Jump to content
The Education Forum

Michael Clark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,737

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Michael Clark

    Does Lifton's Best Evidence indicate that the coverup and the crime were committed by the same people?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Gerry Simone said:

    Nice recap but where's the CIA here?  (Poppy supposedly was a contract agent, but I'm referring to the likes of Hunt, Sturgis, Morales, etc.)

    CIA and military kept at a distance. Some CIA left prints, Like David Atlee Phillips and Hunt. CIA was not on the "need-to-know" list. Lol! Sturgis and Morales were hired agents of fortune, who would get theirs when Cuba was reclaimed. That never happened and I bet Nixon almost keeled-over when Hunt, Sturgis and Barker showed up at Watergate. I don't detect Morales in the JFKA.

    Another look at the back wound.

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    24 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

    Michael,

    I am less qualified on the wounds to JFK, than I am to those of John Connally. However the suggestion that the doctors that treated JFK would make such a mistake is - in my view - insulting.

    Regarding the wounds to John Connally I am on sounder ground. The wound that Connally received ran down the outside of his chest wall. It actually ran down the bone of the fith rib. Around the waist area the bullet came into contact with the fifth rib itself and created a "slapping" wound/impact as described by Robert Shaw. This impact shattered the rib bone matter. I am still not sure whether a gap was created in the rib or it was fragmented: i.e. there were holes all over it.

    This shattered bone matter was pushed inside the chest cavity and damaged Connally's right lung, whereas the bullet carried on its journey outside the chest cavity. Yes it exited just below the right nipple but it did so following the track of the fifth rib.

    In addition these bone fragments also exited through the wound below the right nipple. It is my belief that that the extent of this wounnd was a combination of bullet impact as well bone fragment exiit. These fragments created a diagonal series on holes in Connally's shirt from the level of the pocket down to the waist. These holes are visible on the 1964 FBI colour photo of the shirt. In number they are well over a hundred holes and piercings.

    The bullet - contary to all the wise men of the Warren Commission - ran under Connally's skin ( or just a little inside the muscles ). It never entered the chest cavity. Had it done so and had it exited beneath the right nipple ( from within the chest cavity ) that would have placed the bullet tract very close to the heart. That would probably be a fatal wound - or certainly a life threatening wound.

    James

     

    Thank you James

    Another look at the back wound.

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    James, I deleted my comments here and elsewhere. I'll take your word that my comments were offensive in a extraordinary way. I thought that all of the things that I posted were commonly mentioned elsewhere. I felt that I was just rearranging the pieces in a way that made more sense.

    these threads often get contentious and I usually stay out of them. I'll stay out of them going forward.

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Another look at the back wound.

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    Honestly James, I don't mean to just lightly throw around accusations. But how am Am I to get around the WC's SBT theory without thinking that doctors lied? Weren't there doctors who supported the SBT? Aren't there doctors who do not support the SBT? Do You support the SBT? The answer to that would help me know where you are coming from.

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Another look at the back wound.

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

    Michael,

    You commented:-

    Could some doctors, technicians and nurses been led to, or "encouraged" to believe that they were working on, seeing, x-raying, and viewing wounds to Conally's back, rather than Kennedy's back?

    Could perp-doctors have, while operating on Connally, actually created evidence for the wound that passed-through Connally's chest?

    First with the greatest repect Michael, you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about. To suggest that Perry et al would have made such a mistake with regard to the wounds they knew JFK had suffered is an insult to these doctors.

    Second to suggest that Robert Shaw, Red Duke and Charles Carrico were "perp-doctors" demonstrates how little you know about those surgeons who worked on Govenor Connally.

    Third No bullet passed through Govenor Connally's chest. Only bone fragments entered his chest cavity.

    Parkland hospital in November 1963 could boast they had on staff some of the finest surgeons in America.

    James.

    James, I absolutely have not been able to make any sense out of all this. Haven't all the elements that I have placed on the table, including all your points made, been bandied-about before? Haven't all pictures, x-rays, doctors and reports been questioned as nauseum? That has been my general take. I just arranged the puzzle pieces, that still seem scattered, in a way I have not seen done before?

    And regarding Connally's wound, I am assuming that you are saying that the shoulder to nipple wound, as per the WC, is technically not the chest? Or are you saying that the wound described by the WC is entirely incorrect, even discounting the JFK neck wound and Connally's hand and thigh wound. 

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Oh no, not Lucien Sarti again

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

    Right, thanks. I remember now, I think he identified Barker from a photo of him.

     

    THEORY: BARKER IN DALLAS ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963?

    When Michael Canfield visited Dallas in April 1975 he interviewed Seymour Weitzman, who was in a home for aged veterans. Seymour Weitzman had a nervous breakdown in June 1972 - shortly after Watergate. He requested that his doctor, Charles Laburda, be present during the interview. Seymour Weitzman told Michael Canfield he had encountered a Secret Service Agent in the parking lot who produced credentials and told him everything was under control. He described the man as being of medium height, dark hair and wearing a light windbreaker. Michael Canfield showed him photographs of Watergate burglars STURGIS and BARKER, and asked him if either of these men resembled the "Secret Service Agent" he had encountered on November 22, 1963. He pointed to BERNARD BARKER. He told Michael Canfield: "I can't remember for sure, but it looked like him. Couldn't swear it was him though...anyway so many witnesses are dead...two Cubans once forced their way into my house and waited for me when I got home. I had to chase them out with my service revolver...I feared for my life." A recent JFK Records Collection Computer search revealed that one page of a Warren Commission document that dealt with Seymour Weitzman and the tramps was referred to another agency for review. [NARA 180-10095-10367; see 180-10095-10355] When the HSCA attempted to question Seymour Weitzman, Dr. Charles Laburda objected: "Since Mr. Weitzman was treated for emotional illness for many years...information sought from him should be extracted from his testimony and depositions made at that time [1963 to 1964]." [ltr. VA Laburda 6.1.78] Seymour Weitzman, born January 28, 1922, died in July 1985.

    Does Lifton's Best Evidence indicate that the coverup and the crime were committed by the same people?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark

    23 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

    Michael,

     

    I have mulled this over in my mind for years, and haven't figured out a way to express it, but that's why I haven't given too much credence to the idea of the ultra far right fringe like the KKK or the Knights of Shickshimmey or whatever cooperating much with the anti-Castro exiles. I think they would have been perfectly willing to sit back and watch their little brown brothers kill each other off.

     

    Steve Thomas 

    Steve, I don't think that kind of coordination was necessary. Elements of the DPD and Sheriffs command just had to know to tolerate a few strange Cubans and suits in and around the area. After the hit, let some spooks and suits sort through some of the strangers, let some people out the back door. If any Cubans did get wounded or killed, hide the body and cover up the incident. This last part was the dirty trick because it hid the conspiracy and prevented an action on Cuba.

    The necessity of reading the Palmer Report daily

    in TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND PRESIDENCY DISCUSSION

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

    Not an answer though. It's clear that most Russian effort has been towards dividing the left. But whatever the case, I'd like Tommy to respond. I have no idea how credible Palmer is. I do agree, and don't appreciate, the use of hyperbole, and much prefer straight talk when I am looking for facts. But I will say that Palmer has been essentially right so far about the Trump Putin ties, and in some cases hasn't gone far enough. I think it's hard enough to distinguish truth from lies without smearing someone who appears to be a truth teller using a sensationalist style. As always, style vs substance becomes an important distinction. In this atmosphere I find it understandable that voices on the left (Huffington for instance) try to use the style that the right uses with great effect. But an audience like us tend object to that kind of journalism. So - let's stick to facts. Do any if you have a problem with facts as articulated by Palmer?

    "Not an answer though"

    Paul, I would have addressed you, like I did in this sentence, If I were addressing you.

    ----------------

    "It's clear that most Russian effort has been towards dividing the left."

    Paul, that's an absolute giveaway that they have achieved their goals. They are dividing "us". You see "us" as the the left. They are dividing all of us.

    ------------------

    I generally agree on the rest. 

    I subscribed hoping to get a view from outside the MSM. Yet, this is as creepy and divisive as alt-right stuff that I see on FB.

     

    Cheers,

    Michael

     

    Did a Far-Right/Industrial faction double-cross a Mob/Anti-Castro faction?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    14 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

    I view Oswald as a tragic figure. I don't see him as a left or right extemist. He intersected mostly with the right, but doesn't appear to be one of them. His leftist bonafides were manufactured, but seemingly based on some political philosophy. He worked for US Intel at times and in some capacity. He was not, in my opinion, part of a plot to kill JFK. But he seems to have been aware, at least after the fact, of the danger he was in. Looks to me like he thought he was spying on someone, aware of a plot but not aware that it was a deadly operation. That is only my opinion of course. 

    Paul, You digress. What do you think of my theory?

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Did a Far-Right/Industrial faction double-cross a Mob/Anti-Castro faction?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark

    35 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

    Why? Because he says the word patsy? 

    Paul,  I wrote, in quotes, that he was "part of the plot". The plotters knew he was "part of the plot". Beyond that, I don't know. Yet, If I were Lee, and I saw someone bring a rifle to that building that Thursday, and I had NFC what was going on. I would have come down with the flu by Friday morning. But, thanks to 11-22-63, I have the benefit of paranoia.

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Did a Far-Right/Industrial faction double-cross a Mob/Anti-Castro faction?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark

    1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

    Roger - Michael - Do you believe LHO was part of the plot? I don't. 

    Paul, That is too speculative right now; I don't really have a theory about what LHO thought was going on, and what he thought that he was supposed to do, when he went to work that morning. I believe that he knew there was going to be an attempt on JFK. His part in the attempt and what he thought his part in the attempt was going to be may have been different from one-another.

    Gut-feeling? He wasn't going to kill Kennedy; nor did he want to see Kennedy killed.

    For the purposes of this thread, as I want to present it, it doesn't matter.

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Does Lifton's Best Evidence indicate that the coverup and the crime were committed by the same people?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

    The topic is whether or not Kennedy's killers also conducted the cover-up -- our discussion goes to the heart of the framing of Oswald as a Castro agent, and the motivations of Kennedy's killers.

    Cliff, I, presently, believe that the assassins were Anti-Castro Cubans, sheep-dipped as Communist Cubans. The DPD and the mob, via Jack Ruby, handeled the on-the-ground needs of the cover-up, while LBJ and Hoover handeled the top-level work. Poppy and Co., like Nixon and Co. handled the money-brokers and the power(legislative)-brokers.

    Cheers

    Michael

×
×
  • Create New...