Glenn Nall

How could anyone know? I believe O'Connor said there was no brain in JFK's head when the body arrived at the Bethesda morgue. I believe there was also a brain at the autopsy that was almost intact and thus could not possibly have been JFK's brain. Then there was the extra brain apparently used per Horne's memo. But I'm sure DVP will tell you that anyone with a brain knows there is nothing to see here! right, i remember one of the testimonies by an attending md was that the brain was on the side table when he entered...?

I have a question, please. Regarding motive for the brain in question to have disappeared; is the material and texture of a human brain such that close examination of it can still provide details of the damage and from what direction it came, etc? I've always been under the (likely erroneous) impression that brain tissue is too soft to be able to learn this kind of thing. and for what it's worth, I think DVP has it and won't tell us out of sheer spite.

really???

how very interesting...

It would be a relief if more research would just think about the clues and follow them up rather than wasting so much time criticizing others for not being perfect. just wanted to repeat that. thanks

well, the evil individuals are motivated more to protect some people rather than nail someone else, I'm thinking. right? do some wish it was Oswald...? wondering why...

i DO find it intriguing that LHO may not have known what de Morenschildt was up to, that he wasn't aware of his being "assessed"... and the point someone made about his not even KNOWING what was up 11/22/63... very interesting thoughts... what a tangled web...

my point was really in the notion that people are so able to speak for "most" others. and according to Vincent Bugliosi (and my own observations) perjury happens in court more often than is realized. he clarifies that there are really two kinds of perjury - an understandable kind and a more egregious kind (in And The Sea Will Tell he describes this). And i'm not arguing whether Veciana is reliable or not, just that i'm not so sure that the fact that he's admitted to committing perjury is a good reason to doubt him all the way around. i can surely imagine myself lying about a CIA member's identity IF it meant putting myself in a life-threatening situation by these people. Pretty understandable to me... I was simply commenting on that maybe others are not so quick to doubt someone based on that. of course, i could be wrong. i've been wrong before, i ain't scared...

Do others see what looks to be a dryer area of K's hair down below the larger patch of wettish scalp that might or might not be being held in place by the hand there...? kind of a line of demarcation along the lower part of his scalp? is that too obvious?

"and since we both KNOW for a fact that there WAS, indeed, one single bullet hole of entry on the back side of President Kennedy's head" Well, there you go again...

"Most people will not accept the word of a self-admitted perjurer." Just curious - is that true? Not disputing or verifying the veracity of this person's presentation, but objectively, can one really speak for "most people" and whether they will or won't believe an admitted xxxx? I have lied before. I have had what I considered to be good reasons to lie, and I would be more than willing to accept as honest a person's testimony who has lied in his life, depending upon the reasons for his dishonesty. Perhaps I'm the only person who is willing to hear a man's words knowing that he's lied in the past. Perhaps it's because I have lied in the past. Just curious.

terrific, Mr. Mitcham - i've been looking for stuff like this for my own information. so what Mr. Von Pein is implying is that Horne is simply imagining that this interview took place? or maybe he made it up...? ok. i can see the need to believe that...

will be watching, Doug.

isn't it funny, all the onions we keep running into...

I'd like to share with you all a little something that happened last night that really cracked me up - after a few seconds of paranoia - in the hopes of maybe adding some momentary levity to this passion of ours. You may know (from my bio) that I'm a programmer and web developer (mainly WordPress these days). One of the main reasons I love my work is that it affords me the opportunity to work AND play - at JFK Ass. research stuff - at the same time. Currently the only job i'm working is a WordPress project for some people at Morehouse College. I'm also putting my own website back together which is including some JFK stuff, so I'm going back and forth between the two, somewhat. Needless to say, there is no JFK related material in the Morehouse project - it's all student/alum stuff. Last night I sit back down to hack out some stuff for Morehouse after having done some playing around in the inner sanctum of the JFK / LBJ darkness earlier in the day. I always leave my machine on, btw... Now I don't know about others, but I seem to have a bit of a lofty imagination, and sometimes the reality of this Government/CIA level murder conspiracy gets to me just a little and I might get a little curious as to whether the NSA is reading, or watching, or... but I laugh at myself and get serious and all is well. So while i'm going through a bunch of web files last night with thousands of lines of code (PHP and HTML) i'm trying to find one particular line of code in one of these files by using "Find", right? only after about the 10th or 12th search instead of hitting "Find" I hit "Replace" without knowing it and replaced a code snippet in this file with what happened to be on my clipboard at the time. And it returned no results for what i was looking for. But as i scrolled through the file for a quick look-see and saw this little snippet: <?php do_action( 'bp_before_activity_type_tab_friends' ); ?> <?php if ( LBJ AND the CIA() ) ) : ?> <li id="activity-friends"><a href="<?php echo bp_loggedin_user_domain() . bp_get_activity_slug() // I will tell you that I underwent a good 15 seconds of wondering how on earth "THEY" got to my files to let me know that they KNEW, and were WATCHING me, and wanted ME to know... before I figured out what had happened. and laughed and felt like an idiot and swore i'd never tell a soul lest they send the guys with the coats with the really long sleeves... but i trust ya'll. there ya go. so please laugh at my silliness, and at the things we can get ourselves into -

Doug Caddy mentioned "three hit teams" - where can I read about this? (don't tell me there really was someone in the sewer...) I'm on board with the top of the pyramid, and am putting a few others in there, but haven't spent a lot of time on the "particulars", like was Frank Sturgis there? is Marita Lorenz a reliable witness? who most likely were the three hobos? are James Files and/or Charles Harrelson crazy? was George Bush under that stairwell in the Dal-Tex building? whether i fall in line or not, i love to hear a good theory on the minutiae, esp. by Mr Caddy...

Did i read correctly somewhere that Josefa was murdered as well at the time, and therefore likely by the same persons (her brother via M. Wallace)? "LBJ's lawyer represented Kinser at the subsequent trial..." I'm curious about this - i've never heard of a murder victim being represented in a criminal trial.... is there some special circumstance here, or...? thanks, gn

wow - i just read one of his books three months ago, And The Sea Will Tell - I gained an enormous respect for his mind (even though he's not a CT, i don't think) and for his lawyering skills - you wanna read fantastic defense courtroom strategy, read how he handled that woman's case. my gosh. oh - wait - i forgot who posted this... sorry to hear this.

How very interesting - Robert, or anyone, where might I find a little more material on this? both the reports and maybe some of the published interviews?

*crickets*...

I do not know much about the 35+ year old convention and findings of the HSCA other than what i learned from Plausible Denial, which I'm inclined to take to the bank, mostly. I know that there was some controversy over the position of lead counsel (among other controversies) and that they pretty much felt obliged to find "some suggestion of a conspiracy" although it didn't warrant any actual further investigation into the murder of the US President. (things that make you go, "hmmm") I'm noticing a tendency by "some" to wave HSCA findings when attempting to rebut a CT's argument, and this confuses me. I can't help but think that's only a little better than saying "yeah, but in the Warren Commission Allen Dulles said-" A real question: are there any reliable rulings in this old stuff that reasonable people can use? Didn't they try hard to get around a lot of things (i.e. the truth)? someone just pointed me to an HSCA report on the xrays of JFK's skull, and my only thought was - yeah, AND...?

And by improving my "reasoning skills", you mean I should accept the notion that the JFK X-ray is nothing but a lie and a sham. Right, Glenn? Even though I also know what is written on page 41 of HSCA Volume 7?.... "The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner." Thanks, Glenn. But no thanks. I'll stick with my current batch of reasoning skills. Lest I end up in the "Everything's Fake" arena. you do that. and keep relying on HSCA while you're at it. that'll getcha far...

and maybe --- well, never mind. i didn't say that. just said that the provisions you provided are not exclusive - that there are other options. you're putting yourself in a little black and white box, from which there is no escape without a little crow for dinner. open your mind to a bigger picture than the one you've created - the fact is, there are more possibilities than the ONE you've committed to. in this sense, we are a lot closer to the truth than you are.

that's one way to skin a cat. or keep one quiet... for a week or so, anyway