Which JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theory Do You Prefer?

originally posted by: wtbengineer
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

You know, I'd say it was even before that. I think things were in motion to go the way they have for a long time. It's just that once the movement started to get momentum it really started taking off. That's why we see more change over the later years.

I can't say when it started but I consider JFK's assassination to be the final statement of the Shadow Government that they were now fully in control.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I've been away for a while but just a quick note to say - awesome thread!

Some amazing contributors and information can be found here. I think there would be some seriously nervous people if the info collected here was ever published in something like "Scientific American" or even a semi-dumbed down, but snarked up version in "Wired" would get a lot of people's attention...

Day-um....

a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

I agree with that, and a bold brazen statement it was.

originally posted by: InvisibleOwl
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

If you read "Brothers" by David Talbot, it says that RFK didn't believe the Warren Commission's findings and privately did investigate. A very good book.
-- snip --

I thought I remembered this book being mentioned earlier! It goes on my "wish list" today and will be ordered as soon as I know I can afford it next month. Horne references it several times in Volume V of "Inside The ARRB" when talking about the efforts that JFK (and his brother) were making behind the scenes to get a dialog going with Castro.

If p*sses me off and is depressing to know how much success they were having before they were betrayed by our own government and sold out by the sharing of the wire-taps with the anti-Castro community here in the states. (I would imagine that, having read "Brothers", you already know. This is meant for anyone reading my post that is not familiar with the situation.)

To think that Castro was opening up to the idea of normalization of relations the our country and reducing dependance on the Soviet Union is something I'd never known. JFK was truly a visionary and the first American president to think in global terms instead of a piecemeal, one battlefield-at-a-time mentality...

I was too young to remember this interview (if it was even carried on the news over here. It's hard to imagine that it wasn't considering its international ramifications. It was a major, major foreign policy statement!)

October 24, 1963 President Kennedy made this statement during an interview with French Journalist, Jean Daniel, who was about to go to Cuba and interview Castro as well. It was obviously intended not only for Castro's ears but also to signal to the rest of the world that a change in relations between our countries might be possible. (I can only imagine the animosity it generated behind closed doors with the Hawks here in the US!):

I believe that there is no country in the world including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my country's policies during the Batista regime. I approved the proclamation which Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will even go further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear.

Thanks for the heads up on the book! I look forward to reading it.

One of my big questions is why would JFK tee-off two of his biggest threats and then not do anything?

He -threatened- to disband the CeeEyaye but didn't do it. This angered Dulles and Angelton.

He -threatened- (via Bobby, who was doing it to settle a score by papa Kennedy with the mob) Giancana was deported, Marcello was aggressively questioned in the hearings, yet they really just made threats and didn't actually imprison or take out organized crime.

The smart thing would be to just 'do it' behind the scenes - disband the three-letter group and imprison or tie up organized crime's assets.

He also angered big oil, and threatened the Fed, but didn't exactly reduce their power.

He basically asked for it. Puzzling. Maybe he had a death wish?

I prefer a theory that he was not killed, but lived with another identity

originally posted by: wtbengineer
a reply to: bucsarg
Also, the Remington fireball that he claims to have used would have caused the kind of damage to Kennedy's head consistent with what was reported by doctors at Parkland.

Look at the angle of any shot from the knoll. It's wrong. It would have definitely put Jackie in the line of fire and this was not to be allowed. The shot from the knoll was purposely into the infield in the grass as a distraction.

The actual shots came from the DalTex building, the storm sewer up near the bridge, possibly the storm sewer on the road (a very quick sight picture here, though). Both storm sewer shots had a good exit through the tunnels to the sewer outlet and a parking lot. The street level drain opening was much bigger back then.
Here's one pic - shot trajectory in red:
cfrankdavis.files.wordpress.com...

Here's one of the street level drain as seen from across the street (circled in white):
www.jfkhistory.com...

Again, I favor the storm drain near the triple overpass, and it's known someone parked a car over that manhole and a cop is seen running up there and looking over the wall and possibly seeing or smelling smoke or gunpowder.

I'd think they'd favor an airgun over a fireball type arm.

a reply to: Maverick7

Before I read your entire reply and saw that you said it too I was about to say the shot most likely came from the storm drain imo.

originally posted by: CoriSCapnSkip
There seem to have been three copies made of the Zapruder film, and the original was not altered. www.usatoday.com... This was very enlightening. Previously all I knew was that on becoming president Bill Clinton wanted to get to the bottom of this (as well he might--why so many classified documents if the crime was the work of a lone gunman?--) but no idea of what, if anything, they may have uncovered.

I finally made it through the (extremely technical) section of Horne's book covering Mr. Zavada's (pro bono) work for the ARRB. He seems like a pleasant guy and, if I understood correctly, it was Kodak that drafted him out of retirement for the project. That, alone, makes it difficult to criticize or question his work. Perhaps it's a good idea to bear in mind that not only was Kodak in dire straights financially at the time that they agreed to the validation project, but they are ALSO the very same company that participated in the clandestine film work the week of the assassination...

A good example of how you don't go back and investigation work done that many years ago is taking what we see on film now and use it to form assumptions when questioning the technicians who originally did the work.

Multimedia has become something that we take for granted to the point of making it difficult to wrap your head around just how tedious and complicated something like developing film or making copies was back then. Two books that I intend to read is Richard Trask's 2005 book "National Nightmare on Six Feet of Film" and Harry Livingstone's 2004 book "The Hoax of the Century: Decoding the Forgery of the Zapruder Film".

As I said, this is complicated and I probably won't do justice in getting the point across before either my eyes or my neck give out on me, but I'll try...

Harry McCormack of the Dallas Morning News thought that he could help get the film developed. McCormack, Mr. Z, Forrest Sorrels, the Special Agent in Charge(SAIC) of the Dallas Secret Service Office, Erwin Schwarz (Z's business partner) and two Dallas police officers went to the offices of the Dallas Morning News. They found out that the film couldn't be developed there.

Next McCormack pointed everyone to the TV station owned by the Dallas Morning News, WFAA. They couldn't develop the film, either, but the visit resulted in the short little interview you can find with Mr. Z on YT.

The only local place where color 16mm film could be developed was the Eastman Kodak plant in Dallas. (Remember, what I've said about 8mm film. The finished product was slit and "Side B" was appended to "Side A".) The TV station alerted Kodak that a high priority film was on the way and everyone piled back into the police car.

(Btw, while at Eastman Kodak, Mr. Z me Phil Willis who was getting his color slides developed, also.)

At the Kodak plant the camera was opened and the film developed. SAIC Sorrels insisted on going into the darkroom and even interfered with SOP of the technicians. He was called away when he was contacted about the arrest of a suspect in the shooting of officer Tippet. When the Z film was done and dry, it was viewed once at double speed by Zapruder, Schwartz, McCormack and the Kodak processing and management staff to be certain that he had, indeed, captured the assassination on film. Bear in mind that, because he wanted copies made, this was done with the film still in the original un-slit, 16mm wide, "double perf" format.

The Kodak staff told Mr. Z that, while they could develop Kodak film, they could not make copies because they didn't have an optical printer or a contact printer in their lab. He was referred to Jamieson Film Company.

They also told him that once Jamieson exposed his contact prints (I told you it's complicated), he would have to make another trip back to them so that they could be developed. The Kodak plant didn't routinely stock the film that would have been ideal for his copies, Kodachrome Duplicating Film 7269, and instead gave him 3 rolls of Kodachrome IIA. Also, since they knew that the Jamieson lab's contact printers couldn't accommodate 16mm, "Double 8", film Kodak did NOT slit his original, un-slit 16mm film.

Because of the importance of the film, Kodak consulted with Jamieson's staff about the correct exposure and filter pack that they should use for Kodachrome IIA film.

Mr. Z and Mr. Schwartz with their police escort and minus McCormack made a short stop by their office and then on to Jamieson's.

In order to assure that no unauthorized copies were made, Mr. Z went into the darkroom and observed as the 3 contact prints were made.

At about 8PM Kodak developed the 3 Kodachrome IIA contact prints and the 3 "first day copies" were slit and reassembled per SOP.

From page 1198 of "Inside the ARRB":

The assassination film--either the slit original, or one of the "first day copies"--was then viewed at the Kodak plant in its 8mm configuration by Zapruder and Schwartz, along with Kodak staff, before Zapruder and Schwartz departed at about 9PM.

Whether or not the camera original film was slit and reassembled as an 8mm film at the Kodak plant after the Jamieson copies were developed and slit, remains a matter of controversy today. Rollie Zavada, based upon the recollections of the surviving employees he interviewed at Kodak, concluded in his technical study "Study 1, page 27" that the camera original film was slit at the Kodak plant before Zapruder and Schwartz departed, and that the slit original was the 8mm product viewed by Zapruder, Schwartz, and the Kodak staff at least twice before Zapruder and Schwartz departed the Kodak plant at about 9PM. But an alternate possibility exists, as pointed out by Richard Trask in his 2005 book, National Nightmare on Six Feet of Film.

I do apologize, but I gotta go for now... As you can see, even if the process had been no more complicated than what I've posted, the events of the day would still make almost anyone's head spin. One area when I questioned Mr. Zavada's methods was when he returned to one of the Jamieson employees that worked on the contact prints something like three times and finally got the guy to question his own memory of what processes and settings he had done.

I probably have some glitches in this, but my head's killing me, I'm not up to proof-reading at the moment.

To be continued....

originally posted by: wtbengineer
a reply to: Maverick7

Before I read your entire reply and saw that you said it too I was about to say the shot most likely came from the storm drain imo.

If you were to look at the situation in DP, where would you position yourself as a sniper? You wouldn't be behind the car which would be moving away. You wouldn't be high above because it's hard to be accurate taking into account bullet drop -and- the effects of shooting downward. Remember a bullet goes in a parabola.

You'd place yourself in front so the target would be moving toward you.

Now consider you are NOT allowed to shoot near Jackie, not in the line of fire, not hit by a ricochet. You'd have to be slightly below and to JFK's right, such that a miss would not be close to Jackie (JBK).

Now there's also a few other locations from which you could fire. One would be the parking lot on the other side of the road, behind some bushes. Another would be the storm drain near the overpass on the other side of DP, and then the storm drain on the same side up near the triple overpass. Several people talked about seeing a small hole in the left side of JFK's head (meaning a shot from the opposite side of DP near the Triple Overpass - either the parking lot or the other high storm drain).

I'm cautious about the street level storm drain because the window of opportunity for tracking before shooting would be small, UNLESS this is where Greer hit the brakes, bringing the President's head and upper body into the view of a street level storm drain sniper. And, of course we saw the brake lights lit up on the other video so this could be precisely what happened.

There's quite a few people who say there were between 6 and 8 shots, or more Two were nearly simultaneous. One dented the chrome of the Limo, one went through the windshield, one hit the curb near Tague, two probably were required to cause all of Connelly's wounds. One in JFK's back, one in his neck.

Some think there were three teams of assassins who may or may not have known of each other. One team in the Dal-Tex building, one team on the roof of the Dallas County Records building (where a sabot was found). One team may have been on the opposite side of DP in the parking lot (shooter and spotter), one behind the stockade fence (a distraction shot), and maybe a team on the other end of the 5th or 6th floor of the Depository.

Of course, postulating this is a bit over-the-top, because at some point you couldn't move without tripping over a conspirator, from the stalled truck to the ambulance called to the TSBD, to tales of Ruby picking up LHO or someone else.

There are so many inconsistencies, that it makes a comprehensive theory impossible to construct. Did they really need three teams? Did they really need to switch bodies and brains? Did they really need to doctor the Z-film? Did they really need to put fake agents all around in DP to divert witnesses and steal films? Did they also need to fake the autopsy and the x-rays, putting metal objects on the body to make it appear they were inside? Did they really need to bribe doctors, intimidate witnesses, steal the body from Parkland, kill Officer Tippet to use his body and/or brain?

We have sufficient evidence to conclude that Hunt, Bush, Nixon and LBJ were in the know. We have evidence that LBJ's personal hitman was in the TSBD (Mac Wallace). It was a coup formed at the highest levels and it was almost inevitable. They had tried it and failed in Ohio and Florida and if this one failed, they'd have kept trying in another place.

That's why it's futile to wish you could go back in time and change anything. He'd have been taken out eventually - he was deemed too dangerous to the status quo.

I think it's pretty clear that Bobby knew that LBJ was in at the top, he even accused him, supposedly. But they had something on Bobby so he had to shut up.

My hope is that somewhere, somehow a real version of the Z-film will turn up. It's alleged there's a French version, but the one on YT looks like the one we've all seen.

It seems like too much, but suffice it to say a lot of nervous people were scrambling that day.

Files has got to be lying. There is NO WAY a shot from the picket fence would have been allowed to be directed at the Limo. It would have put Jackie RIGHT in the line of fire.

If a shot was taken from there it's likely the one that went into the infield, shot well over top of the Limo and used as a diversion.

Deputy Buddy Walters is seen pointing at a divot in the infield and one unidentified suit-clad man is seen picking up something and putting it in his pocket. This came from the GK.

There is also no way a shot from the AR by Hickey was a factor. You try standing next to an unsilenced AR shooting a .223 without earplugs and see if you find it forgettable. The shot of the AR raised up at the airport shows no silencer. I do agree there is a lot of good work in Mortal Error, but the conclusion isn't believable.

The smoke and smell reported by occupants in the follow cars was probably due to the street level storm drain shot, which may or may not have hit anything. It was either that or the storm drain near the triple over pass (on one or both sides!) which caused the head shot along with a nearly simultaneous shot from the Dal-Tex building.

It hasn't gotten much media coverage, but Cuban exile leader Antonio Veciana wrote a letter to, Gaeton Fonzi's widow Marie, admitting that Fonzi was correct in his investigations for the HSCA and in his book , The Last Investigation, stating that Oswald had a CIA handler, seen with Oswald by Veciana'

When he first confirmed that David Atlee Phillips was the CIA contact known as "Maurice Bishop," Cuban exile leader Antonio Veciana did so tacitly. But Veciana's meaning was so clear, and his guile so transparent, there was no doubt; both he and House Select Committee investigator Gaeton Fonzi began laughing.


Now, decades later, Veciana has explicitly stated that Phillips (right) was indeed Bishop, and that he did indeed see Phillips with Lee Harvey Oswald in September 1963 – thus formally linking a high ranking CIA officer with the JFK assassination.

Veciana's admission came in a written statement issued November 22, 2013, the fiftieth anniversary of the assassination. In a letter to Fonzi's widow Marie, Veciana, the elderly, former leader of Alpha 66, said, "Maurice Bishop, my CIA contact agent was David Atlee Phillips. Phillips or Bishop was the man I saw with Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas on September 1963."

www.ctka.net...

a reply to: UFGarvin

That's just one more confirmation source for that bit of information. I don't know how you could think that Oswald was anything other than a low level operative. Do you think that anyone from the US could 'defect' to the USSR during that time period, marry a Soviet girl, and come back here just over a year and a half later and not be prosecuted for offering to hand over secrets regarding the U2 spy flights?

Forgive me for scattering facts all over and not taking time to look up specifics that I can't remember any more, but it is well known that Oswald was a Marine and not a particularly good shot. He was also stationed at Atsugi Japan as a radar operator and I can't remember all I've read about that period of his life but a lot of peculiar stuff is on record. Point is, he went through all the channels in the military that those who are skimmed off for intel work do. When he 'defected' to the USSR he was most likely with ONI and he definitely had files with CIA and FBI. When Marina met him she thought he was a Soviet because his Russian was so fluent. You don't learn to speak another language in the military fluently unless you are intel.

I have a son that went into the military and went to DLI so I know the only way you get fluent in a language while in the military is by way of the spyway.

Oswald was most likely involved with the Kennedy assassination in the capacity that he believed he was infiltrating groups that were planning the assassination and thought he was trying to stop it. He liked Kennedy and thought he was a good president. He was a good patsy for the operation because he was likely a little naïve and didn't know until the deed had been pulled off that he had been railroaded. Then he had to do his best to just try to stay alive and be able to talk, but that didn't work out for him too well.

originally posted by: wtbengineer
a reply to: UFGarvin

That's just one more confirmation source for that bit of information. I don't know how you could think that Oswald was anything other than a low level operative. Do you think that anyone from the US could 'defect' to the USSR during that time period, marry a Soviet girl, and come back here just over a year and a half later and not be prosecuted for offering to hand over secrets regarding the U2 spy flights?

Forgive me for scattering facts all over and not taking time to look up specifics that I can't remember any more, but it is well known that Oswald was a Marine and not a particularly good shot. He was also stationed at Atsugi Japan as a radar operator and I can't remember all I've read about that period of his life but a lot of peculiar stuff is on record. Point is, he went through all the channels in the military that those who are skimmed off for intel work do. When he 'defected' to the USSR he was most likely with ONI and he definitely had files with CIA and FBI. When Marina met him she thought he was a Soviet because his Russian was so fluent. You don't learn to speak another language in the military fluently unless you are intel.

I have a son that went into the military and went to DLI so I know the only way you get fluent in a language while in the military is by way of the spyway.

Oswald was most likely involved with the Kennedy assassination in the capacity that he believed he was infiltrating groups that were planning the assassination and thought he was trying to stop it. He liked Kennedy and thought he was a good president. He was a good patsy for the operation because he was likely a little naïve and didn't know until the deed had been pulled off that he had been railroaded. Then he had to do his best to just try to stay alive and be able to talk, but that didn't work out for him too well.

That's certainly a possibility, that he was not in the plot. One thing for sure, intel fingerprints were all over him. When you realize that there were people impersonating him at the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico city just weeks before the assassination, placing phone calls to Russia and etc. it tells you right there that there were other people involved in the assassination. Someone was creating a back story. The CIA and FBI both said as much to LBJ, it was not Oswald in the photos and not his voice on the recorded calls. This was part of the leverage LBJ used in assembling the Warren Comm.

The physical evidence against LHO is actually very weak and would have been very vulnerable to cross examination if the trial had occurred. That's a whole other kettle of fish. To me, the Mexico City shenanigans and the autopsy coverups are the most glaring issues that point to conspiracy.

a reply to: UFGarvin

Yes, those are all relevant events, the Oswald impersonations in Mexico City. They were obviously setting him up as the patsy even as they were assembling the team of shooters and all the others who were involved. I think I read about the Chicago plot that failed against Kennedy and they arrested a few shooters and they were all 'Oswald' types that were obviously selected to take the fall if the hit went down in Chicago. I'm sure it was the same in Miami when they were trying to hit JFK there.

I agree, there is no real physical evidence against Oswald. I am sure in my own mind that a coup d'état occurred that day in Dallas. All the things you mention back this up and other things I've read about and can't think of at the moment. I think when you look at all this stuff in perspective along with the Parkland doctors' original testimony about the wounds they observed you can't come up with any other conclusion. Not to mention the total number of shots that had to be fired to account for the hole in the windshield, the hole in the street sign, two damaged areas of curb and a bullet hitting the grass that was recovered and handed to an 'FBI' man never to be seen again.

This along with all the bullets it took to inflict all the damage that they did to two men. And it's not really a possibility that a single bullet went through JFK and Connelly either. The Connelly's both agree to this and others at the scene. That was a Warren Commission stretch to try to account for the fact that it would be humanly impossible for anyone to pull off more than 3 shots in the 5.6 seconds that they allotted for them with that messed up Manlicher-Carcano rifle.

I'm currently reading "Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza" and the writer claims that neither he nor any other snipers he knew could have pulled off the shots that Oswald was supposed to have done even with modern weapons. There are just too many problems with the angles and trajectory and line of sight to the target and the rifle was not capable of such feats even if a super "American Sniper" was behind it.

It only makes sense that there was a kill zone that was planned before the fact that they were able to triangulate the target and ensure a hit. A sniper firing from the TSBD would never have waited until after the 120 degree turn to start firing. I still think that the angle of the fatal headshot lines up with the storm drain. I also think shots were fired from the 'grassy knoll'.

I know there are some who think that nobody would dare shoot from the grassy knoll when Jackie could have been hit also. I don't thing that they cared that much about that. I'm pretty sure Connelly wasn't a target but a liability. I am sure they would have tried to avoid hitting her but the main objective would be of utmost importance. I'm sure more than one shot came from there and found a target from the evidence.

originally posted by: Maverick7
-- snip --
He basically asked for it. Puzzling. Maybe he had a death wish?

I hope to be able to add more just as soon as possible... I signed on and saw your post (ALL spot on) and decided to hold off on my intended post.

We here in the United States of America (I've considered for a few years now of replying to articles where the author wants to use dates in the format "B.C.E." and suggest that if they are American it would be more properly calculated as "A.K."). (While I'm an unapologetic Christian, I know for a fact that humor is a blessing and the only one capable of judging me on intent needs never waste the bandwidth on email...)

For those born too late to understand, I try to make allowances, but the two young guys (everyone's younger than me --Grin--) that had the podcast on the 50th that were talking about how all us gullible old conspiracy geezer's have to die of before that date can come and go peaceably were speaking out of the ignorance (and innocence) of youth.

A.K., in a way is appropriate. This country has become so very, very jaded since the assassination and lowered its standards so drastically that I can't help but bristle, now, when I hear something I used to routinely say and mean, "If you can't respect the Man, at least respect the Office."

Hopefully I'm making sense. I AM trying to answer your post, but sometimes my approach is a little "different". If I was wealthy I'd be considered "Eccentric".

I had to reply because you'd voiced exactly the line of thought that I hadn't been able quiet as it rolled around in the back of my thoughts. NO other mortal, be they therapist, psychiatrist, preacher or guru can ever truly know what is in someone else's mind or heart. We can, though, (with the exception of the truly physiological psychopath) compare words and deeds to create a scaffold that, if fleshed out, would be a clear view of what was politically popular not all that long ago to call Core Values.

It is a sad fact of Fate (fickle mistress that she is) that JFK was no stranger to the book "Seven Days In May". The book made such an impression on him that (going by what I've read) he did much more than give it multiple reads. He mulled over different aspects of the politics and situations, the "character" of the characters and what a country that provided the backdrop for this particular work of fiction would experience as everything played out.

His position of being the first "Hollywood" president gave him the opportunity to be the driving force in transforming the book into a movie. The fact that the First Family made the Whitehouse available while they took a short vacation and scenes were filmed and technicians did what technicians do to create sound-stages back at Hollywood that are indistinguishable from Reality should give all of us an idea of what our President felt lay between those pages...

Fate truly is fickle and we'll never know if enough Americans could have had their eyes opened to make a difference.

Seven Days In May was scheduled for national release the week after the assassination...

Did he have a death wish? That would only be a guess on my part. If I had to offer an opinion, I would prefer (after living through it and all I've read since) to believe that we actually had a president who believed he'd been put in office to represent and protect the interests of every single American.

If only he'd understood that there IS no Alpha Male in a pit of vipers.

I'd like to finish up my previous post about the Z film and bring up another point or two, maybe.

One mistake I've possibly made was in not stressing that the JFK Records Act did NOT just cover the medical side of the assassination and the law was supposed to put ALL branches of the government on notice that representatives were to have full, un-redacted copies of anything they deemed an assassination record.

The book is printed on demand so anyone truly interested in what happened to our president can start by just going to Amazon and search "Horne" and "ARRB". There is nothing to stop you from just getting Volume I to see what's there. I feel pretty safe in saying you'll wind up wanting the whole set.

Lest anyone get the idea that I'm commercially plugging a book just because I like it,OUR TAX MONEY paid for the Review Board and the information is technically released to the public of research.

You wanna wade through the ins and outs of all the arcane processing procedures of verifying a Kodak home movie (and three copies) made back in 1963....?

#1. You can make reservations and go to read the Zavada Report at the JFK records collection, Archives II, Collegepark, Maryland.

#2. You can purchase a personal copy for $450+.

#3. Douglas Horne suggested books by Richard Trask and Harrison Livingstone.

For anyone that missed my earlier link, here is a good starting point to learn some of what the ARRB was able to bring to light:
Finally hearing the TRUTH about the JFK cover-up.

Before I add anything else... Regardless of what preconceptions you may hold about the assassination, I'd like you to temporarily go back to zero and listen to this closely:


Much has been made of how undependable eye(and ear)witnesses were in the Plaza that day. The man you just listened to was ABC New reporter, Bob Clark. He was not just some citizen who'd gone a bit out of their way to get a glimpse of the motorcade over lunch. Bob Clark was in Dallas to cover the motorcade for ABC News and was riding in the press car just behind the vice-president's.


Source

Bob Clark was a television reporter and White House Correspondent for ABC News from the 1960s until the 1970s. He is most remembered for reporting the assassinations of John F. Kennedy in 1963 and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Clark was the only person to see both Kennedy brothers after each was shot in Dallas, Texas and Los Angeles, California, respectively.

He was also a contributing host to the ABC Sunday interview program, then entitled Issues and Answers, now known as This Week.

Now, am I supposed to believe that a nationally known and experienced reporter was mistaken when he says the lead car in the motorcade came to a short, dead stop and Secret Service Agents jumped out of the car, pulled guns and then jumped BACK into the car when HE was in a car just a few feet behind them???

Go to YT and pick ANY of the assassination vids you want, you aren't going to see what he saw that day! It's that plain and simple. Throw around all the theories you want, it isn't going to change the fact that (unless someone is sitting on something I'd be scared to have in my possession) the American public is only going to see what we've been allowed to see.

Throw 99.999% of what you thought you knew away and read the in depth depositions and interviews of the people that talked to the ARRB. As research tools, none of the videos are of much value. I tried to tell our friend earlier that it wasn't the idea of a SSA having a "machine gun" that day that was my problem. Telling me that I need look no further than his accidental discharge of said weapon because that answered all questions was my problem. (Does anyone seriously think that Clark wouldn't have noticed a SSA blow the top off the president's head? Like I said, too many loose ends...!)

-----------------------------------

That said, I wanted to use just this much from Volume IV from Horne's book. I tried to give you a layman's overview of how the Z film and its copies came about. Here are a couple of paragraph's from page 1252 of the book about trying to ascertain what is even a "genuine copy"!

If the processing edge print lights were turned on (as was normally the case) during the processing of the 'out of camera' original Zapruder film the day of the assassination, then the original film's processing edge print should have been photographically copied onto the 'first day copies' exposed at the Jamieson film lab, resulting in a double printing of the legend "PROCESSED BY KODAK (DOT) NOV 63" on any true 'first generation" copy that was both exposed at the Jamieson film lab and then subsequently developed at the Kodak plant in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

Just such a 'double registration' of the processing edfe print is indeed found on all three purported 'first generation' copies examined by Rollie Zavada. While this might seem to end any argument about the provenance of the three 'frirst generation' copies, it does not----for Kodak Production Foreman Kenny Anderson related Rollie Zavada in July of 1997 in a written communication that the Secret Servise agent present in the developing lab at the Kodak plant in Dallas insisited that the edge printing lights be turned off during the processing of the out of camera original film, and furthermore, the other Kodak Production , Tom Nulty, recalled to Rollie Zavada in July 1997 that Kenny Anderson did mention this interference by the Secret Service agent to him contemporaneously on the day of the assassination! (This will be discussed further in the next subsection.) So wile the presence of a 'double registration' of the "PROCESSED BY KODAK (DOT) NOV 63" edge print is consistant with what one would expect to see in a normal first generation copy, it does not prove the three 'first generation' copies that exist today are really the 'first day copies' exposed in Dallas the day of the assassination at the Jamieson film lab, because the edge printer light may actuall have been turned off when the camera original film was developed the day of the assassination.

Some days I am hopeful they will solve it, while other times I am sad thinking we will never know. I don't remember the original event but now it's never far from my mind--so much hinges on it!

originally posted by: CoriSCapnSkip
Some days I am hopeful they will solve it, while other times I am sad thinking we will never know. I don't remember the original event but now it's never far from my mind--so much hinges on it!

I have reached the point of having enough information that I'm diagramming what will be the framework of my synopsis of the assassination. Hopefully, I'll post it within the coming week.

In the meantime, I've found another little gem that has been on my mind since I read my first copy of "Best Evidence". A big Kudos!!! to David Lifton for getting this picture included in the center of his book. The very first viewing had my hackles up with only knowing that the photo had been taken an instant after LBJ was sworn in. It's hard to think of a more inappropriate sight considering that his predecessor's wife was standing next to him covered in the blood and brain matter of the motorcade...


Lifton had found this picture and its companion photos at the LBJ library. Nobody should be surprised that shortly after "Best Evidence" was released the picture has gone missing from their collection...

For anyone unfamiliar with who the man winking is, that is Congressman Albert Thomas.

LBJ and Texas Governor John Connally had been working for about a year and a half to get JFK into the state. Thomas had served fourteen terms and was instrumental in getting the NASA Manned Spaceflight Center located in Houston. In 1963, the Washington grapevine was seeded with the rumor that Thomas was seriously considering not running for a fifteenth term. Local Democrats organized an appreciation dinner on November 21, 1963 with over 3200 attendees to persuade him to run for another term. When another rumor about Thomas having terminal cancer started making the rounds, the invitation to Kennedy (our space programs biggest supporter) was basically an offer he couldn't refuse...

On another note, the only doubt about where the motorcade luncheon was going to be held was in the minds of Kenneth O'Donnell, special assistant to the President, and any others working with him at the White House. John Connally used the tactics learned from his mentor, LBJ, (Bull and Bluster) to make the Trade Mart THE location for the luncheon. All that had ever really been in question was when those at the White House were tired of fighting and let Connally have his way.

a reply to: CornShucker

Thanks, lot's of good info. Yeah, that picture always sealed it for me too, ever since I first saw it in Best Evidence back in '80 or '81, whichever it was. I am also plowing through a lot of information right now. I've read more in the last few months than I did over the last 10 years I think. Have you looked into the Master Chronology of JFK Assassination books by Walt Brown Ph.D? I've just started that but it's something like 30,000 pages and looks pretty daunting. I like what I've seen so far though. It's just that I think it's 10 bucks a pop for each book and then there are a bunch of appendixes, so it's going to get expensive.