USAF COL. Prouty, Operation BLOODSTONE, SS-Obersturmbannführer Skorzeny, & the murder of President Kennedy...

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

There is no mechanism to work in a single shot rifle.  You manually load one bullet at a time.  My dad still had my grandad's single shot 22, which he learned to shoot with, until it was stolen in the 1980s. I still have an antique single shot 16 gauge shotgun.  New single shots are still available for purchase.  The theory is they teach you to hit what you are aiming at, as there is no second chance.  As opposed to a semi automatic or bolt action or pump shotgun.

I was writing facetiously. 

No one could work the mechanism quickly enough. 

[David Josephs]

11 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Two soft tissue entrance wounds, no exits, no bullets recovered.

Where do you get this conclusion when there is evidence of multiple bullets recovered and "disappeared".

Your of the opinion O'Connor is fabricating?  That there was no bullet behind the ear as relayed to the FBI by someone inside the room a round 9pm?

I'm at a loss how you can know there was a conspiracy yet can accept these men's word on no additional bullets...  we can't realize that is only so much of the same junk as all the other cover-up machinations?

You think they put the 3-bullet scenario on hold?  And until June 1964 (started in April) when WEST changes the survey at the FBI's instruction (CE585) the scenario was 3 shots 3 hits JFK-JC-JFK.... with a shot down by the steps... that disappears

Just like the  bullets

[David Josephs]

4 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I was writing facetiously. 

No one could work the mechanism quickly enough. 

Didn't have to, that rifle was not used that day.

[Michael Griffith]

One is left to wonder what else Prouty would have had to say and do to cause his adoring fans in the research community to repudiate him.

I mean, you have some researchers here who will automatically attack an author and reject what he has to say on the JFK case or the Vietnam War if that author has written for conservative journals and/or has appeared on conservative TV programs and/or has worked at conservative university centers.

Yet, these same researchers brush aside the fact that Prouty appeared on Liberty Lobby's Holocaust-denying, pro-white supremacy radio show 10 times, that Prouty spoke at one of Liberty Lobby's conventions, that Prouty spoke at an IHR Holocaust-denial conference, that Prouty praised the IHR's primary goals, that Prouty had the IHR republish one of his books, that Prouty recommended Liberty Lobby's extremist rag The Spotlight, that Prouty made scurrilous attacks on critics of L. Ron Hubbard and his Scientology fraud, and that Prouty floated undeniably nutty clams about FDR's death and Princess Diana's death, etc., etc.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Where do you get this conclusion when there is evidence of multiple bullets recovered and "disappeared".

There was no bullet recovered from either the back or throat wounds.

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Your of the opinion O'Connor is fabricating? 

Where did he say a bullet was recovered from the back or throat?

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 

That there was no bullet behind the ear as relayed to the FBI by someone inside the room a round 9pm?

I’ll leave the head wound(s) rabbit holes to others.

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

I'm at a loss how you can know there was a conspiracy yet can accept these men's word on no additional bullets...  we can't realize that is only so much of the same junk as all the other cover-up machinations?

You’ve clearly mis-understood, David.  

I thought it was clear I was referring to the shallow wounds in soft tissue in the back and throat.

[David Josephs]

 

35 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

There was no bullet recovered from either the back or throat wounds.

Says you...  not O'Connor.  He was there - I don't remember seeing your name as attending that weekend

35 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Where did he say a bullet was recovered from the back or throat?

Google is your friend...  your approach to me here leaves me no interest in resolving your documentary ignorance

35 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I’ll leave the head wound(s) rabbit holes to others

Yes we know Cliff... you are the dictionary definition of a 1-trick pony. 

And again, your lack of familiarity with the Autopsy-related evidence is staggering. 

Thing is, the BS back to front, rising wound from an elevated spot, only to become a downward traveling bullet thru JC destroys the SBT and the bogus WCR case, which we all have know was BS for decades.  

Thing is, some of us here enjoy diving deeper - the rabbit hole stuff you stay away from with good reason.

We'd like to see more of the tapestry that makes up this terrible historical event... and enjoy a good discussion with peers with intellectual integrity.

You find a way to be obtuse with my posts virtually every single time... I finally get it - your lack of familiarity with the documents and your need to have someone else do the work.

You've NEVER read O'Connor?  Ever hear of Knudsen?  Spencer?  Fox?  

 

edit:  btw - this thread has nothing to do with your 1 clear understanding of the event...  there are 100's of medical threads for you to re-explain the back wound to all who want to listen

Edited July 20, 2023 by David Josephs

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

One is left to wonder what else Prouty would have had to say and do to cause his adoring fans in the research community to repudiate him.

 

One is left to wonder what else Prouty would have had to say and do to cause the U.S. government-employed propagandists (USGEPs) in the research community to stop falsely impugning his reputation.  🙄

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Says you...  not O'Connor.

O’Connor said a bullet was removed from the back or throat wound?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

  He was there - I don't remember seeing your name as attending that weekend

Okay.  Why don’t you provide the quote?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Google is your friend...  your approach to me here leaves me no interest in resolving your documentary ignorance

The assertion is yours — back it up, dude.  

Since the back wound was probed and found shallow, when during the autopsy was a bullet removed from the back or throat?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Yes we know Cliff... you are the dictionary definition of a 1-trick pony. 

I’ve made a well supported case that W. Averell Harriman was the CEO of the assassination.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

And again, your lack of familiarity with the Autopsy-related evidence is staggering. 

I’ll be more than happy to stand corrected if you climb off your high horse and provide the O’Connor quote.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Thing is, the BS back to front, rising wound from an elevated spot, only to become a downward traveling bullet thru JC destroys the SBT and the bogus WCR case, which we all have know was BS for decades.  

Thanks for the lecture.  How about a quote from O’Connor?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Thing is, some of us here enjoy diving deeper - the rabbit hole stuff you stay away from with good reason.

How many times was he shot in the head?  Once?  Twice?  Thrice?  Have at it, Bugs.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

We'd like to see more of the tapestry that makes up this terrible historical event... and enjoy a good discussion with peers with intellectual integrity.

Show some integrity and provide the O’Connor quote.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

You find a way to be obtuse with my posts virtually every single time... I finally get it - your lack of familiarity with the documents and your need to have someone else do the work.

You’re projecting.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

You've NEVER read O'Connor?  Ever hear of Knudsen?  Spencer?  Fox?  

Please provide the statements of these individuals regarding a bullet recovered from the back during the autopsy.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

edit:  btw - this thread has nothing to do with your 1 clear understanding of the event...  there are 100's of medical threads for you to re-explain the back wound to all who want to listen

I was discussing the very possible use of blood soluble rounds in the JFKA.  

It’s a scenario suggested by the autopsists during the autopsy. That technology was developed at Fort Detrick for the CIA operation MKNAOMI.  It’s the only hard lead in the case.

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Paul Brancato]

So much for Operation Bloodstone. 
ok - Prouty. This is for all of us, Michael, William on two sides, others, and Jim D. 
I am bothered by Prouty’s latter day penchant for the far right. But I don’t think speaking at Liberty Lobby events or to Holocaust deniers is an offense in and of itself. So how about this? Can one side or another provide complete transcripts of what Prouty actually said on air or in person on one or more of these occasions? It does, most certainly, matter what he said, much more than who he said it to. 

[David Josephs]

From a PROUTY 1989 interview:

"People don't understand...."

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/chp2_p2.html#pgfId=7598

So when I say that this team was quite effective, it was very effective, very strong, handled a lot of money, worked all over the world, thousands of people were involved. Once when I was speaking to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (at that time General Lemnitzer) he said, "You know, I've known of two or three units in the Army that were supporting CIA. But you're talking about quite a few. How many were there?" At that time, there were 605. General Lemnitzer had no idea. It's amazing -- here's the top man in the military and he had no idea that we were supporting that many CIA units. Not true military units -- they were phony military units. They were operating with military people but they were controlled entirely and financed by the CIA. Six hundred and five of them. I'm sure that from my day it increased. I know it didn't decrease.

People don't understand the size and the nature of this concealed activity that is designed for clandestine operations all over the world. It goes back again to things we've spoken of earlier, that each activity must be under somebody's control. There is no law for the control of covert operations other than at the National Security Council level. If the National Security Council does not sign the directives -- issue the directives -- for covert operations, then nobody does. And that's when it becomes a shambles as we saw in the Contra affair and in other things.

But when the National Security Council steps in and directs it and maintains that control, then things are run properly. During the last decade we've seen quite a few aberrations where they were talking about Iran or Latin America or even part of the Vietnam War itself. In fact, it was in the Vietnam War when the situation really began to come apart -- it just outgrew itself and the leadership role disintegrated. We see the results of the worst of it in the Iran-Contra affair.

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Didn't have to, that rifle was not used that day.

DJ-

Among the many puzzling aspects of the JFKA, is multiple earnest witnesses said they saw a rifle pointing from the 6ht floor window, such as Amos Euins, who said he also saw the rifle fired, although he could make no ID of the shooter. 

OK, I accept a rifle was seen extending from and firing from the 6th floor window during the JFKA. 

But no one is seen descending the back stairs. 

To me, that suggests the shooter vamoosed quickly before other people got onto the stairs. 

Thus, I do not preclude LHO firing a rifle that day, although I suspect only one shot. And I suspect he fired to miss, possibly the Tague shot. 

The whole cheek-GSR test is another issue. 

But, as usual, just IMHO....

[David Josephs]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Thus, I do not preclude LHO firing a rifle that day, although I suspect only one shot. And I suspect he fired to miss, possibly the Tague shot.

Ok - last post on this in the PROUTY thread...  please look up threads that deal with this, there are many of them.

So help me Ben, How do Brennan and Euins miss this person:

And then below how do these witnesses miss such an obvious part of this rifle?  Euins' statements initially included the fact he saw a black man at the window

Q: Would you tell us what happened.
A (Richard CARR): At the time the parade came down towards -- going to the School Book Depository, Dealey Plaza would have been to my left where I was standing, and at the Fifth Floor of the School Book Depository I noticed a man at the third window, this man was dressed -- he had on a light hat, and I saw this man later going down Houston Street, to the corner of Commerce, and then turned toward town on Commerce, and at that time before this happened I heard a single shot which sounded like a small arms, maybe a pistol, and I immediately, immediately there was a slight pause and immediately after that I heard three rifle shots in succession, they seemed to be fired from an automatic rifle and they came --

BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: You can say what you said.
A: I thought he was a Secret Agent man or an FBI man.
Q: What did the man in the window look like?
A: He had on a hat, a felt hat, a light hat, he had on heavy-rimmed glasses, dark, the glasses were heavy-rimmed, and heavy ear pieces on his glasses.
Q: Go ahead.
A: He had on a tie, he had on a light shirt, a tan sport coat.

Mac Wallace:

Euins is not very sure what he saw as no rifle was protruding from the window by a foot or more...

Mr. SPECTER. How far was it sticking out of the window would you say then, Amos?
Mr. EUINS. I would say it was about something like that.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 3 feet?  (DJ: I get this is an estimate - but enough to have seen a scope)
Mr. EUINS. You know--the trigger housing and stock and receiver group out the window.
Mr. SPECTER. I can't understand you, Amos.
Mr. EUINS. It was enough to get the stock and receiving house and the trigger housing to stick out the window.
Mr. SPECTER. The stock and receiving house?
Mr. EUINS. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, what direction was the rifle pointing?
Mr. EUINS. Down--what did you says Elm?
Mr. SPECTER. Elm Street?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir; down Elm.
Mr. SPECTER. Was it pointing in the direction of the President?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, could you see anything else on the gun?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir; I could not.
Mr. SPECTER. For example, could you see whether or not there was a telescopic lens on the gun?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.

 

Brennan is so obviously a plant it's absurd....

Did not see the shots
Did not see a scope
Impossible to create a Height/Weight description from his angle yet describes Robert Webster to a "T".

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

From a PROUTY 1989 interview:

"People don't understand...."

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/chp2_p2.html#pgfId=7598

So when I say that this team was quite effective, it was very effective, very strong, handled a lot of money, worked all over the world, thousands of people were involved. Once when I was speaking to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (at that time General Lemnitzer) he said, "You know, I've known of two or three units in the Army that were supporting CIA. But you're talking about quite a few. How many were there?" At that time, there were 605. General Lemnitzer had no idea. It's amazing -- here's the top man in the military and he had no idea that we were supporting that many CIA units. Not true military units -- they were phony military units. They were operating with military people but they were controlled entirely and financed by the CIA. Six hundred and five of them. I'm sure that from my day it increased. I know it didn't decrease.

People don't understand the size and the nature of this concealed activity that is designed for clandestine operations all over the world. It goes back again to things we've spoken of earlier, that each activity must be under somebody's control. There is no law for the control of covert operations other than at the National Security Council level. If the National Security Council does not sign the directives -- issue the directives -- for covert operations, then nobody does. And that's when it becomes a shambles as we saw in the Contra affair and in other things.

But when the National Security Council steps in and directs it and maintains that control, then things are run properly. During the last decade we've seen quite a few aberrations where they were talking about Iran or Latin America or even part of the Vietnam War itself. In fact, it was in the Vietnam War when the situation really began to come apart -- it just outgrew itself and the leadership role disintegrated. We see the results of the worst of it in the Iran-Contra affair.

Well, there is the Secret Team, eh, David?

And Prouty believed that there were people reporting to Dulles and secretly working for the CIA in a wide array of government agencies.  USAF General Ed Lansdale is a well known example.

Hell, Dallas Mayor Earl Cabell was a CIA asset in 1963, as we learned from one of the files declassified in (?) 2017.

[David Josephs]

9 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

And Prouty believed KNEW that there were people reporting to Dulles and secretly working for the CIA in a wide array of government agencies.  USAF General Ed Lansdale is a well known example.

EDIT:  My emphasis of WN's post

The reality was the Military assigned/loaned its officers to the CIA.

Edward Geary Lansdale (February 6, 1908 – February 23, 1987)^[1] was a United States Air Force officer until retiring in 1963 as a major general before continuing his work with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

We really must remember that in the 50's and 60's young men served. Period.  Intelligence young men became officers.
I don't know of too many key players of that time who did not spend time in and be the property of the US Military.

I'm sure there are exceptions...  I've been of the mind for many years now that people at the top of this were all Military with some very interesting revelations being shared here recently

Edited July 20, 2023 by David Josephs

[W. Niederhut]

     But, David, didn't Allen Dulles deploy Ed Lansdale to Vietnam, to run Saigon Station, after Lansdale's remarkable success with the Magsaysay regime in the Philippines?

     Nominally, Lansdale was a USAF man, but he was running the CIA's Saigon Station, wasn't he?