Charles Black

I have a question, however I would like to preface it with a short statement so that what follows will not be misinterpreted. It is perfectly acceptable to me that John, Mike or nearly anyone (with the exception of myself and perhaps a handful of others) be appointed as moderators. I will absolutely accept and attempt my best to follow their suggestions. There is a very powerful "however" ! Does a spy look like and speak similarly to the motion picture portrait of the various James Bond actors? Does a "cat burglar have "claws" ? How do we really know what a fine young man with an apparently bright future truly is? Have double agents who have penetrated the highest levels of the most wary and cognizant of intelligence agencies ( complete with psychological testing, polygraph, voice stress analysis)...... Were they most likely on many occasions to have been judged in this same manner? Bright..devoted.. honest..having a bright future. This is "sincerely" not a desire on my part to undermine the legitimacy of "anyone" whom might be appointed a moderator. This is an attempt to infer that the success of such an appointment is "hit or miss" ! It was suggested that "prior forum deportment" would be a good measure.....but once again how would an "intelligently planted bad guy" act to not be recognized ? I mean an "intelligent plant", not an obvious forum xxxxx ! I realize that we are not recruitng to fill a spot in an intelligence agency. I am merely saying that if there are those who truly have "covert" motives, there is not a way in hell to recognize them. As long as persons similar to myself are not appointed, I would think that there should not be very many members thought to be unacceptible. There is no perfect way to choose. Charlie Black

This is so ridiculously obvious a question, that I am reluctant to post it to this forum.......But I will ! How am I to believe that an individual, who had pronounced two decades ago, that he believed "the results" of the Warren Commission Report, would embark on "impartial" investigation, of his already deeply held and very publicly announced pre-conclusion. He had Titled the book prior to writing it. This is more like something that I would have expected from the "old Soviet Union"! Does ANYONE truly believe that this man can provide the answers to the questions which this forum alone can present? I believe very strongly in capitalism and I seldom criticize even its "exploitation" ! However "prosecutor" Bugliosi embarking on this, I feel, is very nearly a sacrilege to a man of his previously deserving stature in relation to the law. When a man of his stature is "publicly announcing" that he , a man of the law, began with a preformed conclusion and worked for nearly two decades to "PROVE THAT PREFORMED CONCLUSION" greatly deflates his "stature" in my opinion. But Vince is getting older.....and MONEY MATTERS ! Charlie Black

Hello John I agree with you in general amd most so in the context of the American and British empires. Like you, I and many of my countrymen, openly expressed much displeasure with our "second" and unprovocated invasion of Iraq, a sovereign country. Since it has been proven to the world, that Iraq posed no immediate threat to world peace, I can see no way that ANY reasonable person can support this slaughter. It certainly is against both all natural and international law, that ANY nation attempt, in any fashion, to force their chosen form of government on any other nation..... paticularly those who are nearly defenseless. To further inflame this, this issue was carried out by an administration, whose legitimacy of election is in considerable doubt by many of my countrymen. My complaint with you and Andy was certainly not in defense of my nations and yours egregious action in Iraq, but in reference to an attack on the culture and character of U.S. citizens in general. I feel that it is unsubstantiated, and degrading. These words and similar past references are not claimed by you and Andy to have been accidental, nor has there been any effort toward an apology. This is my complaint ! I will of course abide by any decision to make the forum more responsible and less combative. However should I remain a forum member, I don't see how that I, or any other person with any degree of self respect, can voluntarily remain a member of any forum in which the character and culture of their country and countrymen is under repeated attack. For those who would remain, why would any civilized "body", wish inclusion in their ranks of of an overly agressive, uncharactered and uncultured group of foreigners? Charlie Black Charlie Black

I may have to review, but I don't believe that the British Empire became at one time the largest empire in the world by winning cricket matches and sipping pints in pubs. I agree entirely. See my comments on the Empire of Disorder thread. I am no defender of the British Empire. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7751 I am sure that individual Britons were also extremely aggressive when they thought they ruled the world but I was not around then. The current problem concerns the American Empire. As a country the United States thinks it can use its power and technology to bully the rest of the world to do what it wants. It should have discovered from its experiences in Vietnam that this was not the case. Unfortunately, your political leaders (and a large percentage of the electorate) were unable to grasp the truth that the US had been defeated in Vietnam and are therefore having to learn the same lesson all over again in Iraq. John Not to belabor a point, but was it ONLY my government that chose to forget the lessons of our "defeat" in Viet Nam ? I'm certain that you don't need to again hear Mr. Blair's comments during this period prior to the current Iraq debacle regurgitated ! And on the matter of culture, realizing that we are a "new" nation.....other than your old established nation / empire, where should we the most "newborn" turn in our search of a greater understanding of culture? We somewhat are not too in favor of Neville Chamberlain's cultural approach ! Italy? Greece? Persia? Their culture serves them well in the world today ! I realize that I am asking for culture to be somewhat "defined"....I also realize, unless you wish to refer to Webster, that you can say that it is one of those intangibles, which if you are not already blessed with it...there is no way that it can be explained to you. I suppose this makes as much sense as the other sentiments that I am hearing. Charlie Black

The more I read these ANTI-American slurs by John and Andy in reference to American agressiveness, I feel it very necessary to say that they and many others around the world, more than once gave thanks to their God for this agressiveness, and no doubt prayed that it not be stopped. Perhaps I was born in the wrong century, seriously lack culture, am immature and probably thought to be quite ignorant by you.....however in "my" neolithic culture, it has never been seen as an unmanly or inhuman trait for a man to be agressive. Frankly, I have personally thanked God that I was given the agressiveness that perhaps kept myself and others alive. It is nothing that I would care to sell at any price, and I feel that there are others who are glad that I wouldn't. Do what ever you wish with your "good manners". I am very grateful to have the attributes that I feel that I was Blessed with ! Frankly, I feel that the worst slurs that I have suffered on this forum are those inferences of John and Andy. In reality, they are very damned nasty and were meant to be quite degrading ! But I am certain that you two self proclaimed gentlemanly intellects, who are already legends in your own minds, are quite aware of this. How could you not be ? Please remember that the agressive mistakes that my country has made during the past six years was certainly in concert with those of YOUR government. Are you REALLY IMPLYING that the Brits have been less agressive than Americans ? Charlie Black

Hello John Many years past I had the bad fortune of serving in the miltary during a very unpopular war. But during many occasions I had the "good fortune" of enjoying beers with many men of different nationalities and even professions, as some were newsmen and of other "civilian" occupation. I found none of these mens manners or behavior much differing from the others. I think that when "men" gather and discuss issues such as war, politics and religion.....there are frequent "flare ups" and arguments, even among those that have been "good friends" for years. There are very demeaning things said (tho soon forgotten) and even personal threats made. I realize that this forum is not comprised only of men, but men are the ones with whom I have shared such experiences. This can even be seen among well educated "gentlemen" during a contact sports contest......again usually soon forgotten. I have noticed no particular group when in the company of other internationals, to be more violent and agressive than the others. What I feel you are experiencing is the typically somewhat violent, somewhat joking, somewhat sarcastic, somewhat fun loving "natural reactions" of men. Particularly men who have chosen to engage in somewhat competitive and risky environments. A lot of testosterone and many "Type A" personalities. These are types that feel competitiveness necessary in their world to sometimes stay alive... but ALWAYS to compete. These types generally are capable of being "very close" friends to some, and pretty dangerous enemies to others. In the circumstances of this forum, you are dealing with one nationality that is more deeply involved personally in these issues than are others. Many have fought in these wars, lost many friends, and suffered as a result, broken marriages and families.... and who have by necessity become "accustomed" (if that is possible) to violence, and to what they consider betrayal. Perhaps I have unknowingly associated with a group of international thugs....but I don't think so. Or it is possible that I have been exposed to more than the average number of very competitive men. This will probably shock you, but what I have found most amazing regarding your statements, is that you have many male members asking "you to intervene" on their behalf. I have, for some reason, not known many of this type. Perhaps I have just been lucky ! Charlie Black

Hello John The explanation that I recall is that one was crimped from being re-chambered supposedly after it was fired. What I find most unbelievable, being a hunter and shooter myself, that one would go hunting for the "biggest game" on earth, with less than a fully loaded magazine. I have never known any hunter to do this even when hunting "small game". I feel that a real hunter/shooter never handled this rifle on 11/22, and that it was planted before the actual shooting began. Not to change the purpose of your post, but I have never forsaken a shot coming from same floor, farther West. Charlie Black Charlie Black

Nice Post Gary Thank you. I will try to do the same. It seems that I "bicker" more on this forum than I contribute. This has been 5th grade playground type conduct at best ! We all have much to learn and far better things to do. Charlie Black

Gary I detect a major defect in your "lilly white" armor. Why did you not direct this thread toward Ashton rather than me ? Ashton may feel deprived that I, rather than he, received more of your words of wisdom. And for one who is so opposed to forum friction.... why do you further it with your own inconsequential points and posts, which are so transparently meant to personally degrade me ? Step up and do it like a real......"person". By the way, if Ashton adds anything more to his signature credits, I will feel that I have watched a movie. "Sci Fi", of course ! Charlie Black

Ashton has once again made another enormous contribution to research with his last post. He said "PLONK" This may have been the most relevant of his posts. If one were to construe this response in a very favorable and literal manner, a few of you might s-t-r-e-t-c-h, and respond that this was quite an improvement, for if one were really to push oneself, it might be construed that this response may not have been totally adversarial ! I feel that "this one word" says a great deal ! Charlie Black

Len Colby I sincerely wish that my statement of agreement with your last post does not put you in bad stead with this forum. I, although I realize the possible consequences, cannot live with myself if I do not express what follows. For a number of hours, I have both bitten my tongue and taped my fingers in a "sincere effort to not respond" to what I feel to be Andy Walker's unhidden antagonism toward "Americans", which he expressed in post #18 of this thread and has so done in the past. I refer to the entire sentiment of this post, and in particular to his statement that "....many of the Americans here appear particularly poor at expressing themselves effectively.." Although I cannot call this truly "racist"....in my opinion, it could even be something much worse. Andy...Am I at this moment "particularly poor at expressing" myself "effectively" ? As it seems that your true "problem" seems more to be U.S. citizens rather than "forum misbehaviour", I feel that the solution, which you might inwardly seek, has a most easy solution. Your inferences and rhetoric, seem more in agreement with the direct references to racial superiority, expressed by your Euro neighbors who frequently "dropped in on you" during the "forties". Since I realize that I am one of those backward unfortunates, who has only recently emerged from the dregs of the swamplands of Florida, here in the New World, I hope that you wont find it necessary to find an interpreter for this post ! Charlie Black

All Members & Moderators who may still be interested if their is legitimacy in my references to Ashton Gray's "non answers" to posts on this forum, which have asked for further substantion of his claims. Please refer to Ashton's posts numbers 75 and 68. There was no nasty goading which preceded the answers which he entered in these posts. To his credit, he did try to further educate me in basic math. However before my 16th birthday, I was able to count up to the number of my fingers and by 18, the digits on one foot. These types of non responses have been the major source of my criticism of Ashton. No ! I am not lobbying to have he or anyone booted from the forum ! Just an attempt at definining some of the frustration which evolves when corresponding with Ashton. This is not an isolated pair of posts. Merely his latest ones. Charlie Black Charlie Black

Hello John I was quite surprised to hear that Ashton had been administered any type of comment or warning. Dawn Meredith, even after I questioned her motivation in a post of "my attacks" on Ashton Gray seems to be continuing with her attacks upon my motives. It is true that I have inferred that Ashton was not of right mind when he continued to promise and not deliver substantiation of some of his very far out theories. His right to his theories, I strongly will defend. His inability to substantiate the same, after assuring that he would do so, I have and will continue to believe, that it is a deliberate attempt to mislead forum members....in particular those who may not in depth have yet studied this case. I have repeatedly and openly stated this because I absolutely believe it, and I have imbedded myself so deeply in this case, and for so long, that I absolutely know that what he refers to as forthcoming truths....can never appear. Dawn feels that I have abused Asthon, with what I feel is well founded criticism, yet she censures me for honest personal criticism and seems perfectly willing to forgive his responses to me which include verbage which includes "Filthy Fiction"..."Dipped in Sewage" and "Fling their dung". In regard to your comments about Americans, I really don't feel that we on the other side of the Pond find it any more acceptable than you. I do however very strongly believe that if something is stated in no uncertain terms, that a view or theory is "a personal opinion only", that there is no justice in censoring, removing, or attempting to prevent it. On this type of forum, we deal to a great extent on theory or personal opinion based upon that which "some of us consider fact". In writing this, a thought travelled thru my mind. I would think that we colonists are probably more impassioned by some of the issues which you mentioned than those in other lands might be. After all, these are United States derived issues ! Why should we not feel more fiery and more determined to find TRUTH than should you. I am certain that there are many more viscious confrontations in the U.K. concerning the death of Dianna, than there are in my country, which no longer enjoys a Monarchy . Regarding your specific question, I feel that if you think that I or anyone, does not make substantial contribution to this forum, while at the same time is bringing to it disgrace, the answer should be that those who are degrading the forum should leave. Charlie Black

Hello John I was quite surprised to hear that Ashton had been administered any type of comment or warning. Dawn Meredith, even after I questioned her motivation in a post of "my attacks" on Ashton Gray seems to be continuing with her attacks upon my motives. It is true that I have inferred that Ashton was not of right mind when he continued to promise and not deliver substantiation of some of his very far out theories. His right to his theories, I strongly will defend. His inability to substantiate the same, after assuring that he would do so, I have and will continue to believe, that it is a deliberate attempt to mislead forum members....in particular those who may not in depth have yet studied this case. I have repeatedly and openly stated this because I absolutely believe it, and I have imbedded myself so deeply in this case, and for so long, that I absolutely know that what he refers to as forthcoming truths....can never appear. Dawn feels that I have abused Asthon, with what I feel is well founded criticism, yet she censures me for honest personal criticism and seems perfectly willing to forgive his responses to me which include verbage which includes "Filthy Fiction"..."Dipped in Sewage" and "Fling their dung". In regard to your comments about Americans, I really don't feel that we on the other side of the Pond find it any more acceptable than you. I do however very strongly believe that if something is stated in no uncertain terms, that a view or theory is "a personal opinion only", that there is no justice in censoring, removing, or attempting to prevent it. On this type of forum, we deal to a great extent on theory or personal opinion based upon that which "some of us consider fact". In writing this, a thought travelled thru my mind. I would think that we colonists are probably more impassioned by some of the issues which you mentioned than those in other lands might be. After all, these are United States derived issues ! Why should we not feel more fiery and more determined to find TRUTH than should you. I am certain that there are many more viscious confrontations in the U.K. concerning the death of Dianna, than there are in my country, which no longer enjoys a Monarchy . Regarding your specific question, I feel that if you think that I or anyone, does not make substantial contribution to this forum, while at the same time is bringing to it disgrace, the answer should be that those who are degrading the forum should leave. Charlie Black

Forum members I "sincerely hope" that this will be my last post in this thread. Those of you who might find my following statements degrading will please accept that they are obviously not directed at "that group of you". Very often, both now and throughout History, there have been some severely incorrect perceptions, of individuals who have had the gift of orating or writing with "gifted vocabulary". Vocabulary and INTELLECT are not necessarily conjoined. There are of course some beautifully written fictional texts, which in detail enwrap the reader in a "fairy tale world" which can enter and capture a readers thought processes to the extent that one nearly has to shake himself free of these seeming truths. Throughout history, there have been many Svengalis, Goebells and Hitlers. Some may call them propagandists....some may call them divinely gifted and some may see them as charming leaders. I consider them as oratory "hypnotists" who are able to lead from a believable partial truth, to finally a very misconstrued picture by taking a series of small steps that each of which is not "beyond reason". Of course, the less an audience is educated in a paricular "manufactured" situation, the more easily that they are led. This is why that I, in several previous posts, refer to such disinformationists as "Pied Pipers" who have the ability to completely distort and finally destroy reason. The reality is that I have nothing against this Ashton Gray, whom I have never met. As a matter of fact I have a great deal of respect for anyone that thru oratory can have persons purchase his faulty construction, although it is obvious to all, that its foundation is based in quicksand. It is in fact really not Ashton that I question ! Charlie Black

Hello Chuck You comments as to different "points of view" is certainly applicable to this case. However I am not referring to points of view. I am referring to Ashtons statement that he could PROVE that what was diagnosed by the Parkland medical specialist as appearing to be a bullet entrance wound was not that. He futher stated that he could PROVE that JFK "was not" struck in the throat during the motorcade, but that he had had his throat "punctured" by murderers on the Parkland Staff. He promised this PROOF to be forthcoming. Again, we are not referring to "points of view" ! We are looking at as direct an accusation as a single gunman theory supporter might state if he were to say, I can PROVE that a single gunman fired all shots and...."my proof will be forthcoming". Which of course it both never does nor ever can. Trying to perceive this as merely "different points of view" is quite an understatement. In my opinion, this is attempted misdirection of the highest order and is probably even less "unsupportable" than the ever resurrecting theory that Agent Greer shot the President. Charlie Black

Ashton I'm tired of this. Just two questions. 1) Does this lengthy immediately prior post of yours explain to the forum, the manner in which the Parkland Trauma team, aided in the assassination of President Kennedy? And why they so assisted? Is this the "proof" which you continue to promise? 2) Referring to your forementioned previous post: Does this provide the proof which you promised that no missile entered the President's anterior throat? Or that Admiral Burkely lied to the Bethesda Staff, and also never left the autopsy room? I only NOW ask for these proofs which you voluntarily offered to support your position. They were never asked for ! I knew that you could type, for which I didn't need proof. I also knew that you CANNOT present the PROOF which you on several ocassions promised. How did you think that you would present "truths" to this forum which do not exist? Your lack of understanding, that you can't prove things that have never happened, somehow alludes you. I would think that most people who have a life beyond following this forum, would also require such proof if you are ever to have credibility ! Charlie Black

Ashton Here is another nasty slander of the type to which you have grown accustomed. Your much repeated promises of "evidence to come", has, from past performance, lost a great deal of legitimacy to those who once thought that you posessed some degree of literacy regarding this subject. And another reportable slander....those constant promises of "more to come" places me in absolute agony, as I had hoped "that I had heard the last of it". Charlie Black

Frank I agree with you that this has deteriorated rapidly into something very ugly. What I don't understand is the willingness for forum members to place the fault squarely on my shoulders. I feel that the true venom spewed from Ashton. I merely stated that I felt that his theory, was supported by absolutely nothing factual and that I felt that this was an attempt on his part to purposely misguide the forum. He repeatedly stated that he had evidence to support his views of Trauma Room throat punctures, and that he could prove that no projectile struck Kennedy's anterior throat. He of course had no such proof and therefore being unable to produce it said some vile things as some form of childish retaliation. Whether one wishes to believe it or not, I personally feel that such wild claims, with no supporting evidence, should definitely be challenged.....other wise those that are new to this subject, could consider his un supported theories as fact. I feel that not bringing this to Ashton's attention, by perhaps some that consider themselves "personally close" to him, and who do not wish to hurt his feelings, is a "great disservice" to this forum . My criticisms have been his lack of evidence which led me to state, that without supporting evidence, his theories sounded insane. He has done this repeatedly in the past and has been allowed to get away with no ones questioning. I feel that he has gone too far and it is my personal feeling that his purpose is to mislead and confuse. And yes, I feel that his venomous, absolutely "nasty" outbursts relating to "sewage", "dung", and "filthy fictions" are completely uncalled for and should not be tolerated. I would like for you to read this entire 4 pages of thread, and then tell me that "the blame falls on Charles Black, and that Ashton had every right to engage "in the venomous tirade", which I suggested was "insane". I frankly do not care what any of you think of me personally, because not one of you knows me personally. I have stated what I absolutely believe and I have not heard any sensible support or facts supporting Ashton's theories. I have been made a whipping post for telling someone the truth that I feel that his theories are not even in the ball park, and that I feel that his purpose is nefarious! And yes Frank ! I am a person who "Only" wants solution and justice brought about regarding this assassination. However I feel that the forum's following of "planted Pied Pipers" has set this research back 20 years. This planting is the major element in this cover up....it is successful ! Charlie Black

Dear Eleanor, Your Hitchens-lite post (compost?) doesn't defend Dankbaar The Vampire, I trust. But I do defer to your expertise in pomposity, dear boy. Mark COMPOST ? You and your mentor, Ashton, apparently have an affinity toward the nasty and undesirable ! COMPOST DIPPED IN SEWAGE FILTHY FICTIONS FLING THEIR DUNG I certainly hope for those in proximity of the two of you, that you wash your little fingers vigorously after such posts. Charlie Black

Hello Mark Since YOU have been one of the objects of my "criticisms", it is understandable to me that you are willing to pursue "any cove in a storm" in which you feel that you might have support. That is only human and I admire, at least, your willingness to bring the matter up and confront me with it in a responsible and reasonable manner. However I (me personally) feel that you are being deliberately quite disingenuous when you are taking my quotes, out of order and out of context, and inserting them as the supposed ravings of a madman. If these quotes are re-inserted into the paragraphs and posts from which was their origin.....I don't feel that they would have the same impact on someone reading them as they do in the manner which "you chose" to present them. You attempted to paint an ugly picture and it probably would seem so until someone were to read "in entirety" these dissected threads. To be quite truthful, I did and still do, mean exactly what I stated....however they must be read in "the exact context" in which they were stated. Inerjecting quotes anywhere in a text that one desires, should obviously be seen as a deliberate attempt to press a "point", although in the context so presented, a "point" which may be considerably off center. I must have truly offended you in order for you to have made the necessary effort of researching your last post. However I admit that at times passion overcomes me and I am sometimes rude. BUT Since you are joining in an attack upon me, I would like to ask that even if I were rude, did I refer to your comments as "DIPPED IN SEWAGE"...."FILTHY FICTICIOUS"...and FLINGING DUNG ? ? ? I believe that Ashton has digged far beneath what I consider normal forum criticism, and I still feel that his "rantings", are so far out of control, that "sanity" might be questioned by any reasonable person. Charlie Black

Hello Dawn & general membership I wish to apologize if I have stated something about Mr. Gray that might be demeaning to the forum, although I shall not apologize to Mr. Gray. However, regarding what Dawn posted in her immediately prior entry, I feel that it is quite uncalled for. Ashton Gray is not innocent in this matter regardless of how much that you may personally respect him. I would like to refer you to Ashton's post # 38 which I feel is as despicable a post as I have ever read on this or any forum. I quote Ashton Gray from his post #38 "While the resident spin doctor spins like a dreydl DIPPED IN SEWAGE, spattering malicious filthy fictions in its path, while the howler monkeys chatter and FLING THEIR DUNG...." Do you still feel that my questioning of his sanity and forum conduct to "not be in order". Yes Dawn ! I consider his post "QUITE BAITING". I feel that I have every right to have said "much more", and "in a much more degrading manner". I am sorry but I do not accept your appraisal and condemnation of me, and I am quite offended by it. I don't feel that I am a bully who makes a practice of attacking helpless "innocents". I personally do continue to feel that he posts questions meant to deceive and are based on "very small amounts of fact". I think his intent is purposeful and nefarious....and are in general designed to MISLEAD newcomers to this research. I feel that I have every right in the world to state this belief, as I have seen this type of action undertaken on several forums, which has had the result of stimulating "personal argument" and dissension as he has obviously just done. I feel that I was attacked in a manner that any human being, having even an ounce of self respect, would have responded to. You may refer to it in any manner that you wish.....I call it BAITING and very cowardly. I stand firmly behind EVERY WORD which I have directed toward Ashton Gray. I feel that is I to whom an apology is owed ! Charlie Black

In reference to the nasty, ungentlemanly and obviously ridiculous posts of Ashton. I have seen and heard many persons say that they were misquoted. Some were correct. However it shows great direspect to the intelligence of all forum members, to suggest that we cannot read the words that Ashton wrote. I wonder how he has so far escaped those gentlemen in "white coats". In the words of a million now dead Native Americans, "This White Man speaks with "FORKED FINGERS" ! In my not so humble but honest opinion; debating Ashton is as intelligent as debating an inmate in an asylum. I am embarrased that I allowed myself to be "baited" into doing so. The proper word should be de-BAIT rather than debate. Charlie Black

Ashton I am not going to waste much time with your ridiculous posts....I will be spared your "merciless" proof. I am going to refer back to your "Parkland Trauma Room Staff and Murder Team" ! You stated that "Burkely was present in Trauma Room 1 at all relevant times" and "....had the conversation with Dr. Carrico about the throat wound" prior to the trach. incision. Was Burkely standing there with closed eyes when the murderous throat puncture wound was inflicted ? As you noted, the Trauma Room was crowded. Am I then to assume, that all present within that room, simultaneously closed their eyes, in order for the throat puncturing assassin to do his dirty deed ? You also stated that Admiral Burkely "actively supressed that knowledge" of the throat wound from the Bethesda Autopsists in order to aid the conspiracy. Has it ever occurred to you that DR. Admiral Burkely, may have thought that the autopsists at the Naval Medical Training Facility at Bethesda, were perhaps competent enough professionals, to see for themselves, that the the trach incision had been made thru an already existing bullet entrance wound, that had been pronounced as such by the "expert testimony" of the Parkland medical staff ? Get your "facts" straight before you engage in, above your capacity debate, with knowledgeable forum members. For your future info., Burkely was not in the autopsy room during the entire procedure. Ashton....I feel that you are nothing more than a waste of forum time ! The only reason that I bother to respond is that newcomers might otherwise think that you know what you are talking about ! ! ! Charlie Black

And now we have Ashton Gray, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who in his second career became the worlds foremost authority on the tracheotonomy procedure, now attempting, no doubt with trusty tape measure in hand, to explain to us the square footage of Trauma Room 1. That infamous "LITTLE CLOSET" in which the Parkland Trauma and "Murder" Specialists" did their "dastardly deed". The diminutive size of Trauma Room One and the number of staff and personnel present, can best be compared to the contents of a sardine can. It was in this madhouse "little closet" that the "Parkland Trauma and Murder Team" were able to puncture the President's throat unnoticed. A miniature scalpel was used since the confines of the space did not allow for the use of full sized medical implements. What most surprises me however, is how the Warren Comission failed to include as an advisor, Joint Chiefs Chairman, General Ashton Gray, "M.D." ! They truly deprived themselves a source of deep insight and understanding of all "worldly matters" and possibly an understanding of the world beyond! I suppose the Comission later realized that they had realy "blown it" ! Perhaps it is only hindsight that allows us to realize how well that he would have fit in with their type of investigation. Charlie Black