TOM WILSON

[Charles Drago]

Jack,

"If the photos exist and if Tom's embalmer wax study is valid, it is proof that THE

AUTOPSY PHOTOS WERE FABRICATED. What more proof is needed of

govt involvement? These materials NEVER left the control of the USgovt;

Cubans could not fake them; Russians could not fake them; Mafia could

not fake them, etc."

No argument from these quarters. But it is impossible for me to overstate the importance of separating the "how" and "who and why" questions when we address a public on whose behalf we struggle.

Wilson's work, if verified, will amount to dramatic support of the already arrived-at "conspiracy" answer to the former, and in all probability provide very strong suggestions for answers to the latter.

No time now to explain in depth 1. my argument that the segregation of questions as noted above remains the key to our ultimate success, and 2. the definition of "success" in our shared endeavor. FYI, I've presented and published at least three lengthy papers on the second subject at Lancer conferences and within the pages of "The Third/Fourth Decade."

To be blunt, intellectual rigor and the vaulting courage of our convictions are demanded as we move forward.

Be of good cheer.

Charles

[Bernice Moore]

The Men Who Killed Kennedy Video

Part 6....Tom Wilson

About 5 minutes into the film..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=58...y+assassination

B.........

Edited March 11, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[John Dolva]

Peter, we'lll probabaly be surpsrised at how much easier the actual work will be.

I ook forward to seeing what you (and others) can free up so we have something to work with.

Till then I'll get on with other matters.

Charles your 'cautions' are apt and I have seen similar disintegrations of efforts with no obvious reasons.

Still, I'll participate if/when the material is asssembled and distributed.

[Wim Dankbaar]

I have a long video interview between Joe West and Tom Wilson on Dealey Plaza.

For what it is worth, my conviction is that Wilson invented the story.

Joe West however, what a guy!

Wim

[Nick Bartetzko]

The Men Who Killed Kennedy Video

Part 6....Tom Wilson

About 5 minutes into the film..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=58...y+assassination

B.........

Hi Bernice

Thanks for that link. It had been a while since I last saw it. I've always been interested in Wilson's work. What is curious about the video is the wound shown in Moorman does not appear similar to what is allegedly obscured in the autopsy photo. Any thoughts on that? Anyone else also notice that?

Nick

[Bernice Moore]

The Men Who Killed Kennedy Video

Part 6....Tom Wilson

About 5 minutes into the film..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=58...y+assassination

B.........

Hi Bernice

Thanks for that link. It had been a while since I last saw it. I've always been interested in Wilson's work. What is curious about the video is the wound shown in Moorman does not appear similar to what is allegedly obscured in the autopsy photo. Any thoughts on that? Anyone else also notice that?

Nick

***************

Hi Nick:

There are many threads on the forum, discussing the differences in what is seen between the film and photos compared to the medical studies and autopsy photos.

In the Moorman we are also looking at JFK from the south side of Elm, the Zapruder from the North .....and neither agree with the autopsy

photos..imo..

Within Dr.David Mantik's and Dr.Cyril Wecht's studies....Dr.Mantik has had access to the autopys photos 9 times at the archives. BTW.

They are the most foremost medical minds....in our corner, and discuss at great length those differences

and their findings... Found in Dr.Wecht's latest book,and Dr.Manitik's studies which are in Dr.Fetzer's series of books.

Tom Wilson was a V.P of the company and an Engineer, he developed a computer program that peered within steel for flaws,

which over the years, must have saved the steel companies zillions? Not to mention the safety features of

such a discovery.....

He spent ten years at least, I believe on his assassination studies. Men

of such stature, do not invent findings...His work and studies if obtainable would put to rest many other claims made by others.

Therefore his work would be extremely damaging.

Nothing seems to comply, they did a mighty fine job..and as we see the daily continual attempts at confusion still proceed..

Thanks...take care..

B.

[Charles Drago]

I wanted to revisit this topic, if only to move it to the top of the list with the hope of stimulating additional postings.

Charles

[William Plumlee]

It is late here and I'm tired....and will try to put down a few thoughts

briefly and come back to put down more in a day or so. I'm probably one of the or the only researcher here to have had some of my work and photos 'enhanced' by Tom Wilson. I'm looking at them here on my desk. I've never put them on the internet...and likely not about to. I know some about Tom's computer program and there is much I don't. He was too secretive. There are those who could help, but I can't [yet] pry information out of them. I'll not mention who they are here and now. He was approved by the courts as an expert witness in forensics, using his techniques on forensic materials. Cyril is too busy with his own problems to help much on that now. What to say...I had him use his program on the ultra-high-quality Cancellare photo I got via the back door. He never explained totally how his system worked and thus what one gets [or sees] is, yes, hard to verify. Basicly, he had his system look for spectral patterns characterisic of specific materials: glass, metal, wood, cloth, etc. He claimed he could even 'see'/distinguish variants of these. OK, I can 'see' these in his enhancements...but without the independant test on a non-controversial item who is to say if the new image is an artifact or a real 'enhancement' of what was there. My problem and I'm trying to 'lean' on those who could answer....thus far with no success. My gut feeling is his technique worked, but not to the level he claimed in all cases. I have some very interesing 'images' here I can overlay on the original Cancellare and thus orient what is where...but ....too tired to go into it all now...tomorrow....more.... Peter

I am familiar with Tom's work for Peter, because it was I who persuaded Tom to take a look. However, he was very secretive

with both Peter and me about what he found. He would only tell me that he found TWO MEN in the tree shadows. I never saw

his work on this, and frankly was doubtful, since darkroom enhancement of the area showed nothing. He would not show Peter

what he found either, and soon his relations with Peter soured, because I feel he thought Peter was being too "pushy" and impatient

for progress...plus he was busy building his lawsuit against the govt.

Jack

What does the south knoll photo really mean? Two people in the shadows of a tree? It means nothing unless you take into account the story behind the photo and how it came into being and the background of the people in question..

(1) the location of these two people were first told to the FBI in Buna Vista Colorado in April and May of 1964. The FBI was not at all interested in the story and said there was nobody there because they had pictures of the aera and it did not show anyone at that location.

They also said their investigation proved I was at another location in Florida at the time of the assassination. I was not. ( THE Cancellara Photo had not surfaced at this early date, 1964) It was also stated by the FBI that if I (Plumlee) did not quit talking about Dallas and my wild stories concerning the assassination I would never get out of jail ( I was in lock up from about two weeks after the JFK until sometime shortly after the WC completed its findings. I was never interviewed by the WC)

Some years later (1980) Barnard Finsterwald Jr and Gary Shaw had a copy of the Cancellara photo which appeared in Gary Shaws early or first book (can't recall name about 1976 ??) I was shown that picture for the first time and I pointed out to them where Sergio and I were standing at the time of the shots. (near and within the shadows of the fork tree. I drew them a map of our route out of Delay Plaza. Shortly after that my house in Grant Colorado was burned down and I was beat up at a Evergreen Colorado Bar and had ten stitches in right forehead and eye. A few months later, I was shot at in my truck and ran off the road. There were passengers in the truck at the time who have given statements to law enforcement)

Some years later (1990 ??) Jim Maras and Peter Lambkin and I started research on this subject and others concerning JFK and OPS. It that point all hell broke loose and the FBI hounded me for years and IRS took all my holdings and bank accounts for back taxes) We, the three of us continued to work on trying to prove I and Sergio were there that day and at that location on the south knoll when the shots were fired Around that time Jim Maras introduced me to Jack White and the photo came up and I was under the impression that Jack White was going to look into the picture. I was told he had done that and he failed to see anything there. Soon thereafter Peter Lambkin retained Tom Wilson to take a look at the picture. Carl Which also looked at Tom's work, I was told. I was also told he (Wilson) had found two people near or at the forked tree, but he was working on it . Shortly after that and just before he died The FBI contacted me in Denver Colorado asking about the picture and they showed me a copy and wanted me to mark the location where we were standing. I refused. They also showed me an affidavit which my brother had signed that stated I was in Dallas early AM visiting my step-mother his mother. I refused to help them in any way because I was pissed at them because of the IRS matter. I told them to shove it and to talk to the CIA if they wanted to know anything about what I did and had done, including Iran-Contra operations. I felt I was being set up.

Now that is a very rough background as to the events which leads to this south knoll investigation and the photo.. (For the sake of time, I have been about as short as I Can make this)

The reason this is important to the investigation, is because it proves two people were there and when you take into account the background of these two people then it should be looked into. I have always felt that photo is an important link and should be looked into, perhaps more so than the north knoll..

How and why the software works and who did what back when is really not the issue.

Again. What does it prove if two people are proved to be at that location at the time of the shots?.

Add that to the "Tall Tales" of the Plumlee story and what have you? Include the new release documents and all the new evidence and take a hard look at what Plumlee has said before the new releases were released.. If two people are prove to be there, then why were they there? To kill the President? Well could they have been at that location for other reasons? I have been called "one of the assassins". Why? Could my story be true if it is proved I was at that location... Why one of the assassins? Why not one who tried to stop it?

Preponderance of the evidence over the years and the new declassified documents, I feel should be looked into in order to get the trail to point to the real assassination. That is the issue I feel.

Seems each time we start to go into a matter we get drawn away from the subject and our egos get in the way.

I say I saw JFK get assassinated. I saw we were sent in to stop it or as I have said long ago "ABORT IT"

I do not expect anyone to even read this long post about an old mans forty year plus story.. The JFK matter has been shut down and contaminated by dis information. This story also will die on the vine because this story goes beyond reason and it also conflicts with others theories and their life work has been dedicated to their theories and there is not room for a true tall tale... it goes against the norm and all the experts. If the real story did get out or released then all that has been written would have to be sent to the deep six... and the experts would not be of much help in any new investigations... we would have to breed another group of new experts and investigators, because all the old experts would have discredited themselves by their own works.

[William Plumlee]

I wanted to revisit this topic, if only to move it to the top of the list with the hope of stimulating additional postings.

Charles

Charles. Its been almost a year of this thread and as yet nothing has been done in reference to any of the photos of the south knoll and others. The only thing which has been accomplished is the threads go nowhere and the subject matter goes into the black hole.

What is most important? How the work was done or what the work of Wilson's pointed out. As to the south knoll photo and if shown that two people were there in the shadow of the forked tree, then what does that mean? What questions will this raise if it is prove that there were two persons at that location? We will never get to that point. Its been over a year of back and forth as to the photo work and how it was or was not done. Seems we miss the real point of why these two people, if real, were there on the south knoll. Why were they there and too, why were they not interviewed. The story behind the photo is a interesting story when you mention that the FBI knew about these two people many years ago. Why were they not questioned even after one of these persons stated they were there?

I too, brought this thread forward, but it too will die on the vine and the subject matter will not be addressed. What would these two people in the photo, if real, have to say on the subject of what they saw and why they were there? To me that is the real issues. I understand the work has to be validated. However, we speculate on everything else that comes down the pike in reference to the assassination of JFK.... but this matter seems to be "Taboo" for whatever reasons.

For the benefit of doubt lets say there were two people there... what would that really mean? Would what these two persons have to say really mean anything? Did they hear any shots? From where? How many? What were they going to do? Were they there to kill the President? OR were they there for other reasons? We drift off into speculations on many matters as to JFK. But as to the two people on the south knoll we stay away from that subject and if we push we are attacked and called liars. But the FBI does come to one of them asking many questions about the south knoll and they take things out of your burned house. Why?