Josiah Thompson & the Umbrella man

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Thompson has done so much so fast to provide another reason for millions to dismiss the JFK assassination. I have spent a lot of time trying to spread awareness among the ZILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW NOTHING BUT THE HISTORY CHANNEL SEWAGE, a task which so many experts deem beneath them.

With the dismissal-ticket Thompson just provided in the NYT its as if all the entry ramps for newbies have been bombed.

Thompson'a next book-- if it is in fact pro-conspiracy-- will not have one millionth of the effect of his glib eminance-fleece of those who have been working so hard to democratize awareness of our real political structure.

I am so pissed, and I don't care if he has been working on this case since 1953. What is more important to you Professor, your own celebrity or Truth. I hope you will not object to the capital T, although it is vulgar in the NYT. The unmagical bullets didn't. Just their NYT narrators.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I see that Our friend Josiah

is currently viewing the forum

and I want to say that my respect for Josiah

remains undimmed.

I have no doubt that the snippet

posted by Errol Morris

is taken out of context.

-------

The NYT taking some conspiracy research "out of context"

Please!!!!!!!!!!

When was the last time ANYTHING was in context about JFK in the censor of record?

Sorry this excuse would not fly for a thirty year old.

[Glenn Viklund]

Lee, who are the Three Amigos?

Lifton, Fetzer and Thompson.

Not a patch on Martin, Chase and Short though, Jim.

Once a quarter they pop out of their holes to bitch and moan about each other. Constantly swapping allegiances depending upon the topic. Calling each other, and anyone who disagrees with them, idiots

I wish they'd meet in a car park somewhere to hit each other with their handbags and leave the rest of us alone. It's an unfortunate situation that it will be these three lined up for the TV slots the year after next.

God help us. And I'm an atheist.

Lee,

While I agree that you are probably right about the 50th and the three amigos, I think your underlying assumption that it isn't deserved, is wrong.

First, I can't imagine that Josiah Thompson is calling anyone an "idiot". Nor have seen Lifton use such language. I may be wrong. Lifton and Thompson deserves the attention, they were out there long before most others, with theories and questions about the assassination that had never before been raised. Some of those questions are still to this day relevant and unanswered. Personally, fwiw, I disagree with quite a few of their conclusions, as they stand today.

But they both deserve a lot of respect for their efforts, which I believe are genuine, to find the truth about the JFK assassination.

You, like a few others, have the drive and possibly the skills to move things forward one way or the other. In short, I don't understand your constant need to jump on those people who actually were among the first to ask questions about the JFK-case.

Fetzer is another dimension of this, and I'm not referring to him.

Have you thought about this yourself?

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

"Revilo P. Oliver

Berkeley, California

November 22nd, 2011

6:11 am

Indeed. This begins to point up what I think is the key to the Kennedy assassination as an overall phenomenon, which is that its senseless ultimacy created a void in the collective psyche that attracts, like a vacuum, whatever the spectator brings to it. The only explanation that can encompass the bewildering, chaotic riot of conflicting theories and the obsessive sadness of their promulgators is that we are here presented with the profoundly unsatisfactory truth of our own individual and collective mortality."

Top comment the NYT is putting out right now. Wow. Just look at the special bees attracted to Tink's honey. Millions will see Thompson's dismissal-mechanism. maybee ten thousand will see his new book.

It does not matter if he formally renounces CT or not. Its the number of eyeballs that counts. We need soldiers, as Lisa Pease said in a recent interview. Sewage like this just undid tons of work.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Wow look at the comments the NYT chose to highlight and put at the top of the list, so more people will see them. ALL OF THEM ARE PRO-GLIB DIMISSAL!!!! "and only six minutes"!! Now look at the other comments and how much more like clicks they got.

Thanks again Tink. You may have worked for decades on this.

You have become a de facto Six Minute Man for the Times view of the assassination. Enough to swell the celluloid of Creel... or C.D. Jackson.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Glenn Viklund]

Lee, who are the Three Amigos?

Lifton, Fetzer and Thompson.

Not a patch on Martin, Chase and Short though, Jim.

Once a quarter they pop out of their holes to bitch and moan about each other. Constantly swapping allegiances depending upon the topic. Calling each other, and anyone who disagrees with them, idiots

I wish they'd meet in a car park somewhere to hit each other with their handbags and leave the rest of us alone. It's an unfortunate situation that it will be these three lined up for the TV slots the year after next.

God help us. And I'm an atheist.

Lee,

While I agree that you are probably right about the 50th and the three amigos, I think your underlying assumption that it isn't deserved, is wrong.

First, I can't imagine that Josiah Thompson is calling anyone an "idiot". Nor have seen Lifton use such language. I may be wrong. Lifton and Thompson deserves the attention, they were out there long before most others, with theories and questions about the assassination that had never before been raised. Some of those questions are still to this day relevant and unanswered. Personally, fwiw, I disagree with quite a few of their conclusions, as they stand today.

But they both deserve a lot of respect for their efforts, which I believe are genuine, to find the truth about the JFK assassination.

You, like a few others, have the drive and possibly the skills to move things forward one way or the other. In short, I don't understand your constant need to jump on those people who actually were among the first to ask questions about the JFK-case.

Fetzer is another dimension of this, and I'm not referring to him.

Have you thought about this yourself?

If you think David Lifton is after the truth - then more fool you. He deserves no respect from me and will not receive any.

That's ridiculous, Lee.

Those who have spent the better part of their life to this could be accused of quite a few motives. Not being after the truth is not one of them.

You can do better than that?

[Glenn Viklund]

OIC.

That's the problem? Tell me Lee, where was DL right? This Bledsoe-matter is just too much for you?

The rest is kosher.

[Dean Hagerman]

First, I can't imagine that Josiah Thompson is calling anyone an "idiot".

You must have missed Tink calling Robert Cutler and "idiot" (not that exact word but he was for sure saying as much about Cutler)

[Guest Robert Morrow]

The Umbrella Delivery System is real and it is accurate. I do not know if it was employed that day or not, but to dismiss it as if it was impossible is irresponsible.

The Umbrella Delivery System is absolutely real. And I give its odds of being deployed on 11/22/63 as less than one in ten thousand. The killers of JFK were trying to blow his brains out with bullets not poison him with darts.

Now in reference to the Three Amigos. Just because Fetzer is rude and cranky does not mean he is not right about the JFK assassination. Fetzer knows damn well it was a full blown coup d'etat. As for David Lifton, he has consistently been one of the most brilliant minds in JFK research, certainly a lot smarter than me. And experienced old hand like Lifton also recognizes the the JFK assassination was a coup d'etat and like Fetzer, Lifton recognizes that Lyndon Johnson has blood up to his armpits in the 1963 Coup d'etat.

As for Josiah Thompson - he wrote a nice book on the JFK assassination - which I own and have not read - a long time ago. Maybe I will flip through it. I think Thompson is an honest man and he sincerely believes whatever he does, but I think he turned his brain off about 35 or 40 years ago with regards to JFK. He is most certainly not an "operative." I vote for clueless.

It seems like some of those early researchers were so focused on proving a conspiracy in general or that the Warren Commission was "wrong" that they lost sight of the fact that they were staring a Coup d'Etat straight in the face. Also, it has taken decades for mountains of incriminating details of the JFK assassination to come out - especially the really damaging stuff on Lyndon Johnson that did not come out until the 1980's and 1990's when Madeleine Duncan Brown, Billie Sol Estes, Barr McClellan and Charles Crenshaw started speaking publicly about what they knew. Add in Noel Twymann finding out that LBJ personally called Will Fritz on the afternoon of 11/23/63 and told him to stop investigating.

Not to mention all the mountains of stuff that has come out on CIA involvement in the JFK assassination. One example would be the identification of Ed Lansdale at TSBD by Fletcher Prouty and Victor Krulak, 2 men who worked closely with Lansdale and thus could identify a back side photo of Lansdale.

I could name a lot of other stuff. But apparently this has just gone over Thompson's head or in one ear and out the other. I've been on Education Forum for about 2 years or so and I don't really know what Thompson thinks about the JFK assassination, which is too bad because he has been at it for decades and he has not clarified or made public his thoughts on who killed JFK and why by now, then it is it is probably not worth listening to.

I think it is obvious that the NY Times is using Thompson as a tool to bolster the epic fail lone nutter viewpoint (no matter what Thompson's personal beliefs are).

Edited November 26, 2011 by Robert Morrow

[Glenn Viklund]

"Now in reference to the Three Amigos. Just because Fetzer is rude and cranky does not mean he is not right about the JFK assassination. Fetzer knows damn well it was a full blown coup d'etat. As for David Lifton, he has consistently been one of the most brilliant minds in JFK research, certainly a lot smarter than me. And experienced old hand like Lifton also recognizes the the JFK assassination was a coup d'etat and like Fetzer, Lifton recognizes that Lyndon Johnson has blood up to his armpits in the 1963 Coup d'etat"

Being an agnostic to the JFK case, this pretty much indicates where things are today. 48 years on, no one in the CT community agrees with anyone else about much. There are always a whole range of 'issues' surfacing. A couple of weeks ago, someone clamped down hard on me for using the description "absurd" - to a statement that claimed "there are now more evidence of a conspiracy than there is that the Holocaust took place".

If that was the case, then tell me what happened at Dealey Plaza and who was behind it?

Having been a member of McAdams forum for a few years, I have to say that the discussions in that forum are more to the point. Plenty of disagreements, but the issues are discussed far more up front. Not this much BS, far from these personal attacks and more importantly, the evidence are discussed - here they are dismissed.

This TUM thing - it's been discussed, debated and thrown in the garbage a long time ago. Rightly so, in my opinion. But it just takes one little thing to ignite the never-ending story of the CT community agreeing on - nothing. Basically.

Where does one truly learn about this case?

Edited November 26, 2011 by Glenn Viklund

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Robert, Thanks for these kind words, which I greatly appreciate. Now if you would just get up to speed about research on the Zapruder film, I would feel much better about you. Do your best not to emulate David S. Lifton, when he attacks me regarding 9/11 based upon virtually complete ignorance. And you are being far too generous with Tink, but you probably understand my position about him. Try the three studies on-line that I have recommended: "US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication", "JFK: Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?" (both of which are on Veterans Today), and "What happened on Elm Street? The Eyewitnesses Speak", which is on assassinationresearch.com, which I co-edit with John Costella. Then we can have a conversation about the film.

The Umbrella Delivery System is real and it is accurate. I do not know if it was employed that day or not, but to dismiss it as if it was impossible is irresponsible.

The Umbrella Delivery System is absolutely real. And I give its odds of being deployed on 11/22/63 as less than one in ten thousand. The killers of JFK were trying to blow his brains out with bullets not poison him with darts.

Now in reference to the Three Amigos. Just because Fetzer is rude and cranky does not mean he is not right about the JFK assassination. Fetzer knows damn well it was a full blown coup d'etat. As for David Lifton, he has consistently been one of the most brilliant minds in JFK research, certainly a lot smarter than me. And experienced old hand like Lifton also recognizes the the JFK assassination was a coup d'etat and like Fetzer, Lifton recognizes that Lyndon Johnson has blood up to his armpits in the 1963 Coup d'etat.

As for Josiah Thompson - he wrote a nice book on the JFK assassination - which I own and have not read - a long time ago. Maybe I will flip through it. I think Thompson is an honest man and he sincerely believes whatever he does, but I think he turned his brain off about 35 or 40 years ago with regards to JFK. He is most certainly not an "operative." I vote for clueless.

It seems like some of those early researchers were so focused on proving a conspiracy in general or that the Warren Commission was "wrong" that they lost sight of the fact that they were staring a Coup d'Etat straight in the face. Also, it has taken decades for mountains of incriminating details of the JFK assassination to come out - especially the really damaging stuff on Lyndon Johnson that did not come out until the 1980's and 1990's when Madeleine Duncan Brown, Billie Sol Estes, Barr McClellan and Charles Crenshaw started speaking publicly about what they knew. Add in Noel Twymann finding out that LBJ personally called Will Fritz on the afternoon of 11/23/63 and told him to stop investigating.

Not to mention all the mountains of stuff that has come out on CIA involvement in the JFK assassination. One example would be the identification of Ed Lansdale at TSBD by Fletcher Prouty and Victor Krulak, 2 men who worked closely with Lansdale and thus could identify a back side photo of Lansdale.

I could name a lot of other stuff. But apparently this has just gone over Thompson's head or in one ear and out the other. I've been on Education Forum for about 2 years or so and I don't really know what Thompson thinks about the JFK assassination, which is too bad because he has been at it for decades and he has not clarified or made public his thoughts on who killed JFK and why by now, then it is it is probably not worth listening to.

I think it is obvious that the NY Times is using Thompson as a tool to bolster the epic fail lone nutter viewpoint (no matter what Thompson's personal beliefs are).

Edited November 27, 2011 by James H. Fetzer

[Pat Speer]

Those thinking Errol Morris--the creator of Tink's little film about the Umbrella Man--is some sort of apologist for officialdom... are in for a surprise. He was just on the Colbert Report. He's written a new book on the Jeffrey MacDonald case. He thinks he's innocent.

When asked why he thinks so, he summed it up in one word: evidence.

[Len Colby]

The Umbrella Delivery System is real and it is accurate. I do not know if it was employed that day or not, but to dismiss it as if it was impossible is irresponsible.

The Umbrella Delivery System is absolutely real. And I give its odds of being deployed on 11/22/63 as less than one in ten thousand. The killers of JFK were trying to blow his brains out with bullets not poison him with darts.

Perhaps monsieurs Burnham and Morrow will be so good as to share their evidence that this fantastical weapon existed on the day of the assassination.

[Cliff Varnell]

The Umbrella Delivery System is real and it is accurate. I do not know if it was employed that day or not, but to dismiss it as if it was impossible is irresponsible.

The Umbrella Delivery System is absolutely real. And I give its odds of being deployed on 11/22/63 as less than one in ten thousand. The killers of JFK were trying to blow his brains out with bullets not poison him with darts.

Perhaps monsieurs Burnham and Morrow will be so good as to share their evidence that this fantastical weapon existed on the day of the assassination.

Len, it existed. There were a number of delivery systems for blood soluble paralytics and toxins developed for the CIA and the US Army Special Forces.

http://karws.gso.uri...s/flechette.txt

Here's one of the weapons displayed during the Church Com. hearings.

From the Church Com. testimony of weapon-developer Charles Senseney (emphasis added):

Senseney: I was a project engineer for the E-1, which was type

classified and became the M-1. They were done for the Army.

Baker: Did you have any other customers?

Senseney: To my knowledge, our only customer was Special Forces

and the CIA, I guess.

Baker: Special Forces meaning Special Forces of the Army?

Senseney: That is correct.

Baker: And the FBI?

Senseney: The FBI never used anything.

Baker: Looking at your previous executive session testimony,

apparently you developed for them a fountain pen. What did the

fountain pen do?

Senseney: The fountain pen was a variation of an M-1. An M-1 in

itself was a system, and it could be fired from anything. It could

be put into--

Baker: Could it fire a dart or an aerosol or what?

Senseney: It was a dart.

Baker: It fired a dart . . . a starter, were you talking about a

fluorescent light starter?

Senseney: That is correct. Baker: What did it do?

Senseney: It put out an aerosol in the room when you put the

switch on.

Baker: What about a cane, a walking cane?

Senseney: Yes, an M-1 projectile could be fired from a cane; also

an umbrella.

Baker: Also an umbrella. What about a straight pin?

Senseney: Straight pin?

Baker: Yes, sir.

Senseney: We made a straight pin, out at the Branch. I did not

make it, but I know it was made, and it was used by one Mr. Powers

on his U-2 mission.

I think an umbrella would be deployed only in close quarters. I don't see Louis Witt/Umbrella Man as a shooter or a spotter.

I see that JFK appears to seize up paralyzed in about two seconds in the Z-film. That movement is consistent with him being struck with a blood soluble paralytic, since the round did not exit his throat and only caused minor damage, leaving an air-pocket of all things.

The "first-shot/blood-soluble-paralytic" scenario -- suggest by the autopsists the night of the autopsy -- matches the throat wound far better than a "first-shot/kill-shot " scenario.

Edited September 21, 2012 by Cliff Varnell

[Len Colby]

The Umbrella Delivery System is real and it is accurate. I do not know if it was employed that day or not, but to dismiss it as if it was impossible is irresponsible.

The Umbrella Delivery System is absolutely real. And I give its odds of being deployed on 11/22/63 as less than one in ten thousand. The killers of JFK were trying to blow his brains out with bullets not poison him with darts.

Perhaps monsieurs Burnham and Morrow will be so good as to share their evidence that this fantastical weapon existed on the day of the assassination.

Len, it existed. There were a number of delivery systems for blood soluble paralytics and toxins developed for the CIA and the US Army Special Forces.

[...]

I think an umbrella would be deployed only in close quarters. I don't see Louis Witt/Umbrella Man as a shooter or a spotter.

I see that JFK appears to seize up paralyzed in about two seconds in the Z-film. That movement is consistent with him being struck with a blood soluble paralytic, since the round did not exit his throat and only caused minor damage, leaving an air-pocket of all things.

The "first-shot/blood-soluble-paralytic" scenario -- suggest by the autopsists the night of the autopsy -- matches the throat wound far better than a "first-shot/kill-shot " scenario.

Thanks for the info Cliff. Yes, implicit in my question was a 'gun' capable of hitting JFK from the distance TUM was at the time. There is also the question of his inability to aim his 'weapon' the way he was holding it. Speaking of which are there any images of him ever pointing the umbrella in vaguely at Kennedy?

Just to be clear you think he was hit with some sort of paralytic dart but think someone else was the shooter?

Edited September 21, 2012 by Len Colby