Robert Mady

Robert, the first shot as Cliff pointed out was not guaranteed, but the conspirators also had a second problem, JFK had to also have a fatal wound inflicted otherwise the poison dart might have to be eventually explained or have a plausible explanation as to why KENNEDY just died and coincidentally had a hole in his throat. They also had a script and that script was to cause a wound that could be perceived as fatal, kill YARBOROUGH (man in front of KENNEDY) in the process having fired three rifle shots. The assassination was carefully scripted, they would not have done this on the fly. And yes, compelling evidence points to a shot coming from behind the concrete wall using a silent weapon which fired a projectile with a toxin that immobilized KENNEDY or maybe would have caused his death.

Robert, why are you interpreting the range of the weapon to be 100 yards, this could just as easily be 100 yards with effective accuracy. Plus it was less than 50 yards from the limo to the end of the fence where the dart may have been fired, well within the 100 yard range. Also what is being demonstrated is technology they were willing to release, do you also imagine that this was this was the pinnacle of the technology invented? You are very resistant to evidence, I have provided proof that the first shot at ~Z-189 came from the front as evidenced by G NEWMAN, W NEWMAN and LANDIS, READY, HICKEY BENNETT and HILLs reactions to look toward the gk, that this first shot did not have a sound associated with it that was a rifle shot, no other witnesses in DP recorded hearing this noise. No one in DP understood that the President had been wounded by this shot, ie no one comprehended KENNEDY had a hole in his throat as a result of this shot. Do you have a way to explain why KENNEDY became immobilized after being wounded in Z-189, can a shot to the back explain his lack of reactions. The Parkland doctors did not claim the hole in KENNEDYS throat was an exit wound, they claimed it was an entrance wound, the WC posed a question to each speculating if it could possibly have been an exit wound. Don't revise history. There is no evidence of a back wound having occurred during the assassination, other than BENNETT's statement, but if you take his statement at face value then you must also be able to explain why he failed to react? The SSA lied, they all lied, this must be taken into account that there is very little corroboration between their testimonies. The conspirators punched a hole into KENNEDYS back prior to autopsy, this hole had to be made somehow, the question is how and what damage would it have done to the area and surrounding areas. To be convincing the hole would have to resemble a bullet hole, made by a device that could create a hole and damage flesh in the same manner of a high speed projectile. Doug Horne claims there was no bullet fragments in JFKS body found on x-rays. You provided evidence that the organs of JFKS body had been removed, there is no way to really identify if any damage to the lung was real or contrived. You have no idea what damage the front shot caused because the throat wound was never examined, also the throat wound was mutilated prior to autopsy, probably to obscure the entrance wound and to retrieve whatever penetrated JFKS throat. You theories are interesting but lack foundation and seem to be resistant to significant evidences.

Paul, after listening to "John Judge - Cults, Lies and Videotape" portion pertaining to Jonestown and the CIA / intelligence connections I feel stronger than ever that LANE must fully explain his association with Jonestown, this association must be fully disclosed and uncovered because at face value this association with the CIA poses an insurmountable conflict that disintegrates all credibility of LANE. Why would the CIA bring into one of its darkest most evil projects a major published opponent of their organizations past most traitorous dastardly deed. Fact is they wouldn't they would not include anyone in a dark project that had not been carefully vetted or was not a proponent of the deeds of the CIA. Why would the CIA take the chance on an outsider, specially with LANE???? My opinion - I no longer trust LANE, not now or any work he has published, all of my books of LANES have been trashed. It is one thing to not support Posner or Bugliosi but to put money into the pocket of a poser that played me for the fool, is regrettable. Can I prove it, no. Can I think it and believe it is true, yes. Do as you wish, but if you have not uncovered a reasonable explanation for LANE - CIA connection then ask yourself if you might be a fool? How many times have we seen our heroes turn out to be nothing but villains. 'Americas dad' Bill Cosby seems to be the latest, but the political world is littered with politicians proclaiming virtue only to find out they frequent prostitutes or cheat on their spouse or their lives are fulfilled with illegal drugs which they openly campaign against, then look at the pious religious leaders who have fallen because of revelations of their follies. A Bishop that covered up child molestation became a pope, this is the world we live in. People are not always what they seem or that we perceive. Think on this... Why would some members of the WC take the chance to debate against an opponent that was capable of unraveling the lies and revealing the truth? The members of the WC had to know the WCR was a lie, do you think that they would march off to a potential ambush they may not have been able to recover from, do you think the government would have allowed a real debate that might have redefined the perspective on the assassination or significantly influence public opinion? The debates were fixed and resulted in nothing but idle entertainment. They have successfully fooled us for 51 years. Maybe it is time to put this to an end.

OFF TOPIC Robert P. I went on UTube to review Jonestown after Paul B. mentioned it and ran across another John Judge video that I had meant to bring to your attention if you hadn't already seen it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZZnuJ_8Xs8 John Judge is talking about the wound to President Reagan, he was not shot with a bullet, he was wounded with a disc. By all accounts the shot was also silent. Just something for you to ponder.

Andric, good point. There is also compelling and corroborating testimony from a significant number of witnesses that claimed first shot heard caused debris to fly from the limo. What I have come to realize is that at the first rifle shot heard people recognized that KENNEDY 'slumped' to his left (Z-313) at Z-325 the second rifle shot rang out and MRS KENNEDY released her hold on the President to attempt to escape the gunfire and the President as a result fell to his left. Most observers interpreted the first shot heard to cause the President to 'slump' or duck to his left the second rifle shot heard to be the head shot. From any distance they could not determine which shot actually caused the President's head wound. But the two rifle shots they are referring to are depicted in Zapruder film ~Z-313 and ~Z-325. Also remember testimonies were taken months following the event and memories change specially when influenced by a steady stream of propaganda also some people do not want to be different so they will bend their stories to appear normal.

It would be compassionate to make leeway for visions of fantasy or insanity that had disregarded significant evidences to draw such a frivolous conclusion, we could pity your demise. Just kidding Robert I would say prove it.

I am a little bewildered by the simplicity of your thinking, it would seem to be reasonable and logical that the people that killed KENNEDY would do everything possible to keep the lies and deceptions from being revealed, to start with they must defend the lies but it can't end there because there are those that will untangle the lies, this opposition must ultimately also be controlled, to do so pundits must be promoted to positions to mislead the unsuspecting. What does it tell Stephen that you take the time to cast aspersions on those pointing to serious flaws in LANES works, yet have no comment addressing the evidence presented detailing the flaws? Or are you satisfied with the truthfulness of LANEs works and find no conflict in his association with Jonestown and the CIA?

Brad, it is Mady with one d How could three rifle shots come from the rail yards and hit the motorcade? How did 'they' so perfectly time a rail road torpedo explosion with a fatal head shot from a silent weapon? You do understand that there was a monument in between, trees, parked cars and the street slopped down and the limo was likely out of line of sight to the rail yards when the shots occurred? Maybe DECKER was ordering his men to the rail yards because this would have been the perceived route for escape. Also SORRELS riding in the same car as DECKER claimed the shots came from the monument area or 'terrace'.

Brad, where exactly were the shooters from behind, in which building or buildings were they and do you have compelling evidence to support the contention that a shot came from behind? Brad, do you understand that there were at least 17 people in the TSBD during the shooting. No one reported seeing any strangers in the building. The elevators were stuck on the 5th floor and the stairs were occupied by ADAMS and STYLES going down and BAKER and TRULY going up. The connection to the roof was locked from the inside, meaning that a sniper shooting from within the TSBD could not have escaped via the roof. NORMAN, WILLIAMS and JARMAN testified they did not hear ANY noise from movement on the sixth floor after the assassination.

Robert, again I will ask you, the evidence posted on DTL thread provides proofs that the majority of witnesses located through out DP as well as outside of DP heard three rifle shots. Do you understand that your contention that witnesses heard different sounds as well as number of shots depending on where they were located is without foundation? The evidence posted proves there were three rifle shots fired. Evidence posted previously provides the proofs that the three rifle shots occurred starting at Z-313 Evidence posted previously provides the proofs that at least one 'firecracker' sounding shot occurred at about Z-189 in which only a few witnesses became aware of this noise and that no witnesses or SSA became alarmed by it or comprehended that KENNEDY had been wounded by it.

Robert, why don't you first try to explain why almost everyone in this picture are on the ground AND looking toward the monument area? Brad, are you going to defend that all these bystanders on Elm street are on the ground because of rail road torpedoes being ignited in a rail yard by someone with a brick?

Robert and James, I posted a comprehensive analysis of witnesses experiences of shots heard on DTL thread, I am surprised that neither of you have taken the time to critique or comment on evidence posted since it completely debunks the statements that have been made on this thread concerning the sound of shots.

Paul, odd, but fits the profile of 'godfather' LANE intentionally leading us away from truth. The devil is in the details.

Paul, didn't even need to interview HARGIS, JACKSON, MARTIN or CHENEY, they all stopped their motorcycles when the first rifle shot occured and then looked toward the monument area. Their actions are depicted in the Nix film, actions speak louder than their words. But interviews by LANE would have been noteworthy and revealing if they were questioned about their actions as seen in the Nix frame.

Paul, interesting what you say about the early analysis's published concerning the assassination. Again in retrospect, the researchers that were able to get material published early most likely were supported by the government to maintian the confusion or were honestly confused about the assassiantion and their works were promoted by the system to create more confusion. As researchers we know the government spun and obscured the truth, it seems logical that the government would have controlled both sides of the argument to best maintain the lies, I have no doubt that this is in deed what happened and is still being promoted today to maintain the lie. I too for a long time thought of LANE as an American hero, it was crushing to come to comprehend he was really a hero for the government, not for us.

Pat, it is ironic that you use the term 'godfather' in that the Mafia seemed to play such a significant roll in the assassiantion and the cover-up. I would have to agree with you, yes, LANE may have been the 'godfather' leading the unsuspecting away from truth.

A very good question, when we consider how content not merely Lane, but so many other of the first generation researchers were to ignore so many of the closest witnesses, not least the motorcycle outriders immediately behind and to the side of the presidential limousine. This "oversight" reinforced the omissions of the Warren Report's compilers, and was only corrected thanks to the work, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, of Fred Newcomb and those interviewers working with and for him. One point of fact on Brehm, though, his first quoted testimony to reach print pointed somewhere very different than the grassy knoll: Charles Brehm (carpet salesman, south curb of Elm St.): The shot(s) came from “in front of or beside” the President. Source: Dallas Times Herald, first post-assassination edition, November 22, 1963, cited by Joachim Joesten. Oswald: Assassin or Fall Guy? (London: Merlin Press, 1964), p.176. Paul, thank you for posting the information on BREHM, I suspected this was true based on photographic evidence, it is reassuring to see that this is what BREHM also may have claimed to a newspaper reporter. It would have been more interesting and pertinent if LANE had grilled BREHM on whether or not the FBI had pressured him into altering his story to reflect shots coming from the rear and not the monument area. Similar to ALTGENS, he initially claimed the monument area then in WC trickery and word play was allowed to seem like he meant an area near the intersection of Elm and Houston.

Pat, in documentary 'Rush To Judgment' LANE never said or implied that BREHM claimed the shots came from the GK, BREHM protested afterwards in a propaganda entertainment special created for TV that LANE painted him in this manner, LANE merely implied that the shot produced debris that was expelled in BREHMS direction. Why didn't LANE ask BREEM if he could explain how a shot from the rear could produce debris from the limo to move back toward BREHM? BREHM also made another claim during the interview that LANE should have taken him to task that the first shot occurred as the limo was 30 feet away and was 20-25 feet away when the second bullet struck. BREHM points to a picture LANE called a Nix frame but it was a Muchmore frame, in which BREHM claimed the President had already been struck by the first bullet, but the limo was passing by BREHM in the frame, BREHMS claims made no sense, but LANE allows BREHM to continue to spew non-sense without being questioned critically on what was being claimed. Smoke that occurred on the GK, exactly what does this have to do with the assassination? As far as anyone can determine there is no reason for a modern weapon to create the amount of smoke that was recorded on 11/22/1963, it should be obvious to anyone that this was not created as a result of the shot(s) but as a diversion to take attention away from where the rifle shots originated so as to allow time to evacuate the sniper team from the area without being detected. LANES interview with MAX HOLLAND (4 rifle shots) (smoke from 1 shot from behind the picket fence, produced by specifically the third of four shots) did nothing more than add to the confusion. Did LANE ask HOLLAND where the LIMO was during each of the four shots? No of course he didn't, same as BREHM, if it could have been determined were the limo was during the shots, the farce would have been over. The two most important aspects of HOLLANDS testimony was the smoke and four shots, yet LANE never asked HOLLAND to detail the four shots or BREHM to detail the three shots he claimed to hear. Some of the Zapruder frames had been published, why not request HOLLAND and BREHM to detail in which frames the shots were fired? IMO 'Rush To Judgment' was merely a propaganda piece intended to confound and add to the confusion which would misdirect generations of researchers. HOLLANDS interview also promoted the myth of the fatal head shot coming from behind the picket fence, a deception meant to concentrate peoples awareness on evidence without foundation, it also promoted the myth that the witnesses seemed to be confused, this being the reason why it was impossible to sort out the truth. Just a big fat lie. Smoke and mirrors, deceptions and lies, just enough to fool the children who apparently prefer to stay asleep.

Protecting LANE is intriguing from the stand point that this man in retrospect interviewed witnesses such as BREHM for the documentary, but did LANE really clarify any evidence for the unsuspecting viewer with any witness interviewed in Rush To Judgment, or did LANE purposely produce this film to confound and further add to the confusion? IMO - BREHM is a witness that was influenced by the FBI to change his story, evidenced by photographs of him and his son taken moments after the shots, where is BREHMS attention...toward the monument area not the TSBD, where does he claim the shots came from, "one of two buildings", a WWII veteran, why couldn't BREHM an X-Army Ranger determine that three rifle shots came from a window on the sixth floor, he was wounded multiple times in the battle for France, he had first hand experience with rifle shots. He immediately recognized the sounds to be rifle shots. Just absurd. BREHM is alone in not pointing to the monument area, all the people around BREHM, HUDSON, SUMMERS, HILL, MOORMAN, ALTGENS, W NEWMAN, J NEWMAN, CHISM, MRS CHISM, FRANZEN, MRS FRANZEN, ZAPRUDER and GAYLE NEWMAN all claimed the monument area was where the shots came from. Why didn't LANE interview any of these witnesses? Analyze the interview with BREHM, What does LANE ask,-> about a piece of debris that came BREHMS direction, a piece of skull from the head shot no doubt. IF LANE wanted to impress the viewer with the debris expelled as a result of the impact from the bullet, why didn't he interview PO HARGIS who was splattered with brain tissue? Surely LANE read the FBI report on BREHM before the interview, what should LANE have asked; the most startling evidence from this FBI interview was this: BREHM claimed that all three rifle shots occurred while "the Presidents car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet" (mirrored by JEAN HILL, EMMETT HUDSON and JEAN NEWMAN) Did LANE ask about the distance the limo traveled while the shots rang out? Where was the limo at the first shot, second and third? Did LANE ask why BREHM was still applauding as the limo passed him and his son? LANE had BREHM point himself out in a published Nix frame, depicting BREHM applauding as the limo passed, I would ask Mr LANE how could a Lawyer miss such an obvious discrepancy, two shots have supposedly been fired and there you are BREHM applauding the President, what was going on, didn't you hear the two rifle shots, couldn't you comprehend you were applauding a wounded President as he was passing by you, why didn't you understand this? Why did you wait until after the third shot to get your son down on the ground? LANE went to Dallas to prove OSWALD was innocent, why didn't he just go interview LOVELADY and have him point out exactly where he was on the steps in Altgens #6 photograph and end any controversy? I believe LANE and the CIA went back longer than Jonestown. This podcast, is more of the same from LANE. Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. This is also why it has taken 51 years to understand the assassination, because we trusted the pundits to tell us the truth, did LANE tell us the truth or was the message just carefully spun disinformation?

Vince, have you figured out why SSA did not react until after Z-313?

LANE also claimed a shot from the rear entered KENNEDYS back and exited his throat. So the throat wound according to LANE was an exit wound. LANE had the opportunity to interview many witnesses first hand, he appears to have no clue how the assassination occurred or he is spreading disinformation. Has anyone asked LANE to explain his connection with CIA's Jonestown experiment / murders?

After listening to the podcast, LANE had reconfirmed my opinion of him. I am sorry that I purchased all his books and wasted time reading them.

.

Lies Chief CURRY did not claim where he believed the shots came from, but he did make a radio broadcast to all cars directing them to where the shots originated from: Mr. CURRY - I said what was that, was that a firecracker, or someone said this, I don't recall whether it was me or someone else, and from the report I couldn't tell whether it was coming from the railroad yard or whether it was coming from behind but I said over the radio, I said, "Get someone up in the railroad yard and check." Mr. BAKER - And then I ran, kind of running walk, went all the way around. First I glanced over this side here, because the last thing I heard here on the radio was the chief saying, "Get some men up on that railroad track." Mr. BELIN - Did you hear that on your police radio? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; that was the last thing I heard. Mr. BELIN - As you were getting off your motorcycle? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. verses SSA SORRELS: "And the chief took his microphone and told them to alert the hospital, and said, "Surround the building." He didn't say what building. He just said, "Surround the building." And by that time we had gotten almost in under the underpass, and the President's car had come up and was almost abreast of us." SSA LAWSON: " I heard Chief Curry broadcast to some units to converge on the area of the incident down by where it happened. I don't recall how he phrased it, so that they would know to go to the Texas Book Depository area. He told them to converge on a certain area, and that is what it turned out to be."

Myth #7 Three reliable witnesses saw the rifle shoot from the SN I would vehemently argue against reliability of these witnesses, I won't go into many specifics, you must read each transcript to gain a full appreciation of how wacky these three witnesses were. But to get you started BRENNAN claimed hearing only two rifle shots. (The first shot occurred when the limo was 50 yards from the corner or at ~Z-313, restated this claim a second time and said limo was 30 yards from his position which also equates to limo position being at ~Z-313. <-> Corroborates the four shot model) EUINS and WORRELL claimed to hear 4 rifle shots. The descriptions these three witnesses provided for what they claimed to have seen are simply preposterous. Out of the multitude of witnesses on Houston and in front of the TSBD, only these three claimed to witness a rifle discharge. Of the witnesses that claimed the TSBD as the source of the shots only these witnesses claimed to look to the 6th floor window and only these witnesses claimed to see something. Mrs. CABELL JACKSON COUCH BRENNAN EUINS WORRELL