Rick McTague

10 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

I've just added several new books to my "Kennedy Catalog" below. If anyone notices any titles I have omitted (and I know there are several), please post them in this thread so I can update my Catalog asap. Thanks. ....

 

DVP,

If it hasn't been said before, thank you for your efforts and expense in archiving so much JFK-related media.  It sure is valuable.

Thanks

On 1/20/2019 at 1:29 PM, Andrej Stancak said:

The dark patch on the back of Kennedy's head in Z317 (in the link provided in the first post of this thread)  appears as a sure manipulation. This shape is neatly delinated and much darker than a natural shadow. Can only concur with the authors who analysed this high-res image. Further, to cover up this black patch, the back and shoulder and part of the upper arm were also darkened to make the hair patch less conspicuous and more natural.

👍👍

52 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Off Topic (but kind of fun).....

I have to say, I was deeply distressed when I found out that President Trump's Fast Food Feast at the White House on January 14, 2019, did not contain any KFC items. The Colonel would be heartbroken.

 

8 hours ago, Adam Johnson said:

Hi Rick,

I think we may have to find one more copy or the copy being loaned out on the late, late evening of Nov 22nd and given back to Zapruder first thing Saturday morning...

One of H.L. Hunts minions( I'm not going searching for his name now) stated that he obtained a copy late on Friday night 22nd Nov and paid Zapruder handsomely for it. Plus as a back up to this. there were statements made by many Dallas hob nobs over the next 5 to 10 years that they had seen a copy of the film shown by H L Hunt at functions.

Every thing else above i agree with 100%.

Adam

 

 

Adam,

Thanks much for the reply.  Maybe I'll have to listen to it again, but I recall in the podcast, Mr. Horne says that HL Hunt's copy was a third generation one from the extant film generated at Hawkeyeworks, not from the camera original.  However, if he got that copy on 11/22, it would obviously be from a Dallas copy of the camera original.  It seems like everything about this case, from the films, to the medical evidence, to the evidence around LHO, appeared one way in Dallas and a completely different way once it hit DC.

Those additional hobnobs' viewing would be interesting to explore; Mr. Horne says he knows of just a few, one of which is Greg Burnham (sp?) who have seen the "other" Z film.  He didn't mention those others in Dallas.

Thanks

On 1/13/2019 at 6:22 PM, Adam Johnson said:

Hi Steve,

This could easily be done by someone who coordinated with the plots a man on the inside as it were, who could simply say to each group "we have the Secret Service on board, they are going to slow the Limo at this point here(Elm St. Dealey Plaza)". 

Right between the painted yellow marks on the curb of Elm street, right at the place where the Umbrella Man pumps his umbrella up and down, right where DCM pumps his fist.  These actions and that stretch of Elm were, in my opinion, planned in advance, for triangulation of fire.

Thanks

MWN Episode 107 – Douglas Horne on the Zapruder Film Alteration Debate

While much of this has been discussed in available films (such as "The Zapruder Film Mystery"), it is very refreshing to hear from Mr. Horne fresh and new this year.  He describes some of the reasons for his absence from the research community lately, and offers a very cogent discussion of the providence of the Zapruder film.  

The timeline:

1. Zapruder had (3) unslit 16mm contact copies made on 11/22/63 from the camera original, at Jameson in Dallas, (4) total first day 16 mm films.
2. He had the original and the (3) copies developed / slit by Kodak in Dallas in 8mm format.
3. He gave (2) of the (3) 8mm slip copies to the SS in Dallas as a loan: 
   1. Max Phillips put one of these copies on a plane immediately to Washington, DC, arriving 11/23, before 3:00 am.
   2. He gave one of these 8mm copies to the FBI on 11/23; they flew it to BWI airport in Baltimore, DeLoach (#3 in the FBI) examines this after midnight, early on Sunday 11/24.  (NOTE: DeLoach says JFK's head moves violently FORWARD from this viewing).
4. Zapruder showed his family the 8mm film (either the original or the remaining copy) Saturday 11/23 morning.  
5. Zapruder also showed Dick Stolley at Life and the SS the camera original 8mm film Saturday 11/23 morning in his office in Dal-Tex.
6. Zapruder negotiated a (1) week loan of the 8mm camera original to Life for $50,000.00 for print rights on Saturday 11/23.  He still has the one remaining copy.
7. Stolley from Life sent the camera original to Chicago on Saturday 11/23.
8. Zapruder shows several people his remaining 8mm copy to Dan Rather and others in Dallas, on Saturday 11/23.  (NOTE: Rather says JFK's head moves violently FORWARD from this viewing).
9. Dino Brugioni at NPIC got the camera original, slit 8mm film Saturday night 11/23 from two SS agents to make briefing boards from 12-14 stills.  These boards no longer exist.
10. Homer McMahon at NPIC in DC received from one SS agent, Bill Smith, an unslit 16mm film Sunday night 11/24 to make (3) briefing boards from 28 stills.  Smith says this is the camera original (lie #1), developed at Hawkeyeworks in Rochester, NY (lie #2).  One set of these briefing boards exist today; it is not the one Dino B made, with completely different images, content and format.  These briefing boards match the extant film that is available today.

From this timeline, it is evident that the extant Zapruder film available today is not the same film as the camera original. 

• Who: Kodak, with the CIA. 
• Where: Hawkeyeworks in Rochester, NY
• When: During the day Sunday 11/24

Thanks

11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Every once in awhile I have to thank Davey.

 

Please, enough is enough.

Jim,

But wasn't Prayer Man filmed on the front entrance to WTC 7?

😎

4 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Pamela... do you have anything to support that sequence of events?  

I found this article about that very interaction:  According to the writer describing what Hosty later recalled:, Oswald seemed startled... but never had the chance to answer...

I'll keep looking....

===

Why doesn't Oswald just admit he was at Odio's and in Dallas working for the FBI? 

It appears that Oswald was a good little soldier in this charade and did not give away his alliances. Does anyone then ask - if you were not in Mexico, where were you?

David,

Isn't it ironic that this newspaper clipping includes an announcement about GHWB's Zapata company selling shares of another company in the lower right corner?

Thanks

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

 

The turn on Elm Street by the presidential motorcade is obscured by bad photography which we are supposed to accept as natural.  We are not allowed to think that something unnatural may have occurred to almost all the photography on the day of the assassination in Dealey Plaza.

This is the type of imagery we should have coming out of Dealey Plaza on the day of the assassination.  This can be blown up and looked at in detail.  Why we don’t have this can generally be explained one way.

Instead we have distant, distorted  blurred, and altered imagery to contend with such as this from Hughes.

 

 

 

John,

I am firmly convinced that this is the reason the press bus, with the army of professional photographers in it, was placed so far back in the Dallas motorcade.  In other motorcades, it was placed in front of the presidential limo to get the best view and shots of the president.  In Dallas, it was placed significantly further back to prevent nice, clear, detailed imagery that could be studied.  All we are left with is amateur imagery, with few exceptions (such as Ike Altgens).

You do bring up a good point: any evidence in the assassination that contradicts the WC findings (such as altered photographs, testimony, what the Parkland medical staff saw compared to the x-rays and autopsy photos, etc.) is to be ridiculed and explained away by people being "mistaken" or just plain lying.  

Thanks

Just now, Joe Bauer said:

And what about the inner "steel" windshield frame indentation that no one, even Kellerman, could explain it's origin before the shooting in Dealey Plaza?

And what about Kellerman's WC testimony about a "Flurry" of shots raining into the limo?

Two shots doesn't come close to a "flurry."

And Kellerman said that he heard JFK say "My God I'm hit!" - which could not have been the throat shot, had to have been the shallow shot to his back.  He could not have said this if these were caused by the magic bullet.  The WC and it's apologists expect us to disregard every piece of evidence that runs counter to it's conclusions.  Much like the Parkland nurses and doctors, I am more inclined to believe "day of" testimony by those who were there.

Any thoughts on the multiple ammo types and how they fit in?

Thanks

2 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

I repeat;

after JFK is hit the first time, he straightens up with his arms lifting, then bends his head down slightly ( looking as if he is struggling to breath through the blood?) and he then turns his head - rotating leftward - to look at Jackie with anguish and Jackie immediately grabs JFK's arm and pulls him closer to her which causes JFK's head and upper body to lean leftward and down slightly and then one micro second later JFK's head explodes from another shot.

My point is the fact that JFK's head and upper body is moving significantly upward, downward, rotating leftward, then pulled leftward even more by Jackie's pulling ( traversing two feet leftward from his first hit position? ) then slumping downward again ... all in the short time space between the supposed 2nd and 3rd shot?" 

And Oswald is trying to scope align his last and most hurried shot at a cantaloupe sized target that is moving that much while also moving farther away and on a downward incline slope?

And with all that target movement ( 4 movement dynamics ) at the farthest distance of his shooting sequence challenge he then gets a bull's-eye hit?

Wonder how many experienced hunter shooters could hit a small deer's head bull's-eye while the deer was in the back of an open pickup 265 feet away and the truck was also motoring away and downward and the deer was moving his neck and head all at the same time ?

And using a rifle like the Carcano with a bad scope sight and not under the murderous criminal action urgency stress Oswald should have been feeling?

Now THAT would be a bull's-eye shot worth bragging about.

 

Joe,

As always, I appreciate your logic and reason in your posts and replies here as we look at the evidence and draw conclusions.  In addition to the complexity of the shots which you accurately describe here, I might also add the uncanny ability of LHO to partially load the 6-shot capacity MC clip with only 4 rounds of mixed type in the exact right order:  

#1: Full metal jacket round that missed and caused the wound to James Tague

#2:The so-called magic bullet being of the full metal jacket variety that penetrates and keeps on going (see CE399)

#3: The frangible / soft-nosed round that caused the head wound with the cloud of tiny lead fragments seen in x-rays

#4: FMJ round left in the rifle

There just isn't a logical explanation for how anyone could make those shots with those mixed ammunition types from that window in those conditions - with the added complexities that you point out - with that rifle.  No one I know who uses firearms loads a magazine / clip with mixed purpose ammunition.  I'm not even sure that frangible / soft-nosed ammunition was available then for the MC. 

There is also the related duality of ammunition types / manufacturers in the Tippet murder.

Thanks

23 minutes ago, François Carlier said:

Please be honest. The Parkland doctors at the press conference could only conjecture as far as the wounds were concerned. They themselves said it. Perry said it then (on November 22, 1963) and he wrote exactly that in his letter to me.
They did not take the time to perform an autopsy. And that's what autopsies are for.
But Doctor Humes performed a complete autopsy. And he was adamant that the wound was not at the back of the head (and as to the neck wound, it was then established that it was an exit wound, and you know it).

Francois,

It was more than conjecture, he was stating his observations, the day of the event.  Of course they didn't do an autopsy.  They stated what they saw, but it was with years of experience which is why I tend to believe him on that day - there was no official story that needed to be adhered to.  The WC conjectured that the neck would was one of exit when they invented the SBT out of whole cloth; they hardly "established" it, AND YOU KNOW IT.

And you can keep your lame little dig at me about not being honest.  You don't know me and I take offense at your implication.  This is one forum where, for the most part, people can debate the issues without getting personal and nasty.  Of course there are exceptions ... I for one will refrain. 

1 hour ago, François Carlier said:

Hello again,
Well, to sum up, this is what we have in this debate, regarding the medical evidence :


- Doctor Perry, the key doctor at Parkland, agrees with the official conclusions
 

Francois,

Dr. Perry did not agree with the official conclusion on the day of the assassination when he told reporters at the press conference three times that the wound in his throat was one of entrance.  If anyone is qualified to make that judgment, he would since he had seen hundreds of gunshot wounds.  Obviously, he made a radical change after the "official conclusions" were released; he had "help" arriving at that change by a secret service agent, whose name escapes me now.

I now await your reply that he was "mistaken" like the other Parkland witnesses who described the back of the head wound and did not describe the red/orange/white blob/flap as shown in the Z film.

Thanks

17 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

3.) The 20 Parkland professionals saw a large amount of blood and gore at the right-rear of President Kennedy's head, and those witnesses were honestly mistaken when they reported that there was a large "wound" in that area of the President's head.

Mr. Von Pein,

To carry your 3rd option to it's logical conclusion, not only were they all mistaken that they didn't see the large wound in the back of the head, but they were all mistaken when none of them reported seeing the wound as shown in the Zapruder film, correct?  None of them said they saw the huge red/orange/white blob/flap as shown in the Z film, in addition to being mistaken about the wound in the back of the head?  So they were doubly mistaken, is that your position?

Thanks

11 hours ago, Jake Hammond said:

No, he also relies on the Parkland staff.  I don't see the point of faking one image and not the other ones which show a massive wound ? what is the objective there ? and even if they did fake that image, so what ? we know there was a massive wound there from the reaction of Jackie, the piece of skull that was left near Charles Brem, the autopsy photos (!), the spray covering the motorcyclists to the left rear and as you point out yourself, the Parkland staff. 

 My point here is mutual exclusivity, just because the sky is blue doesn't mean grass cannot be green. just because a large portion of his skull was missing at the rear does not mean that some wasn't still attached to scalp and that the scalp wasn't still attached, it also does not mean that there can't be a wound elsewhere on the head. In fact to claim that the scalp had nicely removed itself in a cartoon like circle really is a big stretch. But again, look at the testimony of Jackie who described seeing the inside of the scalp. If you look at the top of the head in the images you see lacerated section of scalp, it is quite possible that these could be put back in to place to some extent , and the rear section pulled across to create from a rear angle what looks almost like a normal head. The Doctors described doing this in their own testimony, they weren't hiding that. 

 And to repeat... the initial shot caused a blowout upwards and forwards according to all witnesses and the Zapruda film, from the right side of the head. roughly at the top of where the flap of bone is hanging in front of the ear. This is mutually exclusive to a blow out at the rear if there were two shots. 

Jake,

Welcome as a new member to the forum!  I've found even with the back and forth debate, the EF is not as far down in the gutter as other forums are as related to personal attacks, etc.  We can disagree here without being disagreeable.

I'm curious, how do you reconcile what is seen on the Z film, the giant red/orange/white blob-flap above the right ear and temple, and the complete absence of that wound at Parkland?

Thanks

18 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

But its actually worse than that.

When Jim Garrison turned Ferrie over to the FBI, he signed a statement in which he lied his head off. He said he never owned a telescopic rifle, or used one, or even knew how who to use one.

He said he did not know Oswald and Oswald was not in his New Orleans CAP.

He said he never knew Sergio Arcacha Smith from 544 Camp Street or any Cuban exile group since 1961.

Every single one of those seven statements constituted perjury under Title 18 US Code Section 1001.

It would have taken about a day or two for the FBI to find the evidence to indict Ferrie for his declaration.

My question: Did the WC ever pursue this relevant perjury?

 

Jim,

To take this to the conclusion, David Ferrie (like so many other key witnesses and others in this case) was suicided and shut up forever.  Quite curious in two murders that were supposedly committed by a lone nut on a spontaneous whim for personal glory.  Why the eliminations?  Why the forced signatures to agreements of secrecy for those who witnessed the autopsy if it was so open and shut?  Why did GDM off himself the day he was going to be interviewed by Gaeton Fonzi if LHO acted alone?

Thanks

Interesting that he claims (around 11:00 in) that Mr. Zapruder started filming while the limo was on Houston, kept on filming, then stopped to rewind the camera, then resumed filming which is an explanation for the limo jumping down Elm in the extant version today.  I hadn't heard that before, I think Mr. Zapruder said that once he began filming, he didn't stop.  Groden says a full wind would last for 30-40 seconds, which seems like a short amount of time, to have to stop every 40 seconds to rewind the camera.  In addition, it was not 30-40 seconds from when he started filming while the limo is on Houston until the film stops after it goes into the triple underpass, more like 20 seconds I'd guess.  My folks had an 8mm camera that captured our old home movies, and they didn't have to stop every 30-40 seconds to rewind the thing, those movies are continuous.

I'm not sure where he gets the evidence for the camera winding, maybe others have heard that?  I've assumed that someone (as described by Doug Horne and others) altered the film, removing inconvenient / anti-WC frames which includes whatever the original showed during the turn from Houston onto Elm - the limo almost hitting the concrete median on the annex street in front of the TSBD.

Thanks

6 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Ron, thanks for correcting my misstatement regarding Jenkin's helping O'Conner lift JFK's body out of the plain casket.

If Jenkin's book comments about someone other than Humes doing brain removal procedures before hand, so that JFK's brain fell out in Hume's hands without Humes having to do these procedures are true...how can anyone doubt a cover up?

I thought I  heard Jenkins say in the interview that he held JFK's brain in his hand before putting it into a sling and that he stated " less than a 3rd of the total brain was missing?"

 

Joe,

Throughout this book, he goes into an incredible level of medical detail on the wounds and medical evidence, to the point of needing a medical terminology specialist to interpret many passages.  This isn't a criticism, just my perception.

Having said that, it was very interesting about the difficulty he had in infusing the brain they took out since the arteries were not freshly cut and not easy to get the needles properly inserted.  He said the condition of the arteries and the brain itself looked to him as having been removed a significant amount of time before they took it out of JFK's head at the official autopsy.  

Finally, he described the differences between the wounds in the head that they saw, the x-rays and photographs and the brain they removed.  He repeatedly states that the brain he removed could not have been the one that the wounds represented.

If what Jenkins documents in this book is accurate, it is groundbreaking and devastating to those who do not believe in a conspiracy.

Did you get some of those impressions from the book too?

Thanks

I'm listening to the archive of your show now, Jim.  Congrats!

http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2018.html

Rick

I'd like to know what happened to LEE once he was released by Westbrooke or whomever.  Was he taken to the Trinity River basin after putting on a flight suit / coverall and joined by a Hispanic-looking man to board the CIA flight to NM with Mr. Vinson?  Were there any sightings of LEE after his release, once HARVEY was in police custody?

Thanks

Isn't this the same paper that had all the details about Oswald and how he supposedly killed JFK from the TSBD, the rifle info and everything, at an incredibly early time/date after the assassination?  Like so early that it defies anything except pre-assassination information being sent?  I could be off here ...

Thanks

David,

Maybe a little OT, but why would the evidence from SA Drain only contain (2) 6.5 cartridge cases from TSBD, when there were supposedly (3)?  Any ideas?  If there were only (2), that means only (2) shots unless I'm missing something here.  Plus, I recall that one of the cases had a dent in it that made it impossible for it to have been fired.  I wonder why that wasn't called out.

Thanks

On 11/3/2018 at 8:00 PM, Ron Bulman said:

  I could see the throat shot coming from the tree area but I wonder if it might not have come from right at the end of the of the triple over pass. It offers an even little bit better angle, and, crouching down next to the concrete post at the end of it I thought it offered some concealment for a right handed person. 

 

 

Ron,

The position you describe is about exactly where I was standing when I posted my recent picture from the vantage point of just to the south side of the last decorative pillar above Tague in your picture.  Easily concealed and quick egress to the SK parking area.

I think the trajectory from there would lend itself to a through the windshield frontal throat shot because of the steep incline of Elm.  Back up near the turn, the height of the limo would allow this.

Thanks

Rick

Thanks

Rick

Since this is a discussion pertaining to the south knoll, I thought I would re-post a picture I took about a year ago from the concrete walkway portion of the triple underpass.  I am standing about 20' or so from the end of the walkway, right above where James Tague was standing down at street level.  You can see how a shooter from there would have the proper trajectory into the car for both frontal shots.  

The two maroon cars in the center lane are just about over the two X's in that lane marking two shots that hit JFK.  The one in the back is where the front throat shot hit, and the car in front is where the head shot hit.  With the curve in Elm, the position of JFK (ala Sherry Fiester) and the Parkland / other witnesses description of the wounds, you can see how the SK is a likely spot - much more likely IMO than the north knoll.  

Hope this helps.

Thanks

14 hours ago, François Carlier said:

The Harper fragment is parietal bone, not occipital.
And the Zapruder film is genuine and has never been faked by anyone.
That's the truth, pure and simple.
I wonder why some people keep pretending they don't know that and coming back with already-discarded theories ?

Francois,

Can you please provide your explanation of how a multitude of medical professionals describe the same back of the head blowout that is not seen on the "genuine and has never been faked by anyone" Z film?  They can't both be true.

Thanks