Joe Bauer

In my opinion, this Kellerman answer of the later gun firing sounds being "very much so" different from the first firecracker sounding one is clearly more important in what it implies than not and that it is also absurdly illogical to not recognize and seriously consider this. This difference in the sounds and intensity of the shots could be solid proof that there was more than one shooter and one gun being fired at JFK in Dealey Plaza on 11,22,1963. Kellerman's description of the difference using the analogy of the sound a passing jet makes when surpassing the sound barrier versus a firecracker sound may not be the most relatively experienced and understood one but it's clear in it's message that the difference was "significant." When I think of a jet flying over me and creating a sonic BOOM I remember this sound as being so powerful you "felt" it's intensity. Almost like a close by thunderclap. Most people instinctively duck down a little from this powerful blast. Whereas a firecracker sound or even a car backfire sound may startle you also but not near as much as a sonic boom, especially if these firecracker and backfire sounds aren't right next to you. It's a point and question of intensity. All three or more shots occurred on Elm Street in a short 4 to 5 second time span and only 75 feet apart ( 190 ft first shot-265 ft last head shot ) and in the same physical landscape tunnel like location where the acoustics ( including echos ) should have been relatively the same. With no significant difference in shot target and acoustic location ( and alleged origination? ) how does one rationally explain or dismiss Kellerman's firm recollection of the latter shot sounds being distinctly different from the first one - firecracker versus sonic boom? And many other ear witnesses in Dealey Plaza that day also stated that the gun shot sounds differed, most commonly in their intensity. Firecracker pop ( first shot ) versus BOOM later shots. Echoing Kellerman's WC sworn testimony. All of which makes it more reasonable to consider different guns were firing at JFK.

Is this coat ( described as a "Winter coat" ) worn by Cary Grant in the 1963 film "Charade" the same or close to the coat worn by the E.Howard Hunt look-alike in the DP photo? Or this other 1953 coat?Three In One CoatPrice: $28.50 Description Button in the collar, put on the belt... it's a winter storm coat. Remove the collar, it's a dressy coat. Zip-out the pile liner, you're ready for spring or fall. Collar-insert of alpaca pile on cotton back. Coat is water-repellent cotton twill, lined with printed rayon. Choose from tan or black.

Yes DA. "Potomac Basin Spookware" HA! Right on! Classic! I'm still laughing!

The fellow in question in the Dallas Dealey Plaza photo certainly looks different than everyone else in the photo. Call his appearance classic ... cloak-and-daggerish. The East Coast style trench coat ( not a Dallas, Texas one for sure and he's the only one in the photo wearing this type of coat ), the pulled down shadow obscuring fedora that matches the one in Hunt's other picture with similar size and color band and brim style and even slant and slight fold down of this in front. The sun glasses ( only two others in the crowd of 30 have these ) which also obscures full facial recognition. The thin facial features, although not sharp, matches Hunt's. The thin body type matches as well. The Dealey Plaza man seems quite pale in facial skin tone as was Hunt. Hunt's age on 11,22,1963 ( 45 ) could very well fit the man in the DP photo. Did Hunt normally keep his hands in his overcoat pockets like the man in the DP photo? Everyone else is either in casual wear or typical business suit and detective look. The coat Hunt is wearing in the top left photo matches the Dealey Plaza man's one in color and collar. Too bad the DP photo doesn't show the Hunt look-alike's shoes. His family might very well be able to tell whether they matched their father's. Lot there to warrant at least a strong suspicion that this was Hunt. More than the three tramps photo.

Referring to the video posted above by Monsieur Carlier; Aha! Forensic scientist Luke Haag & son provide us with the physical evidence proving truth answer to the ultimate JFK assassination question. You know ... "the big enchilada" as Dean Andrews said to Jim Garrison. Who killed J.F.K.? According to Luke Haag in this unbiased interview, with disgraced Charlie Rose as one of three interviewers, Lee Oswald did it and all by himself. Adding that the average person who refuses to accept this scientifically proven fact does so because "it is in our nature to want to think there is more to it." Mr. Luke Haag apparently reached this conclusion not just through his highly credentialed forensic education knowledge, background, expertise and related and rigorous scientific tests and studies of the Oswald tied weapon, bullets and target, but also through some unmentioned expertise in anthropological, social science, human psychology knowledge and expertise. He states that using the scientific method, "physical evidence always supports the truth." Mr. Haag seems to detest "speculation" by untrained and scientifically uneducated people regards finding such truths. But then he goes on to speculate "himself" in explaining why he believes Lee Oswald did the shooting including Oswald's personal psychological make up and motivations,even quoting Vincent Bugliosi in so doing. And when Luke Haag asked why he and his son took on this scientific effort which required much time and expense, to disprove such speculations as shots from the grassy knoll or other shooters besides Oswald... His first answer? ...Well, it's the 50th anniversary of JFK's assassination... Profound! Sorry, I see such incongruity in this presentation, I am forced to question it's logic and motivation.

I don't see anything in the 3 pictures regards JFK's face, body and clothing showing any changes or signs that would indicate him being hit during this time. JFK and Connolly have smiles that do change slightly but not enough to show any signs of distress, great or even minor.

The mutual agenda promoting marriage of organized crime with our secret government is one of our nation's darkest and most damaging mistakes and legacies. The true impact of this extremely long term ( since WW II ) mistake will take many generations to fully accept and face with understanding grasp. Many of our highest elected officials and many of our highest value constitution guided common good governing principles and policies have been compromised, corrupted or even cut down by this evil cult-like union. And it has also occasionally spawned murderous Frankenstein type monsters ( hit men, hit teams ) that were ordered to blindly do their masters bidding when these masters deemed it necessary to protect their interests to that extreme degree. Isn't it finally time to fully acknowledge and face this monstrous mistake reality?

Interesting claims and statements from John Gotti underboss and hit man "Sammy Gravano" ( AKA "Sammy The Bull") in this 1997 interview by Diane Sawyer. Start at the 25:45 mark and listen to what Gravano says about controlling all the major construction in Manhattan in the 80's and 90's. At the 26+ minute mark in the interview Gravano says that "even Donald Trump couldn't build a building in Manhattan if I ( Gravano) didn't want it to be built." Notice also one of the attorneys in the Diane Sawyer interview tapes sitting with John Gotti defense lawyers during Gotti's final racketeering trials was "Jay Goldberg." Donald Trump's personal attorney. At some point in this interview ( couldn't find the exact minute mark upon a review ) Sammy Gravano also mentions a specific presidential pardon. He infers that President Nixon was paid off with mob money to pardon "Jimmy Hoffa." It's pretty common knowledge now that Richard M. Nixon ( even though he signed the RICO act in Oct.1970 ) was also not totally absolved of having some connections to organized crime. He was also obviously encouraged to place mobbed up and totally corrupted Spiro Agnew on his 1968 ticket as V.P. Agnew was investigated for so many felony crimes after the 1972 presidential election ( construction kickbacks just one ) and forced to resign in 1973 in a plea deal. Makes you seriously consider whether all this very dark interaction with New York organized crime ( exposed more and more through a growing body of serious and valid research ) will ultimately lead to and be one of the main reasons for Trump's inevitable downfall. 56:22 Sammy the bull Gravano interview documentary MOBSTER MEDIA 865K views

I've watched this interview of Woody Harrelson by Barbara Walters several times over the years. Harrelson is extremely hesitant and uncomfortable in this interview. Who wouldn't be when the subject is about one's father and the father's participatory roles in murders. However, I sense a gut feeling of sincerity in Woody Harrelson's answers partly because of his degree of discomfort and unease. That would be a logical emotional state imo. When Walters reminded Woody Harrelson that in the past he had said his father was a CIA Operative and asked again if he still believed this, Harrelson quickly and confidently reaffirmed this past statement of his quoted by Walters ... "Yeah, he was." What I would give to hear what Woody H. knows that gives him this confidence in keeping his belief of his father's employment by you-know-who. We have heard and read hundreds of times statements from highly credentialed witnesses that the agency hired and used members of American organized crime for domestic covert action for decades. Because of this widely stated and held belief that this connection is and has been true in many ways...it is totally believable that Charles Harrelson could have been employed by them. Maybe someday Woody Harrelson will say what he knows in this area regarding his father.

Arthur Krock also wrote the forward to Robert Kennedy's 1960 book " The Enemy Within." Interesting that JFK would later feel such animosity toward Krock. RFK's book "The Enemy Within." was also morally idealistic which seemed to be a stronger trait in RFK ( and his children ) than JFK and his children. Organized crime had taken over the Teamsters and Hoffa was it's thug leader. Hoffa hated RFK to a murderous degree. It is so obvious Hoffa and organized crime viewed an RFK presidency as the greatest threat to their existence ever. Hoover and LBJ too. These were not the types of groups and individuals that sat idly by when threatened. More than almost anyone else, it was their super aggressive DNA to attack like blood thirsty Pit Bulls. To make things happen.

In the 133A photo and perhaps 133B photo it looks like a wedding band ring on his right hand ring finger. Or is that his Marine Corps ring? A little hard to tell from the camera distance. If it is the wedding band ring, isn't this almost always worn on the left hand? Oswald was right handed, right? In 133C the ring on Oswald's left hand ring finger seems larger than his simple wedding band.

By God ... you are right!

I just watched a You Tube interview of New York City organized crime figure Michael Franzese. Franzese was born in 1951. His father was in the business so he naturally became a member himself. Franzese's claim to fame is how at a fairly young age he became one of the highest earning members of organized crime. He was known and respected for his intelligence and ability to think up criminal schemes that eventually brought the mob hundreds of millions of dollars and maybe even billions. He knew the top people ( mob, business, politics, etc ) because of this. His massive rip off schemes were eventually found out and ended, but he served relatively limited time behind bars and is a free man today. He says in this interview that he knows exactly what happened to Jimmy Hoffa, but that he can never reveal the full truth of his whacking. The interviewer kept pressing and asking for even a hint. Franzese finally said something to the effect that Hoffa ended up in "very deep water" after he was whacked. Cement shoes? Saw Jimmy Hoffa interviewed on the Dick Cavett show after Hoffa was released from jail and not long before he was eliminated. You should really watch this interview. Hoffa spends some of the interview time saying how bad prisons were and how abused prisoners were by staff and even more so by other prisoners including violent rape. He wanted to help initiate some type of prison reform in this way. When Hoffa was confronted with questions about the JFK assassination and RFK's, you could so clearly see the lack of remorse. I sensed that he wanted JFK and Robert Kennedy killed in the most passionate way. And I sensed Hoffa knew more about who did JFK than he would ever let on. It is weird seeing this Jimmy Hoffa interview knowing that not long after, Hoffa himself would be whacked. I am convinced that American Organized Crime played some part in the assassinations of not just JFK, but RFK and MLK as well.

Sorry Sandy. I must have cleared out your post content and not cleared your name above when I did.

Well known crime films such as L.A.Confidential, Gangster Squad, Chinatown etc. all had major plot, story, setting and character elements based on true life events and people which clearly correlate to the corruption Wade describes in the L.A. area in that time frame. Much more true life than people who are not from Southern California might believe.

Wade, I also find some of your personal younger life recollections quite interesting. Particularly the descriptions of the areas you grew up in as I was raised in an area of California North of Ventura but not too far away. I share your observations regards the ethnic, economic and political make up of the people of California we grew up with during our time here. However, I have asked myself questions about your writings as they apply to the JFK assassination. At times I have wondered whether they stray too much into your own personal world versus focusing on research areas that commonly make up this forum's usual content. I occasionally find myself drifting into personal life experience areas more than JFK ones and after some rereading I usually realize this and edit much of them out my postings . In your case however, I feel you have just enough valid JFK ( and many other interesting research ) information interwoven into your personal life recollection postings that I find them a compelling read. I am most interested in your takes on corruption and how it was so much more pervasive on every level ( city, county, state and federal ) of our country's governing, judicial, policing and business framework structure than the average American could even imagine. And how intertwined all this corruption was and in many ways still is. And how in all these connected ways this nation wide corruption created a world in which people like JFK, RFK and MLK could not be allowed to exist and gain enough influence to threaten the true higher rungs of power, wealth and control in this corruption matrix. Your take on the red neck parts of California and how they became this way is correctly stated. California has always had the most extreme opposite political and cultural diversities living just 50 to 100 miles apart since I can remember. From KKK minded folk in the inner valleys and Bakersfield type locales ( think the movie Deliverance ) to the most liberal and open cultural tolerant types on the Coast like San Francisco. Now however, the largest ethnic population group in California is Latino. Those of Caucasion ethnicity are in the minority.

I see your physical comparison points here Kirk and I can't disagree too much. But there are still enough similarities to at least pause and study them. And Bush's ridiculous comment about not knowing where he was when he heard of JFK's shooting created just enough suspicion in curious people's minds ( as it should ) to not dismiss any Bush 11/22/1963 location theory out of hand.

Then, when Oswald was shot, our stock dropped right to the bottom again, as if it were our fault. But it wasn’t our fault; we had orders to move him like that. Chief Curry told me later that evening, “I want you and one jockey to come down here, and we’re going to move Oswald to the county jail at two o’clock and nobody will know about it.” Then what happened? Elgin Crull, the city manager, and Earle Cabell, the mayor, eventually gave Chief Curry direct orders, “No, you will not do that! You will notify the news media and the press so that they can be in the basement with their lights and cameras set up before you move him.” That’s what got him killed! But we took the blame for it, and all of us were called a bunch of dummies. It eventually cost Curry his job because somebody else laid it on him and it wasn’t him at all. But he wouldn’t speak up! I was never too up on the who, what, how and whys of the insanely negligent and illogically risky order given to and countermanding Chief Curry to transfer Oswald during the day and just feet in front of a blinding light glaring, pressed in, question shouting and hard to monitor crowd versus at night without notice which was the most basic and rational Oswald transfer safety measure called for, especially since Oswald was clearly the most threatened individual on the planet at that time. The Dallas police and Curry were vilified for Oswald's murder right inside their own building with 70+ armed security present. I have been one of those who has vilified them. I still believe that their failure to catch and stop an armed strip joint owner from walking right into their basement at the most important time of Oswald's brief walk by them justifies the vilification. However, as related through this officer's recollections, it was the totally illogical ( and totally suspicious ) higher authority ( Crull's and Cabell's ) decision to abandon the most basic security measures rationale that Oswald's case called for that put Oswald just inches in front of Jack Ruby's 38 Colt Cobra Revolver. Truly, Oswald was "lynched" in that DPD basement the morning of 11/24/1963 thanks to Crull and Cabell and/or whoever else ordered "them" to set Oswald up for this.

Question about the first three side-by-side pics in the original thread; Is one of these the McIntyre photo or are all three photos by this fellow as part of a film? Now I know where they got that picture of the George H.W. Bush look-alike in Dealey Plaza that day. In the upper left hand corner of the first photo on the left you see the Bush look-alike.

Gene, thank you for this history piece. Very interesting. Makes me want to review Galilei again. Nice early weekend morning read.

Which Oswald do you think Norman Mailer wrote about in his book "Oswald's Tale?" Also, same thing regards Don Dellilo's "Libra?"

It would be so easy for Liggitt to have then be flown back to Dallas via a military plane. His being kept up all those hours and saddled with such a traumatic Earth shaking task...could explain everything his wife Lois described upon seeing John Liggitt when he returned home. ???

A few things in Lipsey's HSCA testimony and TED TALK statements that gave me pause. Some minor. Some not. In the TED TALK interview he exaggerated the distance he was seated from the autopsy table. He told the host he was no more than 2 feet extra distance away from the body than the distance between himself and the TT interviewer and that looked to be about 3 feet. That's 5 to 6 feet away from the autopsy table? In Lipsey's HSCA testimnoy he told them he was 12 to 15 feet away. That's a lot of extra room and would definitely affect his recollections of what he saw and heard versus just 6 feet away. He also mentioned his fear when landing in the Army helicopter behind Bethesda that one slight mistake and the helicopters rotator blades could cut off the heads of many in the crowd of 4,000 there. 4,000? He also said to the HSCA that he didn't know how many people came in to the autopsy room when he first sat down. He also was seated on the left side of JFK's body which blocked any view of the much more right side head damage to JFK's body. He mentions Sam Bird having one of his men go and get them hamburgers which they then ate during the autopsy while seated there. Really? No one came to tell them that this baseball game munch down might be a little inappropriate in that situation? How many times did Lipsey mention "3 shots" in the HSCA interview? In the Ted Talk interview he never mentions 3 shots. His HSCA testimony tone seemed weirdly flippant to me. Inter-spiced with a few added unimportant personal feeling comments that I guess he thought was funny. There's more. Will add soon.

Rick, exactly. You must read Lipsey's sworn HSCA testimony. Listen to Lipsy's Ted Talk interview first. Then read the HSCA testimony second. Its really a quite shocking contradiction in stated observations between the two interviews.