Bernice Moore

thanks peter....Evelyn Lincoln said that JFK told her informally that he was thinking about Governor Terry Sanford for the ticket, but "it will not be Lyndon" (Kennedy and Johnson, p. 205). It was not dictation.

According to Lincoln, he said it in the White House on November 19, 1963.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8437

your welcome i will have another look..take care..b

*** snip ***

ABOUT SOME OF THE POSTS I HAVE BEEN READING ON THIS THREAD:

Any notion that the shipping casket has anything whatsoever to do with the delivery of the embalmed body, to the funeral home, hours later, is without foundation, and is, frankly, absurd. The President's body was embalmed, after 1 or 2 AM in the morning. It was then placed in the expensive mahogany casket that was purchased, by the Kennedy family, at Gawlers. That casket, with the President's embalmed body inside, was then placed in a Navy ambulance, and driven from Bethesdsa Naval Hospital to the White House. All that occurred after 4 AM in the morning.

So anyone coming to this case, decades later, and attempting to introduce the notion that the embalmed body went from Bethesda back to Gawlers, in a shipping casket, is only confusing matters. No "shipping casket" was seen or utilized later in the evening. And the President's body never went back to any funeral home--it went directly from Bethesda Naval Hospital to the White House.

*** snip ***

David,

Thank you for taking the time to respond, however if you're referencing my post, I think you read it wrong.

I never said that the body was taken back to Grawlers. All I said was that the first call sheet from Grawlers mentions that they (the Grawler's team) removed the body from a shipping casket. They didn't specify when. I'm going on the assumption that the funeral home people didn't see or handle the body until after the autopsy was done. What I'm suggesting is that an empty shipping casket was brought to Bethesda (6:35pm, by a Grawler's hearse) on the assumption the body was going to be brought back to the funeral home for preparation, as would normally be the case. After the autopsy, the body was placed into the shipping casket by the medical team for transport. At some point after this, it was decided to do the preparation at Bethesda instead of at Grawlers, and the funeral home team was then brought in and removed the body from the shipping casket, prepared the body, and placed it into the mahogany casket which arrived in the early morning hours. The body may have been in the shipping casket for a few minutes or an hour, tops, and didn't go anywhere.

I'm not saying that there wasn't body alteration. The Navy hearse arrived at 7:17, yet wasn't unloaded until 8pm, which would have given someone plenty of time to do the deed. It also makes more sense, to me anyway, to do that at a hospital instead of on an airplane.

As I said, it's just a theory.

thank you william for your clarification here fwtaw for whomevers, are two photos taken of the ambulance arriving at the w/h with the casket the next morning....b

:blink:the edit is not working, halp...

i tried to change in my post but after editing there was no where to click to post newly edited ... b

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1457

here is the link robert...b

Could someone please find and post Robert Kennedy's very strong statement of support for the Warren Report made in September, 1964? Of course, Robert Kennedy did not believe a word of this. Just read the book Brothers by David Talbot.

I am looking for a prime example of what Robert Kennedy did NOT believe about the JFK assassination, as well as what he was putting out for public consumption.

I've have googled myself out trying to find the statement that Robert Kennedy issued in Sept, 1964 upon the release of the Warren Report farce.

Any help finding this would be appreciated.

robert try checking this thread out, perhaps..sorry i cannot enable the link...??.b

C:\Users\Bernice\Pictures\KENNEDYS\Robert Kennedy and the Warren Report - The Education Forum.mht

Mary Ferrell information; in PEN'S PAPER...b

Jim here is the other Day photo and enlarged rifle but, b

Hi Jack.

Could you post a pic of one of the other ones w/o the patch for comparison?

jim

jim here is a smaller photo, it is no good when blown up, too much distortion...b

I'm glad you enjoyed it, Dave! Thanks--

great job, greg here's one from an old friend of yours you will recognize i know he would be very pleased...best b

I have demonstrated with multiple proofs that several M-C rifles were used in the framing of LHO.

Here is one additional proof of that. An anomaly appears on this rifle photo which I could find on

no others.

Jack

What exactly would be the point of switching the MC found in the depository for another MC?

Maybe the SN didn't match the one Oz ordered?

Why wouldn't a sixth floor sniper planning to place the blame on Oswald just use Oswald's rifle (or the one ordered in his name)? I mean, if I was gonna kill someone and set you up for it I'd use a gun tracebale to you.

This talk of multiple Carcano's is just the type of silliness that makes it easy for Commission supporters to marginalize us conspiracy realists.

Here is one of Jack's comparisons, of three....b

assange accuser ''I AM A CIA AGENT.""

http://www.datelinezero.com/2010/12/10/wikileaks-accuser-im-a-cia-agent/

Let's not forget;

DISPATCH CLASSIFICATION PROCESSING ACTION

TOP SECRET MARKED FOR INDEXING

TO Chiefs, Certain Stations and Bases X NO INDEXING REQUIRED

INFO ONLY QUALIFIED DESK

CAN JUDGE INDEXING

FROM The Director of Central Intelligence MICROFILM

SUBJECT Countering Criticism of the Warren Report

ACTION REQUIRED - REFERENCES PSYCH 1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on,

there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although

this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report (which appeared at

the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the

Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning,

and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's

findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some

kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was

involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren

Commission's Report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the

American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of

those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved.

Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse, results. 2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government,

including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally

chosen for their integrity, experience, and prominence. They represented both

major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections

of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to

impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of

American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint

that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have

benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of

such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole

reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly

involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation.

Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for

example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of

this dispatch is to provide material for countering and discrediting the claims

of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in

other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and

in a number of unclassified attachments. 3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination ques-

tion be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is

active, however, addressees are requested:

DISPATCH SYMBOL AND NUMBER DATE

9 attachments h/w 4/1/67

1 - classified secret CLASSIFICATION HQS FILE NUMBER

8 - Unclassified TOP SECRET DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER

NEEDED

CONTINUATION OF CLASSIFICATION DISPATCH SYMBOL AND NUMBER

DISPATCH TOP SECRET a. To discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts

(especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission

made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the

critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion

only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the

conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists.

Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible

speculation. b. To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the

critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for

this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide

useful background material for passage to assets. Our play should point out,

as applicable, that the critics are (i) wedded to theories adopted before the

evidence was in, (ii) politically interested, (iii) financially interested, (iv)

hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (v) infatuated with their own theories.

In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful

strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached

Fletcher Knebel article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark

Lane's book is much less convincing than Epstein's and comes off badly where

contested by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer

as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.) 4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or

in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments

should be useful: a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not

consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten

and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the

attacks on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits

have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics.

(A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire

of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, A.J.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt)

now believe was set by Van der Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for

either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists,

but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the

Nazis were to blame.) b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend

to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual eyewitnesses (which

are less reliable and more divergent -- and hence offer more hand-holds for

criticism) and less on ballistic, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close

examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting

eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commis-

sion for good and sufficient reason. c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to con-

ceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large

royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and

John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any

conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would

hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and

Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds

on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose

a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his con-

trol: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the

assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have

arranged much more secure conditions. d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they

light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commis-

sion because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one

way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was

an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against

the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties. CLASSIFICATION PAGE NO.

FORM TOP SECRET TWO

8-64 53a USE PREVIOUS EDITION. X CONTINUED CONTINUATION OF CLASSIFICATION DISPATCH SYMBOL AND NUMBER

DISPATCH TOP SECRET e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-

conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability

and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged

three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that

the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to

the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases

coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now

putting out new criticism. g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteri-

ously" can always be explained in some more natural way: e.g., the indi-

viduals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Com-

mission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more

people, conducting 25,000 interviews and reinterviews), and in such a

large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn

Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, ap-

peared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were

from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on

a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.) 5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the

Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be

impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Com-

mission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their

account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far

superior to the work of its critics. CLASSIFICATION PAGE NO.

FORM TOP SECRET THREE

8-64 53a USE PREVIOUS EDITION. CONTINUED

(40)

Document Number 1035-960

for FOIA Review on SEP 1976

robert; you may interested in these Horne files at Lancer......

We should also point out that the tentative memorandum of January 23 substantially differs from the original outline of our work in this area which had as its subject, "Lee Harvey Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy," and which examined the evidence from that standpoint. At no time have we assumed that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy. Rather, our entire study has been based on an independent examination of all the evidence in an effort to determine who was the assassin of President Kennedy.[27] :blink: :blink: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PGchp2.html#Belin130

RFK; MM; JFK';

The Medical Evidence..b

Peter, can you quote the sentence in which Blaine uses the description "narcissistic"? I'd like to know what damn business of his this is.

Good point.

I thought that the job of the Secret Service was to protect the President, the Vice President, their families and certain others - not to make character and personality assessments.

hi christopher, from their non actions that day, i imagined their job was not to protect and make assessments on anything else that happens to pop into their minds now nearly 50 years after, money and centre stage appears to have brought out the real character of these charlatans....what's next the way he wore his hair...it's a matter now, of stating anything perhaps to try desperately to keep the attention that has gone to their heads, still when all is said and done, they did not do the job they were trained for, and that has and will continue to haunt them and their SS forever within history...no book can undo their neglect nor their partying the night before, that is also now part of their history.and their names are attached to such forever, thanks ...b

Jim here is an older but great research article by mike...some good info within...for now..best b i'll be right back lost the copy..ta da ,,,http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Extra_Bullets_and_Missed_Shots.html.b

Thanks Bernice,

My copy of " Cover Up " is pretty ragged and woreout.

What do you think of his " 8 Shots " idea?

jim

hi jim...

Well, we did a research study some time back,into the how many shot's on rich's and many contributed, there were i believe, if the grey cells are kicking, ten counted, including the missed shots, to the sidewalk, the curb, the sewer cover, the harmons etc.i was amazed but they all checked out, so imo now possible very...we should get one going sometime on here, though there may have been such started and perhaps not completed, i do recall it was a fascinating study, oh and btw the flurry of shots mentioned by kellerman i believe, were not counted as he never recalled how many, just spoke of a flurry,and the gov proposes there was one shooter with one rifle, that dog don't hunt, He was not getting out of dealey alive, that was very very obvious..i have read my copy , so often in the past that it is in the same condition,tattered, it has so much like first day evidence, some which has been dropped,and or forgotten down the years it is a great refresher course, such as wiesberg and penn's and meaghers,are without a doubt...carry on,hope all are well, take care, best b

Bill re Stoughton, the schematic information from the motorcade...

These vehicles were provided by Earl Hayes Chevrolet , were

positioned

6th, 7th,8th....behind the presidential Lincoln.

The listing of the seating is below..

Camera Car # 1, 1964 Chevrolet Impala ,Yellow 2 door convertible .

License # PI 9059. 6 men seated.

1.Front seat, Driver, John Hoefen (NBC sound technician) David Wiegman Jr.

...(NBC cameraman),

1.Back seat, Thomas J.Craven Jr (CBS cameraman), Cleve Ryan (Pool

...Electrician ) Thomas M.Aikins ( White House cameraman ).

************

Camera Car # 2, 1964 Chevrolet Implala ,Silver 2 door convertible.

License # PI 7856. 6 men seated.

2. Front seat, Driver, Donald C."Clint" Grant ( Dallas Morning News

...photographer, Frank Cancellare (UPI photographer) .

2.Back seat, Cecil Stoughton (White House photographer) Arthur Rickerby

...(Life photographer) Henry D.Burroughs (AP photographer).

************

Camera Car # 3, 1964 Chevrolet Impala ,Gray 2 door convertible.

License #...856. 6 men.

3. Front seat, Driver, James R. Underwood (KRLD cameraman)

....Thomas C.Dillard (Dallas Morning News photographer)

3. Back seat, Jimmy Darnell (WBAP cameraman) Malcolm O.Couch

...(WFAA cameraman) Robert H.Jackson ( Dallas Times Herald

....photographer)..

************

B..

""from Seth Kantor's notes----"Will Fritz's men called off nite before by SS.

Had planned to ride closed car w/ machine guns in car behind Pres."

as in Chicago, IL, on 3/23/63 & New York on 11/15/63)""

photo below by robin...thanks...b

Bill the large copy taken at love i will remove the above smaller photo...ta click on the photo to get full view..b

David, thankyou, again for your great insight and sharing of your knowledge, good to see you here, for bill kelly i believe, a photo of the coffin beng loaded at love, you can see the handles they speak of, i will look into stoughton again, it did not come up, at first try, many thanks all, this has been a very informative joint thread, b..

Good catch Jim; in a great book, thanks. b

:DThankyou kind Sir; many times over, i owe you again... also thank you to others who offered to help in getting this information posted, appreciated, many times over....take care best b:D