Paul Kerrigan
-
Posts
139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Paul Kerrigan
-
-
Hi, can anyone help me out with which is the best book to read on the Tippit murder and is there a web site anyone devoted only to that subject : :
Joanne, hi. The best book to read on the Tippit murder is "With Malice" by Dale Myers. The book draws the conclusion that Oswald murdered Tippit, which you may disagree with. Whatever your personal conclusion is on that score, Myers provides many photographs and much contextual detail that will enrich your understanding of the Tippit murder case.
Best wishes,
Royce Bierma
Don't trust Meyer's book alone. It is riddled with inaccuracies and doubtful assumptions. If you read it, make sure you read Michael Griffith's review of the book afterwards.
A Review of Dale Myers' Book With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Murder of Officer J.D. Tippit
-
I believe it was decided by the investigators that the chicken bones belonged to a colleague of Oswalds. Oswald had something else for lunch on Friday the 22nd (I believe it was a sandwich).
Oswald was killed two days later, on Sunday November 24th 1963.
Bonnie Ray Williams, an employee at the School Book Depository, had eaten his chicken lunch on the sixth floor until he left at about 12:20.
-
Evgenia,
The work done by Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty suggests that there is a standard handbook for security, relative to providing standard procedures to follow to ensure executive protection.
Two interesting pieces from the website dedicated to his writings:
Who did, who decided let's go to Dallas? You've been to Fort Worth, you've got to go to Dallas. That's important because whoever decided that knew some things.I have worked with the Secret Service in their good work to keep presidents alive. I went to Mexico City when Eisenhower was going down there in 1956 and I'll tell you, the Secret Service knows the game just like the gorillas in France knew the game. They can keep the President alive. Where were they?
How does it happen you can have a six story building with a lot of empty floors. They never wired or sealed the doors as their manual says they will, nor had anybody on the roof with high powered guns and with radios as their manual says they will, or had a man in Dealy Plaza to look at the man on the roof and to look at the windows as their manual says they will. If you don't drive over 44 mph, a nice figure but it works out in tests, why did they bring that car down to a crawling speed. Those are more important to me than a genealogy of Lee Harvey Oswald or anybody else on the grassy knoll.I think I'll stop there. That's what I call the anatomy of assassinations. It gets you thinking, you know.
Trained U.S. Army Intelligence Units were told their assistance was not needed in Dallas during the JFK visit. William McKinney, a former member of the crack 112th Military Intelligence Group at 4th Army Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, has revealed that both Col. Maximillian Reich and his deputy, Lt. Col. Joel Cabaza, protested violently when they were told to "Stand Down" rather than in report with their units for duty in augmentation of the Secret Service in Dallas, McKinney said, "All the Secret Service had to do was nod and these units which had been trained at the Army's top Intelligence school at Camp Holabird, Maryland would have performed their normal function of Protection for the President in Dallas."
The 315th, the Texas unit which would have been involved if its support had not been turned down, had records in its files, according to McKinney, on Lee Harvey Oswald. The 315th had a Dallas office and its records were up to date.
McKinney added that, "Highly specialized classes were given at Camp Holabird on the subject of Protection. This included training designed to prepare this army unit to assist the Secret Service. If our support had not been refused, we would have been in Dallas."
Once they were told that that their unit wasn't needed, they assumed some other unit would get the job. They never dreamed there would be no one along the streets and rooftops.
It's not that the Secret Service didn't do the job... They weren't asked to do the job. Dealey Plaza was left vacant of normal protection.
Very, very clever planning.
Now think about this. Who has the power to make this kind of call? Not Lee Oswald, or Castro, or the Mafia. Another point is that these conversations are based on certin code words. These code words are of key importance. Because once an operation such as "protection for a presidential tour" is set in motion, only someone with this knowledge can make the call and use such code words that are needed to "stand down" an entire Army unit.
That is not true. Colonel Robert E. Jones was the Operations Officer of the 112th and when he gave testimony the the HSCA, he said nothing about any orders to stand down and in fact said that the 112th did in fact provide some protection.
''We provided a small force — I do not recall how many, but I would estimate between 8 and 12 — during the President's visit to San Antonio, Texas; and then the following day, on his visit to Dallas, the regions also provided additional people to assist, that is additional people from Region."
-
The death of Kennedy did indeed keep Johnson out of jail and saved his political career. Johnson was facing at least one serious probe for his criminal activity at the time of Kennedy's death.
-
I wrote a short essay regarding the single-bullet theory on this site not too long ago. It's not so much an essay as it is a quick critique.
-
My name is Paul Kerrigan and I used to be a teacher of history at the DuBois Area High School. My research into the JFK Assassination has taken up most of my time now. I have been thinking about writing a book about the case. My areas of interest in the case are the areas dealing with alteration aspects of the Zapruder Film and the Jim Garrison case.
-
I have read Jack White's section in "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax" with his A-Z slides. Jack, you claim that there were two Oswald's, "Lee" and "Harvey." You show pictures of the two. But how do you explain the fact that forensic anthroplogists working for the HSCA determined that the men that you show were in fact Lee Harvey Oswald?
-
It is true that JFK’s close friends have attempted to suggest that he was planning to withdraw from Vietnam. For example, Kenneth O'Donnell, Kennedy's special assistant, wrote in: Memories of John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1983):
“Kennedy had told me (O'Donnell) in the spring of 1963 that he could not pull out of Vietnam until he was reelected, "So we had better make damned sure I am reelected." ... At a White House reception on Christmas eve, a month after he succeeded to the presidency, Lyndon Johnson told the Joint Chiefs: "Just get me elected, and then you can have your war."
Others have told a similar story and this has been backed up by recently released files that JFK was attempting to negotiate an end to the Cold War after the Cuban Missile Crisis.
What is more, this version of history has been supported by the hawks in his administration. John McCone, Director of the CIA, and the man who persuaded JFK to send military advisers into Vietnam, said the following in an interview with Harry Kreisler on April 21, 1988:
Harry Kreisler: Would our involvement in Vietnam have taken a different course if Kennedy had lived?
John McCone: When Kennedy took office you will recall that he won the election because he claimed that the Eisenhower administration had been weak on communism and weak in the treatment of Castro and so forth. So the first thing Kennedy did was to send a couple of men to Vietnam to survey the situation. They came back with the recommendation that the military assistance group be increased from 800 to 25,000. That was the start of our involvement. Kennedy, I believe, realized he'd made a mistake because 25,000 US military in a country such as South Vietnam means that the responsibility for the war flows to (the US military) and out of the hands of the South Vietnamese. So Kennedy, in the weeks prior to his death, realized that we had gone overboard and actually was in the process of withdrawing when he was killed and Johnson took over.
I suggest that anyone interested in Kennedy and Vietnam read this:
-
Photo attachment test was unsuccessful.
In both films, you can plainly see that there is no explosion of blood and brain matter out the back of the head which was reported by at least four witnesses. Officer Bobby Hargis was hit so hard by brain matter that he thought he had been struck by a bullet. The very quick explosion on the top of the head could not have caused this.
If blood sprayed out of the top of the head at this point, then Mrs. Kennedy should have been plastered with blood and brains but you can clearly see she was not.
-
And I want to know; If the films weren't altered, how do you explain the violent backwards head snap?
Without the ability to post images at the moment this may be tough for some to follow, but I'll give it a shot anyway. First of all, I am not sure why you'd think that a bullet cannot cause JFK's head to snap back and to the left? Some of the top leading forensic pathologist, regardless of which direction they believe the shot came from, have attributed JFK's head movement to being shot in the head.
I think I have already said that there is evidence that the bones on the back of JFK's skull were sprung outward. I called attention to this with profiles of Kennedy's head as seen in both the Nix and Zapruder films. On Lancer there is a two frame clip showing a stabilized view of JFK at the moment his head rocks forward and then explodes in a backward direction. That clip shows JFK's head tilt forward while his shoulders are driven backwards. The author of that clip stated that when he consulted some medical personnel that he found that a blow to the head from the front and on a downward trajectory, while in the same forward posture as JFK, would do exactly what was seen in the clip that was presented. An easy way to test this observation is to sit with your head bowed to the front as JFK was at Z312. Next, have someone hit you in the back of the head and see what happens. You should find that your head and shoulders move forward. Now if someone hits you in the head somewhere on the top of the skull from where the bone plate came loose and with a front to back downward impact as the bullet would have done - you will find that your head rocks forward and your shoulder's are driven backwards. This causes a type of whiplash effect in reverse and the force of this effect is what snapped JFK's head back against the seat. This stabilized clip and data was then presented to Al Carrier who then shared it with some of the experts he works around. Al is a 20+ year officer and has a CSI background. Al Carrier then posted on Lancer his findings and they were supportive of the events described here for you. A search on Lancer under the name "head shot" may pull up the threads that dealt with this issue. I hope this has been somewhat helpful. I think it is better described and detailed on Lancer.
I have been unable to locate this shoulder whiplash demonstration on JFK Lancer but I did find an interview with literally, a rocket scientist. He had this to say.
G: It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?
MacP: No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/macpher.htm
You also cite Dr. Peters saying that the large head wound was only visible from certain angles. That is not how others describe it. Other doctors and non-medical personnel describe and avulsed, exploded-out wound to the rear of the head. Secret Service Special Agent Roy Kellerman said, describing the rear of the head "the skull part was removed." But at frame 321, you can get a good look at the back of the head and you see no blood or brain matter, nor any large wound.
For the sake of argument, let's say Kennedy's head was driven backward by the force of a bullet. Where was the shooter located?
-
And I want to know; If the films weren't altered, how do you explain the violent backwards head snap?
You need to be more specific - what is there about the head snapping backwards that would make you think the films were altered because I have never read or heard where any witnesses have ever said that Kennedy's head did anything other than what has been seen on the assassination films?
BTW - some of the frames that were in the newspaper were showing Jackie on the back of the car after the shots. I am certain that frame Z313 was not placed in the newspaper. A lot of libraries carry major newspapers on microfilm. Contact a branch near you and ask if the Dallas Morning News or Dallas Hearld are on microfilm there and if they have them, then you can go in and scroll through them looking for these published frames.
JFK's head going violently backwards. How can that be explained? And please don't say that a bullet caused it because that is impossible. Not bullet could have forcefully knocked JFK's head and body backwards so violently.
-
The deep-rooted corruption that resulted in the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy reaches into the upper echelons of the Government and the CIA in our day and time, more than 40 years after Kennedy was killed.
This corruption has eaten away at the fiber of American democracy for more than fifty years and caused bipartisan corruption to permeate both the Executive and the Legislative Branches of the United States Government.
It is no coincidence that the father and grandfather of President George W. Bush played significant roles in the Goldwater candidacy of 1964, a candidacy that required the assassination of President Kennedy.
Bush recently said that the insurgency in Iraq was a "power grab by ruthless extremists."
The Bush Presidency is a power grab by ruthless extremists" and so is the candidacy of Senator John Kerry.
Nothing has changed since Kennedy was killed, and democracy in America is all but dead.
[/quote
Oh, it's been longer than that. Democracy has been dead since 1947.
-
What Zapruder frames were being shown? Do you know which ones?
They came out in the Newspapers the following week as I recall. You may see some of them on Ebay at times being sold individually or in lots. The Nix family seen those stills and I believe they found out (maybe through the newspaper) that the Zfilm had been sold. I believe the Nix family then got the idea that maybe their film was of some financial value as well.
Nix turned in his original film to the FBI on December 1. He requested and received a copy from the FBI and stated that the film does not appear as clear as his usual pictures. Years later, Nix's granddaughter Gayle Jackson claimed that her grandfather felt that the film had certain frames removed from it and that it had been edited by the government (Assassination Science, pg. 302-03).
Right. Nix did make that statement as I recall, but I believe he was not sure. One thing about the removal of frames - their removal can be detected because then the movements within the film will have jumps and variances that do not match the other films. More importantly - even if they had damaged or removed half of the original Nix film ... Orville still had the first generation copy in his sole possession.
Here is some additional information that Gary Mack has been kind enough to share with researchers:
The Nix film appeared in theatrical newsreels in late 1963/early 1964. The assassination footage was marketed extensively by UPI until 1992 when all rights to it were given back to the Nix family (and subsequently acquired by The Sixth Floor Museum).
Nix received a first generation print of his film from UPI shortly after selling it to them in 1963. That print, badly worn over the years while in possession of the Nix family and no one else, was exchanged in 1992 for a previously unknown first generation 8mm print kept in the Dallas office of the FBI. That copy matches all known copies of the Nix film dating to 1963.
No one knew of the existence of the Nix film outside of his family until he dropped it off for processing at the Dynacolor Corporation on Industrial Boulevard in Dallas late the night of November 30, 1963. Dynacolor called him the next day and both he and his son, Orville Nix, Jr, watched the film at Dynacolor on Sunday afternoon, December 1. It was only then that Nix decided to contact the FBI.
Meanwhile, millions of issues of LIFE magazine had been distributed around the world for nearly a week with many frames of the Zapruder film. All of those frames are the same in the film today as in 1963 and the frames of both films that coincide in time match each other.
What this means is that neither film was altered, nor were any others. The significance of the timeline is very easily understood and it has been a matter of record for 40 years.
But which frames were published? Insignificant early frames could have been published.
And I want to know; If the films weren't altered, how do you explain the violent backwards head snap?
-
What Zapruder frames were being shown? Do you know which ones?
They came out in the Newspapers the following week as I recall. You may see some of them on Ebay at times being sold individually or in lots. The Nix family seen those stills and I believe they found out (maybe through the newspaper) that the Zfilm had been sold. I believe the Nix family then got the idea that maybe their film was of some financial value as well.
Nix turned in his original film to the FBI on December 1. He requested and received a copy from the FBI and stated that the film does not appear as clear as his usual pictures. Years later, Nix's granddaughter Gayle Jackson claimed that her grandfather felt that the film had certain frames removed from it and that it had been edited by the government (Assassination Science, pg. 302-03).
Right. Nix did make that statement as I recall, but I believe he was not sure. One thing about the removal of frames - their removal can be detected because then the movements within the film will have jumps and variances that do not match the other films. More importantly - even if they had damaged or removed half of the original Nix film ... Orville still had the first generation copy in his sole possession.
Here is some additional information that Gary Mack has been kind enough to share with researchers:
The Nix film appeared in theatrical newsreels in late 1963/early 1964. The assassination footage was marketed extensively by UPI until 1992 when all rights to it were given back to the Nix family (and subsequently acquired by The Sixth Floor Museum).
Nix received a first generation print of his film from UPI shortly after selling it to them in 1963. That print, badly worn over the years while in possession of the Nix family and no one else, was exchanged in 1992 for a previously unknown first generation 8mm print kept in the Dallas office of the FBI. That copy matches all known copies of the Nix film dating to 1963.
No one knew of the existence of the Nix film outside of his family until he dropped it off for processing at the Dynacolor Corporation on Industrial Boulevard in Dallas late the night of November 30, 1963. Dynacolor called him the next day and both he and his son, Orville Nix, Jr, watched the film at Dynacolor on Sunday afternoon, December 1. It was only then that Nix decided to contact the FBI.
Meanwhile, millions of issues of LIFE magazine had been distributed around the world for nearly a week with many frames of the Zapruder film. All of those frames are the same in the film today as in 1963 and the frames of both films that coincide in time match each other.
What this means is that neither film was altered, nor were any others. The significance of the timeline is very easily understood and it has been a matter of record for 40 years.
But which frames were published? Insignificant early frames could have been published.
-
It's interesting that this was the same Gerald Ford who eventually admitted to having moved a wound from the President's back to the neck so to support the Single Bullet Theory (SBT). I should also mention that Arlen Specter was a Republican, as well. FBI Agent Francis O'Neil said that Specter called him and wanted he and Sibert to change and falsify their report in order to support the SBT.
I don't even think Specter believes in the Single Bullet Theory anymore.
"When you talk about US Air, you're between a rock and a hard place. I wish there was some magic bullet which we could come up with," said U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. "But I think we have to leave it to the key people on all sides to figure it out."
-
This is misinformation. Orville Nix himself himself said that his film
had been changed. Additionally, the original film was retained by the
government and never returned. Gayle Nix SUED TO GET THE FILM
BACK, but was given only a copy. TO SUBSTANTIATE WHAT MACK
CLAIMS, ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS PRODUCE THE CAMERA ORIGINAL
WITH THE FOOTBALL GAME ON IT and let it be tested for authenticity.
They cannot, or they would have.
Jack
Mr. White - I take it that when your first sentence said that "this is misinformation", that you were talking about the rest of your reply. You seem to miss some important points for some reason. For instance, the fact that the Zapruder frames were being put into the public domain at a time when no one could possibly have known about Nix's film or what it showed so to know what to alter on the Zfilm went over the top of your head. You also missed the point that Orville Nix had a copy of his film made when he first took it into have it developed. That's like going to the local photo lab with a roll of film and asking them to make double prints. Just because one print gets lost or damaged - you still have the second print. That copy made from the original film had remained in the Nix family's sole possession until the early 90's and well after the assassination or any possible film alteration had taken place. The film copy that "Orville Nix" had made back at the end of November 63' (the copy that no one but the Nix family possessed for the next 30 years) shows the exact same thing that the copies of the original Nix film shows. I don't know why the importance of all this escapes you, but that copy Orville Nix had made in the beginning had never gone out of the families possession for over 30 years. I hope that no one is going to suggest that the Nix family altered their original copy so to match your alleged altered version.
What Zapruder frames were being shown? Do you know which ones?
Nix turned in his original film to the FBI on December 1. He requested and received a copy from the FBI and stated that the film does not appear as clear as his usual pictures. Years later, Nix's granddaughter Gayle Jackson claimed that her grandfather felt that the film had certain frames removed from it and that it had been edited by the government (Assassination Science, pg. 302-03).
-
I am at the Library of Congress in Washington DC. I just read through the Dallas Morning News for the week that Kennedy was killed.
On Monday the Dallas Morning News simply speculated that the motorcade would travel down Main.
On Wednesday the Dallas Morning News stated that it would indeed travel straight down Main.
On Thursday, November 21, 1963, the Dallas Morning News had a map with the motorcade going straight down Main and not making any turns.
Mayor Earl Cabell of Dallas was the brother of Air Force General C.P. Cabell, who was Allen Dulles’s Deputy Director at the CIA.
Mayor Earl Cabell’s Administration made a change in the route that President Kennedy’s motorcade would take. Instead of traveling straight down Main through the middle of Dealey Plaza, which was the route published in the Dallas Morning News on November 21, the motorcade turned right on Houston and went over to the Texas School Book Depository at Elm and Houston. It then turned left and headed down Elm. President Kennedy was shot and killed on Elm.
Someone on the forum had said that the motorcade route was not changed, and that it was said all that week that it would be going down Houston and then Elm street.
The motorcade route was changed at the last hour to both make the assassination possible and to be able to accuse Oswald.
No, the route was planned in advance. The evidence for this changed route theory is a small map on the cover of the Dallas Morning News. The reason it doesn't show the detour through Elm Street is because the map is so small and hasn't been drawn to scale. The previous evening, the Dallas Times-Herald ran a much larger map which showed the real motorcade route.
-
This is mostly for Jack White. How could the forgers of the photos hide the deception so tampering would not be evident under grain structure analysis?
Mr. Thirdeye...it is easy to pull wool over the eyes of those who
do not know the right questions to ask.
Jack White
Well, that's why I asked you. I know very little about any aspect of photography.
-
Sorry, double post.
-
You're a conspiracy theorist. Do you believe that the Dallas doctors were right when they said the back of the President's head was missing?
Yes I certainly believe the Dallas doctors, but the hole they seen was from the bones being sprung open.
Mr. SPECTER - Before proceeding to describe what you did in connection with the tracheostomy, will you more fully describe your observation with respect to the head wound?
Dr. McCLELLAND - As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open.
Is that why the massive rear defect is not visible in the "Zapruder" film?
-
Were these supposed to be the pictures of Oswald holding the rifle?
Yes, the infamous "Backyard Photos." There are five of them I believe. Three show Oswald in different positions.
-
This is mostly for Jack White. How could the forgers of the photos hide the deception so tampering would not be evident under grain structure analysis?
-
In an email I sent to Gary Mack at the 6th Floor Museaum in Dealey Plaza, I asked the following -
Mr. Gary Mack,
In Jim Fetzer's book there is a section that deals with Mr. David Healy's theory over the possibility of the Zapruder film being altered. I would think that if any of this were true, then Mr. Healy would have produced some experts to support his position. What can you share with me concerning any experts other than Zavada looking at the camera original and their being able to reach a conclusion as to the films authenticity? Are there signs on the alleged original Zapruder film that an expert would know what to look for and so on and have any signs been found to date that would make one think the alleged original Zapruder film isn't the genuine artifact? Any information you may have to offer would be most appreciated.
Thanks,
Larry Peters
Gary Macks reply is seen below:
Not a single expert in the field of motion picture special effects believes, or has noticed, any signs of alteration in the Zapruder film. Despite Oliver Stone's and some of Hollywood's top experts repeated examinations and despite the proliferation of high quality frame images, not a single expert in the field supports the alteration theory.
At one point, film technology expert Robert Ryan's name was trotted out as one who supposedly had questions about some of the suspected alterations. But a few summers ago, Ryan examined the camera original Zapruder film at the National Archives along with many other experts in film technology and preservation. Also present was Kennedy assassination photo expert Richard Trask. According to Trask, once he made Ryan aware of the time line (something others had not done) in which any such alteration had to have been made, Ryan changed his mind and no longer supports any alteration theory.
Nor does anyone else who knows the full story of the Zapruder film and all the other photographic records of the assassination.
Gary Mack
You're a conspiracy theorist. Do you believe that the Dallas doctors were right when they said the back of the President's head was missing?
-
But the pipe was hot. Researcher Paul Burke observes that this is the same pipeline Officer Seymour Weitzman testified he burned his hands on just a few minutes after the shooting.
Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, so let me try another way of explaining how I saw it. I've come up on fences that were hot/electric and I have thrown up a leg to hop over them without getting shocked. Somewhat like a track runner would hop a hurdle. I personally think too much is being read into the older and out of shape Arnold throwing his leg over the pipe for Turner's documentary. I get the feeling that some people are thinking Gordon threw his leg over and onto the pipe on the day of the assassination because of what he did in the MWKK series. The Arnold in the MWKK series was heavy, aging and out of shape altogether. As I recall, Gordon even hobbled somewhat when he walked. I might add that Gordon didn't even make it clear if he stopped as he was raising his leg to get over the pipe because of his being confronted. Because the Older aging Arnold rested his leg on the steam pipe in his interview so to continue telling his story, I don't necessarily think it means he sat on the pipe on 11/22/63 while talking to the man who ran him out of the area. I 'll just say that I don't think a 22 year old man just out of basic training would have had any difficulty in hopping over that pipe without getting burnt had he not been stopped before hand.
The thing is, he would have been insane to try to climb over the pipe. It was giving off steam and he would surely have felt the heat coming off of it. Why wouldn't he simply go around the pipe?
Confession of an Assassin
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
I don't buy into James Files' story for a second. For one thing, I think he traps himself when he said that a map of the motorcade route that Jack Ruby brought him showed a "change." We know now that the motorcade route was not changed so what are we supposed to make of James Files when he is obviously lying about the route?