JL Allen

Mr. Ritchson, Would you happen to know the approximate circumference of the Carcano rifle-stock at the location indicated by the red dots? Thanks.

Tom - Are you sure Dulles wasn't a "player"? He sure fools me. Also, from their brand of questioning - it seemed that some of the underling/attorney/examiners (who actually conducted many of the proceedings) were most likely "players". Like the fellow (his name escapes me) who so pointedly gave Jack White such a hard time in his appearance.

The feeling I get from reading the testimonies given in the WC hearings - is that the examiners are the ones who are in possession of some sort of a "master script" from which they want to hear specific details at specific times from the "witnesses". If testimony begins to stray - the examiners stop things and redirect - if memories lapse, they fill in important details themselves or ask testifiers to read from prepared sheets - "in their own words". It seems they are always asking "Don't you mean this, instead?"... "Don't you mean that, instead?" Sometimes, when someone makes an interesting comment - laden with new possibilities for "opening up" a previously obscured area in the course of actual events - the testimony will suddenly be short-circuited by some asinine question relating to some completely different subject - something bland and uninteresting - which somehow captures the imagination of everyone concerned - and they all abandon the previous subject like it never existed. Sometimes, as in the case of Marguerite Oswald and her desire to discuss the Altgens photo - they merely thank the witness, and adjourn.

I think someone may have misheard and misrecorded the town's name. The town near Ft. Hood, is - I think - "Killeen". Not just clean - but, really ca-lean...

It's those minute, obscure details - such as the note explaining the supposed "taking of a sample" from such a controversial, surely forbidden, location on the coat (where a bullet had actually penetrated) - that repeatedly reveal what a thoroughly sickening and repulsive pack-of-lies was the entire ruse - top to bottom, front to back. The mind-boggling number of instances similar to this where standard procedures are abandoned - evidence altered, lost, destroyed - excuses made, alibis constructed, memories gone blank - reveal it all to be precisely what many suspected from the start. The tiny throat wound becomes a gaping exit wound - Ford changes the diagram - the bullet hole in the back becomes a "fabric sample" - the Mauser is a Carcano - and some of the bullets don't match the guns. Specter's Magic Bullet Theory should have been presented by the comedian, Gallagher - while he smashed watermelons and grapefruit.

Marina testified: "Lee had many wallets. He liked to leave them around town and hoped that people would find them and contact us and become our friends." ... not.

Tom. Could you possibly make your images a little bigger, i am having trouble reading the fine print. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Robin, I think it says: Commission Exhibit No. ??? Photograph taken during reenactment showing C2766 rifle with camera attached. (must be CE 887...) (After reading some of Tom's other threads - I think your request probably had more to do with those rather than this one... oh, well ... good picture...)

I was thinking of John Ritchson. Sorry.

Are you suggesting that James has fired one of these rifles? I think he has only seen the photographs? I think Ryan Crowe should be able to answer this question. Not that I am suggesting anything by this comment. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thank you, John. James always seems to have a great deal of knowledge regarding the firearms - I didn't know if he had an actual collection or not (Now I'm beginning to wonder if I've mixed James Richards up with someone else's postings...) That was a rather spontaneous "p.s." - just something I'd been meaning to ask the right person. I can probably get a rough idea in a local gunshop.

I am marking that down as Theory # 92,347 - be sure to hold on to your ticket. 8^) p.s. - OT - James, would you happen to know the approximate circumference of the Carcano rifle stock at a point near the front tip of the telescopic sight - near the rifle's "manual" sight? I thought if anyone would or could know - it would be you. Thanks.

I think you've got something there.

Thanks, Robin. "He also stated that it seemed quite apparent to him that the shots came from one of two buildings back at the corner of Elm and Houston Streets..." He hit the dirt to avoid the shots - but, he should have also worried about being stampeded by all of the people running for the grassy knoll... 8^) Here are some interesting facts I found in a search - The location of Brehm's November 22, 1963 written Dallas police voluntary affidavit statement is unknown. In the 1966 video documentary Rush to Judgment while speaking of the blood cloud and the bits of brain and bone matter that Brehm saw flying in the air when the President's head exploded, Brehm stated he was specifically attracted to watch a piece fly towards himself, "over in the area of the curb where I was standing." ... "It seemed to have come left, and back." ... "Sir, whatever it was that I saw did fall, both, in that direction, and, over into the curb there." Charles Brehm was behind and to the President's left when the President's head first exploded. On November 22, 1963 while still standing within Dealey Plaza, and only minutes after the assassination, Brehm was quoted by a reporter as saying that Brehm, "seemed to think the shots came from in front of, or, beside the President." In his November 24, 1963 FBI statement and during the 1987 Showtime cable-tv mock trial, The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald, Brehm testified that the shots came from either the Texas School Book Depository or the Dal-Tex building. In 1988, Brehm told author Larry Sneed, "After the car passed the building coming toward us, I heard a . . . surprising noise, and (the President) reached with both hands up to the side of his throat and kind of stiffened out . . . And when he got down in the area just past me, the second shot hit which damaged, considerably damaged, the top of his head. . . . That car took off in an evasive motion . . . and was just beyond me when a third shot went off. The third shot really frightened me! It had a completely different sound to it because it had really passed me as anybody knows who has been in down under targets in the Army or been shot at like I had been many times. You know when a bullet passes over you, the cracking sound it makes, and that bullet had an absolute crack to it. I do believe that that (third) shot was wild. It didn't hit anybody. I don't think it could have hit anybody. But it was a frightening thing to me because here was one shot that hit him, obviously; here was another shot that destroyed his head, and what was the reason for that third shot? That third shot frightened me more than the other two, and I grabbed the boy and threw him on the ground because I didn't know if we were going to have a 'shoot-'em-up' in this area." Just like many other supporting witnesses, Brehm stated he remembered hearing another shot after the President's head had already exploded. Charles Brehm was not called to testify publicly in front of the Warren Commission, but he did supply a deposition. Brehm thought the 2nd shot was the most damaging and another shot followed - originally thought shots originated from front or side - then changed to TSBD and Dal-Tex... Hmmmmm...

PHOTO REMOVED TO RECAPTURE SPACE I flipped this photo of Hunt, horizontally. When I saw this other fellow - it made me think of the phony Oswald at the Mexican Embassy. Many along the route have been identified - I wonder if this guy's name known?

PHOTO REMOVED TO RECAPTURE SPACE This is what I meant.

Why is there no similarly angled shadow from the base of the support post consistent with the body figure's shadow? Some of the highlights to the left of the post should be in darkness - as should the top of the sea-bag.

Mr. Jack White - So many of your early criticisms were easily seen with the naked eye - no exotic methods of measurement ("photogrammetry") were necessary. They seemed to want to disqualify all of your points with your admission that you were unfamiliar with that term. Your theory that the pictures were complete composites used to seem a bit too radical to me - but, I have seen the light - and, I now believe you have been completely correct, all along. No neighbor or passer-by would ever forget witnessing that particular "photo-shoot" - yet, there are no witnesses. And, perpetrators would never risk "posing" a stand-in like that in broad daylight, leaving such a "loose thread". On March 31, according to weather records - the day ascertained to have been when pictures were taken - was overcast and rainy all day long. I also agree that Roscoe White was the "stand-in". His full-length body-type matches almost exactly with the backyard figures - Lee Oswald does not. White only became employed with the Dallas police in October - and worked in their photo-lab - and shared some amazing, coincidental history with Oswald. His own son publicly incriminates his dad - saying that he left a diary admitting complete involvement in the assassination plot - shooting at the President with a Mauser - and eliminating 28 witnesses afterwards - all set in motion through cryptic orders from superiors. His wife Geneva worked for Jack Ruby in September and related that she had heard the plot discussed. She also provided some of the "new" backyard photos to investigators prior to the opening of the HSCA. I was wondering about the "re-creation" (Marina & Lee) which you staged in the actual 214 Neely Street backyard when all of the main backyard elements were still in place (which seemed to be very well done, by the way) in your video, "FAKE". Did you ever take any measurements while you were there that day - such as the prominent stairway support post to the figure's left - the fence - or, the left edge the shed? Thanks.

I believe that this is the "Bronx Zoo photo" mentioned in post #2, from which Pic says he cannot identify Lee Harvey Oswald.

IMO - Johnson's first choice - odd and suspicious - was that there be NO investigation. Barring that, he opted for the rather small Texas investigation - which he must have felt he could "control". When he began to read the writing on the wall - that people everywhere were demanding a high-level, thorough and complete examination of all aspects of the case - he hurriedly formed the WC in order to head-off several other commissions and committees which would have operated independently and been completely out of his and Hoover's realm of influence and manipulation. I'm not sure that the tapes are much more than "theatre". Johnson knew he was being recorded - controlled much of what he discussed, when, and to whom. He was a consumate actor - shifty and duplicitous - milking scenes far beyond what they were worth. He was shamelessly sappy. Many of his calls are merely heart-tugging soap opera. But, politically, deep-down, he was like a guided-missile. He knew what he wanted and how to get there. He would use any trick in the book. When he asks Hoover, "Do you think they were shooting at me?" - it's the #1 ploy to avoid suspicion and throw off the scent. He knew from Murchison's "party" the night before the murder who they were shooting at.

Thanks, Harry. This all reminds me of Ruby's actual testimony before Earl Warren and Gerald Ford. Ruby - "There is an organization here, Chief Justice Warren, if it takes my life at this moment to say it, and Bill Decker said be a man and say it, there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization - take it for what it's worth, Chief Justice Warren. Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in jeopardy with their lives. Don't register with you, does it?" Earl Warren: "No; I don't understand that." Ruby: "Would you rather I just delete what I said and pretend that nothing is going on?" Earl Warren: "I would not indeed. I am only interested in what you want to tell this Commission. That is all I am interested in." (...Except for this part, which I find very disinteresting.) Ruby: "Well, I said my life, I won't be living long now. I know that. My family's lives will be gone." Maybe Earl was calling to apologize?

It's always a real pleasure (and, an honor) to read your posts, Harry. I've been wondering lately about multiple officers of the Dallas police department - and how they might have been tied together, philosophically, by their common membership in some religious/political organization - outside of the department. The Tippit reference is very interesting. Do you think the JBS might have played such a role with the Dallas police? Does anyone else know if there was some other "after hours" affiliation these officers may have had in common?

I've heard of "Get Me To The Church, On Time..." - but, this is ridiculous! Good job on self-diagnosis and doing the right thing with no time to spare. Keep on "dodging"... Serpentine, Jack!!! Serpentine!!!

"The garrison investigation started in 1979..." John - Garrison started fairly soon after the assassination - arrested Clay Shaw March 1, 1967 - after much investigation.

"(D)rehm (sic) seemed to think the shots came from in FRONT OF or BESIDE the President." (my EMPHASIS) ----CHARLES F. BREHM, a gunfire-battle experienced, WWII D-day, United States Army Ranger veteran, quoted just minutes after the attack and while still standing within Dealey Plaza ("Dallas Times Herald," 11-22-63, final edition) From Presidential transcripts of 11/29/63: LBJ How did it happen they hit Connally... JEHoover Connally turned... to the President... when the first shot was fired... and I think in that turning... it was where he got hit. (The schematic of the Magic Bullet's path does not show Connally leaning to his right - if he had been, according to the drawing - he'd have been shot through the heart...) LBJ If he hadn't turned... he probably wouldn't have got hit? JEHoover I think that is very likely. LBJ Would the President've got hit the second one? JEHoover No, the President wasn't hit with the second one... LBJ I say, IF CONNALLY HADN"T BEEN IN HIS WAY? (???) JEHoover Oh, yes... yes... the President would have no doubt been hit... I was thinking the other day that every time I have seen the victim of a gunshot first reacting to the initial wounding - invariably they reach for the point of the bullet's entry. Even a person who has been shot in the center of the back tries desperately (and in vain) to reach for the spot that the missile first contacted the body's sensory apparatus. Why didn't JFK reach for the top of his back - instead of the front of his throat? I've never seen anyone reach for the point of exit.

"Sorry ! No real message. Just venting." - Charlie Black No real message? Unfortunately... THAT is the real message. Go, Charlie!

Mr. JENNER. It's charting of coastal areas, sea bottoms, and some land areas or what? Mr. STOVALL Yes; and some foreign areas, too. Mr. JENNER. That is, other than continental United States? Mr. STOVALL. Yes; right. I did not say that Lee Oswald learned photography at JCS. I asked if JCS might possibly have participated in the creation of the maps used for the Bay of Pigs invasion. But, Oswald was a highly skilled photographer - his talents already finely-hewed when he was in Russia. He was an artiste. Quite a few examples of his work were collected by the Dallas police on 11/23/63. Although they are displayed in evidence like so much garbage - upside-down, crooked and overlapping - and must be reduced from a gargantuan size - they can be manipulated with the computer for proper viewing. His abilities were pretty astonishing - even in the form of photostatic copies. His compositions possess a rare beauty and quality - extremely impressive - city-scapes worthy of appearing in history books or travel magazines - reminding me of the paintings of Camille Pissarro. George de Mohrenschildt said that his photographs were prominently displayed - enlarged and framed - on the walls throughout his home. I'm not surprised. He acknowledged that Lee had good reason to be extremely proud of his work - and, I agree completely. His photographs are moving and compelling - I would almost say historically important - but, I suppose they are already historically important.