Bernice Moore
-
Posts
3,556 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Bernice Moore
-
-
I will read the link provided by Bernice before labeling Ian and her as extremists. This way I won't have to apologize to them!
But by posting this thoughless remark, you already have..which was exactly
what you had in mind, or you never would have in the first place..IMO. .B
-
The History of the Zundel case in Canada and the United States.
Please read all, if interested......
I am very proud of Canada..for taking such a stand, and opening itself to this type of criticism, to protect all of it's citizens....
http://www.adl.org/learn/Ext_US/zundel.asp...d=2&item=zundel
-
Hi Craig;
The link that you posted does not work.....
BTW: Have you read the book...??..what did you think of it..?
I thought it gave all much to think about..
Thanks...Bernice
Sorry it was broken, lets try this one.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_..._36/ai_n8643124
Have not read the book but followed Fetzers work on this and I think it's bunk.
*********************************************************
Thanks Craig for enabling the link....after reading the book, I meant to do a much through search on this subject, your post last evening reminded me..
After reading the link to Justin Peters of the Washington monthly, well I believe now more so, that the answers are not as simple as he implies.....Perhaps
you and others may be interested...
Senator Paul Wellstone
There are at least 381 links to Senator Paul Wellstone..His biography,political history, the information on his and his families death by airplane crash..He apparently was a very special kind of that rare man, we call, and honest Politician......Below you will find many links, not all.....some conspiratial, some government,some honoring the man and his accomplishments, some with simply many questions.....Non are to Dr.Fetzer's site, though that is available also...go to Google...he relates much information on the crash......as this search does not relate in anyway to him, just my inquisitiveness....After reading the book, and the post last evening, thankyou...Craig for drawing my attention to this subject again....I became even more interested, so I thought I would share with you some of what I have found...
I wanted to make it known and show the other side of the coin, here perhaps, as I think this site honours the Freedom of Speech, and wants to present all evidence and opinions not just in part or what a particluar individual may believe and chose not to present when he is of a different opinion, ......though in some areas I also see this being done...I thought on this special man it should not be left to any one sided view, so I took the time,to find more information for myself and decided to share it perhaps with the members..or anyone interested.
I have not completed reading all, but have been to many, and it seems there are many other people out there who do not believe this was a simply airplane crash and accident...
Read and make up your own minds, let no one do that for you ever..That relates to freedom...of speech and is your privilege alone...
So we proceed:
Two years ago, all eyes were on the Senate race of Senator Paul Wellstone. In the wake of the defection of Jim Jeffords, the White House hand-picked Norm Coleman to attempt to unseat the populist Wellstone. But Coleman still trailed Wellstone late in the campaign. On October 11th, Wellstone voted against the President’s war on Iraq, despite a dire personal warning of "severe ramifications" from Vice President Cheney. As the result of his vote, Wellstone’s popularity soared.
Then tragedy struck. Just ten days before his probable re-election, Senator Wellstone was killed in the mysterious crash of his small aircraft. On October 25, 2002, the American people suffered the loss of a leader for peace and justice. Some folks harbored suspicions. And some remember how the media blamed the weather.
After two years of research, James Fetzer, Ph.D. and Don "Four Arrows" Jacobs, Ph.D., prove that the weather did not kill Senator Wellstone. Nor were the two pilots incompetent, as the final report of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) would claim.
With impeccable logic, these two highly-lauded university professors ask the hard questions: Why the mysterious cessation of communication from the airplane right before the crash? Why did a passer-by experience cell phone interference at the exact time the pilots lost control? How did the FBI arrive at the crash scene, only an hour or so after the first responders, and eight hours before the NTSB?
At the time of Senator Wellstone’s death, 69% of Minnesotans polled said they had a hunch a "GOP Conspiracy" was at play. Now, a new book makes the case that the common people were right all along..
http://www.drenchkiss.com/wellstone_conference.html
Analysis: Wellstone Anomaly
The webmaster of RadarMatrix makes the allegation that something fishy caused Senator Wellstone's plane to crash in Minnesota on October 25, 2002 at 10:20am. The claim is that some kind of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) caused a problem with the aircraft and subsequently led to the crash. EMPs are bursts of energy that cause electrical failure of devices within the area of effect of the EMP. He then produces the following image from an infrared satellite image and draws attention to the black lines, which he calls "magnetic strips", which appeared on the image to the north and south of the airport where Wellstone's plane went down. His original claims may be found here.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The claims of such a high-tech conspiracy to kill the senator are not based in science.
First, an EMP causes severe problems with electronics in its area of influence. It is not a directed beam, but the affects are spread out in all directions from the burst. Had an EMP been employed against Wellstone's plane it would have affected all other electrical devices in line-of-sight including any nearby power lines which would have propagated the effect outside the area. While the possibility that the U.S. military has directed-EMP weapons is not entirely impossible, it is only speculation.
Second, since an EMP pretty much destroys everything that uses electricity, including engines and motors, we would expect the engines of a plane targeted by an EMP to shut down. However, evidence indicates that the engines on Wellstone's plane were operating when the plane crashed.
Perhaps most interestingly, however, is the IR satellite image above that the webmaster at RadarMatrix provides us with as evidence.
If you'll look at the time/date stamp on the image you'll see it is 10/25/02 at 05:15Z (Zulu). That equates to UTC or GMT. During Daylight Savings Time, which was in effect on 10/25/02, "Zulu" is 5 hours ahead of Central Daylight Time. That means that the satellite image provided at RadarMatrix at 0515Z was at 12:15am Centrail Daylight Time--over 10 hours before the Wellstone accident. When the above satellite image was taken the Wellstones and their plane were in St. Paul far outside the area enclosed by the "magnetic strips." So what relevance the above "evidence" has on a crash that occurred 10 hours later is very questionable.
Of course, the black lines, or "magnetic strips," are themselves irrelevant. While he suggests they are magnetic strips or some kind of signature of an EMP and somehow provoked by other radar anomalies (which themselves are irrelevant), the reality is that these are simply communications errors between the satellite and the receiving station. The GOES satellites from which these images are received operate in geosync orbit at approximately 22,000 miles above the equator. They are constantly making observations and transmitting data back to scientists and meteorologists, and they do a good job most of the time. But just like your cell phone occasionally has interference problems, so do satellites. If a satellite experiences interference during the transmission of the IR imagery, "noise" will be apparent in the resulting image.
While monitoring GOES imagery for a few days, here are a few examples of similar anomalies that I observed:
These are just a few examples. It seems that these kind of anomalies are pretty common on the GOES West satellite but, even so, appear from time to time on the GOES East satellite. That these relatively common communications problems happen at any given time is not particularly surprising and certainly not evidence of a conspiracy to kill a senator.
CONCLUSION
The evidence that RadarMatrix presents is flawed. The satellite anomaly presented is almost definitely a communications problem that can often be observed in different forms and magnitudes by constantly monitoring GOES satellite imagery. And even if the satellite imagery presented by RadarMatrix were something besides a communications error, the anomaly occurred more than 10 hours before the Wellstone accident.
The suggestion that the Wellstone crash was anything but an accident is completely unfounded based on the "evidence" provided by RadarMatrix.
http://www.letxa.com/issue_wellstone.php
How Very Convenient..Rense
http://www.rense.com/general31/covneb.htm
Many reporters have already pointed out how convenient it is that that George W. Bush's most outspoken opponent was killed in a plane crash less than two weeks before an election in which his victory was essential to maintain Democrat control of the Senate. FoxNews.com, reported that Wellstone was flying in a "King Air A-100 turboprop, said to be one of the safest planes in the air." Further, reports indicate "freezing drizzle and light snow had been falling and there was light fog, but officials are not certain the weather contributed to the crash." In addition, "the plane's pilots called the airport to get clearance for landing when they were about seven miles out, and they reported no problems, said Gary Ulman, who was on duty at the small airport at the time." As a direct consequence of Wellstone's death, Bush now has control of both Houses of Congress.
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/wellstone.htm
http://www.nmha.org/state/parity/wellstone.cfm
Wellstone’s death comes almost two years to the day after a similar plane crash killed another Democratic Senate hopeful locked in a tight election contest, Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan, on October 16, 2000. The American media duly noted the “eerie coincidence,” as though it was a statistical oddity, rather than suggesting a pattern.
One might say, paraphrasing Oscar Wilde, that to lose one senator is a misfortune, but to lose two senators, the same way, is positively suspicious.
Last year two leading Senate Democrats, Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, were targeted for assassination with letters laced with anthrax. The federal Justice Department—headed by John Ashcroft, who lost to the deceased Mel Carnahan in the Missouri contest—has failed to apprehend the anthrax mailer.
Wellstone was in a hotly contested reelection campaign, but polls showed he was beginning to pull ahead of Republican nominee Norm Coleman, the former mayor of St. Paul, in the wake of the vote in the Senate to authorize President Bush to wage war against Iraq. The liberal Democrat was a well-publicized opponent of the war resolution, the only Senator in a tight race to vote against it.
More broadly, with the Senate controlled by the Democrats by a margin of 50-49, the loss of even a single seat could shift control to the Republicans. The immediate effect of Wellstone’s death is to deprive the Democrats of a majority in the lame-duck session scheduled for late November.
Without exaggerating Wellstone’s personal significance—he was a conventional bourgeois politician and no threat to the profit system—there are enormous financial stakes involved in control of the Senate. Republican control of the Senate would make it possible to push through new tax cuts for the wealthy and other perks for corporate America worth billions of dollars—more than enough of an incentive to commit murder.
See below..
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/well-o29.shtml
Wellstone was the only progressive in the U.S. Senate. Mother Jones magazine once described him as, "The first 1960s radical elected to the U.S. senate." He was also the last. Since defeating incumbent Republican Rudy Boschowitz 12 years ago in a grassroots upset, Wellstone emerged as the strongest, most persistent, most articulate and most vocal Senate opponent of the Bush administration.
In a senate that is one heartbeat away from Republican control, Wellstone was more than just another Democrat. He was often the lone voice standing firm against the status-quo policies of both the Democrats and the Republicans. As such, he earned the special ire of the Bush administration and the Republican Party, who made Wellstone's defeat that party's number one priority this year.
http://www.alternet.org/story/14399
In the mood for a cartoon...
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Wellstone/main.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/1...ane.crash.minn/
http://www.voxfux.com/archives/00000039.htm
More Rense:
http://www.rense.com/general31/assis.htm
A Government report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2003/AAR0303.htm
Links to Facts & Commentaries about the plane crash of Senator Paul Wellstone and his family
http://www.linkcrusader.com/paul.htm
In Appreciation
http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/6625
The Plane Crash: All files in alphabetical order.
http://www.oilempire.us/wellstone.html
Welcome to America's Future
As stated there is much more information, both pro and con on the web....My opinion..well I feel there has been the loss of too many good men over the years, through, assassinations, accidents, sudden deaths.etc...Many years ago I was not into conspiracies, but as time has gone by, and the good continue to die unexpectedly, and the questionable, continue to prosper and, live long healthy lives, I see a unequality about all this, that has raised my ire, and curiousity to the point, where yes, conspiracies at times have become the norm...IMO.
Thanks Bernice.
P.S....I do not know if the maps above will attach here, if not then you must go to them...for the information.
-
Hi Craig;
The link that you posted does not work..... BTW: Have you read the book...??..what did you think of it..? I thought it gave all much to think about..
Thanks...Bernice
-
Hi Antti:
Thanks for the info....This was copied from...The Cuban Site....below..
"It can be added that in her statement before the Warren Commission, Mrs. Silvia Odio said that on September 26, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald an two other persons visited her house in New Orleans. This contradicts the other results of the investigation which gave Oswald as traveling by bus from New Orleans to Mexico City that day."
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_001-025/doc0010.html
WC testimony....
"Mrs. ODIO. From Ponce, I came straight to Dallas last year, March of last year.
Mr. LIEBELER. So that you have been in Dallas since March of 1963, is that correct?
Mrs. ODIO. That's right.Mr. LIEBELER. You indicated that you had gone to school in the United States. Where?
Mrs. ODIO. Eden Hall Convent of The Sacred Heart, in Philadelphia. "
She was also with her sister at the time of the visit....and I believe separated from her husband, not positive...on that......
Might be worth looking into this discrepancy in dates...hmmmmm, good Catch.....Antti
Thanks again, regards.....B....
-
_____________________________
Thanx Bernice. I was just about to give Shanet this information. In fact I make reference to it on another thread, the three censored hours from TMWKK.
The John Ligget hour is fantastic. Also The Guilty Men, which is what got the show pulled, as it features Barr McClellan and his book, Blood Money and Power, How LBJ killed JFK". Walt Brown is on, Ed Tatro, Nathan Darby, (who made the print match). Ladybird and Jack Valenti went nuts over this and got it pulled, BUT why all three hours??? The Ligget hour is the key!!!
Shanet I might be able to get you a copy of this. I will PM you.
Dawn
********************************************************
Hi Dawn:
If you have this information all compiled, I did but cannot find my typed article.
Then please post it for all the members, as I more than likely may have left out bits of information....
I do have the sets on tapes and CDs....but thankyou for the thought.
Another thought re the information on this program, was perhaps it was not so much pulling the three complete hours, as perhaps obtaining all ,and therefore ending the series, which their actions apparently seems to have done....?
******************************
For those who have followed along....
One other bit I have beem reminded of, was that John Liggett would disappear at times, for maybe several days at a time....His co-workers also stated that they had to be at work, as usual each and every day...but John would simply inform whomever that he would not be in, and simply leave.....he never lost his job, nor was reprimanded in anyway..and the others did wonder why he was allowed to.......Lois also comfirmed this....
-
Found a bit more from my records on Malcolm .
He lives in Varo Beach in Florida, and
he is a professional mediator....an elderly man now...he has served at the Univ.in Labor relations..and the Faculty Senate at Pen State...He was a supervisory economist for 3 years at the nat. research Office of the EEOC.
Liggett was arrested in 1974 for the murder of Jay Bert Peck's widow.
According to Billie Sol Estes in "JFK, le dernier témoin", John Liggett would also have killed Jay Bert Peck himself, and many other people related to John F. Kennedy's assassination. He would have been a serial killer used by an organization responsible of JFK's death..
Jay Bert Peck was a cousin of Lyndon B. Johnson who resembled him amazingly. He had been LBJ's official double.
According to Billie Sol Estes in "JFK, le dernier témoin", Jay Bert Peck would have replaced Lyndon Johnson during the night between November 21 and 22.
Corrections to the previous post and a wee bit more info.
When John Liggett was arrested in 74 for the murder of Beck's widow he was held in jail for assault for a year,but during that year the Police were not allowed to interview him....... and then when they were transferring him he got loose,with a key..
It was when John was in jail, his brother Malcolm got ahold
of Lois by phone, and they met in the park....and he warned her to never say anything about anything and to never see John again...for her and the childrens sake.
Now why would he relax at what was a motel in Corpus Christi when he saw Oswald had been shot, unless he knew of this beforehand ??
That perhaps no one would now talk about the cover-up of the conspiracy and the real murderers and he and his family were safe now..?? Was he being coerced to keep his mouth shut ?? and from whom did the money come from that they came into shortly after the assassination.??
-
Yes, there is more to that Liggett story! After he supposedly died, his ex wife was on a trip to Las Vegas. While in a Casino, she looked up and saw Liggett working, as a Pit Boss (I am thinking it was) He also saw her, but he turned around and walked the other direction, so as not to have to be confronted by her. She also knew that he did love to be around gambling, yet he was also suppose to be dead. She believe his death was staged and he was relocated in a witness protection program.
At some point a woman from her church befriended her, seemingly out of the blue. I don't recall what transpired from this friendship.
However, a photo was found that seemed to be at a Night Club (maybe the Carousel). In the photo, sitting at a table was, Jack Ruby, Liggetts brother Malcalm and his wife and that woman who had befrieded her before.
Not long ago, I believe I heard that Malcalm Liggett, denied that photo being him and his wife and was in fact suing someone, not sure who though.
I may not have this all exactly correct, but this was it more or less.
I have wondered if anyone had any updates to this story, since seen in TMWKK.
Dixie
**********************************
Hi:
I did the Liggit story in two parts but so far cannot find the second, the info was taken right from the tape TMWKK......
As I recall.....
Yes Dave he was shot by Police trying to escape, though there is something odd also ?? about the wound, he was shot in the back but the wound was to the front of the neck, hmmmm sound familiar, something to that effect...He also was held in the County Jail I believe for a year with no trial or official charges ??, for attempted murder of his girlfriend before his death??
After John and Lois were divorced they remained close...but one day she had a call from Malcolm, and met him in the park...he wanted she said to walk into the open as if he did not want anyone overhearing anything he had to say...he told her to never see John again, that is was dangerous for her and her family....He was so serious she took all to heart and it frightened her, and she then moved the children to another city in Texas..She did remarry...and the woman Dixie mentions she met at church became I believe one of the childrens Godmothers, the daughter's whom also told the story on the Tape...the woman was constantly dropping in and out and they were the best of friends and also became like one of the family, one day she simply disappeared, and they have never seen nor heard from her again, and they do wonder now, if somehow she was keeping an eye on them......( not sure now but I do think she disappeared after John was killed, ??)
Lois also recalled when John was killed, and she spoke to his new wife at that time, and she told her she has seen him in death and that it did not look like John,in the coffin...??...this next wife was not interviewed..
The day they went to Las Vegas, and into the Casino, she looked around and saw a man who she would swear was John Liggett looking at her, he turned and spoke to a fellow worker and seemingly stared at her, she called one of her grandchildren to her, as he was watching, and they left immediately ,it so unnerved her.....She also stated that , Las Vegas with all it's gambling Casinos was just the type of place John would have gone to...to hide out, if need be.
Yes, Malcolm denies being in the photo, or that any part of this story is true..have not heard anymore on his suit nor information on this story...if and when..
-
***************************
Hello Again James
Mortician John Liggett :
When the HSCA met for their final reading to the world...the statement was issued, along with the rest of the report that the medical Doctors....all agreed, 16 from Parkland and 10 associated with Bethesda , 26 in all, that they had stated they did not see a hole, a blow out wound ,in the rear of President Kennedy's head.....needless to say, all witnesses were also wrong, which included Secret Service, F.B.I., Nurses, Attendants, Staff, and eye witness in Dealey Plaza....including his wife Jacqueline..
..The HSCA lied..
Dr.Mantik has been to NARA and viewed the autopsy photos 9 times..he has related the information ,in his opinion..there is a soft matt insertion in these photographs that cover that aspect of the back head wound.... so many others state there was no wound to the side of the Presidents head....nor was there a wound to the top of the head..
Though there may have been damage to the top of the skull that later during the actual autopsy, caused the top area, simply to fall away in several pieces.....at the time of Parkland, and the arrival of the body at Bethesda there was no open, blasted out wound to that area...if it was shattered, at that time,the scalp tissue and hair, contained it all.....
John Liggett, worked for the Restland Mortuary in Dallas..
The day of the assassination, he and his wife Lois,at that time, whom had been married just three months before, after her first husband Charles Godwin and father of her 4 children ,had been killed in a private plane crash.....were attending a funeral service for her Aunt at Restland...John came to her with the news that the President had been shot....and he left for Parkland Hospital.
At 2pm he called her from the hospital with the message that John F.Kennedy had died....she asked if Restland had gotten the job....he replied no, but that he had a lot of work to do and he would be gone for some time and would call her ..
He returned home, 24 hours later ..He was very tired and exhausted but hyper....Lois says he appeared to have had a traumatic experience in her opinion.He told the family that they must get out of town for awhile till this all blows over, explaining nothing more,they proceededito pack the car, and leave Dallas..
They drove to Austin, and San Antonio, and along the way they stopped at various relatives and friends..he met with his brother Malcolm..Lois felt that she was not privilege to hear what was being said in conversations, that it was all somehow, secretive or to do with secrets..
Sunday morning they stopped and checked into a Motel near Corpus Christie....Debra, her daughter and Lois state that John was intently watching the T/V broadcasts, and perched on the edge of the bed....chain smoking, and seemingly very nervous.
When they saw Lee Harvey Oswald on the TV being transferred and suddenly shot, John Liggett physically relaxed, and basically told them pack your things we can go home now....
After the assassination, John seemed to come into a large amount of money...Their whole lifestyle changed, they bought and moved to a very expensive new home...and John's new friends and the company he kept, were described as wild ,with regular poker games ,gambling and parties at the new house...
He was always tied in with the Dallas Police and always seemed to be under investigation in something he was involved in, gambling or such...Their whole life style became chaotic..they later divorced..
One day Debra and her sister recall a visit by a freakish man, with painted eyebrows, wig and all...they were told by John that he was an old friend from the Civil Air Patrol.....
Lois stated that she always felt John was involved somehow in the assassination of the President.....She thinks perhaps he flew to Bethesda in Washington with the Presidents body, (or on AF 2 ) to fix the wounds.
It has been stated by Charles Smith and fellow co-workers and friends from Restland, that John was the best in reconstruction..that he would work all evening or as long as it took, to say repair damage to someone who perhaps had been disformed in an accident and that after all was restored to perfection, you would never know of the damage that had been received to the body....He was a master.
Info..from TMWKK
-
I was wondering if anyone had any background on Alberto Gallego? From what I have been able to gather, he was in charge of CIA surveillance at the embassy in Mexico City and was most likely responsible for the Mexico Oswald photographs.
Gallego's full name is Alfredo Augusto Rodriguez Gallego. His photo is below.
Any information at all would be appreciated.
James
**********************************************************
Hi James:
A very quick search revealed this..will have a more in depth..anything I will send..
BTW: His full name came up as Alfredo Augusto Cesar Rodriguez Gallego.? Alberto ?
The person in charge of this CIA center was Alberto Cesar Augusto Rodriguez Gallego, of cuban origin, who pretended to be Colombian and who now lives in Spain and works at the Berlitz Language School at 80 Jose Antonio Street, Madrid.
If those mechanisms existed, why does the photograph submitted to the Warren Commission show someone else and not the real Oswald? The CIA can produce from its files the negatives of all the persons that visited the Cuban consulate on September 27, 1963. Agent Rodriguez Gallego can provide details on this.
It can be added that in her statement before the Warren Commission, Mrs. Silvia Odio said that on September 26, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald an two other persons visited her house in New Orleans. This contradicts the other results of the investigation which gave Oswald as traveling by bus from New Orleans to Mexico City that day.
*****************************************************************
Alberto Cesar Augusto Rodriguez Gallego, who pretended to be a Colombian, but was actually born in Havana, was the CIA's main agent in the Espionage Center at No. 149 Francisco Marquez St.
___(photograph)
with caption: CIA agent Rodriguez Gallego who now lives in Spain
Data on Rodriguez Gallego
He was born in Havana on November 6, 1922, attended grammar school in Tampa, Florida, and graduated from the University of Havana Law School. From 1941 to 1950, he worked in the legal department of the Cuban Finance Company, and later for the Cuban Telephone Company, one of the most powerful US monopolies on the Island. There, Rodriguez Gallego managed to become the president's right- hand man.
He left Cuba for Mexico in 1960. There he lived at No. 800-1 Bolivar Street, Colonia Alamos, Mexico, D.F. and, in late 1961 he moved to No. 149-1 Francisco Marquez Street, Colonia Condesa, Mexico 11. D.F. (Telephone 514-74-967). Then and there, the CIA's Espionage and Surveillance Center came into existence.
From a window on the third floor of the house Rodriguez Gallego watched all the visitors to the Consulate, working full time for the CIA throughout his stay in Mexico.
When the CIA's LIEMBRACE group was temporarily disbanded in 1972, Rodriguez Gallego hurriedly set off for Spain to carry out missions for the Central Intelligence. There he bought apartment 7-A at No. 194 Manzanares Avenue, Madrid 26, where he now lives.
He is listed as assistant director of the Berlitz English Language Academy, at No. 80 Jose Antonio Avenue, Madrid.
Bugging Techniques
The espionage tapping operation that Philip Agee mentions in his book was a CIA job that used the telephone network in the offices of the Cuban ambassador and his secretary, in the consulate and the consul's office and in the sentry box. Nor is this the only espionage action against the Cuban Consulate and Embassy in Mexico City.
Another kind of device was discovered when the chairs in the ambassador's office were sent to be upholstered. Another time the CIA placed a bugging device in a sofa that had been sent for reupholstering, along with four chairs, to the Bucky shop, at No. 418 Coyoacan Avenue, Acc. B. Colonia del Valle, Mexico 12 D.F. It has been established that these espionage devices were installed while the furniture was in that upholstery shop.
-
Dixie... I am sorry if I upset you.
==j==
IMO....
It's none of your business whom Dixie emails.....and you wish you had
upset her, instead of just cheesing off another person..your not that
good.....get over yourself..
It does not matter whom replies to you, or what question they
ask, you turn the tables with glee, and attack...and then and if you
find out how wrong you are, you try to come back all sweetness and light.
Forget it......you always go too far...have watched this
for many years, on many forums, you are worse now than you have
ever been..and don't whine back about how you have been attacked
we have all heard it a million times, and heck girlie many have been,
get over it...and look to yourself for the reason why..the difference is
they don't make a production out of it....
Wonder why most people do not respond to your posts....
take your pick....but one of the bottom reasons being..
their opinions and differences are always regarded as a
personal attack against you....you only discuss the evidence
with those whom agree with you, therefore nothing is
accomplished...
How about answering some questions from Uwe or Nancy instead of
whining about why you can't ,won't and do not want to....or refusing to
reply....
I know this thread is suppose to be about another subject....but it has
changed....you changed it....
This is my opinion Judyth, to which I am entitled, like it
or lump it...
You and your no discussions are simply not worth the time nor effort
to correspond with you on any matter...and boy does this thread prove
that point.....Dix tried to relate some information to you...and you xxxxe
on her.....
Now go hollar for John again, as you have in the past about who this woman
is who is " attacking" you , the words you seem to always use,
who cares...
you have worn it all out....you give nothing...it is all about you....
You and your story simply aren't worth bothering with any longer....Nancy and Uwe are right..
IMO....
-
Hi Bill:
More questions , please..if you will allow me.
Weigman is running towards them...so his camera is trained towards a
somewhat side view of the pedestal..so it would show them side by side
more or less if she had stepped behind him, would it not.??..similar as to
Betzner and this is all within seconds of the last shot fired at the limo...?
Would you inform me if this frame, is before or after when he shows the limo
passing into the underpass and shows the smoke on the film ?
Bernice - I am not sure which frame you refer to, but let me cover the ones I recall from this thread if I may. The frame from the Wiegman film showing the smoke comes at the very end of the Zapruder film as the limo is entering the underpass. Jack did a composite made up of more than one Wiegman frame to show the pedestal. I don't recall if he posted a single Wiegman frame of the pedestal, but he may have. About 17 seconds passes from the time Betzner took his photo to the moment Zapruder stops filming. Zapruder stops filming about 9 - 10 seconds after the head shot to JFK. These time frames may not be all that relevant, but I thought I'd share them as I go. Once Zapruder and Sitzman go out of view on the Nix film I do not know how they moved around on the pedestal. I know the Bell film pans back towards them after the limo passes through the underpass and it catches Sitzman and Zapruder off the pedestal by that time. The Paschall film shows Zapruder hoping off the pedestal behind Sitzman as I recall.
The smoke in the Wiegman film would be in the air during Zapruder's filming, but his camera pans just below the smoke, thus not allowing us to see it. However, there may be a small part of the smoke seen in the Zapruder film around Z419/420, but I cannot be for certain. (see attachment one)
..................................
Bill
The Wiegman clear frame showing the smoke and limo. It occurs after Wiegman
has run past the first lamppost but before he gets to the second lamppost. Of interest
are the cars and motorcycle pulled over to the south curb...NOT SEEN IN OTHER FILMS
OR PHOTOS.
Jack
********************************************
Hi Bill & Jack :
Thank you for the photos and explanations..and the gif, and all appreciated.
Sorry I did not make myself clear,last evening I referred to the Weigman's that both you and Jack posted, tinted red, and thanks for sharing the timing also..that does help as it all becomes confusing..I believe some are working on that area, for all so perhaps in the future we shall have a timetable, as I do not think one is available at present.?
So if I have read this red Wiegman frame correctly they would be, Zapruder in front to Sitzman being behind him in that frame, if I could see them,as Wiegman's view was more of the side of the pedestal coming down Elm....but because of the blurr I do not..
I understand that he was running and pausing as he leaped off the car, at the corner of Houston and Elm, I believe he states he did so as he heard the second shot, there may be other views in the Wiegman that have not been looked at too closely ,one is the frame, that Jack has found and posted that reveals the bikes and cars stopped on the left on Elm,as the limo goes under..but are not found in others....too bad so much was so very blurred.
Bill...The Betzner lit, contrast and blurred does show how objects are changed and can be wiped out...in some photos...appreciated...but I always was under the impression that a very light object only became lighter, but I do not know anything about this area, that you have pointed out to me...but thanks for taking the time and doing so.
I must admit I am lost on the Bronson slide.....I do see people,her two legs,and perhaps his right leg to the left on the pedestal, but it appears to me that she looks as though she is in front of him, and her dress is so very dark..and she was wearing beige.....I have studied this photo many times, in looking for Marilyn, but this one does confuse me..
The smoke to me in Wiegman is quite clear, but had not seen the possible smoke in Zapruder for a long time.
In the future at some time when convenient, would it be possible for someone to post the Pascall frame, of them descending from the pedestal. Or is it just available on the film, perhaps.?
Now I do not see any sign of them in the second Wiegman frame to the right that Jack has attached above...now in this one I do see the sun is quite bright on the pedestal, and the shadows in contrast very dark and I would think they should be shown, to some degree as this appears to be at the same time that the limo is travelling into the underpass...and it appears to be clearer ..but ?
I believe that Zapruder stepped down from the pedestal about ,perhaps 13 seconds after he stopped filming and I thought the Weigman film would have shown them even though the frames are not that sharp...he did start filming as he ran perhaps some three to four seconds after the second shot....and Marilyn stated that she stood atop the pedestal without Zapruder, awhile and when she looked around he had gone.......But in her statement with Professor Thompson that changed and she stated that she had gotten down after the limo disappeared into the underpass and she ran down the hill and seeing that Wiegman would be right there at that time and filming I had thought and hoped I would have seen her in the Wiegmans, but??and I have not been able to find her in the many other photos taken of the south side at that time.... I do see her and Zapruder in some,and in Bell as she turns and goes into the Pergola..and he walks away but we do see him then walking into the Pergola in Altgens I believe it is, but if the Bell was taken around 10 seconds after they they got down, then I should be able to find them in the Wiegman I have thought, but??
I do see them in some photos, in others I am not sure, and yet again in some, I do not...I do realize the tumultuous chaos that must have broken out as the assassination occurred....and the scrambling by the photographers for their photos and films..most seem to be,either very dark shadows or very bright light..nothing much was grey apparently or just right in otherwards..It is just that in this Sitzman area to me there is inconsistancy in the photos..that's just my opinion.. as I have been looking for her in all, for some time now...and I still am......
Thankyou both Gentlemen for your time,and your photos, and your work and remarks, much appreciated......
B -
Hi Bill:
More questions , please..if you will allow me.
Weigman is running towards them...so his camera is trained towards a
somewhat side view of the pedestal..so it would show them side by side
more or less if she had stepped behind him, would it not.??..similar as to
Betzner and this is all within seconds of the last shot fired at the limo...?
Would you inform me if this frame, is before or after when he shows the limo
passing into the underpass and shows the smoke on the film ?
Wouldn't a darker background be even better to show her light dress ?
than those with a light background.I thought Zapruder and Sitzman were in the sunlight....?
She also was much taller than Mr Zapruder so wouldn't her upper area be
showing above him somewhat, if she had somehow been able to maneuver
herself behind him. I would think part of her still would be showing..?
Isn't the pedestal only about two feet in width..and perhaps approximately
four feet in length there abouts..?
Marilyn was a big girl, and taller than Mr.Zapruder by several inches and
two feet does not sound perhaps enough room for her to have been behind him.
...if I am recalling the measurements
properly...but am not sure on this info....I know I have many questions .
Thankyou for the previous reply......
-
Hi Bill:
Question please.....
In Jack's and your Wiegman's frames I notice that the people
who have lighter clothing on ,do show up light in colour.....almost glaring
in the sunlight.
Marilyn Sitzman had on a light beige dress that day, so it should show up
as a very light in colour figure on the pedestal as with the others, in front
of the dark tree foliage you mention ..
But is in not showing at all...? She is behind to his left, in full view,
so he is not standing in front of her..??..I am also wondering where she
is as she is in bright sunlight.
Thanks
-
This is an essay I prepared prior to TMWKK segment. The man is Mr. Whitaker; we still don't know what his job at the Rouge was. However, this man and others heard stories from and about Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with 100X and interpolated them into their own.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pamelajfk/fetzerweldonmidp.html
Issues with the Fetzer-Weldon "MIDP" Nameless "Witness"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A researcher named Doug Weldon, under the mentoring of Dr. James Fetzer, conducted an interview with a man he describes as a "Ford Man" in 1993. If you read this chapter in "Murder in Dealey Plaza" You will notice that there are virtually no substantiating details in this interview, or in fact anywhere in his discussions about this man. Weldon has chosen to do no additional research since that point to independently validate or discredit this man's statements using either sources available at a local library, on the internet, or the resources of the Ford Motor Company itself. Weldon insisted that you accept all of this man's statements without question. The basis of Weldon's faith that this man is telling the truth appears to be the fact that he supposedly met the man and liked him. This interview was included in "Murder In Dealey Plaza", Part Two, the chapter on the Kennedy Limousine.
Weldon claimed this witness was a "Man from the Ford Motor Company." This is a misrepresentation. This man had no identity. The researcher was to trust that this man had a connection to the Ford Motor Company. We were later told that this lone mystery-witness was actually a union employee of the Ford Rouge complex Assembly Plant B -- a far cry from the Ford Experimental Garage where 100X was built. The reseracher was led to think that this lone mystery-witness worked in a "repair and maintenance" garage somewhere at Ford, that had a "Glass Plant Lab" attached to it. The researcher was encouraged to believe that there was nobody else around when the 8,000 lb. limousine SS-100-X was brought into "B Building" to have its windshield replaced. The resercher was encouraged to trust this man who has no descriptive references for the "lab men" that actually did the replacement, except that they are now deceased. The Nameless "Witness" had no inside information into the condition of 100X on 11/25/63, and he was presented as the the only witness to "see" a through and through bullet hole in the Shaeffer /Altgens 1-6 "spiral nebulae"position. He tried to give the impression that he and he alone had any knowledge of thd inner workings of the Ford Motor Company. Weldon also attempted to impugn the credibility of witnesses who actually saw 100X after the assassination; such people as the FBI's Robert Frazier, and DC Ford's F. Vaughn Ferguson.
Reading this chapter demands objectivity Go ahead and ask "Does this make sense or not?"
Dr. Fetzer has chosen to include this questionable if not fraudulent account in his latest compendium "MIDP". Dr. Fetzer has chosen do do so knowing the story is most probably entirely false. When presented with exhaustive research done at considerable expense through the Henry Ford Museum, refuting this man's story, Dr. Fetzer took it upon himself to try to discredit the messenger, researcher and author Pamela McElwain-Brown.
The "B Building" this man mentioned is, in fact, part of the 1,100 acre Ford River Rouge Complex.t is the final assembly building for this complex, where, during the early sixties, the Ford Falcon was assembled. From early 1964 on, the Ford Mustang has been assembled there. The building was designed as an assembly building. It has since been repeatedly updated as an assembly building, to give it state-of-the art equipment.
The Rouge also supplies parts to many Ford assembly plants, because it contains a steel mill (Rouge Steel, now spun off) and a Glass Plant (that makes windshields and automotive glass) and a Stamping Plant (that makes doors, roofs, trunks, etc, all metal vehicle parts made from rolled steel). It also contains a Power Plant (that is now being rebuilt after a tragic explosion in 1998) that supplies steam and electricity to the Rouge Complex; it could power a city the size of Boston. The Rouge, at it's height in WWII, employed as many as 130,000 people; in 1963 it employed over 10,000 people. The Rouge is a security complex, so everyone entering and leaving it needed identification. Tours through the Rouge will be available starting in the Spring of 2004 for anyone interested in attempting to recreate the events this Nameless "Witness" mentions.
According to the Henry Ford Museum, B Building had NO facilities for automobile repair. It was designed and run as an assembly building only. According to them, The Rouge Complex B building would NOT have been a place that 100X would have been taken, were it to have come to Ford. The appropriate place would have been the Experimental Garage at the Proving Grounds, about a mile away. This was where 100X actually was taken whenever it was at Ford. There were facilities there for repairs and maintenance, as well as any other specialized function that might be needed. This facility would also be relatively isolated in terms of the number of people around, and far more private, had any covert activity needed to take place.
All of the issues with the Nameless "Witness" have been presented to Weldon on one or more occasions. This interview is at the core of Weldon's theory regarding 100X. All attempts to discuss issues regarding it have been greeted only with arrogant hostility, in which Dr. Fetzer (Weldon has apparently left the research community) challenged not only Mrs. McElwain-Brown's information, but information from the Henry Ford Museum and from the Ford Archives, yet without providing any documented information to the contrary. Why?
Is this shoddy research, or something even worse? Is this really just a hoax? Is the only bintent to stir things up? Weldon and Fetzer had seven years to objectively verify information in this interview, and never bothered to do so. They have not even bothered to communicate to the research community that the B Building was in the Rouge Complex; that information, as has the rest of the substantiating information, came from Pamela McElwain-Brown. Weldon has also given copies of this interview to several "trusted researchers",among them Jack White, who have also had access to it for years. None of them have ever come forward and asked any questions regarding it either. Why not? Yet on the JFKResearch Board (which some call the disinfo board) Jack White repeatedly defended even the most ridiculous of this man's statments, such as referencing 100X as a "convertible". Are these issues the sort of thing that can only come from a specialist in the area of the Presidential Limousine, or are many of them simple common sense?
What is going on here? Are Fetzer and Weldon attempting to direct our attention away from something? Are we being distracted to think the Ford Motor Company is responsible for what happened to 100X after the assassination, leaving the Secret Service blameless? Are Fetzer and Weldon sincerely working to move the research effort forward or simply create disinformation that will generate conflict in the conspiracy camp? You will have to decide for yourself.
**************************************
Hey Pamela :
Knock off the name calling, and the accusations....wev'e had enough of that kind of nonsense around here of late.....and that is not research.....IMO.
That's my two cents.....
You two cents? It's exactly what your comment worths. I don't see any wrong in what Pamela has written.
*******************************
And you are entitled to your opinion, Denis, and so am I....
If you are not aware please read Andy's post below, made after all the past problems on the Forum, and in particular his very last line..
which reads...
"ancient squabbles brought in from elsewhere are not"..Thanks B.
Andy Walker Dec 29 2004, 08:13 AM Post #8
Administrator
Group: Admin
Posts: 786
Joined: 15-December 03
From: Gravesend, Kent
Member No.: 1
As a "non combatant" as it were in this area of the forum I would like to post my support for John's actions.
After repeated requests to have all his posts and seminars removed and yet rather eccentrically continuing to post rather incoherently across the whole forum, deleting Tim Carroll was an entirely appropriate action.
Wim appears to be the short of character who enjoys the game "Let's you and he fight" and as John points out has struggled to comply with the forum guidelines from the start.
Hopefully these events will serve as reminder to all that there are guidelines here.
Free academic debate engaged in maturely and intelligently is wholeheartedly welcomed, aggressive and ancient squabbles brought in from elsewhere are not.
--------------------
Andy Walker http://www.learningonline.me.uk http://www.historygcse.org Dartford Technology College Andy Walker's Biography
*****************************************
I have been ccd this communication between Dr. J.Fetzer and Doug Weldon, Doug is not a member of this Forum......and has asked me to pass along this
information..as Dr.Fetzer is not available..
Jim:
You requested that I repond to some issues raised on the Simkin forum. Though there are many I will address a few:
1. It is written that "A researcher named Doug Weldon, under the mentoring of Dr. James Fetzer, conducted an interview with a a man he describes as a "Ford Man" in 1993.
Response: I am not certain what is meant by the statement that I conducted an interview under your "mentoring." The interview was conducted several years before I met you. Though I have always had the highest respect for you I have never considered you to be my "mentor." We now know that the identity of the "Ford Man" has beeen revealed world-wide as "George Whitaker."
2. "However, this man and others heard stories about Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with 100x and interpolated them into their own."
Response: This is very interesting. For anyone interested I discuss the Ferguson memorandum in detail in MIDP. I believe that the Ferguson memo was written as an effort to provide a cover story to what really happened to the limo after the assassination. I do so most of all because Ferguson's account does not correlate with any account ever published. I did find one person who knew Feguson well. That was Willard Hess, the owner of Hess and Eisenhardt, who built and rebuilt the limousine. Hess smiled and referred to him as "Fergie." All I will state about that now is that Ferguson was an individual that would cooperate with the deception Furthermore, this is quite an off the wall statement, without any factual basis. The first question I would have is who are these "others." I conducted the Whitaker interview in 1993, years before the Ferguson memo was "discovered." I cannot think of any link between Whitaker and Ferguson and their accounts have nothing to do with each other. Why would Whitaker even want to insert himself into Ferguson's account anyway? Whitaker told his family the story immediately in November of 1963. He never shared the story with anyone outside the family until I spoke with him in August of 1993. He was very frightened by what he knew and I promised not to reveal the story during his lifetime. Therefore, not only did he not seek attention, he did everything he could do to avoid it. There was never any publicity or monetary compensation. For those interested, I would again allude to my chapter in MIDP. I would like to see any iota of proof that Whitaker or any "others." heard about Ferguson's experiences. Unsubstantiated supposition is meaningless. It was alleged and insinuated for a couple of years that the "Ford man" was not bonafide and the essay on a website still ignores the fact that he has been identified as George Whitaker and any researcher is welcome to verify his employment with the Ford Motor Company.
3. It is stated that the "B' Building had NO facilities for automobile repair. "The Rouge Complex B buikding would NOT have been a place that the 100x would have been taken, were it to come to Ford. The appropriate place would have been the Experimental Garage at the Proving Grounds..."
Response: The first statement is in error. In 1963 and before there was a small repair garage in the B building. Sometimes executives would take their vehicles there on weekends and they would be worked on even by off-duty union workers. In addition the B Building was in very close proximity to the glass facility that Whitaker described. I do not believe that there was a designated building that it was required for a vehicle to be brought to to cover up the assassination of the president. The limo may well have been in the Experimental Garage at a later time or could have been there also on 11/25/1963 but Whitaker's account stated it was in the B building. Mr. Whitaker worked for Ford for many years. If he wanted to fabricate anything or place himself in the story he would have been aware of the experimental garage and used that as part of his "story." He was unequivocal that it was the B building.
4. The essay later states that "...this lone mystery witness was actually a union employee..."
Response: It is disturbing to see George Whitaker continue to be referred to as a mystery witness. In addition, he was not a union employee nor has it ever been stated that he was such. This is a misrepresentation . He was a managerial employee that was not subject to any of the confines of being a union employee. (period) Again, I encourage anyone with any question about this statement read MIDP.
5. The essay also asks: Are we being distracted to think the Ford Motor Company is responsible for what happened to 100x after the assassination leaving the Secret Service blameless.
Response: Jim, I am incredulous in reading the statement. My chapter in MIDP is one of the most powerful indictments of the Secret Service's role in the assassination ever published. The information shows how the coverup could be facilitated because of the close relationship between the Secret Service and the Ford Motor Company at that time. Anyone can read the chapter and reach their own conclusions.
At one time the author of the essay argued over and over that the account at the Ford Company was impossible because November 25 was a day of mourning and noone would have been at the Ford plant. It is true that many businesses throughout the land were closed all day on November 25, 1963. The Ford Motor Company, for whatever reason, was not. Ford, the head of the company at that time, did despise Kennedy. Interestingly, the hours of the Ford Motor Company, on that day provided a perfect opportunity to provide for the account of Mr. Whitaker.
6. The writer of the essay states in the forum "I was discussing a misunderstanding by virtually all of those who claim to have seen a hole" in the windshield of 100x after the assassination that they for some reason seemed to believe the windshield was bulletproof."
Response: This is the most bizarre statement of all. I am not aware of anyone, and certainly not the people that I described seeing a hole in the windshield who thought the windshield was bulletproof. Noone that I interviewed ever claimed that the windshield was bulletproof. In fact, it would have been a contradiction. How could anyone see a through and through hole if the windshield was "bullet-proof?" The windshield was laminated, which was uncommon in 1963. I do acknowledge that there are questions that I have also that may never be answered. Why did those covering up the hole go through the process that was done with the windshield according to Whitaker. I do know that the Lincoln Continental was a fairly new vehicle and rather expensive for the time. There were not many thousands of them sold. I am doubtful that windshields were as easily replaceable as they are now. I am sure that they did not have the glass repair facilities that are so common everywhere now. I am also doubtful that Ford sales facilities would have stocked replacement windshields because it was a new car and windshield breakage was rather uncommon. Even today sales facilities do not commonly have spare windshields in storage. There has also been some criticism that the bullet hole was so "clean" without anyone accounting for fragmentation. Please understand that I am merely the historian of these accounts, not the creator. I did take a different approach however. I did not take the official records as "gospel." I have talked with as many people as I could that had information. I was fortunate in that I reached many of them before their passing. The people I spoke with, including Dr. Evalea Glanges (within weeks of her passing), Sgt. Stavis Ellis, Whitaker, and Officer Nick Prencipe all described the hole as clean and appeared about the diameter of a pencil. Everyone of these people, including the police officers, described this "clean: hole" as a bullet hole. Furthermore, the written account of Secret Service agent Charles Taylor, Jr., also appears to corroborate these observations. I would also note that the HSCA struggled with what happened to the limousine after the assasination and found discrepemcies in Ferguson's account.
I encourage everyone to read my chapter in MIDP. I have accumulated much new information since the publication of MIDP and I am hopeful that it may all be organized to show that our nation has lived a lie about what happened on November 22, 1963. At this point, I believe it is a debt I owe to all thise wonderful people I got to know (and the many that passed on) who I owe such gratitude that they were willing to share their trust in me in telling their accounts and each of them also wanting to know what exactly happened with that windshield and limousine after November 22, 1963.
Best,
Doug Weldon
-
This is an essay I prepared prior to TMWKK segment. The man is Mr. Whitaker; we still don't know what his job at the Rouge was. However, this man and others heard stories from and about Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with 100X and interpolated them into their own.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pamelajfk/fetzerweldonmidp.html
Issues with the Fetzer-Weldon "MIDP" Nameless "Witness"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A researcher named Doug Weldon, under the mentoring of Dr. James Fetzer, conducted an interview with a man he describes as a "Ford Man" in 1993. If you read this chapter in "Murder in Dealey Plaza" You will notice that there are virtually no substantiating details in this interview, or in fact anywhere in his discussions about this man. Weldon has chosen to do no additional research since that point to independently validate or discredit this man's statements using either sources available at a local library, on the internet, or the resources of the Ford Motor Company itself. Weldon insisted that you accept all of this man's statements without question. The basis of Weldon's faith that this man is telling the truth appears to be the fact that he supposedly met the man and liked him. This interview was included in "Murder In Dealey Plaza", Part Two, the chapter on the Kennedy Limousine.
Weldon claimed this witness was a "Man from the Ford Motor Company." This is a misrepresentation. This man had no identity. The researcher was to trust that this man had a connection to the Ford Motor Company. We were later told that this lone mystery-witness was actually a union employee of the Ford Rouge complex Assembly Plant B -- a far cry from the Ford Experimental Garage where 100X was built. The reseracher was led to think that this lone mystery-witness worked in a "repair and maintenance" garage somewhere at Ford, that had a "Glass Plant Lab" attached to it. The researcher was encouraged to believe that there was nobody else around when the 8,000 lb. limousine SS-100-X was brought into "B Building" to have its windshield replaced. The resercher was encouraged to trust this man who has no descriptive references for the "lab men" that actually did the replacement, except that they are now deceased. The Nameless "Witness" had no inside information into the condition of 100X on 11/25/63, and he was presented as the the only witness to "see" a through and through bullet hole in the Shaeffer /Altgens 1-6 "spiral nebulae"position. He tried to give the impression that he and he alone had any knowledge of thd inner workings of the Ford Motor Company. Weldon also attempted to impugn the credibility of witnesses who actually saw 100X after the assassination; such people as the FBI's Robert Frazier, and DC Ford's F. Vaughn Ferguson.
Reading this chapter demands objectivity Go ahead and ask "Does this make sense or not?"
Dr. Fetzer has chosen to include this questionable if not fraudulent account in his latest compendium "MIDP". Dr. Fetzer has chosen do do so knowing the story is most probably entirely false. When presented with exhaustive research done at considerable expense through the Henry Ford Museum, refuting this man's story, Dr. Fetzer took it upon himself to try to discredit the messenger, researcher and author Pamela McElwain-Brown.
The "B Building" this man mentioned is, in fact, part of the 1,100 acre Ford River Rouge Complex.t is the final assembly building for this complex, where, during the early sixties, the Ford Falcon was assembled. From early 1964 on, the Ford Mustang has been assembled there. The building was designed as an assembly building. It has since been repeatedly updated as an assembly building, to give it state-of-the art equipment.
The Rouge also supplies parts to many Ford assembly plants, because it contains a steel mill (Rouge Steel, now spun off) and a Glass Plant (that makes windshields and automotive glass) and a Stamping Plant (that makes doors, roofs, trunks, etc, all metal vehicle parts made from rolled steel). It also contains a Power Plant (that is now being rebuilt after a tragic explosion in 1998) that supplies steam and electricity to the Rouge Complex; it could power a city the size of Boston. The Rouge, at it's height in WWII, employed as many as 130,000 people; in 1963 it employed over 10,000 people. The Rouge is a security complex, so everyone entering and leaving it needed identification. Tours through the Rouge will be available starting in the Spring of 2004 for anyone interested in attempting to recreate the events this Nameless "Witness" mentions.
According to the Henry Ford Museum, B Building had NO facilities for automobile repair. It was designed and run as an assembly building only. According to them, The Rouge Complex B building would NOT have been a place that 100X would have been taken, were it to have come to Ford. The appropriate place would have been the Experimental Garage at the Proving Grounds, about a mile away. This was where 100X actually was taken whenever it was at Ford. There were facilities there for repairs and maintenance, as well as any other specialized function that might be needed. This facility would also be relatively isolated in terms of the number of people around, and far more private, had any covert activity needed to take place.
All of the issues with the Nameless "Witness" have been presented to Weldon on one or more occasions. This interview is at the core of Weldon's theory regarding 100X. All attempts to discuss issues regarding it have been greeted only with arrogant hostility, in which Dr. Fetzer (Weldon has apparently left the research community) challenged not only Mrs. McElwain-Brown's information, but information from the Henry Ford Museum and from the Ford Archives, yet without providing any documented information to the contrary. Why?
Is this shoddy research, or something even worse? Is this really just a hoax? Is the only bintent to stir things up? Weldon and Fetzer had seven years to objectively verify information in this interview, and never bothered to do so. They have not even bothered to communicate to the research community that the B Building was in the Rouge Complex; that information, as has the rest of the substantiating information, came from Pamela McElwain-Brown. Weldon has also given copies of this interview to several "trusted researchers",among them Jack White, who have also had access to it for years. None of them have ever come forward and asked any questions regarding it either. Why not? Yet on the JFKResearch Board (which some call the disinfo board) Jack White repeatedly defended even the most ridiculous of this man's statments, such as referencing 100X as a "convertible". Are these issues the sort of thing that can only come from a specialist in the area of the Presidential Limousine, or are many of them simple common sense?
What is going on here? Are Fetzer and Weldon attempting to direct our attention away from something? Are we being distracted to think the Ford Motor Company is responsible for what happened to 100X after the assassination, leaving the Secret Service blameless? Are Fetzer and Weldon sincerely working to move the research effort forward or simply create disinformation that will generate conflict in the conspiracy camp? You will have to decide for yourself.
**************************************
Hey Pamela :
Knock off the name calling, and the accusations....wev'e had enough of that kind of nonsense around here of late.....and that is not research.....IMO.
That's my two cents.....
You two cents? It's exactly what your comment worths. I don't see any wrong in what Pamela has written.
*******************************
And you are entitled to your opinion, Denis, and so am I....
If you are not aware please read Andy's post below, made after all the past problems on the Forum, and in particular his very last line..
which reads...
"ancient squabbles brought in from elsewhere are not"..Thanks B.
Andy Walker Dec 29 2004, 08:13 AM Post #8
Administrator
Group: Admin
Posts: 786
Joined: 15-December 03
From: Gravesend, Kent
Member No.: 1
As a "non combatant" as it were in this area of the forum I would like to post my support for John's actions.
After repeated requests to have all his posts and seminars removed and yet rather eccentrically continuing to post rather incoherently across the whole forum, deleting Tim Carroll was an entirely appropriate action.
Wim appears to be the short of character who enjoys the game "Let's you and he fight" and as John points out has struggled to comply with the forum guidelines from the start.
Hopefully these events will serve as reminder to all that there are guidelines here.
Free academic debate engaged in maturely and intelligently is wholeheartedly welcomed, aggressive and ancient squabbles brought in from elsewhere are not.
--------------------
Andy Walker http://www.learningonline.me.uk http://www.historygcse.org Dartford Technology College Andy Walker's Biography
-
This is an essay I prepared prior to TMWKK segment. The man is Mr. Whitaker; we still don't know what his job at the Rouge was. However, this man and others heard stories from and about Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with 100X and interpolated them into their own.
http://www.mindspring.com/~pamelajfk/fetzerweldonmidp.html
Issues with the Fetzer-Weldon "MIDP" Nameless "Witness"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A researcher named Doug Weldon, under the mentoring of Dr. James Fetzer, conducted an interview with a man he describes as a "Ford Man" in 1993. If you read this chapter in "Murder in Dealey Plaza" You will notice that there are virtually no substantiating details in this interview, or in fact anywhere in his discussions about this man. Weldon has chosen to do no additional research since that point to independently validate or discredit this man's statements using either sources available at a local library, on the internet, or the resources of the Ford Motor Company itself. Weldon insisted that you accept all of this man's statements without question. The basis of Weldon's faith that this man is telling the truth appears to be the fact that he supposedly met the man and liked him. This interview was included in "Murder In Dealey Plaza", Part Two, the chapter on the Kennedy Limousine.
Weldon claimed this witness was a "Man from the Ford Motor Company." This is a misrepresentation. This man had no identity. The researcher was to trust that this man had a connection to the Ford Motor Company. We were later told that this lone mystery-witness was actually a union employee of the Ford Rouge complex Assembly Plant B -- a far cry from the Ford Experimental Garage where 100X was built. The reseracher was led to think that this lone mystery-witness worked in a "repair and maintenance" garage somewhere at Ford, that had a "Glass Plant Lab" attached to it. The researcher was encouraged to believe that there was nobody else around when the 8,000 lb. limousine SS-100-X was brought into "B Building" to have its windshield replaced. The resercher was encouraged to trust this man who has no descriptive references for the "lab men" that actually did the replacement, except that they are now deceased. The Nameless "Witness" had no inside information into the condition of 100X on 11/25/63, and he was presented as the the only witness to "see" a through and through bullet hole in the Shaeffer /Altgens 1-6 "spiral nebulae"position. He tried to give the impression that he and he alone had any knowledge of thd inner workings of the Ford Motor Company. Weldon also attempted to impugn the credibility of witnesses who actually saw 100X after the assassination; such people as the FBI's Robert Frazier, and DC Ford's F. Vaughn Ferguson.
Reading this chapter demands objectivity Go ahead and ask "Does this make sense or not?"
Dr. Fetzer has chosen to include this questionable if not fraudulent account in his latest compendium "MIDP". Dr. Fetzer has chosen do do so knowing the story is most probably entirely false. When presented with exhaustive research done at considerable expense through the Henry Ford Museum, refuting this man's story, Dr. Fetzer took it upon himself to try to discredit the messenger, researcher and author Pamela McElwain-Brown.
The "B Building" this man mentioned is, in fact, part of the 1,100 acre Ford River Rouge Complex.t is the final assembly building for this complex, where, during the early sixties, the Ford Falcon was assembled. From early 1964 on, the Ford Mustang has been assembled there. The building was designed as an assembly building. It has since been repeatedly updated as an assembly building, to give it state-of-the art equipment.
The Rouge also supplies parts to many Ford assembly plants, because it contains a steel mill (Rouge Steel, now spun off) and a Glass Plant (that makes windshields and automotive glass) and a Stamping Plant (that makes doors, roofs, trunks, etc, all metal vehicle parts made from rolled steel). It also contains a Power Plant (that is now being rebuilt after a tragic explosion in 1998) that supplies steam and electricity to the Rouge Complex; it could power a city the size of Boston. The Rouge, at it's height in WWII, employed as many as 130,000 people; in 1963 it employed over 10,000 people. The Rouge is a security complex, so everyone entering and leaving it needed identification. Tours through the Rouge will be available starting in the Spring of 2004 for anyone interested in attempting to recreate the events this Nameless "Witness" mentions.
According to the Henry Ford Museum, B Building had NO facilities for automobile repair. It was designed and run as an assembly building only. According to them, The Rouge Complex B building would NOT have been a place that 100X would have been taken, were it to have come to Ford. The appropriate place would have been the Experimental Garage at the Proving Grounds, about a mile away. This was where 100X actually was taken whenever it was at Ford. There were facilities there for repairs and maintenance, as well as any other specialized function that might be needed. This facility would also be relatively isolated in terms of the number of people around, and far more private, had any covert activity needed to take place.
All of the issues with the Nameless "Witness" have been presented to Weldon on one or more occasions. This interview is at the core of Weldon's theory regarding 100X. All attempts to discuss issues regarding it have been greeted only with arrogant hostility, in which Dr. Fetzer (Weldon has apparently left the research community) challenged not only Mrs. McElwain-Brown's information, but information from the Henry Ford Museum and from the Ford Archives, yet without providing any documented information to the contrary. Why?
Is this shoddy research, or something even worse? Is this really just a hoax? Is the only bintent to stir things up? Weldon and Fetzer had seven years to objectively verify information in this interview, and never bothered to do so. They have not even bothered to communicate to the research community that the B Building was in the Rouge Complex; that information, as has the rest of the substantiating information, came from Pamela McElwain-Brown. Weldon has also given copies of this interview to several "trusted researchers",among them Jack White, who have also had access to it for years. None of them have ever come forward and asked any questions regarding it either. Why not? Yet on the JFKResearch Board (which some call the disinfo board) Jack White repeatedly defended even the most ridiculous of this man's statments, such as referencing 100X as a "convertible". Are these issues the sort of thing that can only come from a specialist in the area of the Presidential Limousine, or are many of them simple common sense?
What is going on here? Are Fetzer and Weldon attempting to direct our attention away from something? Are we being distracted to think the Ford Motor Company is responsible for what happened to 100X after the assassination, leaving the Secret Service blameless? Are Fetzer and Weldon sincerely working to move the research effort forward or simply create disinformation that will generate conflict in the conspiracy camp? You will have to decide for yourself.
**************************************
Hey Pamela :
Knock off the name calling, and the accusations....wev'e had enough of that kind of nonsense around here of late.....and that is not research.....IMO.
That's my two cents.....
-
Hi Shane:
James is to be away for a few weeks...then will return.
So perhaps you could give him a post in Jan. ?
Bernice
-
You don't have to pay to read the articles, just sign up......B..
The secrets of Dallas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arieh O'Sullivan, THE JERUSALEM POST Nov. 21, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O0n April 7, 1964, a 26-year-old detective in the New Orleans Police Department appeared before the Warren Commission investigating the previous November's assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
That detective was my father, Fred (later Efraim) O'Sullivan.
I'd always known my dad had been acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald. They had grown up half a block from each other and shared homerooms at school: My father sat in front of Lee for years, O'Sullivan alphabetically ahead of Oswald.
Somewhere back in my mother's house today there is a letter from Jacqueline Kennedy thanking him for appearing before the commission. It wasn't something he spoke of often – just a tidbit of information in a life that went on to greater adventures.
Kennedy's assassination in Dallas was a benchmark event. Everyone remembers where they were when they heard the news, just as we remember where we were when we heard that the other John – Lennon – had been shot dead; and the Saturday night Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated.
But with JFK we always believed there was a conspiracy. I mean, how could one lone gunman have killed the president of the United States, in a rolling motorcade, at an almost impossible distance?
My father always intimated that he thought there was more to the story, and that the plots to kill JFK and black rights activist Martin Luther King Jr., gunned down in Memphis in 1968 by white supremacist James Earl Ray, crossed paths in New Orleans.
There were a lot of mysteries in New Orleans in the 1960s and my father, as commander of intelligence at the New Orleans Police Department, had a ringside seat.
Dad's ties to Oswald included his efforts, when he was active with the Civil Air Patrol in high school, to get Lee to join the drill marching team.
"Oswald carried himself always erect, always gave the impression that he could be marching, that he may be marching, eyes straight ahead, head straight, shoulders back, so he impressed me as the sort of fellow that would really fit well on the drill team," my father would tell the Warren Commission all those years later.
"He seemed like he could – well, he even gave the impression that he would make a pretty good leader if he ever got into the squadron."
The commission, I found, reading dad's testimony in the basement of the Stanford library, questioned him over a possible "relationship" between Oswald and a man called David Ferrie, a known New Orleans homosexual with dubious links to the mob.
"I am trying to get things straight in my mind," my dad told them. "Of course I have been trying to get it straight in my mind, just what I know and what I have heard.
"It gets kind of confusing when you read so much. Sometimes you remember things that you don't really remember, you know."
Gosh, my old man seemed so young and earnestly innocent back then.
Eventually, he recalled that Ferrie – who had earlier been charged with a "crime against nature with a juvenile" – was arrested after the assassination in connection "with this Oswald situation."
"Now you go ahead," encouraged Wesley Liebeler, a member of the commission, pushing dad for more details.
And so he told them how he and another New Orleans detective drove out to the local airport immediately after the assassination to examine Ferrie's airplane. It was their initiative, he said. They wondered if Ferrie had somehow been involved.
"We wanted to check it to see if it was flyable... with the thought that he may have transported Oswald to Dallas We found the plane, but his plane was not in flyable condition. It had flat tires, instruments missing, needed a paint job.
"We also checked to see if he had rented an aircraft... and one company in particular said they wouldn't rent him an airplane."
An apparent dead end – even though New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison would later finger Ferrie, memorably portrayed by Joe Pesci in Oliver Stone's JFK, as a prime suspect in the assassination and would haul him in for more questioning more than three years after the killing.
Garrison would talk of the JFK murder as a "homosexual thrill killing," and later as a wider CIA /anti-Castro / military-industrial plot, asserting a major role for Ferrie in both; Ferrie was still denying all involvement when he died in February 1967.
Kennedy conspiracists kept returning to my father over the years, through to the late 1970s.
When I close my eyes I can just make out my old man as a young cop. His hair cut in the traditional flat top. His soul still Irish Catholic before he saw the light and we threw away our Christmas tree, lit the big brass menora and took off for Zion land.
My father had voted for the Catholic Kennedy. JFK's death wounded the hearts of so many men, catching them off-guard and suddenly making them think of what they had done and what they could be.
My father was certainly one of those affected. You could hear in his testimony how shattered dad was.
"Well I have put quite a bit of thought on this ever since it all happened," he told the commission, before concluding regretfully: "As much as I would like to help, I just can't think of anything else [to add]... There is nothing else I can think of."
To me, as I was growing up, dad often used to say there was more to JFK's assassination than met the eye. But he never gave me any details, and I never pressed him. Always a close friend, he had his private side. He'd keep secrets better than anyone I have ever known.
Once I stumbled upon a Lebanese driver's license in his name, with his photo in it, in his desk drawer. He shrugged it off, telling me it was for my own good I not know. I was brought up not to prod.
Still, I wish I had pushed him more on JFK before the years and strokes started to dim his brain.
And so the other day, as the 41st anniversary neared, I telephoned him to make one more attempt.
"Forty-one years! Already?" he stuttered incredulously down the transatlantic line, from the nursing home in Mississippi.
"Who killed JFK?" I asked him straight out, wondering whether he really could cast any new light on America's most puzzling enigma.
"Just Lee," he managed to say. "By himself."
"That's it?"
"Well, I have my suspicions who helped him."
And then the nurse hung up the phone.
The writer is the military correspondent of the Jerusalem Post.
-
Hi John:
You were adding your posts as I was making out mine....as I stated when I went, there was none, and there is none now.....Rich has stated that there was none when he read the posts...I believe him.
If something was posted earlier than he checked in and much earlier than I,and then deleted, as happens on here also, then of course no administrator can control such as,to what he has not seen...the same on this Forum if deletions are made when you are asleep in the middle of the night such as the thread the other evening, you did not have a chance to see such until you were awake, if deletions had been made or changes then of course you would never know, just common sense.........
Of course no administrator has control at such times....nor members what they see or do not see..and even members that fool the adm. with their information, pertaining to their membership.... as has happened here.... it happens......and no fooling about that.....seeing that there are hours in time difference between countries....so as does happen on here, things can change without being seen, by those in control.
I wish you had thought to have gotten the photo...for all....along with the information, that would have clarified the problem....but then perhaps you would not have wanted to post such.....but as you say it is from the link, then perhaps it is still available..
Thanks for your information.........B
P.S...I don't believe anything anyone tells me, until I see the proof for myself, and or documentation...and that is what I am after ....was there or was there not a photo....As far as Rich not seeing it, yes I believe him....I did not either..
-
Hi Denis: Fellow Canuck....
There is a proper way and this has been done...
It is the copying of full posts, without permission of the poster to another Forum that is against the rules ,without permission.... John has already posted in his first post information taken from the Forum. But it was correct....
His information about the photo was not ,so there is no problem with trying to clarify information that is incorrect, and in this thread....
Thanks.....for your interest.....B
QUOTE(Bernice Moore @ Dec 2 2004, 12:14 AM)Hi John:
There is none, and has not been any photo of Gibson posted
at the J.F.K Research Forum...
I was there earlier yesterday and read that post, no photo, late last evening,
I checked it ,no photo, and just now, no photo...
and Rich has stated there has never been a photo of Gibson posted
on the Forum, and he reads each and every post...
There never was one.
Perhaps you should check your source. Hope this clears up this
matter.
B
Bernice, did you know that Rich may kick you out of his forum for reporting what is posted, or not posted on his forum?
-
Hi John:
There is none, and has not been any photo of Gibson posted at the J.F.K Research Forum...
I was there earlier yesterday and read that post, no photo, late last evening, I checked it, no photo, and just now, no photo... and Rich has stated there has never been a photo of Gibson posted on the Forum, and he reads each and every post...
There never was one.
Perhaps you should check your source. Hope this clears up this matter.
B
-
Welcome Dawn:
Your a breath of fresh air.......will look forward to
more of your posts.....Thanks...
B..
-
Hi Roy:
Steve:
Is this an extension of work in John's book ?, in so far as perhaps containing new related information...or perhaps work that John had uncovered that was not included at that time in his?.
As you know ,there was much, that he did not include, as it did need verification.....and solid proof...your post is not quite clear..
Any name on this upcoming book...?
Thanks ..B
B
Nazi Race Hate on Our Forum
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore
*************
Hi Don:
Yes we have had nice exchanges in the past and we will again, just because we may differ on thougths, well on these type of sites, I believe that is what they have been created for, we are fortunate to have access to them...
No I am not an extremist by any meaning of the word....I posted the link so that people would have the opportunity to see perhaps some of all that was behind the reason for this action...there were three countries involved here, not one...
I do think that hate literature, and such can help to urge others groups to take on
minoritys and such and that can and does lead to riots, beatings and racists remarks...Children and the youth are very vulnerable to such, if taught in the home, or as some say, LHO was indoctrinated in some way to his Communist leanings because of a pamphlet he was handed on a street corner,which I also think was just more crap from the coverup people...but anyway such can happen and does happen...then they become involved in such groups and the hate spreads...
There are many documents not released on all this, like another we know of...therefore I do support my government for shutting down perhaps this one link to such being curbed...at this time......I find it difficult to believe that three governments have no reasons for trying to curb this man and his leanings...and his literature,which is support for hate groups....just because he does not swing the club, does not mean he is not giving them a reason to pick such up or not encouraging them by inciting and in a way handing it to them....
I think when we see this type of literature, or a remark made to say a man,woman or child on any type of descrimination, that is the time to speak out, not after the fact, like now...if that had been done and perhaps people had ,had the courage in the first place, but that is not the way of human nature..as we know, none of this may have happened in the first place in history...I hear lots of well I didn't say anything or I didn't do anything "because"...
Remember the poem.."then they came for me"....
I have no answers to this type of subject, but I do know that in the past and in the future, as I have and my family, when such a remark is made, or a joke supposedly to be funny, takes a pot shot at any religion or race, they are not allowed, not in our presence...we make our disagreement known...
that is what I have tried to teach my children and grandchildren and their spouses.
We have grandchildren whose Mom is indian, we have seen the looks, and seen the smiley snears, and we know about all about the remarks that were spoken after....we don't live with it, we shoot back, and always have...so do not in anyway any of you, jump to nor, make any remark or hint about me being in any way an extremist, nor your conclusions as some of you have as you have not walked in my shoes, and know nothing about me , simpley because I posted a link that I thought, you all might read first, before you made any remarks, it was to give you simply some background on the given subject...as I did not see any real knowledge about Zundel being stated..
All I do know, is that if this man and his types are allowed to spread their poison whether by phamplets, radio, web sites whatever, it spreads it is a desease, and is now more prevailant, in some ways, than I have seen in many years....it is not just against a certain race of people but also towards any minority, any colour and other creeds....
Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but not when it hurts and can incite others being beaten,targeted or hurt and maimed in anyway...this is the other side to the coin perhaps....with the Freedom of speech comes much responsibility..
To all, instead of spouting off on a Forum, the next time you hear a joke directed at a minority group or another religion, or are passed a phamphlet, or come to a site who preaches this unacceptable trash, make your thougths known, don't just talk about it on here, do something about it, even if it is only a written complaint to such a site, even if it is a remark to such a person, when handing him or her back the phamplet...and teach and tell your youth WHY it is wrong...if that does make me an extremist then so be it.....I am perhaps thinking though I also agree I do not like to see anyone imprisioned , for no reason there is too much posting going on his plight and not the plight of others that he has been preaching his hate against all these years....and has encouraged others to harm in some way..Hate breeds hate, labels enourage others to use them, it is not remembered when the label is removed, it is only recalled that the accustation was made...as Dennis has done with Ian and myself....that is an old disinfo ploy as we of the JFK assn forums know all about....swing first with no proof nor documentation, and accuse whomever of whatever you feel like it at the time, label him a disinfo or CIA or whatever, it'll stick, well not this time it shall not Dennis....shame on you...you spout off, without thinking at times, and by taking what I stated out of context, and without even reading the link first, that I thought you and others perhaps may be interested in.....And speaking of free speech, it is my right to express myself that I do support my Government without being jumped on for it....for whatever reason...and in this case whether you or any disagree, that is my opinion....right now...Zundel and his kind need to be stopped,and not by just talking about it on Forums....hate is a desease and needs to be wiped out....
Now go ahead and take all the pot shots you want, all or any of you, I have had my say,for now..I will be back..... in otherwards ladies and gentlemen, put up or shut up, do something about it real problem not just talk...words are very cheap as we all know, if not then we should......
B