Heart Attacks and the JFK Assassination

[Francesca Akhtar]

QUOTE:

Are you guys talking about soccer, cricket, or badminton? I thought that the World Cup was soccer ("football"), but maybe there's a World Cup for everything? You'll have to excuse my ignorance, but to us Americans "football" means only one thing. The real thing! And a "cricket" is something that chirps.

.......

I always said that American lacked culture. Cricket is a great game and is nearly as good as soccer...

Thanks for the link.

UNQUOTE:

Don't forget the ever popular LAWN BOWLING. When I was in London in the late 80s, only two

channels were available on the hotel tv. One channel was devoted entirely to "Lawn Bowling

Championships" for more than eight hours.

Yawn.

Jack

Yes there is a cricket World Cup, and a rugy WC as well as a football (soccer to you) WC. Not sure about about a badmington one though....

As I recall Lawn Bowling has to be the most boring spectator sport ever invented , along with snooker.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

QUOTE:

Are you guys talking about soccer, cricket, or badminton? I thought that the World Cup was soccer ("football"), but maybe there's a World Cup for everything? You'll have to excuse my ignorance, but to us Americans "football" means only one thing. The real thing! And a "cricket" is something that chirps.

.......

I always said that American lacked culture. Cricket is a great game and is nearly as good as soccer...

Thanks for the link.

UNQUOTE:

Don't forget the ever popular LAWN BOWLING. When I was in London in the late 80s, only two

channels were available on the hotel tv. One channel was devoted entirely to "Lawn Bowling

Championships" for more than eight hours.

Yawn.

Jack

So at the risk of demonstrating lack of culture and refinement on the part of all Americans I have to ask...

were there actually spectators at the "Lawn Bowling Championships"?

Myra, I think Jack is reffering to Crown green bowling, the object being to place, "bowl" your balls as close to the Jack as possible, whilst preventing your opponent from doing so. Rivetting stuff alright, Perhaps the CIA could use prolonged exposure to enduce death by boredom.

[Terry Mauro]

Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty:

""It was in my own office, in a part of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, in the Pentagon in 1960 that I first saw an early version of the weapon fired. On July 29, 1960 I flew to Fort Detrick, Maryland by helicopter from the Pentagon to see developments of this and other new weapons at that top secret installation. I am able *from personal and official experience* to support the Sprague- Cutler thesis that an umbrella weapon was used as part of the JFK murder plot.

The inventor of the flechette rocket was shown into my office by a fellow staff member, and I was told that he had something he wanted to demonstrate to the military to see if it could be developed into some useful tactical weapon system. In his hand he held several small plastic tubes which looked to me like soda straws, about "thick malt shake" size. Then he showed me a small plastic, nylon perhaps, rocket. It was a perfectly shaped, miniature rocket, complete with tail fins. Inside was a tiny charge of propellant.

Then, without further introduction, the inventor touched a button, and two tiny flechettes zipped out of the "straws" and slammed into the thick soundproofing of the wall across the office. Only their tail fins stuck out from the wall, and the inventor said that it was a good thing he had only a partial charge in them, because they could easily have gone right through a normal wall panel and acoustic board.

This early, unengineered weapon was shaped something like a pistol with a flashlight-size chamber above the grip. The inventor contemplated using about twenty-five or thirty "straws" mounted together and fired all at once or in clusters. This would give a buckshot impact and more effective target coverage. I was impressed.

I called my boss' office and introduced the inventor. Again we went through the demonstration. It was not long before the weapon system was under top secret control and was being worked on by some of the military specialists at Fort Detrick. I heard about the development of the weapon many times later, but I did not see it again until it was exhibited at the Church Committee hearings. Shortly after that, when I saw Cutler's first "Umbrella Man" book (The Umbrella Man: Evidence of Conspiracy), published in October 1975 and describing an "air-rifle" type umbrella weapon, I wrote to him to explain that I thought it much more likely that The Umbrella Man had used the rocket flechette I had seen demonstrated.

It remained for Senseney's Church Committee testimony to close the circle when he stated that he had developed just such an umbrella weapon at the same place I had gone with the earlier weapon---Fort Detrick. The rest of this remarkable story is developed by Sprague and Cutler.

As you read this article, consider this: It is against Secret Service directives for anyone to be permitted along the route of the President carrying something as conspicuous a weapon concealer as an umbrella. Furthermore, it is abnormal for anyone standing close to the President to open an umbrella in sunlight, raise it, lower it, and maneuver it as this man did. Why was this permitted by the Secret Service? Who had the power to arrange that TUM not be apprehended with the umbrella weapon that day?

Consider also that until the day of the JFK assassination in 1963, there was no place that anybody outside of the very small CIA and Special Forces group (perhaps as many as twenty people) could get access to that flechette-launching weapon system or anything like it.

Someone had the power to ensure TUM's nonapprehension and access to the weapon. That person was the murderer. ""

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

June 1978 : Gallery Magazine

November 22, 1963, the day President Kennedy was slain, was bright

and sunny in Dallas. Why, then, was there a young man with an open

umbrella on Elm Street, less than 30 feet from the President's car

as it slowly passed by? Presented below is an answer to this

puzzle by a former consultant to the House Select Committee on

Assassinations.

THE UMBRELLA SYSTEM: PRELUDE TO AN ASSASSINATION

by Richard E. Sprague and Robert Cutler

INTRODUCTION:

To the skeptic who refuses to accept the idea that the Central

Intelligence Agency was involved in the assassination of John

Kennedy, nothing could be more convincing than to demonstrate how

one of the CIA's secret poison and weapon systems was used in the

assassination. Such a claim would have been scoffed at by

everyone, but the weapons system itself was made public by Mr.

William Colby, CIA director; Mr. Richard Helms, former CIA

director; and Mr. Charles Senseney, a contract weapons designer

for the CIA in testimony before the Senate Select Committee on

Intelligence (the Church Committee) in September 1975.

The system is based on launching devices of various types, used

to launch a self-propelled, rocket-like dart, or flechette. The

flechette can carry either a paralyzing or fatal poison.

The flechette itself is very simple. It is about the same size

and looks like the tip of a large chicken feather. It is plastic

and has tiny tail fins. Many varieties were developed for

different uses. The great advantage of this weapon is that it is

recoilless, almost silent, and the flechette travels at a high

velocity which increases after launch. The flechettes can be fired

singly or in high-impact clusters.

It is propelled to its target by a solid-state fuel, ignited

electronically at the launcher. It strikes its target, animal or

human, dissolves completely in the body leaving no observable

trace, and totally paralyzes its victim within two seconds.

The launching devices developed by Mr. Charles Senseney at Fort

Detrick, Maryland for the CIA included a cane, a fountain pen, soda

straws, and an umbrella.

The umbrella was used to shoot President Kennedy.

The flechette struck JFK in the throat, causing a small entrance

wound, but leaving no other trace. The missile was about 5

millimeters in diameter, and the wound was 4 millimeters. The size

of the wound as compared to the size of the flechette is consistent

with other findings of this nature. This particular wound,

officially called an exit wound by the Warren Commission, puzzled

medical examiners and critics of the Warren Commission alike. The

critics charged that had the throat wound been an exit wound, it

could not have been so small.

JFK was paralyzed by poison contained in the flechette in less

than two seconds--so paralyzed that the first rifle bullet that hit

him did not knock him down, but left him in a nearly upright

position. A second volley of shots fired at JFK a few seconds

later struck a stationary, visible target. The paralyzing

flechette shot was fired by a man holding the umbrella launcher.

He was in close proximity to an accomplice. Using a radio

transmitter, the accomplice signaled the riflemen through each of

their respective radiomen in the Dal Tex building, the western end

of the Texas School Book Depository building, and on the grassy

knoll.

An exquisitely timed intelligence murder was performed. The

paralytic poison allowed two volleys of rifle shots to be fired

into JFK. He had become a sitting duck.

In what follows, the basic evidence for this sophisticated

murder technique and weapon system will be presented. Much of the

evidence, in the form of photographs, has been under the noses of

assassination researchers for many years. The testimony given by

Colby, Helms, and Senseney opened the minds of a small group of

researchers, who looked at the photographic, medical, and

ballistics evidence in a new way.

The coauthors of this article and researcher Christopher

Sharrett have now been able to clearly show that JFK's

assassination had to have been a carefully planned, well-executed

intelligence operation, using CIA weapons and techniques.

___________________________________________________________________

| |

| Analysis of JFK's Motions and the Shots: |

| |

| Numbers beginning with "Z" are frames of the Zapruder film. |

| |

| |

| Crucial to an understanding of the shots and JFK's |

| reactions to them is an understanding of President |

| Kennedy's hand, head, and upper torso movements at the |

| time he was hit by shots, and the motions of Governor |

| Connally. Contrary to what most media organizations and |

| some researchers state, JFK's hands did not raise to grasp |

| at his throat. The Zapruder film shows quite clearly that |

| just the opposite occurred. Photos #1 through 6, are |

| frames 189, 190, 204, 224, 225, and 227 from the Zapruder |

| film. The President's right hand can be seen making what |

| appears at first to be a slight forward jerk between |

| frames 189 and 190 (1/18 second) and then snapping |

| downward from his forehead to a position well below his |

| throat by frames Z224 and Z225. It also clenches into a |

| fist. His head, during this two-second timespan, snaps |

| into a nearly straight-ahead position, and his left hand |

| raises and clenches into a fist somewhat below his right |

| hand level. His right fist can be seen to be still moving |

| downward between frames Z224 and Z225. |

| The discontinuity between Z189 and Z190 added to the |

| continuous downward, fist-clenching motion of his right |

| hand from Z190 to Z225 has been taken by many researchers |

| as evidence of a shot striking JFK at frame Z189. The |

| theory of discontinuous motion caused by a transfer of |

| momentum from an externally applied force is evident here. |

| Any discontinuity in JFK's motions occurring in the 1/18 |

| second between frames can be taken as evidence of momentum |

| transfer from a projectile, rather than being caused by |

| any internal neurological phenomenon, voluntary or |

| involuntary. What actually occurs between Z189 and Z190 |

| is a backward and upward motion of JFK's head. His right |

| hand remains in a fixed position with respect to the side |

| of the limousine. This indicates a shot from the front. |

| A second such discontinuity occurs between frames Z225 |

| and Z227 (2/18 second), during which time JFK's head and |

| upper torso are driven forward and down into his clenched |

| fists. The fists remain in a fixed position with respect |

| to the side of the limousine. JFK's elbows are flung |

| upward and outward by the force of a rifle bullet striking |

| him in the back. This is the shot that caused the back |

| wound 5 3/4 inches down from the top of his shirt and |

| created holes in his jacket, his shirt, and his back. It |

| did not exit at his throat. |

| A similar analysis of momentum transfer from the rear |

| causing a discontinuity in motion can be made for Governor |

| Connally between frames Z237 and Z238 (photos #7 and 8). |

| Finally, JFK's head motions between frames Z312, Z313, |

| Z314, and Z321 (shown in photos 9 through 12) demonstrate |

| two transfers of momentum--one from the rear, between Z312 |

| and Z313, and another from the right front, between Z313 |

| and Z314 and up to Z321. The latter bullet drove JFK's |

| head and upper torso back and to his left, where he |

| bounced off the rear seat into his wife's arms. |

|_________________________________________________________________|

BASIC QUESTIONS:

Throughout the last fourteen years, a number of questions

arising from the evidence obtained at Dealey Plaza have puzzled

serious researchers. While these questions seem to be unrelated,

all of them are answered in a very logical way by this new

interpretation of the evidence.

The questions concern President Kennedy's throat wound, the

motions of his hands and head before the fatal shot struck, the

timing of the shots, the absence of bullets, the presence of a man

carrying an open umbrella, and the trajectory of an early shot from

in front of JFK. Here are the questions:

The Throat Wound and Trajectory of the Throat Shot:

Assuming the throat wound in JFK to be an entry wound, why was

it so small (4mm)? How could a rifle bullet leave such a small

wound (about the size of a soda straw)?

If a bullet did enter JFK's throat, where did it go? Why was no

trace of a bullet found? The entry wound apparently was not at a

downward angle. If a bullet *was* fired from the grassy knoll,

hitting JFK in the throat at Z189 (frame 189 of the film shot by

Abraham Zapruder), where could it have come from to enter at a

*nearly horizontal* trajectory, while missing everything in its

path, including the Stemmons Freeway sign, Abraham Zapruder, a

small tree, the side of the limousine, Secret Service agent

Kellerman, Governor Connally, and the limousine windshield? Where

did the throat shot come from (see photo #13 [CAPTION READS: "TUM

at lower left of Stemmons sign, The Accomplice farther left. (For

actual photograph, see Warren Commission Hearing and Exhibits, Vol.

XXI, P. 770.])

Why is there a *forward* motion of JFK's right hand between Z189

and Z190, if a shot hit him from the front at that time? Why

didn't that bullet drive JFK violently backward (see photos #l and

2)?

The Motions of JFK's Hands:

Why did the President's hands clench into fists and drop below

his throat as the result of a bullet striking him in the throat?

Why did his head snap around to the front? These motions, which

can be observed in photos #1 to 6, Zapruder frames 189, 190, 204,

224, 225, and 227, appear to be more like a stiffening action,

taking a little less than two seconds, rather than the grasping at

his throat described by many casual observers. JFK did not grasp

at his throat at all.

Why didn't the bullet fired at frame Z225, striking JFK in the

back, knock him down on the seat? Why are JFK's fists still in the

same position after the bullet hits, Z225 to Z227 (see photo #6,

2/18 second after photo #5)? The motions make it appear that JFK's

head, torso, and fists were frozen in position at Z225. The bullet

forced his head and upper torso down and forward into his fists.

It flung his elbows outward as though they were pivoting around his

fists and shoulders. Why?

Why didn't JFK duck or turn or shout after he was hit at Z189?

His mouth opened, but there is obviously no lip or mouth motion

between Z224 and the time of the fatal shots. When Governor John

Connally was hit, he screamed "like a stuck pig," said Jackie

Kennedy, and rolled to the floor of the car. One bullet went

completely through Connally, and he is alive today. If JFK had

been able to fall to the floor after the first, nonlethal bullet

hit him in the back, he might have lived, too. But he could not,

because the flechette's poison had paralyzed him. The people who

thought they heard JFK scream were imagining it.

The Timing of the Shots:

Some witnesses said they heard two volleys of shots separated by

a few seconds. The photographic evidence coupled with other

evidence shows there actually *were* two volleys of shots: The

first volley was timed between Z189, when the throat shot hit, and

Z237, when a shot hit Connally.[1] The back shot hit JFK at Z225.

The shots in this volley occurred over forty-eight frames, or about

two and a half seconds. If the Z189 shot is taken out, the other

two shots were separated by only twelve frames, or about a half-

second. The earliest overseas press reports, such as NZPA-AAP (New

Zealand Press Association) datelined Dallas, said, "Three bursts of

gunfire, apparently from automatic weapons, were heard." These

earliest reports had not been tampered with.

The second volley occurred at frames Z312 and Z313, nearly

simultaneously. The shot that missed could have also been fired at

about this same time (see photos #9 and 10).

The questions are:

Were there two volleys of shots, and if so, why?

How could shots fired from three or four widely separated

positions be timed so accurately? Keep in mind that the earliest

reports said "automatic weapons." On-the-spot witnesses heard

shots so closely timed that they reported them to be from automatic

weapons. This takes precision firing under control.

[1] The authors disagree on the timing of the Connally shot. Cutler

believes it was fired at Z223, Sprague at Z237, a difference of

less than a second. In either case, it was part of the first

volley and was a separate shot from the JFK back shot at Z225.

The Umbrella and The Umbrella Man (TUM):

Questions have always been raised about TUM (The Umbrella Man)

ever since Josiah Thompson and Richard Sprague discovered the open

umbrella in a series of photographs. Photo #13, a picture taken by

Phil Willis at Zapruder frame 202, shows TUM with open umbrella.

Photos #4, 5, and 6 (frames 224, 225, and 227 of Zapruder's film)

show the umbrella protruding from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign.

Photo #14 (by Richard Bothun) [CAPTION READS: TA and TUM seconds

after shooting] shows TUM less than a minute after the shots,

sitting on the edge of the grass near his original position, with

another man seated next to him. The umbrella is lying on the

sidewalk. Photos #15 and 16 (by Wilma Bond) [CAPTIONS READ: TA at

left, casually walking down Elm Street. AND, TUM, folded umbrella

in hand, to right of sign.] show TUM a minute later, standing near t

he highway sign holding the umbrella.

The temperature was a cool and breezy 68 degrees F. The sky was

clear blue. No rain had fallen since early that morning. No

natural reason seemed to exist for a fairly young man to be holding

an open umbrella over his head while the President of the United

States was passing by, ten to fifteen feet away (see diagram of

relative positions of TUM and JFK). An examination of the

thousands of photographs taken during the Presidential procession

and in and around Dealey Plaza that day revealed not a single other

open umbrella.

Thompson and Sprague's speculations were that TUM was giving

visual signals--first to go ahead (opening umbrella), then to fire

a second round (raising umbrella). Afterward, the speculation

went, he stayed around to see whether anyone had noticed anything

about the actual shooters.

A closer analysis of the Zapruder film shows that TUM actually

raised and lowered the umbrella very rapidly--too rapidly to have

been a good signal for riflemen as far away as the Dal Tex building

and the grassy knoll (see photos #3, 4, 5, 6, 17 [CAPTION READS:

TA's arm raised at right front of limousene (Z228)]). Why did he

do this?

Analysis also shows that TUM actually rotated the umbrella.

This rotation appears in the original Zapruder film, including

frames up to Z236 that show the umbrella in the space between the

sprocket holes. Measurements of this rotation show that it tracks

JFK's position during his travel down Elm Street at this time

period. Why did TUM rotate the umbrella? If he were an observer,

he would turn his head, not the umbrella.

After the shooting, why did TUM sit down and then stand up,

within a few feet of his position in front of the Stemmons Freeway

sign, when everyone else in that vicinity ran or jumped away in the

direction of the grassy knoll? Everyone, that is, except one man

who sat down next to TUM. Who was he, and where was he when the

shots were fired, and what was he doing with TUM?

____________________________________________________________________

| |

| No natural reason seemed to exist for a fairly young |

| man to be holding an open umbrella over his head |

| while the President was passing by ten or fifteen |

| feet away. |

| |

| Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty of the Defense Department |

| witnessed a demonstration of the flechette-launching |

| weapon system in his office in Washington, D.C. in 1960. |

| Here is his description. |

| |

| |

| It was in my own office, in a part of the Office of the |

| Secretary of Defense, in the Pentagon in 1960 that I first |

| saw an early version of the weapon fired. On July 29, |

| 1960 I flew to Fort Detrick, Maryland by helicopter from |

| the Pentagon to see developments of this and other new |

| weapons at that top secret installation. I am able *from |

| personal and official experience* to support the Sprague- |

| Cutler thesis that an umbrella weapon was used as part of |

| the JFK murder plot. |

| The inventor of the flechette rocket was shown into my |

| office by a fellow staff member, and I was told that he |

| had something he wanted to demonstrate to the military to |

| see if it could be developed into some useful tactical |

| weapon system. In his hand he held several small plastic |

| tubes which looked to me like soda straws, about "thick |

| malt shake" size. Then he showed me a small plastic, |

| nylon perhaps, rocket. It was a perfectly shaped, |

| miniature rocket, complete with tail fins. Inside was a |

| tiny charge of propellant. |

| Then, without further introduction, the inventor |

| touched a button, and two tiny flechettes zipped out of |

| the "straws" and slammed into the thick soundproofing of |

| the wall across the office. Only their tail fins stuck |

| out from the wall, and the inventor said that it was a |

| good thing he had only a partial charge in them, because |

| they could easily have gone right through a normal wall |

| panel and acoustic board. |

| This early, unengineered weapon was shaped something |

| like a pistol with a flashlight-size chamber above the |

| grip. The inventor contemplated using about twenty-five |

| or thirty "straws" mounted together and fired all at once |

| or in clusters. This would give a buckshot impact and |

| more effective target coverage. I was impressed. |

| I called my boss' office and introduced the inventor. |

| Again we went through the demonstration. It was not long |

| before the weapon system was under top secret control and |

| was being worked on by some of the military specialists at |

| Fort Detrick. I heard about the development of the weapon |

| many times later, but I did not see it again until it was |

| exhibited at the Church Committee hearings. Shortly after |

| that, when I saw Cutler's first "Umbrella Man" book ("The |

| Umbrella Man: Evidence of Conspiracy"), published in |

| October 1975 and describing an "air-rifle" type umbrella |

| weapon, I wrote to him to explain that I thought it much |

| more likely that The Umbrella Man had used the rocket |

| flechette I had seen demonstrated. |

| It remained for Senseney's Church Committee testimony |

| to close the circle when he stated that he had developed |

| just such an umbrella weapon at the same place I had gone |

| with the earlier weapon---Fort Detrick. The rest of this |

| remarkable story is developed by Sprague and Cutler. |

| As you read this article, consider this: It is against |

| Secret Service directives for anyone to be permitted along |

| the route of the President carrying something as |

| conspicuous a weapon concealer as an umbrella. |

| Furthermore, it is abnormal for anyone standing close to |

| the President to open an umbrella in sunlight, raise it, |

| lower it, and maneuver it as this man did. Why was this |

| permitted by the Secret Service? Who had the power to |

| arrange that TUM not be apprehended with the umbrella |

| weapon that day? |

| Consider also that until the day of the JFK |

| assassination in 1963, there was *no place* that *anybody* |

| outside of the very small CIA and Special Forces group |

| (perhaps as many as twenty people) could get access to |

| that flechette-launching weapon system or anything like |

| it. |

| Someone had the power to ensure TUM's nonapprehension |

| and access to the weapon. That Person was the murderer. |

|__________________________________________________________________|

THE WEAPON SYSTEM:

The answers to all of these questions and the analysis of the

evidence must begin historically with the development of the weapon

system itself. There is no better way to describe it than to hear

about it from ex-CIA directors William Colby and Richard Helms and

weapon developer Charles Senseney. Here is their testimony before

the Church Committee on September 16 to 18, 1975, as published in

Volume One (1976) of that Committee's final report, under the

title, "Unauthorized Storage of Toxic Agents."

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1975. Testimony of William E. Colby,

director of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Committee met at

10 A.M. in the Russell Building.

Present: Senators Church, Tower, Mondale, Huddleston, Morgan, Hart

of Colorado Baker, Goldwater, Mathias, and Schweiker. Also

present: William G. Miller, staff director, Frederick A. 0.

Schwarz, chief counsel, Curtis Smothers and Paul Michel, Committee

staff members.

Chairman Church: The particular case under examination today

involves the illegal possession of deadly biological poisons which

were retained within the CIA for five years after their destruction

was ordered by the President. . . . The main questions before the

Committee are why the poisons were developed in such quantities in

the first place: why the Presidential order was disobeyed; and

why such a serious act of insubordination could remain undetected

for so many years.

William Colby: The specific subject today concerns the CIA's

involvement in the development of bacteriological warfare materials

with the Army's Biological Laboratory at Fort Detrick, CIA's

retention of an amount of shellfish toxin, and CIA's use and

investigation of various chemicals and drugs. . . . Information

provided by him [a CIA officer not directly associated with the

project] and by two other officers aware of the project indicated

that the project at Fort Detrick involved the development of

bacteriological warfare agents--some lethal--and *associated

delivery systems suitable for clandestine use* [emphasis added].

The CIA relationship with the Special Operations Division at Fort

Detrick was formally established in May 1952.

The need for such capabilities was tied to earlier Office of

Strategic Services World War II experience, which included the

development of two different types of agent suicide pills to be

used in the event of capture and a successful operation using

biological warfare materials to incapacitate a Nazi leader

temporarily.

The primary Agency interest was in the development of

dissemination devices to be used with standard chemicals off the

shelf. Various dissemination devices such as a fountain pen dart

launcher appeared to be peculiarly suited for clandestine use. . .

. A large amount of Agency attention was given to the problem of

incapacitating guard dogs. Though most of the dart launchers were

developed for the Army, the Agency did request the development of a

small, hand-held dart launcher for its peculiar needs for this

purpose. Work was also done on temporary human incapacitation

techniques. These related to a desire to incapacitate captives

before they could render themselves incapable of talking, or

terrorists before they could take retaliatory action. [Or to

prevent guard dogs from barking.]

One such operation involved the penetration of a facility abroad

for intelligence collection. The compound was guarded by watchdogs

which made entry difficult even when it was empty. Darts were

delivered for the operation, but were not used.

Church: Have you brought with you some of those devices which

would have enabled the CIA to use this poison for killing people?

Colby: We have indeed.

Church: Does this pistol fire the dart?

Colby: Yes it does, Mr. Chairman. The round thing at the top is

obviously the sight; the rest of it is what is practically a

normal .45, although it is a special. However, it works by

electricity. There is a battery in the handle, and it fires a

small dart. [self-propelled, like a rocket.]

Church: So that when it fires, it fires silently?

Colby: Almost silently; yes.

Church: What range does it have?

Colby: One hundred meters, I believe; about 100 yards, 100

meters.

Church: About 100 meters range?

Colby: Yes.

Church: And the dart itself, when it strikes the target, does the

target know that he has been hit and [is] about to die?

Colby: That depends, Mr. Chairman, on the particular dart used.

There are different kinds of these flechettes that were used in

various weapons systems, and a special one was developed which

potentially would be able to enter the target without perception.

Church: Is it not true, too, that the effort not only involved

designing a gun that could strike at a human target without

knowledge of the person who had been struck, but also the toxin

itself would not appear in the autopsy?

Colby: Well there was an attempt--

Church: Or the dart?

Colby: Yes; so there was no way of perceiving that the target was

hit.

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1975. Richard Helms' testimony:

Huddleston: Mr. Helms, you said you were surprised, or that you

had never seen the dart gun that was displayed here yesterday.

Would you be surprised or shocked to learn that that gun, or one

like it, had been used by agents against either watchdogs or human

beings?

Helms: I would be surprised if it had been used against human

beings, but I'm not surprised it would have been used against

watchdogs. I believe there were various experiments conducted in

an effort to find out how one could either tranquilize or kill

guard dogs in foreign countries. That does not surprise me at all.

Huddleston: Do you know whether or not it was used, in fact,

against watchdogs? Helms: I believe there were experiments

conducted against dogs. Whether it was ever used in a live

operational situation against dogs, I do not recall.

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1975. Testimony of Charles A. Senseney:

Senseney: I worked in the Biological Warfare Section of Fort

Detrick from 1953. . . . I was the project engineer of the M-1

dart launcher and following on microorganism projectiles and so

forth.

Smothers: Is this a device that looks roughly like a .45 caliber

pistol with a sight mount at the top?

Senseney: This was a follow-on. It was to replace the M-1

projectile to go into the Army stockpile. It did look like a .45.

Smothers: Did the CIA have, Mr. Senseney, the wherewithal to

utilize this dart launcher against humans?

Senseney: No, they asked for a modification to use against a dog.

Now, these were actually given to them, and they were actually

expended, because we got all of the hardware back. For a dog, the

projectile had to be made many times bigger. It was almost the

size of a .22 cartridge, but it carried a chemical compound known

as 46-40.

Smothers: And their interest was in dog incapacitation?

Senseney: Right

Baker: Your principle job with the DOD, I take it, was to develop

new or exotic devices and weapons: is that correct?

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*

[emphasis added]. 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.

Huddleston: Were there frequent transfers of material between Dr.

Gordon's [a researcher at Fort Detrick] office and your office,

either the hardware or the toxin?

Senseney: The only frequent thing that changed hands was the dog

projectile and its loaders 46-40. This was done maybe five or six

in one quantity. And maybe six weeks to six months later, they

would bring those back and ask for five or six more. They would

bring them back expended, that is, they bring all of the hardware

except the projectile, okay?

Huddleston: Indicating that they have been used?

Senseney: Correct.

Huddleston: But it could have been used on a human being?

Senseney: There is no reason why it could not, I guess.

Schweiker: Mr. Senseney, I would like to read into the record

[from a CIA document] at this point a quote from paragraph nine

[exhibit 6, document 67]: "When funds permit, adaptation and

testing will be conducted of a new, highly effective disseminating

system which has been demonstrated to be capable of introducing

materials through light clothing, subcutaneously, intramuscularly,

and silently, without pain."

Now, I just have a little trouble, Mr. Senseney, reconciling

your answers in conjunction with this project, when the CIA

document makes clear that one of the very specific purposes of the

funding and the operation was to find a weapon that could penetrate

light clothing subcutaneously, which obviously means through the

skin, and intramuscularly, which obviously means through the

muscles of a person. And are you saying that you have absolutely

no recollection at all that tests or programs were designed to use

any of these devices to permeate clothing on people and not dogs?

Senseney: We put them on mannequins.

Schweiker: What's that?

Senseney: We put clothing on mannequins to see whether we could

penetrate it. These were the requirements. You almost read the

exact requirements that the SDR quoted from the Special Forces

there.

Schweiker: I would not expect you to test them on live human

beings. I would hope that you did use mannequins, Mr. Senseney.

Wouldn't that be directed toward people-usage, though? That is the

point we're trying to establish.

Senseney: That is what the Special Forces direction was. You have

to look at it this way. The Army program wanted this device. That

is the only thing that was delivered to them. It was a spin-off,

of course, from the M-1. The M- 1 was a lethal weapon, meant to

kill a person, for the Army. It was to be used in Vietnam. It

never got there, because we were not fast enough getting it into

the logistics system.

Schweiker: What was the most-utilized device of the ones with

which you worked and supervised?

Senseney: The only thing I know that was really used was the dog

projectile. The other things were in the stockpiles. I don't

think anyone ever requested them.

Schweiker: How do you know for certain it was for dogs?

Senseney: Well that is what they asked us to test them against.

They wanted to see whether they could put a dog to sleep, and

whether sometime later the dog would come back and be on its own

and look normal.

Schweiker: Of the devices that came through you, which of these

were utilized in any capacity other than for testing?

Senseney: That was the only one that I know of--the dog

projectile. I call it a dog projectile. We were developing it

because the scenario read that they wanted to be able to make

entrance into an area which was patrolled by dogs, leave, the dog

come back, and then no one would ever know they were in the area.

So that was the reason for the dog projectile.

Church: Thank you Senator Schweiker. I think it is clear that the

CIA was interested in the development of a delivery system that

could reach human beings, since not many dogs wear clothing. And

you would agree with that, wouldn't you?

Senseney: Yes.

Church: Okay.

Schwarz: Along the same line, I assume you must agree that

spending money in order to make darts of such a character that they

cannot be detected in an autopsy does not have much to do with

dogs?

Senseney: No, that would not have anything to do with dogs.

SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY:

In 1960, the CIA purchased from the Army at Fort Detrick, Maryland

a poison-dart weapon system, consisting of small flechette-type

projectiles, self-propelled by solid-state rocket fuel, and

launched by a series of devices, including umbrellas. The

flechettes were about 5mm in diameter and about an inch long. The

poisons carried were of two types. One was a lethal poison,

apparently used against enemies in Vietnam. The other was a

quick-acting, paralyzing poison that took effect in less than two

seconds and lasted for several hours. This was intended for use

against dogs guarding a secured enemy area. It had to cause

paralysis fast enough to prevent the dog from barking.

The flechette completely dissolved in the body, leaving no

trace, so that enemy agents would not be suspicious. The dogs

recovered after several hours and behaved as though nothing had

happened.

The launching devices did not have to be very accurately aimed

and fired, because the weapon was designed for close range. The

flechette could hit any part of the body of a dog or human and

still cause complete paralysis. The solid-state fuel was ignited

by completing an electrical circuit.

The umbrella used a battery-powered circuit. The battery and

trigger button were located in the handle of the umbrella. Wires

running up the shaft connected the button and battery to the

igniter, which was mounted on the shaft. The trigger button

activated the igniter, firing the solid propellant, which sent the

flechette through the rocket launcher--a straw-sized metal tube--to

its target.

WHAT HAPPENED IN DEALEY PLAZA?

Here is the way the assassination team used the weapon system to

kill JFK.

The Umbrella:

TUM took aim by sighting along the launcher and tracking JFK as he

moved down Elm Street. He continued to track JFK after firing the

flechette at Z189. He quickly raised and lowered the umbrella

after firing. This motion may have been caused by operating a

reloading mechanism in the umbrella to put a second flechette into

the firing position. It could also have been a signal to a

radioman accomplice to transmit a beep, calling for a second volley

of shots (see next section).

The flechette struck JFK in the throat at Z189, entering above

his collar, creating a 4mm entry wound and causing immediate

paralysis. The trajectory can be seen from photo #13 to have

cleared the edge of the limousine. The flechette was traveling at

an angle from the right front of the limousine, and it missed the

other occupants of the car. The paralysis took place in about one

and a half seconds, from Z189 to Z216. By Z224 (see photo #4),

JFK's arms, fists, head, and shoulders had been in a paralyzed

state for a half-second. The flechette made no noise when

launched, so that no one heard a shot at the time of Z189.

The flechette's momentum was small because it was extremely

lightweight. As a result, only a small transfer of momentum

occurred, driving JFK's head only slightly upward and backward.

This can be detected by a careful comparison of photos #1 and 2,

Z189 and Z190. JFK's right hand can be seen to remain in a fixed

position between these two frames (1/18 second) with respect to the

side of the car. His head moves up and back in comparison to his

hand or the car.

The Rifle Shots:

The first rifle shot was fired from the second floor of the Dal Tex

building. It struck JFK in the back, five and three-quarters

inches below his shirt-collar line, at frame Z225. Since JFK's

muscles were paralyzed, he was like a rigid, sitting duck target.

His head and upper torso were driven down and forward, and his

elbows were flung upward and outward, because no muscles would stop

a rotating elbow and arm motion pivoting around two frozen points-

-his fists and his shoulders. (Observe all of these points between

photos #5 and 6, Z225 and Z227--2/18 seconds apart.) If JFK had

been in a nonparalyzed state, the back shot would have knocked him

much farther forward and down.

The flechette dissolved in JFK's body, leaving no trace, except

for the small entrance wound in his neck. The poison would not

have shown up in the autopsy, even if tests for it had been made.

However, because there was no apparent reason to suspect poison, no

tests for it were made.

The Timing of the Shots and The Accomplice:

After Jim Hicks made his statement to Jim Garrison's investigators

in 1968 about being a radio coordinator for the firing team,

researchers were convinced that radio communications were used

between radiomen located near each of the riflemen and some central

coordinating transmitter.

Hicks appears at the center of the plaza on the south side of

Elm Street, near Houston Street. In the Zapruder film, he is seen

during the shooting with both hands showing, no radio transmitter

visible, and no other indication that he is doing anything but

observing at the time of the shots (photos #1, 2, and 3). Hicks'

real role was as the radio system supplier and tester. Later Hicks

shows up with the radio in his back pocket, walking down Elm Street

(see photo #18, taken by Willis [CAPTION READS: Hicks in light

jacket with radio in back pocket (Same as #13 above)]).

In 1977, Cutler, Sprague, and Sharrett discovered the real radio

coordinator in a series of photos. In photo #13 he appears with

raised hand, standing to the left of the Stemmons Freeway sign, on

the north curb of Elm Street. He is about twenty feet away from

TUM. Because his identity is unknown, he will be called TA (The

Accomplice) in this article. His raised hand appears in photos #4,

5, and 6. Early observations of his hand concluded he was waving

at the President. Closer analysis shows he was not waving. His

hand remains raised and motionless, except for a slight clenching.

TA can be seen sitting next to TUM in photo #14 and walking away

down Elm Street in photos #15 and 16. The radio can be seen in

photo #19, taken by Jim Towner [CAPTION READS: TA, radio in back

pocket, heading down Elm Street.], in TA's belt at the back, and

also in photos #14 and 15.

TA undoubtedly was using a button-type beeper transmission

technique for signaling all radiomen to have the riflemen shoot in

volleys. The button was in his raised hand. A wire connection to

the battery-powered transmitter was mounted on his belt at the

back. The first beep was transmitted as soon as TUM launched the

flechette. The second beep was transmitted a second or two ahead

of Z312. The first signal triggered rifle shots from the shooter

in the Dal Tex building and the shooter on the west end of the

sixth floor of the TSBD (Texas School Book Depository). The man on

the knoll did not have a clear shot at that time and did not fire.

The Dal Tex shot hit JFK in the back at Z225, and the TSBD shot hit

Connally at Z237.

Three shots were fired in the second volley--by the Dal Tex

rifleman, whose bullet narrowly missed JFK and hit the south curb

of Main Street; by the TSBD rifleman, whose shot struck JFK in the

head at Z312; and the man behind the fence on the grassy knoll,

who now had a clear path and fired the fatal shot. His bullet

struck JFK in the right temple and exploded at Z313. The fourth

rifleman was positioned right by the octagonal structure at the

west end of the semi-circular wall on the grassy knoll north. He

did not shoot, because the Stemmons Freeway sign and a tree were in

his way. He had a clear shot after the limousine had passed the

sign, but by then JFK was dead. He would have fired had the others

missed their target.

TA and TUM got together, for about two minutes, immediately

after the shots, probably to discuss the results and to observe any

police or Secret Service activity in the area (see photo #14).

Then they went in separate directions, up and down Elm Street (see

photos #15 and 16).

___________________________________________________________________

| |

| ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS: |

| The questions plaguing researchers can now be answered. |

| |

| |

| * The President's small throat wound was caused by a |

| small flechette. |

| |

| * The flechette dissolved, leaving no trace, |

| explaining why no bullet was found. |

| |

| * No bullet was fired from the grassy knoll at the |

| time of the first hit. TUM had a clear shot at Z189. |

| |

| * TUM's flechette was actually moving in a slightly |

| upward trajectory, explaining the backward and upward |

| motion of JFK's head between Z189 and Z190. |

| |

| * The flechette's small momentum explains why there |

| was no violent backward motion. |

| |

| * JFK's fists clenched and his head snapped to face |

| forward while his right hand snapped downward because |

| his muscles were paralyzed quickly by the poison. |

| |

| * The bullet at Z225 didn't knock JFK down, because |

| he was paralyzed. |

| |

| * The paralysis affected the muscles, fixing them in |

| position and preventing those portions of JFK's upper |

| body from moving when he was hit in the back. His |

| elbows were not fixed and were flung outward. |

| |

| * JFK did not make a sound, because his vocal cords |

| were paralyzed (see testimony). |

| |

| * There were definitely two separate volleys of |

| shots. Each of the four gunmen were prepared to |

| shoot twice upon radio coordinating commands. One |

| knoll gunman could not fire the first volley, because |

| of obstructions. The other did not fire at all. |

| |

| * All the questions about TUM and the umbrella are |

| answered by knowing he was using an intelligence |

| weapon system with umbrella launcher and flechette |

| dart. |

| |

| * Raising and lowering the umbrella was a signal to |

| TA for a radio beep to order a second volley. |

| |

| * The umbrella rotated because TUM was tracking JFK. |

| |

| * TUM and TA sat down together to assess what |

| happened. |

| |

| * TA was the radio coordinator and was standing |

| behind TUM, where he could see TUM's signal and |

| transmit a beep to the radiomen, ordering the first |

| volley. |

|_________________________________________________________________|

CONCLUSIONS:

What conclusions can be drawn from this analysis?

FIRST: Some higher-level individuals within the CIA furnished

one of their secret weapons systems to be used in the

assassination. It is doubtful that more than a very few

umbrella launchers were made for the CIA at Fort Detrick.

This may have been the principal reason for the CIA cover-up

that began on November 22, 1963.

SECOND: The degree of sophistication in such a complex

intelligence murder--including the planning for the paralysis,

the radio coordination, the firing positions creating a cross

fire in two volleys, gaining access to the buildings, setting

up a patsy (Oswald), and all of the other techniques used--

indicate that lower-level anti-Castro Cubans, or even Mafia

members, could not have pulled it off without CIA guidance and

supervision. Skill and intelligence training, plus detailed

management, were required from the only organization capable

of running such an operation.

THIRD: The Select Committee on Assassinations and the Senate

Intelligence Committee have a lot more interrogating to do.

They must question the people who designed the weapon system

and those who made it available to the assassination team.

Richard E. Sprague is currently a consultant to the Battelle

Institute, a think tank in Columbus, Ohio, and was formerly a

consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations.

He has written numerous books and articles, including the

self-published "The Taking of America 1-2-3."

Robert Cutler is an architect and a assassination researcher.

He has self-published five books on the Kennedy assassination,

the latest of which is "Seventy-six Seconds in Dealey Plaza."

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

Below Senator Church and Senator Towner..... with a flechette firing weapon..

The Church Committee ""referrs to the United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental

Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, a U.S. Senate committee chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-ID) in 1975.""

Bill Number: SB 578

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/...9_enrolled.html

CABO Weapons List

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:zZ00Gw...ct=clnk&cd=

B...

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

WELL HELLO AND HALLELUJAH!!!

THANK YOU, BERN! You old bean, you! Gotta love that gal!!! And, THANKS TO YOU TOO, PETE!

[Bernice Moore]

After all last evening, difiiculty in posting...I have found the link to the "ratmandu"......the ratman's..site.....

Where he has Colonel Prouty's statement and the copy of Richard Sprague's article, with

some photos, and frames of the Zapruder film....a study.....and in a much more concise form

for all.......If interested....

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.html

What I posted was from my files, this is a much better rendition...

The rest of the info, photo & sites etc..were on file..and added to the information...

If interested grab the facts from the weapons list, as this type of information

seems to be disappearing from the web, the site is no longer active...??

Well from what I see..

Thanks B....

Edited March 28, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Kathleen Collins]

Now that I know of the left carotid artery sleeper method -- and that you have to stand in back of the victim to do it, I am more convinced than ever that Karyn Kupcinet was murdered by Intel -- CIA or the Mob. It justs hits the nail on the head. There were no marks on her except for decomp. But inside her throat, yes. Left side. And so many suspects. Her killer certainly got away with -- shall I say it? -- murder. Kupcinet adored his little girl and that was a way to get to him.

Kathy,

Why let Kup live? Can anyone predict how a man will react if his daughter is killed--surely, there would be a risk he would go public with his knowledge?

I don't know. Nobody knows. It was the method of death. Did Prine know how to kill someone in that way? Or the late David Lange? You have to stand behind the victim in order to do it. The coroner said she was killed by a very strong man, standing behind her, possibly left handed, and using only one hand.

Kathy

Edited March 28, 2007 by Kathleen Collins

[Terry Mauro]

After all last evening, difiiculty in posting...I have found the link to the "ratmandu"......the ratman's..site.....

Where he has Colonel Prouty's statement and the copy of Richard Sprague's article, with

some photos, and frames of the Zapruder film....a study.....and in a much more concise form

for all.......If interested....

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.html

What I posted was from my files, this is a much better rendition...

The rest of the info, photo & sites etc..were on file..and added to the information...

If interested grab the facts from the weapons list, as this type of information

seems to be disappearing from the web, the site is no longer active...??

Well from what I see..

Thanks B....

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

"What I posted was from my files, this is a much better rendition...

The rest of the info, photo & sites etc..were on file..and added to the information...

If interested grab the facts from the weapons list, as this type of information

seems to be disappearing from the web, the site is no longer active...??

Well from what I see.."

Thanks for the link, Bean. But, from what I can deduce, your documentation is nothing short of excellent, as far as laying out a blueprint of the specs involved. And, Pete's explanation of his experience with the methodology involved in this field goes perfectly with yours.

Now, as far as the disappearance of this type information from web sites, I've found that if I transpose something I've copied and pasted from a site, and put it in another format, that if I later find the link to that site has disappeared, mine will remain intact, even if it's in my Saved Box. Of course, making sure to back them up on a floppy, or burning them to a CD is always the best way to go.

Thanks for keeping this thread on track.

[Kathleen Collins]

Now that I know of the left carotid artery sleeper method -- and that you have to stand in back of the victim to do it, I am more convinced than ever that Karyn Kupcinet was murdered by Intel -- CIA or the Mob. It justs hits the nail on the head. There were no marks on her except for decomp. But inside her throat, yes. Left side. And so many suspects. Her killer certainly got away with -- shall I say it? -- murder. Kupcinet adored his little girl and that was a way to get to him.

Kathy,

Why let Kup live? Can anyone predict how a man will react if his daughter is killed--surely, there would be a risk he would go public with his knowledge?

I don't know. Nobody knows. It was the method of death. Did Prine know how to kill someone in that way? Or the late David Lange? You have to stand behind the victim in order to do it. The coroner said she was killed by a very strong man, standing behind her, possibly left handed, and using only one hand.

Kathy

I feel funny using words like "Intel," etc. But it's the method of killing. In a court of law you don't have to prove motive. The Coroner described her death just like this carotid artery sleeper business. I read on another site that after Karyn's death, Irv Kupcinet no longer mentioned the Kennedy Assassination in his column, not until the film JFK came out. He raged about it. I've seen a couple of his columns about that movie. He was so mad about it, you'd think it was personal. Maybe (unconsciously?) it was.

Kathy

[Michael Crane]

"You have to stand behind the victim in order to do it. "

Not true.

There are many,many more kinds of carotid artery chokes.The only difference is the way that they are applied.

Edited March 29, 2007 by Michael Crane

[Kathleen Collins]

"You have to stand behind the victim in order to do it. "

Not true.

There are many,many more kinds of carotid artery chokes.The only difference is the way that they are applied.

Who did you kill that you know this? -- Only kidding.

Kathy

[Michael Crane]

Kathleen,

I have not killed anyone.There are just some things in life that I know are facts.

Edited March 31, 2007 by Michael Crane