Steven Kossor

I have learned a great deal from the thoughtful and insightful contributions of so many people on the Education Forum, but Chris Bernard, your work and understanding of the mechanisms of coercion has been truly inspirational.  Thanks so much for all you've done to explain the vessel we've been placed in and its probable intended course.  I do not see a more viable place on earth from which I could continue my existence more effectively than the US right now, so I'll keep on here for as long as I can.  I'm weathering through my own post-vaccination COVID experience now, so I am fully immersed in the controversy from an experiential perspective. I'll keep waving my entrepreneurial flag to help children whose lives have been misdirected by malevolent and/or well-meaning but misinformed parents and other adults; the workforce has been horribly decimated but young people continue to stand up and declare their desire to help, so we'll persist, God willing, to do the right thing.  Thanks for your inspiration in the face of so much deceitful behavior coming from so many directions!  Stay healthy!!!

I wasn't aware that a transcript of Bowers interview with Lane existed.  I stand corrected, if it captures his statements to Lane accurately.  Bowers may not have seen anyone on his side of the fence but Mary Moorman's photo does seem to show the same anomaly in the area that Tink staged with someone standing there, and the evidence of debris exhausted from the back of JFK's head onto the driver's side taillight & officer Hargis lines up with a shot originating from that position, so I'm inclined to think that Bowers didn't see one or more people who were actually there. The other unnerving possibility is that the transcript is not an accurate representation of what he actually said, and it's just not possible to tell with certainty.  Given the extent to which the official record in this case has been doctored to create evidence for a lone assassin and suppress other evidence, a written transcript discovered long after the event it describes strikes me as suspicious. The preponderance of evidence seems to impugn the integrity of the Bowers-Lane interview transcript, as far as I can see. Thanks to Pat for helping clarify the facts in evidence.

A picture is worth 1,000 words, but I added a few to clarify the view that Bowers had at the time of the shooting, and what he was describing to Mark Lane in his interview.  This is the view Lee Bowers had from the switching station tower, looking toward Elm Street. The only part of the Grassy Knoll that he could see from his vantage point is the small section between the picket fence and the pergola where Zapruder was filming. This narrow area is where two men were standing at the time of the shooting, and where Bowers could possibly have seen a motorcycle officer riding about 2/3 up the "embankment" on the other side of the picket fence before dismounting and running to investigate the possibility of someone firing from the side of the fence that was facing Bowers. In his report to Mark Lane, Bowers described a commotion he noticed "on the embankment" but clearly, he was not able to see through the fence to see anything on the other side of it - he was referring to activity on HIS side of the fence. As an employee of the railroad yard, he would consider the area "behind" the fence to be the area of the railroad yard, and the area "in front of the fence" to be the GK and Elm Street, but the "embankment" was the location of the fence itself, not the area in front of it.

I've gone to DP twice, filmed the limo route while driving down Elm Street myself several times using a Go Pro camera mounted on the rear view mirror of the rental car, walked the ground there for several hours viewing it from all perspectives, watched all of the available footage of the limo's passage down Elm Street countless times, read dozens of books and consulted with Doug Horne and David Lifton directly and in-depth over a period of several years, and have come to conclusions that are thoughtful and complete syntheses of the available evidence. It's inaccurate and insulting to claim that all of this input is "garbage" and that the resulting conclusions are "garbage" as well.  Ad hominem attacks are never helpful or useful, and tend to cast the author in a negative light, despite any valuable contributions he/she might have made in the past.  The truth will out only if we continue to look for it, without being blinded by the confirmation bias that becomes all the more potent with each observation and conclusion that we publish. I'm thankful to have the opportunity to share insights and conclusions in this forum, no matter the insipid responses they may provoke from others from time to time.

By the way, I think my brother-in-law, Steve Zampana, is the sound engineer that Robert Groden worked with to synchronize gunshot sounds with the Zfilm.  I recall his talking about being involved in a sound recording project related to the Zapruder film some time ago, and I believe he said that the producer was Robert Groden.  I noticed a reference to an "audio" version of the Zapruder film in the Thompson documentary; that must have been my brother-in-law's work.  Small world....

A shot from farther West along the fence line hitting JFK in the hairline above the right eye (and fragmenting inside his head) would also account for the appearance of a "shoulder pad" on JFK's right shoulder that David Lifton noticed in the Moorman photo if it dislodged skull/hair a split second before Moorman snapped her photo, and a split second before the other shot from the front right struck JFK near the right ear and exited from his head through a hole at the right rear (he would have been facing toward the GK at that moment so that the debris cone would be pointing in the right direction).  The fact that we don't see his head turned toward the GK n the Zfilm is further evidence of the Zfilm having been doctored. 

One last thing still has me confused: I thought the engine noise of the motorcycle with the stuck microphone was that of a 3 wheeler, and there is no 3 wheeler in any film showing the headshot sequence.  That means that, unless Hargis or someone else had their mic stuck (not likely), the only other live mics that could have picked up the sound of gunshots would be Kellerman's mic or a mic in the Queen Mary.  That's not likely to have been recorded on the DPD dictabelt, so it seems to me that anything resembling gunshots on a DPD dictabelt has to be an acoustical artifact, rather than a ballistic event.  What am I missing?

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thank you Steven.  This is excellent, and it meshes well with the analysis of Mantick/Chesser/Horne.  Two shots from the front, one from the back to the head.  Obviously coordinated imho.  It all begins to finally make sense.

You don't know how long I've hoped to see those words in print ("It all begins to finally make sense")!  I think you're RIGHT!!!

The Thompson documentary is phenomenal, but I think it may have a little bump in it.  Fluid debris fields have to form a symmetrical "cone" that can't have any bends in it, based on fluid dynamics.  I think you'll see what I mean in the annotated frames from the documentary I have attached.  It appears that the documented debris cones indicate that two shots came from the right front, not just one. Food for thought, for sure, submitted with great appreciation for the terrific work done on this documentary.

Malcolm Perry actually spelled out E-N-D-O-T-R-A-C-H-E-A-L for a reporter in the 2:15 pm press conference to be certain that he was referring to the procedure performed by Dr. Carrico before Perry arrived at the ER, which involved the passage of a tube into the mouth and down the throat (endotracheal) to create an airway.  The problem was, Carrico's insertion of the endotracheal tube was incorrect (the cuff was inflated above the level of the wound, so it did not seal the trachea) and Perry removed it to do the tracheotomy incision in the neck to improve the President's respiration capacity.  Since JFK was already dead (he was "cyanotic" meaning that his body had been deprived of oxygen for several minutes), Carrico's insertion of the endotracheal tube sent the inaccurate message to the doctors who arrived soon afterward that JFK was still alive.  Perry's initiation of a tracheotomy incision, assisted by Drs. McClelland and Baxter, on a dead body was an action that Perry and the other doctors were distancing themselves from by the time of the 2:15 pm press conference.  The reports of "agonal respiration" filed by several of the ER doctors were apparently made to justify Carrico's insertion of the endotracheal tube, but the description of JFK's body and the extensive nature of his brain injuries at the time of its arrival at Parkland are incompatible with any respiratory (or circulatory) activity being present for at least a few minutes prior to the time Dr. Carrico inserted the endotracheal tracheotomy tube into JFK's throat.  His reasons for performing a medical procedure on a dead body remain obscure.  Neurologist Kemp Clark (who pronounced JFK dead) backed up Carrico's action when he later wrote in a Trauma text book edited by Parkland's Dr. Tom Shires, that the most important thing in a case of a gunshot wound to the head is to establish respiration; more important than controlling bleeding, apparently, according to Dr Clark.

In my reading of Perry’s report at the 2:15 pm press conference, he doesn’t mention his tracheotomy incision at all.  He only talks about the endotracheal intubation performed by Carrico.  It appears that he realized that JFK was already dead when he cut into the throat and just distanced himself asap from the implication of that action by telling only about Carrico’s work (which appears to have fooled Perry & others into believing that JFK was still alive).  The tales told after 2:15 pm on 11/22/63 just muddied the water further in the search for cover.  Or so it seems to me.  

All of the factors that contributed to JFK's life trajectory were missing or disfigured in the lives of the CIA guys, and I agree that carrying resentment over past injustices is at the root of much malevolence; the smarter the victim of injustice, the more furiously their malevolence erupts later in life when the opportunity presents itself.

The highest echelons of the CIA seem to have been populated by a disproportionate number of physically handicapped individuals (Allen Dulles and "The Poisoner in Chief" at the CIA who held sway over the MK Ultra project had club feet if I'm not mistaken), and having a hairlip certainly contributed to the weight on Humes' psyche that would be assuaged by obeying orders and rising in a military hierarchy.  Some of the cruelest and most nefarious people in history had significant burdens in the way of physical challenges with which to contend, and the "vending machine approach to human interpersonal relations" that often characterizes people with significant Autism symptoms (the "highest functioning" people with that symptom configuration used to be diagnosed with "Asperger's Syndrome") lends itself to ignoring the wants, needs and aspirations of other people in pursuit of personal gain.  Think of the leaders in the Social Media realm, for example.  In the wake of the Nuremberg trials, psychologists tried to figure out the "mind set" that typified the National Socialist Party leaders, and discovered that those people who most closely matched the Nazis insofar at their perception tendencies and orientation to living based on responses to inkblot cards, were US businessmen. Trump comes to mind (although not as an especially noteworthy businessman).  I'll have a look at the Angleton book soon. I'm looking forward to doing more fly fishing in the spring!!!

I knew about parts of this book and that it explained a great deal about the uses and effectiveness of hypnotic methods for propaganda purposes.  I didn't realize that it covered so much more ground!  Thanks again for this link to a body of knowledge that is understandably under-reported.  What prompted you to accumulate such a robust reservoir of understanding about coercive practices?

I have been returning to the Education Forum for insight and inspiration regularly for about a decade now, and am so thankful to continue finding them in such abundance here. Thanks especially to you, Chris.

I read the annual report of the Jamieson facility years ago and discovered that they had all of the technology in their Dallas facility (optical printer, etc) necessary to create the special effects needed to produce the “official film record” of the JFKA that would eliminate the credibility of “car stop” and other inconvenient witnesses.  For the equipment to be so close, and the editing capability on site in Dallas to be so accessible, and for the zfilm to have passed through those same fingers suggests that this is a prime location for some further research.

We’re figuring out that part of the plot was to have a movie of the big event to stand forever as a “record” of what happened that could replace peoples’ recollections of events with the “best evidence” of what happened, to suppress conversation about it.  Fifty years later, the technology isn’t as flawless as it once seemed to be.  The thought that two CIA employees at a film editing facility in New York might be helping to obfuscate things (divert attention away from the Dallas Jamison facility) is intriguing, for sure.

Don’t forget that the Jamison film company had all of the technology on site in their Dallas facility to edit the Zfilm as effectively as any film lab in the US (they were known as “the Hollywood of the midwest” after all).  The necessary edits could have been done right in Dallas, within an hour of the shooting.

Has anyone else noticed that the hand gesture that Honest Abe made when he was interviewed on TV on the afternoon of 11/22/63 was more consistent with the appearance of JFK's head at Bethesda (the right side blown-out) than with a hole in the back of his head (and the rest of the head intact) that was documented at Parkland? He was describing what his film would *eventually* show (rather than the actual wound at the right rear of the head through which brain and gore were sprayed onto the driver's side taillight and officer Hargis). Maybe he was psychic as well as honest.

Pat, your analysis of the 2016 election was terrific.  Thanks so much!   Best wishes for a fast & full recovery!!!

Chris, this is the most comprehensive, clearly described summary of the stumbling blocks facing anyone who wants to understand the truth about anything.  Even things that they themselves have personally experienced/witnessed!  Nice work!!!

I'd welcome any deeper understanding of the rest of the visual record of the JFKA.  The Zfilm has received entirely too much ink (in more ways than one).

I read Tragedy & Hope several years ago and squeezed the same realizations out of it. Quigley was one of the people who was a mentor to Bill Clinton and who he praised roundly for his insights and understanding of political realities. I really appreciate the extent to which several of the people on this thread are reading the same books and finding the same thoughtful, insightful information in them that I have. It's becoming a real "meeting of the minds" here, isn't it. So glad to be a part of it.

Watched the HOPIUM program. No doubt that appeals to hope (for change, for justice, for integrity) have resonated with people of all sorts throughout history, and will always do so, and explains why politician/actors strive to embody it and ride the optimism it produces into office. That they are merely actors in a production not of their making is clarified by their behavior once in office....

Is it possible that the "National Security State" operatives and the "fascist oligarchy" operatives are competing forces, and that the US is in the midst of a power struggle between those two forces (acknowledging that there are undoubtedly some with loyalties on both sides)?

Remember that the people who were successful in manipulating voters "just enough" to get Trump elected in 2016 (read Chris Wylie's book Mind F*ck for more information about them) proved very sophisticated in their understanding of the Electoral College and how to move the levers of power to achieve their goal. The same people are probably behind the events following the 2020 election when their "plan a" didn't work.  The people in the spotlight are actors -- they are never responsible for the production.