Michael Walton

I'm connecting the dots here, but if you believe in the viability of Prayer Man - and with the quality of the work that's been put into it - as well as what Gilbride has put together in his writings (who was out in front moments after the shooting and so on) - then somehow or some way the Fritz notes match up with that's been documented to date (PM, who was out there, etc.). Maybe Fritz was known to be a great interrogator...who knows? As mentioned above, maybe he wanted to keep the notes private and they were revealed after his death. But based on PM and the documentation of who was doing what out there, someone got it right about Oswald being "out with Bill Shelley in front." Think about what's happened here. Oswald is supposedly up on the 6th floor killing Kennedy. So what are the odds of him making a fantastical guess of him being with Shelley in front when the shots rang out when he was questioned by Fritz? Plus, go to Gilbride's page above about who saw whom moments afterward, and now PM and at least in my mind, you have pretty strong corroboration of LHO's whereabouts at 12:30 PM.

Just copying the crib notes for all to read (from part 1 of the article): Now, they knew damn well that they wouldn’t be able to unseat Castro. And when Allen Dulles died, there were coffee-stained notes on his desk, which said. “Once we get on the beach, there is no way the president of the United States can refuse to support us with his military.” Interesting. We’re well on from that now. It seems to me that in this question of the “deep state” we described informal interactions during a time that is no longer. This now seems to be very dangerously consolidated. A president in another context, who might be quote “reformist” can’t get anything done. Well, John Kennedy had problems of the same kind, and he fired Dulles. And that was a no-no. You don’t fire people like Dulles. Kennedy embarked on a new course. He talked with Khrushchev, he had people, interlocutors, who talked with Castro, and, worst of all, he issued two executive orders, saying that 1,000 U.S troops would be pulled out of Vietnam by the end of 1963 and the bulk of the rest by 1965. He was going to give up Southeast Asia to the Commies, and God knows what would happen next with the dominoes falling and Indonesia, and my God… So he was killed by the “deep state.” And there you have it.

http://gawker.com/ted-cruz-yes-my-dad-killed-jfk-1774471699

Being deaf, is there any audio in it? I'm asking because does anyone know how far the shooter was when the guy took the head shot in that clip?

I enjoyed this film when I saw it and thought it helped me understand more about Kennedy. And by the way, it's also on Netflix if you want to watch it there as well.

Richard, I'm reading your Inside Job story and you've done a really nice job, with everything well documented. I do want to point out one thing though. When you go to the page, it takes a few seconds to load the embedded PDF. You also give the viewer the option to just let the PDF open in the PDF reader in the browser. That's a good idea. But the embedded version is pretty awkward to use. For example, after it finally loads and when I scroll down to read and then hit the bottom, then click on the next page, the browser does not automatically move back up to the top. This forces me to manually scroll up to the top to begin reading the page. My suggestion is why take your content and make genuine web pages with it, then of course continue to have a link to the PDF. That way you can make your images larger too so folks can make sende of them, and you also won't have the awkward embedded PDF. Otherwise, a nice story with some very interesting information.

Tom Fairlie - I believe that JFK knew exactly what he was doing and was fatalistic about it. However, I don't think he realized the extent to which the Cold War was essentially a scam. He knew it was a right-wing ploy that was designed to oppress leftist regimes, but I don't think he guessed at exactly how deep and how venal this plot was. The Cold War was created explicitly to demonize leftists (including Democrats, unions, liberals, etc.), create a Christian wedge in world religions, and foment the kind of tensions that demand military spending (similar to what the British used in the 1800s/early 1900s). I don't believe that the Establishment ever wanted to invade Cuba. The military certainly did, but the Establishment saw a communist/militant Cuba as a Hegelian wet dream right off our coast. Tom, just wanted to compliment you on your post. I think the establishment was banking on Nixon winning the election in 1960. As I'm sure you know, Nixon was part of that establishment so who knows what would have happened during the BOP when it was time to send in air support. Kennedy's American University speech probably caused a lot of vein bulging that day among that hidden hierarchy you mention. It completely went against the hierarchy's status quo of keeping the heat on with the Cold War, thus, keeping the mega dollars flowing in defense and intel.

Thanks for sharing this. It's actually a pretty good example of how the head and body do move backward when a frontal shot hits.

Note: I just wrote a detailed response to this, that got eaten just as I was about to post. Is anyone else having this problem? Is the forum now booting out responses that take longer than 10 minutes? For what it's worth, I never *ever* type posts in the forum reply box. Instead, I type them in Notepad (because if you do it in Word, it sometimes carries the formatting of Word over to the reply box). That way, you can type to your heart's content in Notepad, even save the file to go back to later, and then just copy and paste into the forum reply box when you're ready. It's a little bit more work, but you'll never lose anything.

Thanks Larry the link works now. That timeline is very useful for me regarding the authenticity of the film.

That JFK Lancer link above does not work for me. I'm putting together a web article with video clips and so forth about the Zapruder film. The "lady takes the film to DC" story seems to be one of those fascinating side stories of the case, but nothing more than that. For what it's worth, I believe the Z film, seen as it can be today on the internet, is authentic. Anthony Marsh wrote a good story about why he thinks it's authentic (his is based on how the film gate works and it would have been impossible to fake it). I agree with his assessment, plus I have my own reasons for why it's authentic.

Sandy and Ron, Here is the animated GIF I made a while back showing the guy people think of as Landsale (and now Taylor) wore glasses in Dealey Plaza.

DVP - Then why even bring up the subject of Fritz' activity in the basement at all? What useful purpose is served by mentioning it? We all know the DPD blew it (big time) by letting their prisoner get shot in the gut with 70 of their armed officers right there nearby. So that's not exactly "bombshell news". I was being sarcastic throughout this thread. Probably not a good idea to do that with the subject matter we discuss here, but here's a (pretty big) hint of the sarcasm: Yes, David Andrews, more interesting events and observations. But it's all just one big coincidence and can be chalked up to sheer happenstance. ;-) DVP - Re: Dan Rather.... https://app.box.com/...nrp3fc77lb470de (And, yes, I wrote the caption to that audio file.) As for the "numerous errors" caption you wrote for that clip, I'm sorry to say but you writing a quote like that is not good enough for me. It's one thing for reporters to say the wrong thing. For example, Wolf Blitzer, when discussing Prince's death recently, said he sang "Purple Haze," a Hendrix song, when we know he meant "Purple Rain." But for a reporter to view a film of the assassination - and one that the public will have absolutely no chance of seeing for ourselves for 12 long years (and completely omit describing something he is seeing) - is not the same as making a "Purple Haze" error like Blitzer. To put it kindly, it smells of deception and of sweeping things under the rug. Just like it smells when Life magazine said that Kennedy had actually turned his body 180 degrees to face the crowd and, thus, taking the throat shot. Again, this is not a "Purple Haze" error but one to totally mislead the public. How in the world could the editor of Life magazine, who owned the Z film at that time, have gotten it so very, very wrong? They actually didn't get it wrong because they were trying, instead, to pass a rotten bill of goods along to an unsuspecting and blind public.

BTW, don't ever try using those awful "Automated Captions" on YouTube videos. The only time I ever use them is when I'm desperate to know what's being said in any video. Then my brain has to work overtime to try to wade through the muddle to make sense of it all.

One of the things that aggravates me about the article's comments section is someone said: "Kennedy road the same way through Mexico City, months earlier, garnering much media praise (and a photo of Kennedy riding in the same open way as Springfield on Life Magazine's cover). Today's media largely ignores how reckless Kennedy was back then." I've seen this kind of statement over and over again to make it sound as if Kennedy was to blame for his own death. What this person doesn't realize is that's the way it was back then - public officials rode in open cars all the time before 11/22 and after as seen in the photos below:

Mark - another post was started on this so you might want to delete your post since it's a duplicate. Or maybe ask admin to delete just so there's not two threads on the same topic: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22803

I've always thought that the "Lansdale" walking past the tramps in Dealey Plaza looks as much like Taylor (if not moreso) than Lansdale. Taylor also wore a large ring on the fourth finger of his left hand. Just sayin'. Ron - don't know if you're aware but the guy walking in Dallas with his back to the camera was wearing glasses and they don't appear to be sunglasses either.

Michael - I hope you don't think that I have omitted the Air Force One tapes (the new longer 2012 version) from my websites. No sirree David - the reason why I posted the other link to the transcripts was because I'm deaf (as are others out there too) and versions on that link have sub titles so they can read along with the audio. Michael

DVP: you're not going to sit there and suggest that all of the things you brought up in Post #6 above have NOT been explained... David, I know it may be hard for you to believe, but try to keep in mind that all of the people who refute the evidence of a conspiracy in this case are basically doing their job. It's what they do. The army of lawyers, clerks and administrators, from the day Katzenbach and Hoover sent out the letter shutting down any vigorous pursuit of the truth in this case, gave everyone on down the line their marching orders - NO conspiracy. One man did it. Period. And I hate to say it, and I know you find it hard to believe, but the media was in cahoots with them. All you have to do is watch Rather's disgraceful description on live TV (11/25) of the "head falling down" description instead of describing *everything.* Or even worst, why not just let the public see the Z film right then and there? I know you're going to say "Well, that's not a conspiracy" and on and on. I, and many others, happen to believe it is. It may not be the smoking gun part of the conspiracy, but it does show that the government, in cahoots with the media, was trying very, very hard that early in the game to keep the whole truth from the public. All you have to do is go to the thread about the guy who exposed the bullcrap that CBS pulled on the public. Why CBS Covered up the JFK Case (pt1) Meanwhile, it's been done before. Look how the Pat Tillman case was handled. The big sorrowful funeral service, the fireworks and plastering his face everywhere that he was this huge hero. Only we're to find he was shot by one of his own. And on a much smaller and local scale, look at the Mel Ignatow case. This case is the exact opposite of Oswald. Unlike Oswald, a man who was literally handheld from the TSBD to the theater to his murder in front of the entire DPD police force, Ignatow was guilty as sin and you'd have to be a complete ignoramus to think otherwise. But like the JFK case, the lawyers went to work, fudging and twisting the truth. And of course, they were able to do so enough to fool some pretty gullible (and in my opinion, stupid) jurors into acquitting him. And if you're familiar with the case, we all know the shocking post trial conclusion. Believe me when I say, this case did have a shocking smoking gun result; if you're not familiar, go here and here. If you watch the video story of the case, the jurors interviewed there really remind me of people who continue to fall for the JFK Lone Nut theory of the case. All wide-eyed and "Oh, the lawyers say that's how it happened," and "there simply was not enough evidence," and so on and so forth. But unlike Ignatow, Lee Oswald never got his day in court, and I read elsewhere that when the WC started, they pulled some kind of legal thing stating that there'd be absolutely no rebuttal of the evidence the army of lawyers working for the WC would present. If that's not putting the cart before the horse I don't know what is.

BP: Where's black tie man? The green man:

I agree - my hunch is that he was leaning on the handrail. In the next image from the film it looks like he quickly decides to look up Houston Street toward the camera filming. Remarkably, PM appears to still be in the same position he was in the earlier image but just lowers his arm

I'm posting this link so folks can listen and read the AF1 transcripts: http://www.audioforensicexpert.com/john-f-kennedy-assassination-air-force-one-recordings/

Sandy - here you go...

The King reenactment was ridiculous. But the Reiner reenactment photo above is a pretty amazing view from the TUP. The car is in the correct position as Jackie climbs out. I'm only eye-balling it but if you look at the rear of the limo in relation to the light pole (which has been moved over to the grass; it originally was on the curb and you can see where the new concrete was poured after it was moved) it does appear to be in the correct position a second or two after the Z313 frame. When you look at that photo though - and see how steep the 6th floor to limo angle is - it confirms for me even more how there's simply no physical or scientific way a person's head, just receiving a shot from that window, could have been thrown so violently backward and to the left. I know I may be stating the obvious here (and I've been accused elsewhere on EF that I preach to the choir a lot), but it just doesn't compute, no matter how much junk science the LN community throws at it. And not to nitpick, but the black guy, who was very close to umbrella guy that day, and who had a peculiar wave (his arm was almost straight up instead of clapping like the Newmans and others did), is missing from the above photo.

- James Altgens made his way from Dealey Plaza to the Dallas Morning News building, where he handed his film to a technician; - the film was developed, washed, fixed, washed again and dried; - prints were exposed, developed, fixed, washed and dried; - one print was chosen, and a caption added to it; - finally, the print was scanned and transmitted. In my previous post, I was not sure what Altgens's whereabouts were after he took the photo. Your above timeline certainly confirms that it was next to impossible to have faked the photo. Returning to the topic of this thread (PM) I think there is far more valuable info related to the case with PM than the Altgens photo. At least for me, the Altgens photo confirms that Lovelady was in an awkward pose when he leaned over to view the motorcade down Elm Street as seen in the Weigman film and Altgens #6.