the colonade located on Elm Street across from the West end of out building . The shots really did not sound like they came from above me."... VOL; XX11, 685. He said he heard three shots and that the entire shooting sequence took less than five seconds... After making these statements above , to the FBI on March 25/64 Wilson was visited repeatedly by the FBI ."I couldn't get any work done.They were always there ."......he said. He refused to change his statement and was not called as a WC..witness. ."JFK Assassination" Benson. 5: Hopson: Mrs.Alvin ( Mary Madeline)..Employee : was looking out of a fourth floor window on the South side of the Depository,( the window would not open.).. facing on Elm Street, during the assassination. Although she was never called by the WC, she was questioned by the FBI, which reported: "She stated that it did not sound to her like the sounds were coming from her building ....She stated she thought they had been set off on the street below, and she saw people on the street running toward the underpass and the railroad tracks." ... VOL; XX1V, 521. 6: Davis: Mrs.Charles Thomas ( Avery): (Steps).....was standing on the steps of the Depository, where she worked, when she heard "three explosions". She told the FBI, "I did not know from which direction the shots had come, but thought they were from the direction of the viaduct which crosses Elm Street West from where I was standing." ..VOL; XX11, 642. 7: Garner: Dorothy Ann .. was watching the motorcade from a fourth floor window in the Depository when she heard the shots. She said in an FBI affidavit, "I thought at the time the shots or reports came from a point to the West of the building." ...VOL; XX11, 648. 8: Kounas: Mrs.George Andrew (Dolores Arlene). was outside the Depository, her place of employment,standing near South West corner.. when she heard gunfire. She told the FBI: "Although I was across the street from the Depository building and was looking in the direction of the building as the motorcade passed and following the shots. I did not look up at the building as I had thought the shots came from a westerly direction in the vicinity of the viaduct."... VOL; XX11, 659. 9: Williams;Otis Neville,(Steps):.. Book Depository's credit manager, who was standing on the steps of the building when the assassination occurred. told the FBI that he heard. " three loud blasts" and that " I thought these blasts or shots came from the direction of the viaduct which crosses Elm Street." VOL; XX11, 683. 10: Adams;Victoria Elizabeth ..was watching from a pair of windows on the fourth floor of the Book Depository, where she worked. The alleged assassin's window was two floors above her and to her left : The Grassy Knoll was below and to her right. Testifying about the source of the shots, she said. "....It seemed as if it came from the right below, rather than from the left above..".VOL; VI, 338. 11: Billy Lovelady: (Steps):...an employee of the Depository,( had been assigned to lay plywood flooring on the sixth floor that day.."Crossfire"..Marrs)....who at the time of the assassination was standing on the steps at the entrance to the building, was questioned by the Commission Counsel Joseph Ball: Ball:.."Where was the direction of the sound?" Lovelady:.."Right there areound that concrete little deal on that knoll..." Ball:..."How did you happen to go down there.?" Lovelady..."because everybody was running...toward that way: everybody thought it was coming from that direction."...VOL: V1,338-9. Lovelady told the FBI, " I did not at any time believe the shots had come from the Texas School Depository Building." ..VOL:XX11, 662. 12: Arce; Danny Garcia ...Employee..part of floor laying crew..who was standing in front of the Depository, near Truly and Campbell.where he worked, he testified: "I thought (the shots) came from the railroad tracks to the West of the Texas School Depository ."..VOL:V!, 365. 13: Frazier; Buell Wesley ( Steps):...the Depository employee who had driven Oswald to work that morning, was standing on the steps of the Depository building. He testified: "Well to be frank with you I thought it came from down there, you know, where that underpass is. There is a series, quite a few number, of them railroad tracks running together and from where I was standing it sounded like it was coming from down the railroad tracks there"..VOL:11, 234. 14: Molina: Joseph Rodriquez: ( Steps) :...was standing on the steps of the Depository building. He was interviewed by the Commission: Ball:..."Where---what was the source of this sound.?" Molina:..."sort of kind of came from the West side.....I didn't want to think what was happening ....but I wanted to find out so I went down there to where the grassy slope is..."...VOL:V1, 371-2. 15: Baker: Mrs.Donald , "Virgie" (nee Rachley)..TSBD bookeeper... who had been standing at the South-Western corner of the Depository----at the end of the building nearest the Grassy Knoll---testified that she heard shots after the President's car passed the building. Liebeler:.."Did you have any idea where they were coming from?." Mrs.Baker.." Well, the way it sounded...there was a railroad track that runs behind the building...so I guess it would be by the underpass....as well as I can remember now, back there, and we all ran to the plaza.." Liebeler:.."And you say there are some railroad tracks back in there....immediately behind Dealey Plaza away from Elm Street....and is that where you thought the shots came from.?" Mrs.Baker: "Yes."...VOL;.V11, 510-1 16: Jarman James Jr:."Junior"..a Depository employee, ( floor laying crew) was on the fifth floor of the building ( one floor below the "snipers nest") watching the motorcade from the Southeast windows.( Photos of the Depository taken seconds after the shooting show Jarman's two friends looking out the windows, but Jarman is nowhere to be seen.).. He thought the shots came from below, near the motorcade..VOL:111, 204. Jarman was standing with two other employees, Bonnie Ray Williams and Harold Norman, both of whom testified that they heard shots from above them. Upon hearing the shots however, the immediate reaction of all three men was to run to the West side of the building, not upstairs. "We saw the policeman and people running....There are some tracks on the West side of the building, railroad tracks. They were running towards that way and so we all ran that way."...VOL:111, 175. 17: Bonnie Ray Williams:..(floor laying crew ) was later questioned by Commissioner Gerald Ford: Ford:.." Why didn't you go up to the sixth floor ?". Williams: "I really don't know. We just never did think about it."..VOL:.III, 177. Also: Information from "The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond." Scott:Hoch:& Stetler.. ********************************** MISSING FROM ROLL CALL AT THE TSBD.. Jack Charles Cason - President of School Book Depositary - left the building at 12:10 p.m. and went home. (VOL:22:P 640) Gloria Jean Holt - clerk at TSBD - did not return after shooting. (VOL:19:P.526) (VOL:22:P.652) Sharon Simmons Nelson, Secretary, (VOL:19:P.256;VOL: 22-P.665) did not return. Bonnie Richey, Secretary, (VOL22:P.671) did not return. Carolyn Arnold (VOL:22:P.635) did not return. Mrs. Donald Baker, Clerk, did not return (VOL:22:P.635) Judy Marie Johnson (VOL22:P.256) did not return. Mrs. Stella Mae Jacob (VOL:22:P.665) did not return. Charles Givens did not come back. Virginia H. Brnum - McGraw-Hill employee does not return (VOL:22:P.636) Vida Lee Whatley, Clerk, does not return.(VOL:22:P.680) Warren Caster (VOL;22:P.641;VOL 26:P.738) eating lunch in Denton. Spauldin "Pud" Jones (VOL:22:P.658) eating lunch at Blue Front with Herbert Junker (another McMillan employee) (22:659) Mrs. Helen Palmer, clerk, (VOL:22:P.666) not present was at Love Field. Franklin Kaiser - was absent from work on 11/22.(VOL:6:P.342), (VOL:23:P.751) Vicki Davis, employee, was absent. Dottie Lovelady, employee, was absent. Mrs. Rudell Parsons, employee, was absent. Joe Bergen, Scott Foresman, absent. Maury Brown, McGraw-Hill, absent. John Langston, absent. Now how did Truly take an accurate roll call? People on floors: 7th - 0 6th - 1 5th - 4 4th - 8 3rd - 4 2nd - 2 1st - 3 *************************** Bernice Moore B..

Robin : Altgens 3..... even further cropped...but much clearer I believe, all I have found so far... B..

************* Hi Jaxie: You will be interested in the following article that was researched and presented by Chris Mills, and a much better photo of your Aunt, who was very lovely as a young woman..found these in my files.....the story is much deeper and complicated than what has been related to you, so far....FYI.. His address is also attached.. B.. ----------------------------- RAMBLING ROSE ----------------------- by Chris Mills The hymn that was played as the body was ushered to its final resting place could hardly have been more apt. With heads bowed, the mourners heard the strains of "Take your Burden to the Lord and leave it there." As Melba Christine Marcades was eased into the next life, it was to be hoped it would prove more successful than the one she had recently departed. At 2.00 pm, Monday, 6 September 1965 the world threw its last handful of dirt on one of the most intriguing mysteries surrounding the JFK assassination. It had cost just eighty-five dollars to bury the truth.1 Early life Melba had begun life on 14 October 1923(2) and had managed to squeeze a great deal of sadness into her 41 years. Her mother still lived in her home town of Houston, Texas. A State Police rap-sheet stretched back to 1941, detailing 28 offences until her untimely but nonetheless predictable demise. All of the early listed offences could be regarded as minor, ranging from vagrancy to car theft, and during the war years "aiding soldiers to escape." By 1947, however, she was being reported as criminally insane, and had been arrested on charges of prostitution; this, presumably to feed the drink problem that had also become apparent. Ms Marcades had used many names during her career of petty crime. Between the ages of 18 and 24 she would normally give a name based loosely upon her genuine one - Melba Christine Youngblood, her father being one Thomas J. Youngblood. Notably among her many aliases she never chose to use her mother Minnie's maiden name of Stroud. By 1956 Melba had married and gained the name of Marcades. This appears on her record, along with several invented names, throughout the next four years, until 1960, by which time it appears she was no longer using her husband's name. Her death certificate states that she was a divorcee but does not give the date that her marriage ended. Only once, prior to her death, does the name by which most JFK assassination students know her, show up on the State Police records. Roselle Renee Cheramie was charged on the 21 October 1964 with vagrancy, her behaviour being described as loud and erratic.3 Having studied the assassination of JFK for some years, I was familiar with the story - touched upon briefly in several books - that slightly prior to the shooting, a woman had been found apparently thrown from a car and taken to hospital. During her stay, she was said to have made numerous statements to police and doctors to the effect that President Kennedy would be killed during his forthcoming trip to Dallas. I was, initially, reasonably satisfied that as several respected "Warren Commission Critics" had mentioned it in their writings, and the HSCA had apparently investigated these allegations, there could be little here but unsubstantiated rumour. The brief mention given to Cheramie in James Hepburn's "Farewell America" made me reconsider. Ruby connection? In what is almost a throwaway line Hepburn says "Ruby dispatched her on 18.11.63 to Miami" as a drugs courier.5 James Hepburn was a pseudonym. Even now the true identity of the writer remains a mystery. The publishing company "Frontiers Publishing" did not exist either. The book was not released in the USA, and the combination of these factors gave the author licence to say whatever he liked without the fear of retribution either through the courts or otherwise. Could it be true that this woman worked for Ruby? What information did she have concerning the assassination and, more importantly, when did she have it? Accident victim On the evening of 20 November 1963 Lt Francis Fruge, of the Louisiana State Police, was on duty patrolling Highway 190, near Eunice, when he came upon a woman who seemed to be the victim of a road traffic accident. Although she did not seem badly injured Fruge thought it prudent to take her to The Moosa Hospital in Eunice to be examined. During the journey the woman told Fruge that her name was Rose Cheramie, explaining that she was en-route from Miami to Houston via Dallas, when an argument developed between herself and the two "latin" type men she was travelling with. This concluded with them abandoning her on the road after which she was stuck by another vehicle. Cheramie was examined at the hospital and found to be suffering from minor abrasions consistent with being struck by a car. As the Moosa was a private hospital and the patient had "no financial basis," the medical staff informed Fruge that they would discharge her. By now it had become obvious that Cheramie was suffering withdrawal symptoms from narcotics. In fact she was a nine-year, mainlining heroin addict having had her last fix at 2.00pm that afternoon. Fruge decided, as was usual in these situations, to take her to Eunice Jail to "sober up." Things did not go quite according to plan. At 10.30pm, as Cheramies condition deteriorated, medical help, in the form of Assistant Corone of St. Landry Parish Dr F J DeRouen, was summoned. The doctor administered a sedative, although he described the patient as being "coherent" at that time. The medication seemed to have little effect. DeRouen was recalled later that evening when Cheramie became violent, stripped off her clothing, and began to cut her ankles. The doctor agreed to commit her to Jackson East Louisiana State Hospital for treatment. It fell to Fruge to accompany the patient on the journey of between 1 and 2 hours . It was during this journey that the police officer began to ask Cheramie a few routine questions. Fruge later stated to the HSCA: "She related to me that she was coming to Dallas with two men who were Italians, or resembled Italians. They had stopped at this lounge and they'd had a few drinks and had gotten into an argument or something. The manger of the lounge threw her out and she got on the road and hitch-hiked to catch a ride, this is when she got hit by a vehicle." The lounge from which she had been ejected was in fact a brothel called the Silver Slipper. When questioned about her business in Dallas, she replied that she intended to "number one, pick up some money, pick up her baby, and kill Kennedy."6 Although Fruge later described Cheramie as "quite lucid" at this time, he understandably chose to ignore this warning as being the ramblings of a dope addict going cold-turkey. Late on the night of 20 November Fruge deposited his charge at the hospital where she was duly admitted. An initial examination indicated that the patient was suffering from heroin withdrawal and clinical shock. This hospital was not a new environment to Rose Cheramie, she had been admitted here in March of 1961 suffering from alcoholism and narcotics addiction.7 Arrest Two days later, when Fruge heard the news of President Kennedy's assassination, he immediately telephoned the hospital and asked them not to release Cheramie until he had spoken with her. Unfortunately the officer had to be patient. Cheramie was apparently not well enough to be questioned on the 22nd and Fruge was told he would have to wait. By Monday 25th Cheramie had recovered enough to be transferred to a ward and was interviewed by Fruge.8 Now the policeman was taking more notice of what Cheramie had to say. The story she told was that as a result of connections made while working for Jack Ruby, she was involved in a drugs run. Cheramie and her two companions were to go to Dallas where she believed her two companions would kill the president - she had overheard this in a conversation between the two men - she would then collect $8000 from a person she could not, or would not, identify, and proceed on to Houston where the trio would purchase 8 kilos of heroin from a seaman who was bringing it in by boat to the port of Galveston. The final part of the plan involved escaping to Mexico. Cheramie furnished the officer with details of not only the names of her companions, but also the name of the ship that was bringing the drugs into Galveston and the name of the hotel in Houston where the transaction would take place.9 Armed with this information, Fruge informed his superiors who told him to follow up on it. On Thursday 25th she was released into his custody, and place under arrest.10 Now, Fruge set out to verify what he could of her story. Most of what could be investigated checked out: Fruge contacted customs officers at the port of Galveston and not only established that the correct ship was due to dock at the time Cheramie specified, but also the seaman that she had named was indeed on board. The customs officer had trailed the seaman as he left the ship but unfortunately lost him shortly after. Years later Fruge was to state that he believed the customs officer in Galveston was also able to verify the name of the man whom Cheramie had said was holding her son.11 Drugs deal According to Cheramie, the drug transaction was due to take place in the Rice Hotel in Houston.12 Fruge took Cheramie on a flight to verify this, and other aspects of her story. On the return journey she caught sight of a newspaper with headlines that indicated that the police were unable to find a link between Oswald and his killer, Jack Ruby. Cheramie laughed out loud, telling the officer that she had worked for Ruby, or "Pinky" as she knew him, in his Dallas nightclub and that Oswald and Ruby "had been shacking up for years...They were bed-mates."13 Taken literally, this is unlikely to be true. There is neither evidence to suggest a long term relationship between Oswald and his killer, nor a sexual relationship between the two. It is possible, however that Cheramie was simply using colloquial phrases to describe how close she believed the two men to be, or she may simply have been exaggerating the little knowledge she actually did possess. As much of what the woman had told him checked out, Fruge telephoned the Dallas Police Department and managed to get through to Captain Fritz. Amazingly, Fritz was dismissive of Fruge's information and said that, as the assassin was dead and his assailant in custody, he was "not interested."14 Due to the lack of enthusiasm he had encountered, Fruge released Cheramie and his own investigation was wound up. Thus ended the first part of the Cheramie story. It was not until four years later that anyone again showed any interest in the ramblings of Ms Roselle Renee Cheramie. Garrison On 23 February 1967, Detective Frank Meloche sent a memorandum to Jim Garrison, the then District Attorney of New Orleans. Garrison had re-opened an investigation into the murder of JFK after becoming disillusioned with the Warren Commission's official version of events. The memorandum was the statement of one Mr A H Magruder, who explained that, during the Christmas holidays of 1963, he had been on a hunting trip with a Dr Victor J Weiss. The two men had fallen into conversation at Magruder's home, when Weiss began to relate some curious events that had occurred at the East Louisiana State Hospital around about the time of the assassination. Weiss allegedly explained that he was one of the doctors who had treated a woman who was brought in as a narcotics addict and who had supposedly been thrown from an automobile. According to Magruder, Weiss then repeated the story the woman had told to him, which varied little from that which Cheramie had told Fruge when first interviewed. She included details of her employment by Ruby as a dope runner and the plot to kill the President.15 This became one of many leads Garrison was to follow. He asked Frank Meloche to investigate further. The detective soon found that the woman Magruder had referred to was Rose Cheramie, and before long he had the name of the state trooper who had taken her to the Hospital. Now that Garrison had Fruge and all the information that nobody had wanted four years previously, he needed to find Cheramie. Fruge was detailed to work for Garrison. He met Meloche in Houston, on 6 March 1967, and began to search for Ms Cheramie. They were soon to be disappointed. In Dallas, Meloche found a Mrs Morris Wall who told him that her sister, Melba Christine Marcades, was dead.16 Death The events surrounding the death of Marcades/Cheramie are almost as intriguing as the statements that she made two years earlier. It seems, at least according to the official version, that Cheramie had a penchant for walking lonely roads at night. In the early morning of 4 September 1965 she was involved in an accident on Highway 155, 1.7 miles east of the town of Big Sandy, Upshur County, Texas and died later that day of head injuries received.17 What actually happened deserves closer scrutiny. At approximately 2.30 am that morning, Jerry Don Moore was driving out of Big Sandy towards his home in Tyler. As Moore drew level with a roadside parking area, he noticed three or four suitcases laid along the yellow line in the middle of the road. Naturally he swerved to his right, to avoid them. Suddenly, looking up, he saw the prone figure of a woman lying at ninety degrees to the highway, with her head on the road. Moore braked as hard as he could. "I don't know exactly whether I hit her or not. There was a sound but it could have been a brake shoe hitting on that old car." Neither the car, nor it's driver were in good shape. Moore admitted that he was "speeding pretty heavy" and had been drinking, while he described his vehicle as having only one headlight and slick (treadless) tyres. Moore managed to stop only after he had passed the woman. He then returned to where she lay to offer help. Rose Cheramie was still alive, although unconscious. As Moore sought the assistance of a group of black men and women who were driving north on the highway, he noticed a red Chevrolet, which he thought to be either a 1963 or 1964 model parked in the lay-by opposite where the woman lay. He had no recollection of seeing it, or the suitcases, when he passed this area about 15 minutes earlier. There then followed a bizarre series of events as Moore attempted to obtain first aid for the injured woman. Firstly, he asked the occupants of the car that he had stopped to move the cases to prevent further accidents, then he put the unconscious Cheramie into his car and raced off to Big Sandy where he asked for the nearest doctor. He was told that there was a doctor in Hawkins, a nearby town, and once again set off at breakneck speed. Once in Hawkins Moore found a cop who escorted him to a doctor's house where Cheramie was laid out in the yard. "She was still breathing, but had pretty good brain damage." The doctor gave her a few shots before the ambulance arrived to take the patient to Gladewater Hospital.18 What happened at the hospital remains a subject of some conjecture. In three places on Melba Marcades death certificate are the letters D.O.A. (dead on arrival), and yet on the very same document we are told that there was a period of nine hours between onset of injury and death. The certificate also states the time of death as 11 am - approximately nine hours after she was admitted. Did the doctors work for all this time on a corpse?19 Punctate stellate wound The cause of death was "Traumatic head wound with subdural & subarachnoid & Petechial Hemorrage to the brain caused by being struck by auto".20 There was an autopsy performed but, unfortunately, the hospital is now unable to locate these records. There are three further points which should be mentioned about Rose's death. Firstly, Moore noticed definite tread patterns on the head of the injured woman - the tyres of his vehicle were treadless. There was very little blood to be found on the road where she lay, and none at all on Moore's car.21 Secondly, the case was investigated at the time by Officer J A Andrews of the Texas Highway Patrol. Andrews tried to establish a connection between the driver and victim but was unable to do so. Due to the unusual nature of the accident he had doubts about the information received. As the relatives of Cheramie did not wish to pursue the case, it was closed.22 Finally, it should be noted that Cheramie's hospital records state that in addition to her other injuries, she had suffered a "deep punctate stellate wound above her right forehead." 23 This type of injury, according to medical textbooks, often occurs as the result of a contact gunshot wound. When a gun is fired touching flesh, the resultant gasses, trapped between a layer of skin and the underlying bone, can cause a bursting, tearing effect on the surrounding tissue leaving a star-shaped (punctate stellate meaning star-shaped puncture) wound. Fruge interviewed Officer Andrews and reported back to Garrison that although the police report on the incident would lead one to believe that Cheramie was involved in an unfortunate accident whilst trying to hitch-hike, in his opinion this was not a likely scenario. He found, as well as the aforementioned irregularities, that Highway 155 was a farm-to-market road running parallel to US Highways 271 and 80, these would have offered a much better chance of a ride. In his report to Garrison, Fruge also stated that back in November 1963, when Cheramie had been in police custody, she had volunteered "that she onfiltered= for Jack Ruby as a stripper, which was verified." 24 As Cheramie herself was no longer available for interrogation, Fruge pursued other avenues of enquiry that had not been followed up in 1963, but as the Garrison investigation gathered momentum, and attracted the unwelcome attention of the media, Fruge's work was almost forgotten. In Clay Shaw, the New Orleans D.A. had found a bigger fish to fry. The HSCA The critics, however, had most certainly not forgotten and in many books published in the late sixties and early seventies, there was reference to the Cheramie rumour. When the House Select Committee on Assassinations re-investigated the killing of JFK in the late seventies, one of the witnesses they called was Dr Victor Weiss. Weiss was the doctor mentioned in the Magruder statement that had set Garrison on Cheramie's trail. Now Weiss' story was slightly different from the one he allegedly told to Magruder. Weiss, a resident physician at Jackson in 1963, said that on 25 November of that year he was called by a colleague, Dr Bowers, to examine a patient who had been committed a few days previously. Bowers explained that the woman, Rose Cheramie, had stated before the assassination that the president was going to be killed. Under questioning from Weiss, Cheramie said she worked for Ruby and stated that "the word in the underworld" was that Kennedy would be hit.25 The good doctor was very precise about his dates before the HSCA, certainly more so than he was ten years earlier when questioned by Garrison investigator Frank Meloche. At that time, says Meloche, Weiss stated that he "doesn't recall whether this was told to him before or after the assassination.26 The doctor also went on to say on the Jack Anderson TV Special "American Expose: Who Killed JFK" that "On the 20th November....she (Cheramie) quite openly and readily told a number of the staff, including the doctors attending her that she was aware the President was going to be assassinated." Dr Bowers, unfortunately, was not interviewed by the Committee and I am unable to find records of him being interviewed by anyone else. Of all the information that the HSCA received during it's investigation of Cheramie, by far the most difficult to dismiss came from none other than the policeman who first found her. When he had interviewed Rose Cheramie at the hospital, Fruge said she had given him the names of her travelling companions. One, she divulged, had been called Osanto, the other was Sergio Arcacha Smith.27 During his period working for the Garrison investigation, Fruge had visited the Silver Slipper lounge and interviewed the owner, Mr Mac Manual. The Silver Slipper was the bar where Cheramie said the argument had taken place between herself and her two companions. Manual remembered the incident clearly, and picked out mug shots of both Arcacha Smith and Osanto from the stack that Fruge showed to him. There had been an argument, stated the bar owner, the woman had become drunk and abusive and was taken out side and "slapped around" by Smith and Osanto. Mr Manual said he recognised the two men as regular transporters of prostitutes in and out of Miami.28 Who was Sergio Arcacha Smith? Sergio Arcacha Smith In the month of March 1952 Fulgencio Batista accomplished a coup d'etat similar to one that he had successfully carried out twelve years previously. Once again he was President of Cuba. Batista encouraged tourism. Gangsters of all types were welcome, crooked casinos flourished and the bourgeois and the rich grew richer. Behind this thin veneer of prosperity seethed a restless under-class. They lived on the streets, ate when they could, formed a guerilla group and bided their time. That time came on 1st January 1958. Although the leader of the rebels opposing Batista was still in Oriente, some five hundred miles from Havana, the dictator had fled the country late the previous night and Cuba had itself a new president - Fidel Castro. 544 Camp Street Fearful of Castro's reprisals against Batista's corrupt officials, many of them followed their leader's example and ran for safety. One such ex-diplomat was Sergio Arcacha Smith who settled in Miami along with many of his exiled countrymen. Here they plotted the overthrow of the rebel president and dreamed of a return to the good old days. One of their number formed them into a cohesive group and, with the help and encouragement of the CIA, leading exiles moulded the Cuban Democratic Revolutionary Front. Various cities in the USA had branches of the movement and in 1961 Sergio Arcacha Smith was sent to be the head of the new group in New Orleans. The address of his new office - 544 Camp Street, may raise an eyebrow on many an assassination student.29 This was the same address that would appear on hand-bills issued by Lee Oswald three years later, the same address where Guy Bannister, ex-FBI man and CIA contact, had his private investigators office, the same office in which witnesses claim to have seen both David William Ferrie (a major suspect in the Garrison investigation) and Lee Oswald. Was this just coincidence? Let us look closer. It is likely that the infamous CIA agent, E Howard Hunt, had helped Arcacha Smith to find the office.30 Bannister, Hunt, Ferrie and Smith were active in the 1961 "Bay of Pigs invasion" that went tragically wrong for the exiles when, at the eleventh hour, Kennedy refused air -support. The attack was a debacle, with many of the invaders being cut down on the beaches by Castro's forces before they could make any headway. The CIA and the surviving Cuban Exiles held the American President responsible. The exiles continued to train, encouraged and funded by the CIA, in the southern states of the USA hoping for a better result on their next attempt. Ferrie, who had reportedly been a pilot on the ill-fated invasion, set to work moulding the Cuban recruits into a fighting force. The base for this training camp was a ranch owned by the family of Mafia money-man Meyer Lanskey.31 According to an April 1961 FBI report, New Orleans Mafia boss Carlos Marcello was funding Smith and his group in return for favours in Havana when Castro was toppled and the exiles regained power.32 Marcello, Hunt, Bannister, and Ferrie have all been strongly linked to the investigation into the assassination of JFK. Ferrie letter During the Garrison investigation of 1967 Smith was accused of a munitions robbery from Schlumberger Well Surveying Company. His accuser was Gordon Novel, a self confessed CIA agent. The stolen goods were apparently deposited at Guy Bannister's office.33 David Lewis stated that he saw Quiroga, a close associate of Smith, in the late summer of 1963, in a restaurant on Camp Street in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.34 When the CDRF folded, the CIA helped form The Cuban Revolutionary Council (CRV) of which Smith became a delegate. As an illustration of his ties to David Ferrie, consider the following: when Ferrie, a homosexual, was dismissed as a pilot by Eastern Airlines, a letter of support was sent to the company describing his heroic efforts on behalf of the Cuban cause. It's author - Sergio Arcacha Smith.35 There are many other witnesses and statements connecting Smith to Ferrie, Bannister, Marcello and Hunt. Smith was finally relieved of his post as a result of funds being mis-appropriated. He moved to Dallas and in 1967 Garrison, despite pleas to the Texas authorities, was unable to extradite him. It was actually John Conally himself who refused Garrison's request.36 If Cheramie is to be believed, and her travelling companion was indeed Arcacha Smith, then by virtue of his connections in New Orleans it is possible he did have foreknowledge of the assassination. As a final footnote to Smith's alleged involvement - on 17 September 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald, or someone using his name, applied for a Mexican tourist visa. The next visa was issued - by pure coincidence, of course - to CIA operative, William Gaudet. This agent denied knowing Oswald but, in a later interview, said "another vital person is Sergio Arcacha Smith. I know he knew Oswald, and knows more about the Kennedy affair than he ever admitted." This is not intended to be a definitive article on Arcacha Smith, he deserves much deeper investigation, but it has hopefully exposed how unlikely it would be that Rose Cheramie should pluck this man's name out of thin air. I am aware that others are currently researching the Cheramie incident and am confident that the last word has not yet been heard on the predictions of "Rambling" Rose Cheramie. Notes 1) Statement from "Malcolm Stone Funeral Home". 4 September 1965. 2) Death Certificate - Melba Christine Marcades. Texas State File No. AX-8-3976 ( The HSCA give the date of birth as 1932. I believe this to be incorrect. Not only does the death cert., contradict this, but accepting the HSCA's date would mean that her first criminal offence of vagrancy occurred when she was only nine years old!) 3) Louisiana State Police record. Document No.256375 4)James Hepburn, Farewell America, (Frontiers Publishing 1968). 5) Hepburn, pp. 349. 6) Memorandum, Det. Frank Meloche to Jim Garrison, 13 March 1967, and House Select Committee on Assassinations Volume 10 pp. 201. 7) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 200. 8) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 201, 202. and Memorandum, Det. Frank Meloche to Jim Garrison, 13 March 1967. 9) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 202. and Anthony Summers interview with Lt. Francis Fruge 1978 10) Memorandum, Det. Frank Meloche to Jim Garrison, 13 March 1967. 11) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 202. 12) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 202. 13) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 202. and R Groden and H E Livingstone, High Treason, Conservatory Press, 1989. pp.122. 14) Memorandum, Meloche to Garrison 13 March 1967. 15) Memorandum, Det. Frank Meloche to Jim Garrison, re- statement A H Magruder 23 February 1967. 16) Memo. Meloche - Garrison 13 March 1967. 17) Death cert. Marcades. 18) Interview of Jerry Don Moore by J H West and J Gary Shaw. 19) Death cert. Marcades. 20) Death cert. Marcades. 21) Interview of Jerry Don Moore by J H West and J Gary Shaw. 22) Francis Fruge's staement to Garrison. 4 April 1967. re interview with officer J A Andrews. 23) J Gary Shaw, "Case Closed" or Posner's Pompous & Presumtuous Postulations, Dateline Dallas, Nov 1993 pp. 12. 24) Francis Fruge's staement to Garrison. 4 April 1967. 25) HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 200, 201. 26) Memo. Meloche to Garrison 13 March 1967. 27) Summers, Interview with Fruge 1978. 28) Summers, Interview with Fruge 1978. and HSCA, Vol. 10, pp. 202. 29) Weberman & Canfield, Coup d'etat in America, Quick American Archives, 1992, pp.36. 30) Weberman & Canfield, Coup d'etat in America, Quick American Archives, 1992, pp.36. 31) Bob Callhan, Who Shot JFK, Simon Schuster, 1993, pp.86. 32) Weberman & Canfield, pp. 44. and J H Davis, Mafia Kingfish, McGraw Hill, 1989. pp. 85. 33) R S Anson, They've Killed the President, Bantam, 1975, pp.108. 34) Wardlaw & James, Plot or Politics, Pelican Publishing, 1967, pp. 49. 35) Callahan, pp. 8. 36) Milton Brener, The Garrison Case, Clarkson N Potter, 1969, pp. 184. Acknowledgements For providing information, documents, access to the HSCA Vols., Warren Commission Vols., and their valuable time: J Gary Shaw, Ian Griggs, Walter Anderson and John Rudd. Chris Mills 76 Main Street Burton Joyce Nottingham NG14 5EH email: des3millscc@ntu.ac.uk ------------------------------- end ----------------------------------

Admittedly, I've been busy doing things you can only dream of: making a living; making love; not falling asleep in a recliner; being regular; etc. Just think how much more peaceful it'll be when God yanks your cord. ******************* Brandon... Shame on you, that is disgusting...Grow up.. ...Never ever say anything like that, you have no idea, if you will wake, up tomorrow...nor someone in your family.... Talk about tempting fate, also be concerned about driving your car, and crossing the street in fact, be very....What goes around, has the distinct habit of coming around.... Whether you agree or not, it does...shame... B....

Craig Lamson Today, 04:19 PM Post #55 Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 533 Joined: 15-November 04 Member No.: 1913 Bernice, Take or leave my remarks, I really don't care, but please dont tell us you deal in facts and evidence because it is clear from your post that you do not. You deal with things from the perspective of your worldview...period. I know the history of the "badgman" fraud very well...in depth if you will. It's nothing but pure poppycock. You believe it because it FITS YOUR WORLDVIEW. Cut through all of the crap and ct garbage and lies and ONE SIMPLE FACT REMAINS and this SIMPLE FACT cannot be challenged...the MOORMAN CAMERA/LENS/FILM did not have the required resolution to produce the fradulent image known as "badgeman" The image known as "badgeman" is simply an artifact created from repeated copying and them additional alteration by Jack White. Those are the simple facts, everything else is PURE BULLxxxx. Now it is plain to see you are ignorant of these simple facts. Should you deside to live your life in ignorance, fine by me. However your ignorance, nor the ignorance of those who believe in the fraud that is known as badgeman CANNOT ERASE THE SIMPLE FACT THAT THE MOORMAN CAMERA/LENS/FILM (and a handheld...panning camera/lens/film at that) IS UNABLE TO RECORD THE DETAIL FOUND IN THE FRAUDLENT BADGEMAN IMAGE. And that is the SIMPLE FACT. Try your BS on someone else.. ""P.S. By the way, nice "selective" quoting in your post. It was so nice to see you leave out the parts that trash the badgeman works..... This post has been edited by Craig Lamson: Today, 04:22 PM"" ********************* Craig: You protest to much. Isn't it interesting how worked up you can get when someone disagrees? If the camera had had sufficient resolution power, there would be no doubt, one way or the other. Because it did not, to provide a clear image of a person-sized object, there is controversy. Blurred images caught in photographs may constitute evidence. You present "your" world-view and then you become offensive and obnoxious when there is disagreement. On the other hand, in the past you...have backed up the fact that Zapruder and Sitzman are seen on the pedestal, filming, even though their images are extremely blurred.....?? I do wish you would slow down, and read more comprehensively, as you can reread below, I copied and pasted the information pertaining : Quote: " to read the documentation, the story of the BDGM""..end quote.....not someones after thoughts....the members do have the ability to make up their own minds, not by what Myers says, he did some years after the facts...nor what you nor anyone else tells them to believe.....it is expected that they are able to click the link and read all, I posted the story of the Bdgm studies....as I stated..below.. Quote: ""Perhaps it would be enlightening, to read the DOCUMENTATION, the STORYof the BDGM, and how all went down and came about....and the many studies, by many parties, that were involved through the years.....With reference numbers, working at site link..it is much more complicated than some apparently want others to perceive..."" ******************************* It is absolutely sad.......to read your post, in which you knowingly, and for the sake of argument, put yourself upon a pedestal higher, than the British photo expert Geoff CRAWLEY..as well as MIT....and ITEK.as well it seems of many other true researchers. ""CRAWLEY also shot 3D photographs with "his special camera" and made measurements to determine whether the MOORMAN camera lens could resolve an image clearly from that distance. "" ""CRAWLEY determined It could because Her Camera had a Glass Lens Rather than a Plastic lens available in similar cameras. .."" Gary Mack :2000,In defending the Badge Man theory, MACK often cited the work of British photographic expert Geoffrey CRAWLEY telling his critics in 2000, "Check out British photo scientist Geoff CRAWLEY's credentials, and then find someone who is better who can debunk his findings. He did the appropriate scientific work [60] and was satisfied the size and shape was consistent with a person at that position. [61] CRAWLEY proved that the shapes were consistent with the size and shape of real people at that real location as photographed with that camera. It was a classic, simple, scientific study. [62] That's the scientific corroboration Geoff CRAWLEY provided independent of what Jack WHITE and I found earlier in similar studies. CRAWLEY reviewed all of Jack [WHITE]'s work, including the negatives, and was extremely impressed with his photographic skills. We can't prove Badge Man was a shooter - the picture just isn't clear enough. But we did prove the object is a person [63] at or close to the fence. [64] Without that, there'd be no reason to continue." [65] http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/badgeman_2.htm#42 "Check out British photo scientist Geoff CRAWLEY's credentials, and then find someone who is better who can debunk his findings."" Gary MACK, currently the curator for the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, seems to have completely backed off, his BDGM findings, as it was not mentioned in the last T.V. special .........as well as other findings, he did some great work before he obtained this position.... ************************************** P.S. I just read your newest post, and Meyers as we well know, from the past contacted Geoffrey Crawley, in 2001...though there is no written verification....as with Gary Mack, and Jack White, there is no written verification, there is verbal...as to his actual words.........Myers states that he , Crowley,did not agree with the findings presented within..TMWKK " Forces of Darkness" reiterated on Oct. 25/88.........But I gather he did not renege on his findings nor statements to Gary Mack and Jack White, in July of 1988.?? nor to his quote in an article Gary wrote in 1993..?? I do not know,but then again neither do you.. ""CRAWLEY took the original print and two extremely sharp 1963 prints back to England where MACK later claimed that CRAWLEY "duplicated Jack [WHITE]'s work using his own techniques." In a 1993 article, MACK wrote that the "Badge Man images passed every test [CRAWLEY] devised." [38] Five years later, MACK, offered a caveat, "Did Geoffrey confirm Badge Man? Not quite, for there just isn't enough detail in the original or 1963 copies to know with 100% certainty. But he was unable to conceive of any other explanation and found that the size, shape and clarity of both images were certainly consistent with two people in the poses and positions Jack and I measured." [39]"" You state in your posting, to me, " Try your B/S on someone else"........ You do not seem to comprehend, this is not my research......it is a small part of my studies.... The work, began and continued with a published photo from, David Lifton, to Raymond Marcus, to Josiah Thompson, to F.Peter Model, to Robert J.Groden, to Gary Mack and Jack White, to Gordon Arnold,(to Bill Miller, re his research on Arnold) , to MIT, Nigel Turner, pre 2001 statements possibley of Geoffrey Crawley, to ITEK,.....you are calling their work, and research b/s, not mine..many of these men saw what they thought was a shooter within the Moorman photograph...you wallow in your deliberate non-comprehension. And that is entirely up to you, but then again, you don't care, as you have already made very clear..and to return a wish..... "Why don't you take your LNr ,B/S and yada yada" B..

Craig: No repeated snide remarks, were necessary to me, within your reply, nor to anyone. That never furthers any studies, that only causes broohaws....as well you know.....So stick them, where the sun doesn't shine, as far as I am concerned, they are never worth the time nor effort to reply to, you only continue to try to show your nasty, bully side...which only comes across, as empty noise...somehow....IMO.. ************************** I deal with the documentation and evidence, well, what they have left us with, that is..not with anyones thoughts..I take positively no ones findings as a given......though that is anyones perogative.....I follow no one, and think for myself, many others do not, which also is entirely up to them... Whether some agree or disagree, to each their own. Perhaps it would be enlightening, to read the documentation, the story of the BDGM, and how all went down and came about....and the many studies, by many parties, that were involved through the years.....With reference numbers, working at site link..it is much more complicated than some apparently want others to perceive... ""In May, 1965, UCLA graduate engineering student David LIFTON brought MOORMAN photo No.5, which had been published in a souvenir photo history of the assassination, to the attention of early critic and researcher Raymond MARCUS, who became one of the first to note the potential importance of the MOORMAN photo and its view of the grassy knoll at the time of the fatal head shot. [8] Around this same period, Josiah THOMPSON, working on his forthcoming book, Six Seconds in Dallas, discovered an "exceptionally clear 8x10 inch print of the MOORMAN photo" in the files of UPI's New York City office. [9] In February, 1967, THOMPSON contacted Mary MOORMAN, who graciously allowed him to hire a professional photographer to copy the original Polaroid picture. [10] THOMPSON later wrote in Six Seconds in Dallas that there appeared to be a man in the MOORMAN photograph hiding behind the fence, about eight feet west of the southeast corner. [11] In a November 1967 edition of the Los Angeles Free Press, Raymond MARCUS offered up his own evidence of a figure holding a rifle in the bushes immediately to the west of ZAPRUDER's position. [12] In their 1976 book, JFK: The Case for Conspiracy, authors F. Peter MODEL and Robert J. GRODEN claimed to have discovered yet another assassin in the MOORMAN photo, this time standing just behind the end of the L-shaped concrete retaining wall. [13] In 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) contacted Mary MOORMAN and she loaned the committee's photographic panel her two surviving photographs for examination. The panel noted that the original photographs had deteriorated during the intervening years but nonetheless asked the Rochester Institute of Technology to make a high quality copy negative. Prints with varying degrees of contrast enhancements failed to produce significant increases in detail. Robert GRODEN, a consultant to the panel, later criticized the panel for relying on the faded original print instead of securing the high quality negative that had been made by UPI from the original Polaroid in 1963. [14] In October, 1982, researcher and Coverups! Newsletter editor Gary MACK received some items from Robert GRODEN, including a second generation slide of Josiah THOMPSON's exceptionally clear 8x10 inch print of the MOORMAN photo, which THOMPSON obtained in the mid-1960's from UPI's New York office. [15] The MOORMAN slide enlargement showed the end of the concrete retaining wall and MACK "almost immediately" spotted the figure that would become known as Badge Man. [16] MACK gave the slide to co-researcher and advertising photo technician Jack D. WHITE, asking him to make a series of varying density enlargements of the figure. [17] The WHITE-enhanced enlargements seemed to show the upper body of a man whose face was partly obscured by what MACK and WHITE took to be a muzzle flash or a puff of smoke. The figure also seemed to be wearing a badge on his left chest and an insignia on his left arm that resembled those worn by Dallas police officers. They dubbed the figure, "Badge Man." [18] One of the first things MACK did was check other films and photographs taken in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, to see if some kind of object might explain the presence of the Badge Man figure. MACK later wrote, "If Badge Man were just an object in the background, that object would show up in the aerial photo, right? But the photos tell us there was nothing back there that was big enough, or tall enough, to show up where Badge Man is. That was one of the first tests I did...and other films and photos from 11/22 have turned up since then confirming that there was no such object. Badge Man, whatever he did, was a person." [19] MACK and WHITE also went to Dealey Plaza and took a series of reference measurements. [20] Ultimately, MACK, made arrangements with Mary MOORMAN to have Jack WHITE copy the faded original print for "comparison studies." [21] WHITE's continued photographic enhancement efforts eventually led to the discovery of what MACK and WHITE believed were two additional figures in the MOORMAN photograph. One appeared to be a man standing to the left of Badge Man, wearing a hard hat and looking in the direction of the Texas School Book Depository. A third figure appeared to be standing to Badge Man's right, allegedly wearing a soft military-style hat and taking pictures with some kind of camera. [22] The man in the hard hat was dubbed; "Hard Hat Man." The third man was identified by MACK and WHITE as Gordon L. ARNOLD, a 23-year-old soldier on leave at the time of the assassination who first made his story public in 1978. At that time, ARNOLD told Dallas Morning News reporter Earl GOLZ that on the day of the assassination he was in uniform standing on the grassy knoll, armed with his mother's movie camera. ARNOLD claimed to have heard a shot fired from behind the stockade fence, dropped to the ground, and was immediately accosted by a police officer, who came up from behind him, ripped the film from his camera, and fled. MACK later conducted "three telephone interviews with Gordon ARNOLD, specifically to ask him questions not addressed in the August, 1978, Dallas Morning News article written by Earl GOLZ." MACK recalled, "In one of my interviews, I told him I had a photograph that may show him, but I didn't want him to see it until I was certain I had obtained the clearest possible version." [23] MACK and WHITE eventually embraced ARNOLD's account and offered the newly discovered ARNOLD figure as supportive of his version of events. [24] Meanwhile, MACK and WHITE tried unsuccessfully to get a major news organization interested in financing a scientific analysis of the Badge Man figure. [25] Then, in late 1984, a national tabloid agreed to have the image studied. In February, 1985, Jack WHITE and a representative from the tabloid magazine flew to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) where the MOORMAN photograph was subjected to computer analysis. MACK later explained that MIT did not use the superior UPI prints or the original MOORMAN print in their study, [26] apparently relying on the earlier WHITE enhancements. MACK wrote, "We spent a lot of time at MIT studying the flash/smoke by varying the density and contrast levels. It has shape, form, and texture whereas the light area over Badge Man's left shoulder was nothing but clear sky through the trees." [27] Conspiracy author Jim MARRS reported in his 1989 book Crossfire that MIT told them, without question, that the MOORMAN photograph did show a man firing a rifle. "The next day, however," MARRS wrote, "the chairman of the MIT department involved suddenly gave all materials back to them and, with no explanation, told them the school would no longer participate in any study of the photo." [28] On February 24, 1985, Josiah THOMPSON sent MACK and WHITE several MOORMAN prints "one of them originating from THOMPSON's rephotographing of the original carried out in February 1967" to use in their studies of Badge Man. [29] By early March, 1985, MACK and WHITE had engaged the services of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California under the auspices of former HSCA photo expert Robert SELZER. [30] According to SELZER, MACK made his request through the JPL public information office, which allowed SELZER to examine the materials without charging a fee. SELZER told author Richard TRASK that he received a whole series of "extremely grainy and noisy" copy prints. The JPL ran various types of linear computer filters on the images in an attempt to suppress noise and enhance detail. In the end, SELZER said, "We felt the noise was too high to do anything with - to do anything useful." [31] In 1986, British filmmaker Nigel TURNER, curious about MACK and WHITE's work with the MOORMAN photograph, telephoned MACK and asked him to be a senior consultant for an upcoming television documentary he was producing for Central Independent Television entitled The Men Who Killed Kennedy. [32] MACK later wrote that he "refused" to get involved with the program unless TURNER agreed to hire a photo expert to conduct "a scientific study beforehand" [33] and "either confirm or deny the Badge Man image." [34] TURNER contacted the British Photographic Society and hired Geoffrey CRAWLEY, the British photographic expert best known for his debunking of the Cottingley Fairy photographs. In July, 1988, TURNER and CRAWLEY flew to Texas to examine the MOORMAN's original camera and her two surviving prints. They met with MACK and WHITE at WHITE's home in Fort Worth where WHITE presented a lengthy slide show of his photographic work on the assassination. MACK recalled that after WHITE's slide show, CRAWLEY told Jack "his technical work was some of the finest he had ever seen." [35] The next day, CRAWLEY, MACK and WHITE went to Dealey Plaza and restaged MOORMAN photograph No.5 using her original camera loaded with 620 size Tri-X black & white film. MACK later wrote that CRAWLEY measured various objects, including the end of the retaining wall, for reference. "We then stood in those positions holding, as I recall, a 10 inch or so pie plate and CRAWLEY photographed us." [36] CRAWLEY also shot 3D photographs with "his special camera" and made measurements to determine whether the MOORMAN camera lens could resolve an image clearly from that distance. CRAWLEY determined it could because her camera had a glass lens rather than a plastic lens available in similar cameras. MACK reported that CRAWLEY's study included "distances, focal length of the lens, and other characteristics that are somewhat beyond my understanding." [37] CRAWLEY took the original print and two extremely sharp 1963 prints back to England where MACK later claimed that CRAWLEY "duplicated Jack [WHITE]'s work using his own techniques." In a 1993 article, MACK wrote that the "Badge Man images passed every test [CRAWLEY] devised." [38] Five years later, MACK, offered a caveat, "Did Geoffrey confirm Badge Man? Not quite, for there just isn't enough detail in the original or 1963 copies to know with 100% certainty. But he was unable to conceive of any other explanation and found that the size, shape and clarity of both images were certainly consistent with two people in the poses and positions Jack and I measured." [39] As the program air date neared, Geoffrey CRAWLEY and the program's assistant producer flew to New York to view a newly discovered copy negative of the MOORMAN photograph at the Bettman/UPI archives. [40] Gary MACK joined them. [41] CRAWLEY later said that "to a large extent the trip to UPI, you know, was unavailing - it didn't add anything and there was no more information - they had got various peripheral pictures of the event that were quite fun to look at but nothing absolutely material to the assassination itself...[42]...in fact it very soon became obvious there was no more information in it." [43] CRAWLEY stated that he didn't think the UPI prints were any clearer than what he had already studied, "One was over developed or something like that and that's how the story came that one was clearer than the other. It may be clearer to the eye, but as far as the actual detail present, I don't think there's any difference." [44] Gary MACK agreed. [45] On October 25, 1988, Central Independent Television, a British commercial network, broadcast Nigel TURNER's two part documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. [46] Part two of the documentary, "Forces of Darkness," featured the work of MACK and WHITE and the three figures identified as Badge Man, Hard Hat Man, and Gordon ARNOLD. The program offered MACK and WHITE's work as "convincing evidence of a gunman up on the grassy knoll," and put great emphasis on the recollections of Gordon ARNOLD, deaf-mute Ed HOFFMAN, and the testimony of Lee BOWERS as corroboration for the three figures discovered by MACK and WHITE. At one point, narrator Hilary MINSTER offered scientific corroboration for the three figures, "Gary [MACK] and Jack [WHITE]'s work has been verified and duplicated by independent experts in Great Britain. Measurements taken in Dealey Plaza and from Mary Ann [MOORMAN]'s original camera confirm that it was possible for the Badge Man figure to have fired the fatal headshot." MACK concluded his on-camera remarks by saying that he believed the FBI "knew the evening of the assassination that there was a second gunman up on the grassy knoll. The medical evidence as it exists now does not indicate a shot from the front, but we do have to understand that if Badge Man was firing and if it was Badge Man's shot that struck the President in the head, that means that the medical evidence has been altered. And there you've got conspiracy existing within the United States government...So we now have to wonder seriously, perhaps for the first time, whether Lee Harvey Oswald even fired any shots." [47] MACK later distanced himself from the implication that Badge Man was the grassy knoll shooter, writing, "I'm not locked into Badge Man being the man who killed Kennedy, although that is what [Nigel TURNER] claimed. Having spent far more time than anyone on the image, and reviewed photographic evidence few researchers have even heard of, much less seen, I cannot find an object that could be mistaken for the Badge Man image. In short, it has to be a person. Whether he is firing or not is a separate issue." [48] MACK has told interested persons that despite considerable efforts to clarify "what [badge Man] was doing" [49] no one has been able to say for certain "what he was doing before and after the picture was taken." [50] MACK adds, "Those who know me know that if I found anything to debunk Badge Man...I'd make it public immediately." [51] A month after The Men Who Killed Kennedy aired in Britain, PBS's NOVA aired a program in the United States on the Kennedy assassination which included an analysis of the MOORMAN photograph. Although NOVA concluded that the MOORMAN photograph did not contain gunman in the shadows, including the Badge Man figure, they relied on inferior prints. [52] In 1991, the A&E Cable Network purchased the U.S. Cable television rights to The Men Who Killed Kennedy from Central Independent Television and produced three additional parts with narrator/host Bill KURTIS. [53] The five-part documentary was broadcast for the first time in the U.S., and has since been repeated (with an additional sixth-part) many times since. [54] In 1993, MACK arranged to have ITEK Corporation personnel examined several MOORMAN prints. In an Internet posting, MACK described the examination, "...they were extremely helpful, even calling in one of their retired experts who was one of the team involved with the NIX and ZAPRUDER analyses. We spent nearly all day on that image, and several people walked in and out looking at it. None could debunk the possibility that it was a person. It was quite amazing, and self-satisfying, to watch them examine the image and ask questions. Near the end of the day, one of them said he thought the left arm seemed to be at a slightly odd angle. To which I replied, 'But it is an arm, right?' He agreed that it sure looks like one. The bottom line is that the picture is not sharp enough to be definitive. If the original 1963 Dallas copy negative(s) can be found, we'd have a first-generation copy of the original Polaroid and a significantly better source image to work from." [55] Unlike the earlier MIT study, ITEK computer scanned the two UPI prints and the original MOORMAN print for their study. [56] MACK later wrote: "The two UPI prints and original Polaroid we worked with have far better gray scale than any published versions of that picture." [57] In mid-October, 1993, a "major U.S. news organization" teamed up with a Japanese network to enhance the MOORMAN photograph using a new radiation technique. They approached MACK and requested access to the original photograph. MACK later wrote: "A few years ago I learned that an archaic form of radiation enhancement can, literally, bring a dead black and white picture back to life, even if the silver image, to the eye, has faded away. If the Polaroid original is radiated properly and held next to a piece of fresh photographic paper, the radiation absorbed by the silver will create an identical image on the paper with all the fine detail the original possessed thirty years ago. But the only scientists with expertise at this technique are in Japan, and the MOORMAN original would retain its radioactivity. It could never again be handled and, under agreements dating back to the end of World War II, Japan cannot export any kind of radioactive material. It would have to stay there, stored in a lead container...At this writing, the middle of October, I cannot decide what to do. In a few years the original picture will have faded away to nothing, whereas the radiation enhancement will prevent any further hands-on study, even if some new enhancement technique is developed." [58] MACK ultimately decided not to send the original MOORMAN photograph to Japan for analysis. On November 22, 1999, the Dallas Morning News published a feature story on Gary MACK, then (and currently) the curator for the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. MACK told writer Michael GRANBERRY, "The best lesson I've learned about studying this subject is not to get locked into anything. There were times when I was not as open-minded as I should have been." Still, MACK clung to the Badge Man theory contending that the MOORMAN photo "reveals a possible second gunman standing behind the picket fence at the top of the grassy knoll." MACK said, "It looks like a person in the position you would expect a person firing a rifle would be in. He appears to be dressed in a manner that's certainly consistent with a police uniform." MACK also still felt that the testimony of Lee BOWERS and the recollections of Gordon ARNOLD support the Badge Man allegation. [59] In defending the Badge Man theory, MACK often cited the work of British photographic expert Geoffrey CRAWLEY telling his critics in 2000, "Check out British photo scientist Geoff CRAWLEY's credentials, and then find someone who is better who can debunk his findings. He did the appropriate scientific work [60] and was satisfied the size and shape was consistent with a person at that position. [61] CRAWLEY proved that the shapes were consistent with the size and shape of real people at that real location as photographed with that camera. It was a classic, simple, scientific study. [62] That's the scientific corroboration Geoff CRAWLEY provided independent of what Jack WHITE and I found earlier in similar studies. CRAWLEY reviewed all of Jack [WHITE]'s work, including the negatives, and was extremely impressed with his photographic skills. We can't prove Badge Man was a shooter - the picture just isn't clear enough. But we did prove the object is a person [63] at or close to the fence. [64] Without that, there'd be no reason to continue." [65] "" http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/badgeman_2.htm#42 B..

Craig: What you have stated in your posts, in regard to a few statements re Badgeman and Mary Moorman, appear to me to be in error.. Post # 19...Craig Lamson ""So how doi White get his "badgeman" image? Simple. He used a photograph that was many generations removed from the original and simply threw away (false, grain created) detail by over exposing the film in his COPY until he produced the image he calls badgeman. Badgeman never existed in the original Moorman polariod. Thats why Jack had to look at MANY different copy versions to find the stuff he needed for his hoax. "" ***************************** Badgeman was not Jack's..find originally.... He did not use a photograph that was many generations away from the original...and did not throw away detail until he produced the image BDM.. Neither did he look at MANY different copy versions to find the stuff he needed for his hoax.. In 1982 KFK researcher Gary Mack noticed what he thought to be the image of a gunman behind the fence on the knoll in a Moorman slide copy given to him by Robert Groden...Gary then asked Jack if he could copy the image, enlarge and enhance it ....They worked on BDGM together..with Groden's input of the slide...... The image was later confirmed by computer photoanalysis at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Jet Propulsion Lab... If you need corrroberation then you will need to email Gary Mack as well as Robert Groden. *************************** " Quote" Post # 23..Craig Lamson ""The bottom line is pretty simple here. Jack used a really POOR image (the zippo) to try and build his case that Mary Moorman was in the street when she took her polaroid of JFK. He was shown to be totally wrong on this count."" Jack did not need to use a really POOR image (the zippo) to try to build his case that Mary Moorman was in the street when she took her polaroid........ Mary has stated she WAS in the street , when she took her polaroid..... She was interviewed by KRLD in 1997....The interview was originally, and kindly provided by Debra Conway..... Moorman: " UH, just immediately before the presidential car came into view, we were, you know, there was just tremendous excitement. And my friend who was with me ( Jean Hill ) we were right ready to take the picture. And she's not timid. She, as the car approached us, she did hollar for the president . " Mr.President, look this way ! AND I'D STEPPED OUT OFF THE CURB INTO THE STREET TO TAKE THE PICTURE. AND SNAPPED IT IMMEDIATELY..And that evidently was the first shot . You know I could hear the sound.And." Jones: "Now, when you heard the sound, did you immediately think 'rifle shot'..?" Moorman: "Oh no. A firecracker, maybe. There was another one just immediately following which I still thought was a firecracker. And then I stepped back up on to the grassy area. I guess just, people were falling around us, you know. Knowing something was wrong . I cetainly didn't know what was wrong. " If you need further confirmation, then you will need to contact Debra Conway.. Within the assassination of President John F. Kennedy ""the bottom line is NEVER pretty simple here...."".. B..